Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/28/2011• arm n Energizing Ontario GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE DATE: February 28, 2011 TIME: 9 :30 A.M. PLACE: COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER 2. DISCLOSURES OF PECUNIARY INTEREST 3. ANNOUNCEMENTS 4. ADOPTION OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING(S) (a) Minutes of a Regular Meeting of February 7, 2011 4 -1 5. PRESENTATIONS (a) David D. Stewart, Architect, Williams and Stewart Associates, Regarding Report PSD- 018 -11, General Architectural Design Guidelines (2011 Update) 6. DELEGATIONS (Draft List at Time of Publication — To be Replaced with Final 6 -1 List) (a) Jacquie Hoornweg, Durham Strategic Energy Alliance (DSEA), Regarding, and Update and Information on the Innovation Durham Northumberland Project (b) Jacqueline Muccio Regarding Parking which Inhibits Proper Snow Removal (c) Libby Racansky, Regarding Report PSD- 016 -11, Draft Plan of Subdivision Rezoning Applications (d) Clifford Curtis, Regarding Report PSD- 016 -11, Draft Plan of Subdivision and Rezoning Applications (e) Bob Annaert, D.G. Biddle & Associates, Regarding Report PSD- 016 -11, Draft Plan of Subdivision and Rezoning Applications CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905 - 623 -3379 G.P. & A. Agenda - 2 - February 28, 2011 (f) Ron Richards, R.G. Richards & Associates, Regarding Report PSD- 017 -11, a Proposed Zoning By -Law Amendment to Permit the Development of a Food Store of 2,829m2 and Two Smaller Buildings of 783m2 and 185m2 Respectively for Retail /Service Commercial Uses — 680 Longworth Avenue, Bowmanville 7. PUBLIC MEETINGS No Public Meetings 8. PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT (a) PSD- 016 -11 Two (2) Proposed Draft Plans of Subdivision and Two (2) 8 -1 Zoning By -Law Amendment Applications to Permit a Mixed Residential Development Owner: Kingsberry Properties (1317870 Ontario Limited) & William Tonno Construction Limited (b) PSD- 017 -11 Proposed Zoning By -Law Amendment to Permit the 8 -58 Development of a Food Store of 2,829m2 and Two Smaller Buildings of 783m2 and 185m2 Respectively for Retail /Service Commercial Uses — 680 Longworth Avenue, Bowmanville Applicant: 1804603 Ontario Inc. (c) PSD- 018 -11 General Architectural Design Guidelines (2011 Update) 8 -75 (d) PSD- 019 -11 Proposed Zoning By -law Amendment to Permit Increased 8 -119 Garage Widths, Increased Garage Projections, and Increased Lot Coverage on Lots with One Storey Dwellings — Courtice Applicant: Halminen Homes (e) PSD- 020 -11 2010 Annual Report on Applications for Plans of 8 -131 Subdivision and Plans of Condominium (f) PSD- 021 -11 Application for Removal of Part Lot Control 8 -146 Applicant: Carrington Homes (Courtice) Limited (g) PSD- 022 -11 Removal of Holding Martin Road 8 -152 Applicant: 1557366 Ontario Inc. (h) PSD- 023 -11 Solar Energy Projects in Urban Valleylands 8 -159 9. ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT No Reports G.P. & A. Agenda - 3 - February 28, 2011 10. OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT (a) OPD- 002 -11 Tender No. CL2010 -23 Driveway Tie -Ins - Amendment 10 -1 (b) OPD- 003 -11 Sports Field User Fees 10 -9 11. EMERGENCY AND FIRE SERVICES DEPARTMENT No Reports 12. COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT (a) CSD- 004 -11 2011 Community Grant Requests 12 -1 13. MUNICIPAL CLERK'S DEPARTMENT (a) CLD- 008 -11 Appointment to the Committee of Adjustment 13 -1 (b) CLD- 009 -11 Amendments to Property Standards By -Law 2007 -070 13 -4 14. CORPORATE SERVICES DEPARTMENT No Reports 15. FINANCE DEPARTMENT No Reports 16. SOLICITOR'S DEPARTMENT No Reports 17. CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE No Reports 18. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 19. OTHER BUSINESS 20. COMMUNICATIONS 21. CONFIDENTIAL REPORTS 22. ADJOURNMENT Claringiton Leading the My General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes February 7, 2011 Minutes of a meeting of the General Purpose and Administration Committee held on Monday, February 7, 2011 at 9:30 a.m. in the Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Present Were: Mayor A. Foster Councillor R. Hooper Councillor M. Novak Councillor J. Neal Councillor W. Partner Councillor C. Traill Councillor W. Woo Also Present: Chief Administrative Officer, F. Wu Purchasing Manager, Jerry Barber Deputy Fire Chief, Mark Berney, entering at 10:33 a.m. Director of Community Services, J. Caruana Director of Engineering Services, T. Cannella Director of Planning Services, D. Crome Director of Operations, F. Horvath Director of Finance/Treasurer, N. Taylor Director of Emergency & Fire Services, G. Weir until 10:33 a.m. Municipal Solicitor, A. Allison Deputy Clerk, A. Greentree Clerk II, J. Gallagher Mayor Foster chaired this portion of the meeting. DISCLOSURES OF PECUNIARY INTEREST Councillor Hooper indicated that he would be declaring an interest in Report PSD- 013 -11, as he owns property in downtown Bowmanville, which is referenced in Section 1.2 of the Report. Councillor Novak advised, later in the meeting, that she had a pecuniary interest in the matter of the request for a report regarding health benefits for employees because she is a licensed insurance broker and the discussion surrounds health benefits. - 1 - 4 -1 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes February 7, 2011 ANNOUNCEMENTS Mayor Foster announced that several Members of Council were present, this morning, at the flag raising for the Heart & Stroke Foundation. Mayor Foster also announced that there will be a pancake breakfast on Sunday, February 13, 2011 hosted by the Kendal Lions Club. He also noted that the "Annual Taste of Italy Dinner and Auction" held on February 6, 2011, to benefit the Lakeridge Hospital Foundation, was a success. Councillor Hooper reminded the Committee that there will be a Sweetheart Dance on February 12, 2011 at 7:30 p.m. at the Garnet B. Rickard Recreation Complex in support of the Lakeridge Health Bowmanville Emergency Room: Tickets are $60.00 per person and are available from East Side Mario's and the Emergency and Fire Services Department. Councillor Woo agreed that the 8th Annual "Taste of Italy Dinner and Auction" was a success, well attended, and sold out. He noted that the Hospital Foundation has been fundraising for the Hospital for 98 years. MINUTES Resolution #GPA- 088 -11 Moved by Councillor Novak, seconded by Councillor Hooper THAT the minutes of the regular meeting of the General Purpose and Administration Committee held on January 24, 2011, be approved. CARRIED PRESENTATIONS Sheila Hall, Executive Director, Clarington Board of Trade (CBOT), was present to provide the Committee with an Economic Update. Ms. Hall acknowledged the following members of the Board of Trade in the audience: Randy Henry (President), Martin Voegh (Vice President), Ron Collis (Director at Large), and staff members, Laura Wood and Lindsay Taylor. She made a verbal presentation to accompany her PowerPoint presentation. Ms. Hall provided the Committee with a summary of the contacts, meetings, leads, new businesses, expansions, new jobs that have been created since the last update. She noted that there has been a small economic recovery, which provides the CBOT with opportunities to assist businesses. Ms. Hall stated that there have been approximately 305 new jobs created in the past year. She informed the Committee that since April, 2010 when BizPal was launched, there have been 1062 hits to the BizPal website. She explained that BizPal is a one -stop, online service which helps local businesses start up or grow by providing access to information on business permits and license requirements from all three levels of government. Ms. Hall -2- 4 -2 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes February 7, 2011 reviewed the statistics derived from BizPal, showing where the interest has been generated, which will assist in deciding where to spend marketing dollars. She noted that they have recently placed ads in the Trade & Industry magazine and the Business Guide of the Toronto Star. Ms. Hall informed the Committee that there has been a decrease in inquiries of vacant lands. She provided the Committee with a list of the new businesses showing the number of employees. Ms. Hall also provided a list of business relocations (three) and closures (six). She noted that businesses tend to communicate more with other businesses within their industry sectors. As a result, the CBOT, has started to host round tables. Ms. Hall outlined the business growth activities which they have hosted, including the AGM & Business Awards, the second Annual Energy Summit, Simply Social Networking Events, Economic Breakfast with Dan Hoornweg, educational seminars, GTMA, DSEA and UOIT /Durham College. She thanked Council for supporting the CBOT's attendance at last year's Canadian Nuclear Association Conference and to be able to attend this year's conference, which will be held on February 23 -25, 2011. Ms. Hall noted that there has been some interest from engineering firms, associated with the refurbishment of Darlington. She informed the Committee of the following special projects planned for this year: the Federal Economic Development Agency of Southern Ontario — 10 Year Economic Development Strategy; Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency Funding for the Peer Review of the Darlington Nuclear Project Environmental Impact Study, including a presentation at the Joint Review Panel meetings; economic development website review through the Economic Development Council of Ontario; and opportunity to speak to the Standing Committee on Finance for the Federal Government Pre - Budget consultations. Ms. Hall discussed a chart which depicted a mathematical model showing emerging sectors, strong sectors, limited potential sectors and priority retention targets. She provided the Committee with an update on the physician recruitment project. Ms. Hall noted that there have been three physicians which have taken up practice within the Municipality (two of which are not on the recruitment program). She summarized by noting that, as of February 7, 2011, there are 51 doctors working in our community. Ms. Hall noted that there are two other doctors which plan to open up a new office shortly. Costas Catsaros, from Zas Architectural, was present regarding the Architectural Design of Fire Station #2, which will be located to the north of the Newcastle Recreation Complex on Rudell Road in Newcastle. He made a verbal presentation to accompany an electronic presentation, copies of which were distributed to Members of the Committee. He presented a proposed site plan of the new fire hall design. Mr. Catsaros discussed some of the challenges, including the topography of the property. He noted that there is visitor parking on the north side, with employee parking at the back of the building. Mr. Catsaros reviewed the plans for the interior of the one storey building, which includes a bunker room, apparatus bay, public entrance, patio entrance, staff dining room, lounge, fitness area, dormitory, laundry room, equipment rooms, locker rooms and washrooms. He provided the Committee with a preliminary rendering of the building, which includes a colour palette to complement the existing buildings. Mr. Catsaros provided a breakdown of the 12,210 square foot building. -3- 4 -3 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes February 7, 2011 DELEGATIONS Reverend Frank Lockhart was present regarding Valleys 2000. Rev. Lockhart informed the Committee of the history of the organization, which began in 1998. He noted that the organization is incorporated and has charitable status. Rev. Lockhart stated that some of the Directors are in the audience. He noted that the major work began in the year 2000 and that they are in the second term of a Memorandum of Understanding with the Municipality of Clarington. Rev. Lockhart informed the Committee that 2010 was a good summer for the trees and the sugar maples are doing especially well. He noted that every year they plant at least 200 trees. Rev. Lockhart informed the Committee that some of the "vagabond" trees have been removed to make room for the introduction of specific species. They have created a pond, a butterfly garden and a commemorative forest. Rev. Lockhart noted that Valleys 2000 performed an informal count which showed that it is very popular (with approximately 1000 persons using it every weekend), including the winter. Therefore he believes this area still needs municipal services such as garbage pick up and some plowing during the winter. He stated that the river is a challenge during the flood season in spring, but that the Municipality assists with the issue. Rev. Lockhart informed the Committee that there is currently a steel fish ladder (in the bypass channel), which is suitable for the smaller fish, but not the larger fish. He noted that a project for an improved ladder has been made a priority for this year. Rev. Lockhart noted that CLOCA has paid for a consultant which developed a plan. He stated that further planning will cost $45,000 and construction will be $200,000, which they have already begun fundraising. Rev. Lockhart has noted that Valleys 2000 has approached banks and larger corporations for donations to the project. He noted that this will be a great benefit for the Municipality which will attract more fisherpersons and nature lovers. Jim Richards advised staff prior to the meeting that he would not be in attendance at today's meeting. His written comments were forwarded to Members of Council. Councillor Novak chaired this portion of the meeting. PUBLIC MEETING (a) Subject: Application to Amend the Zoning By -law 84 -63 Applicant: Halminen Homes Report: PSD- 012 -11 Mitch Morawetz, Junior Planner, made a verbal and PowerPoint presentation to the Committee regarding the application. No one spoke in opposition to or in support of the application. ZM 4 -4 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes February 7, 2011 Hannu Halminen, the applicant, was present in support of the application and to answer questions. PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT PROPOSED ZONING BY -LAW AMENDMENT TO PERMIT INCREASED GARAGE WIDTHS; INCREASED GARAGE PROJECTIONS; AND, INCREASED LOT COVERAGE ON LOTS WITH ONE STOREY DWELLINGS — COURTICE APPLICANT: HALMINEN HOMES Resolution #GPA- 089 -11 Moved by Mayor Foster, seconded by Councillor Hooper THAT Report PSD- 012 -11 be received; THAT the rezoning application submitted by Halminen Homes continue to be processed including the preparation of a further recommendation report; and THAT all interested parties listed in Report PSD- 012 -11 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. CARRIED MONITORING OF THE DECISIONS OF THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT FOR THE MEETING OF JANUARY 20, 2011 Councillor Hooper declared a pecuniary interest with respect to Report PSD- 013 -11 as he owns property in downtown Bowmanville, which is referenced in Section 1.2 of the Report. Councillor Hooper left the room and did not participate in discussions and voting on this matter. Resolution #GPA- 090 -11 Moved by Councillor Traill, seconded by Councillor Woo THAT Report PSD- 013 -11 be received; and THAT Council concurs with the decisions of the Committee of Adjustment made on January 20, 2011 for applications A2010 -0042 & A2011 -0001, and that Staff be authorized to appear before the Ontario Municipal Board to defend the decisions of the Committee of Adjustment. CARRIED Councillor Hooper returned to the meeting. -5- 4 -5 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes February 7, 2011 ANNUAL REPORT ON SITE PLAN ACTIVITY FOR 2010 Resolution #GPA- 091 -11 Moved by Councillor Partner, seconded by Councillor Neal THAT Report PSD- 014 -11 be received for information. CARRIED APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION OF PART LOT CONTROL APPLICANT: 2231231 ONTARIO LIMITED Resolution #GPA- 092 -11 Moved by Councillor Hooper, seconded by Councillor Neal THAT Report PSD- 015 -11 be received; THAT the request for Removal of Part Lot Control by 2231231 with respect to Block 19 on Plan 40M -2316 be approved, and that the Part Lot Control By -law attached to Report PSD- 015 -11 be passed pursuant to Section 50 (7.1) of the Planning Act; THAT a copy of Report PSD- 015 -11 and Council's decision be forwarded to the Region of Durham Planning Department and the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC); and THAT all interested parties listed in Report PSD- 015 -11 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. CARRIED REQUEST FOR REPORT ON ROLE OF HOST COMMUNITY AGREEMENT IN GRANTING OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR ENERGY FROM WASTE INCINERATOR Resolution #GPA- 093 -11 Moved by Mayor Foster, seconded by Councillor Partner THAT the Planning Services Department, in cooperation with appropriate staff, prepare a report on the role that the Host Community Agreement plays in the granting of the Environmental Assessment for the incinerator; and THAT a $5000.00 limit on expenses for independent expert advice be set. CARRIED 4 -6 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes February 7, 2011 Councillor Traill chaired this portion of the meeting. ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT PROPOSAL TO CLOSE AND CONVEY A PORTION OF A ROAD ALLOWANCE (LORD ELGIN STREET) SITUATED IN LOT 12, CONCESSION 2, FORMER TOWNSHIP OF DARLINGTON Resolution #GPA- 094 -11 Moved by Councillor Hooper, seconded by Councillor Neal THAT Report EGD- 006 -11 be received; THAT Council approve, in principle, the closure and conveyance of Lord Elgin Street from Concession 3 to the north limit of that portion of Lord Elgin Street, which was closed in 1988, situated in Lot 12, Concession 2, former Township of Darlington (Attachment 1 to Report EGD- 006 -11); THAT Council authorize the publication of a notice that Council intends to declare part of the road allowance be surplus and to pass a by -law to close that part of the road allowance; THAT the applicant pay all legal, advertising, appraisal and land costs associated with this transaction; and THAT 1825284 Ontario Limited (City Homes) be advised of Council's decision. CARRIED RECESS Resolution #GPA- 095 -11 Moved by Councillor Novak, seconded by Councillor Partner THAT recess for 10 minutes. CARRIED The meeting reconvened at 11:29 a.m. Councillor Woo chaired this portion of the meeting. -7- 4 -7 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes February 7, 2011 OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT PITCH IN WEEK Resolution #GPA- 096 -11 Moved by Councillor Hooper, seconded by Mayor Foster THAT Report OPD- 001 -11 be received; and THAT all interested parties listed in Report OPD- 001 -11 be advised of Council's decision. --_k Councillor Hooper chaired this portion of the meeting. EMERGENCY AND FIRE SERVICES DEPARTMENT NEWCASTLE FIRE HALL #2 — RELOCATION AND CONSTRUCTION Resolution #GPA- 097 -11 Moved by Councillor Partner, seconded by Councillor Neal THAT Report ESD- 003 -11 be received for information. CARRIED Councillor Neal chaired this portion of the meeting. COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT CUSTOMER SERVICE WEEK Resolution #GPA- 098 -11 Moved by Councillor Novak, seconded by Mayor Foster THAT Report CSD- 002 -11 be received for information. CARRIED 4 -8 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes February 7, 2011 COMMUNITY SERVICES — 2010 YEAR END REVIEW Resolution #GPA- 099 -11 Moved by Councillor Traill, seconded by Councillor Partner THAT Report CSD- 003 -11 be received for information. CARRIED Councillor Partner chaired this portion of the meeting. CLERK'S DEPARTMENT 4TH QUARTER PARKING REPORT Resolution #GPA- 100 -11 Moved by Councillor Hooper, seconded by Councillor Neal THAT Report CLD- 006 -11 be received; and THAT a copy of Report CLD- 006 -11 be forwarded to the Bowmanville Business Centre for their information. CARRIED PROCEDURAL BY -LAW Resolution #GPA- 101 -11 Moved by Mayor Foster, seconded by Councillor Traill THAT Report CLD- 007 -11 be received; THAT the proposed Procedural By -law included as Attachment No. 1 to Report CLD- 007 -11 be forwarded to Council for passage. CARRIED AS AMENDED (See following motions) 4 -9 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes February 7, 2011 Resolution #GPA- 102 -11 Moved by Councillor Novak, seconded by Mayor Foster THAT the proposed Procedural By -law be amended to include wording, similar to the City of Ottawa's Procedural By -law, prohibiting Members of Council from using communication devices during Council or General Purpose and Administration meetings, exclusive of meeting recesses. CARRIED Resolution #GPA- 103 -11 Moved by Councillor Neal, seconded by Councillor Traill THAT Sections 4.2.1, 4.2.2. and 4.2.3. of the proposed Procedural By -law be amended, to add the following at the end of each of the three sections: "and that said meeting shall only be held within the Municipality of Clarington." CARRIED (See following motion) Resolution #GPA- 104 -11 Moved by Councillor Hooper, seconded by Mayor Foster THAT the foregoing resolution #GPA- 103 -11 be amended to add the following clause: To delete "and that said meeting shall only be held" and replace with "and that consideration be given to hold said meeting ". MOTION WITHDRAWN The foregoing amending resolution #GPA- 103 -11 was then put to a vote and carried. Resolution #GPA- 105 -11 Moved by Councillor Novak, seconded by Mayor Foster THAT Sections 10. 13.12 and 10. 13.13 of the proposed Procedural By -law be amended to replace the word "Mayor" with "Chair" with regard to recorded vote. CARRIED The foregoing resolution #GPA- 101 -11 was then put to a vote and was carried as amended. -10- 4 -10 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes February 7, 2011 Mayor Foster chaired this portion of the meeting. CORPORATE SERVICES DEPARTMENT TENDER NO. CL2009 -40 SNOW CLEARING & WINTER MAINTENANCE PROPERTIES, SIDEWALKS & PARKING LOTS FOR NEWCASTLE & SURROUNDING AREAS & CL2009 -43 SENIORS & PHYSICALLY DISABLED SIDEWALK & WINDROW SNOW CLEARING SERVICES Resolution #GPA- 106 -11 Moved by Councillor Hooper, seconded by Councillor Novak THAT Report COD - 007 -11 be received; THAT the actions taken by the Manager of Purchasing with respect to the termination of the contracts CL2009 -40 and CL2009 -43 with Birds Property Management & Grounds Control, Hampton and the award of the contracts as follows, be endorsed: a. Contract CL2009 -40 — Snow Clearing and Winter Maintenance of Municipal Properties, Sidewalks & Parking Lots for Newcastle and Surrounding Areas awarded to B. J. Flint & Sons, Bowmanville, effective January 28, 2011; and b. Contract CL2009 -43 — Seniors and Physically Disabled Sidewalk & Windrow Snow Clearing Services awarded to B &D Tractor Services Limited, Bowmanville, effective January 28, 2011; THAT Bird's Property Management be removed from the Municipality's bidder's list and not be considered for future bid opportunities; THAT pending satisfactory pricing and service the contracts be extended for the reminder of the contract term (i.e., third year); and THAT the required funds be drawn from the respective year's operating budget for snow clearing and revenue generated from the seniors snow clearing program. CARRIED - 11 - 4 -11 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes February 7, 2011 CORPORATE ADVERTISING VERSUS CORPORATE NEWSLETTER Resolution #GPA- 107 -11 Moved by Councillor Hooper, seconded by Councillor Woo THAT Report COD - 008 -11 be tabled to the Special General Purpose and Administration Committee of February 25, 2011 to be considered during the Budget process. CARRIED FINANCE DEPARTMENT HEALTH BENEFIT CATEGORY BREAKDOWN Councillor Novak declared a pecuniary interest because she is a licensed insurance broker and the discussion surrounds health benefits. Councillor Novak left the room and did not participate in discussions and voting on this matter. Resolution #GPA- 108 -11 Moved by Councillor Neal, seconded by Councillor Traill THAT staff be directed to request, from our Health Benefit Insurance Carrier, a report which details a breakdown of benefit types paid out to employees of the Municipality of Clarington for the years 2008, 2009 and 2010. CARRIED SOLICITOR'S DEPARTMENT There were no reports to be considered under this section of the Agenda. CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER There were no reports to be considered under this section of the Agenda. -12- 4 -12 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes February 7, 2011 UNFINISHED BUSINESS PRESENTATION OF SHEILA HALL, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, CLARINGTON BOARD OF TRADE, REGARDING AN ECONOMIC UPDATE Resolution #GPA- 109 -11 Moved by Councillor Woo, seconded by Councillor Hooper THAT the presentation of Sheila Hall, Executive Director, Clarington Board of Trade, be received with thanks. CARRIED DELEGATION OF FRANK LOCKHART REGARDING VALLEYS 2000 Resolution #GPA- 110 -11 Moved by Councillor Hooper, seconded by Councillor Neal THAT the delegation of Rev. Frank Lockhart regarding Valleys 2000, be received; and THAT Rev. Lockhart and his Committee be thanked for their hard work and efforts in this project. CARRIED Councillor Novak returned to the room. OTHER BUSINESS There were no items considered under this section of the Agenda. COMMUNICATIONS There were no items considered under this section of the Agenda. CONFIDENTIAL REPORTS There were no items considered under this section of the Agenda. -13- 4 -13 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes February 7, 2011 ADJOURNMENT Resolution #GPA- 111 -11 Moved by Councillor Novak, seconded by Councillor Hooper THAT the meeting adjourn at 12:54 p.m MAYOR 4 -14 CARRIED -14- DEPUTY CLERK DRAFT LIST OF DELEGATIONS GPA Meeting: February 28, 2011 (a) Jacquie Hoornweg, Durham Strategic Energy Alliance (DSEA), Regarding and Update and Information on the Innovation Durham Northumberland Project (b) Jacqueline Muccio Regarding Parking which Inhibits Proper Snow Removal (c) Bob Annaert, D.G. Biddle & Associates, Regarding Report PSD- 016 -11, Regarding Draft Plan of Subdivision and Rezoning Applications (d) Clifford Curtis, Regarding Report PSD- 016 -11, Regarding Draft Plan of Subdivision and Rezoning Applications (e) Libby Racansky, Regarding Report PSD- 016 -11, Regarding Draft Plan of Subdivision and Rezoning Applications (f) Ron Richards, R.G. Richards & Associates, Regarding Report PSD - 017 -11, Regarding a Proposed Zoning By -Law Amendment to Permit the Development of a Food Store of 2,829m' and Two Smaller Buildings of 783m2 and 185m2 Respectively for Retail /Service Commercial Uses — 680 Longworth Avenue, Bowmanville Applicant: 1804603 Ontario Inc 6 -1 Leading the Way REPORT PLANNING SERVICES Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: February 28, 2011 Resolution #: By -law #: Report #: PSD- 016 -11 File #: 18T -90003 and DEV 90 -007 18T -89055 and DEV 89 -067 Subject: TWO (2) PROPOSED DRAFT PLANS OF SUBDIVISION AND TWO (2) ZONING BY -LAW AMENDMENT APPLICATIONS TO PERMIT A MIXED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OWNER: KINGSBERRY PROPERTIES (1317870 ONTARIO LIMITED) & WILLIAM TONNO CONSTRUCTION LIMITED RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report PSD- 016 -11 be received; 2. THAT the application for the proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision, submitted by Kingsberry Properties to permit the development of 70 residential units be approved, subject to the conditions contained in Attachment 5 to Report PSD- 016 -11; 3. THAT the Zoning By -law Amendment application submitted by Kingsberry Properties be approved as contained in Attachment 6 to Report PSD- 016 -11; 4. THAT the By -law authorizing the entering into a Subdivision Agreement between the Owner of Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T -90003 and the Municipality of Clarington be approved as contained in Attachment 7 to Report PSD- 016 -11; 5. THAT the application for the proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision, submitted by William Tonno Construction Ltd. to permit the development of 77 residential units be approved, subject to the conditions contained in Attachment 8 to Report PSD- 016 -11; 6. THAT the Zoning By -law Amendment application submitted by William Tonno Construction Ltd. be approved as contained in Attachment 9 to Report PSD- 016 -11; CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T (905)623 -3379 F (905)623 -0830 8 -1 REPORT NO.: PSD- 016 -11 PAGE 2 7. THAT the By -law authorizing the entering into a Subdivision Agreement between the Owner of Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T -89055 and the Municipality of Clarington be approved as contained in Attachment 10 to Report PSD- 016 -11; 8. THAT the Region of Durham Planning Department and Municipal Property Assessment Corporation be forwarded a copy of Report PSD- 016 -11 and Council's decision; and 9. THAT all interested parties listed in Report PSD- 016 -11 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. Submitted by: Da i . Crome, MCIP, RPP Director of Planning Services ATS /C P /df 18February 2011 7 Reviewed by: 4,vl�_ Fra klin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer REPORT NO.: PSD -016 -11 PAG E 3 This Report deals with two (2) separate development proposals that are abutting and closely tied to each other. Many reports prepared in support of the proposals have reviewed the lands jointly. As a result, one staff report has been prepared for the two (2) separate proposals. 1.0 APPLICATION DETAILS — "KINGSBERRY" 1.1 Owner: Kingsberry Properties (1317870 Ontario Limited) 1.2 Agent: D.G. Biddle & Associates Limited 1.3 Proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision: The proposed draft plan of subdivision includes 70 residential units consisting of 30 lots for 10.0 metre single detached dwellings, 10 lots for 12.0 metre single detached dwellings, 7 blocks for 30 townhouse dwellings, and a block for a portion of a public elementary school. 1.4' Zoning By -law Amendment Application: To change the zoning on the subject lands from "Agricultural (A)" to appropriate zones to permit the development of the proposed draft plan of subdivision. 1.5 Site Area: 6.218 hectares (15.364 acres) 2.0 APPLICATION DETAILS — "TONNO" 2.1 Owner: William Tonno Construction Limited 2.2 Agent: D.G. Biddle & Associates Limited 2.3 Proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision: The proposed draft plan of subdivision includes 77 residential units consisting of 28 lots for 10.0 metre single detached dwellings, 25 lots for 12.0 metre single detached dwellings, 6 blocks for 24 townhouse dwellings, a block for a stormwater management pond, an open space block and a block for a portion of a public elementary school. 2.4 Zoning By -law Amendment Application: To change the zoning on the subject lands from "Agricultural (A)" to appropriate zones to permit the development of the proposed draft plan of subdivision. 2.5 Site Area: 9.058 hectares (22.382 acres) III= REPORT NO.: PSD- 016 -11 3.0 LOCATION PAG E 4 3.1 The subject lands are located between Tooley Road and Trulls Road in Courtice north of George Reynolds Drive and Daiseyfield Drive. See Attachment 1 for the "Kingsberry" key map and Attachment 2 for the "Tonno" key map. 4.0 BACKGROUND 4.1 For the purpose of this report, proposed draft plan of subdivision 18T -90003 and related file DEV 90 -007 will be referred to as the "Kingsberry" applications, while the abutting proposed draft plan of subdivision 18T -89055 and related file DEV 89 -067 will be referred to as the "Tonno" applications. An air photo depicting the two sites is included as Attachment 3. 4.2 The "Kingsberry" applications were originally submitted in January 1990. The initial draft plan of subdivision proposed 116 residential units. Over the years, the applicant has submitted revisions to the proposed draft plan of subdivision with the most notable modification being the creation of a partial school block within limits of the plan which has impacted the number of units proposed. The current draft plan of subdivision proposes 70 residential units as illustrated by the chart below. Land Use Current'Pro osal 10.0 m single detached units 30 12.0 m single detached units 10 7.0 m townhouse units 30 Total Residential Units 70 Total Residential Area (ha) 2.545 Future Residential (ha) 0.042 School (ha) 1.667 0.3m Reserves (ha) 0.01 Road Allowance (ha) 1.955 Total Area of Submission (ha) 6.218 4.3 The "Tonno" applications were originally submitted in May 1989. The initial draft plan of subdivision proposed 93 residential units. Over the years, the applicant has submitted revisions to the proposed draft plan of subdivision with the most notable modifications being the creation of a partial school block and the addition of a stormwater management pond which has impacted the number of units proposed. The current draft plan of subdivision proposes 77 residential units as illustrated by the following chart. 8 -4 REPORT NO.: PSD- 016 -11 Land Use Current Proposal 10.0 m single detached units 28 12.0 m single detached units 25 7.0 m townhouse units 24 Total Residential Units 77 Total Residential Area ha 3.047 Future Residential ha 0.262 Open Space ha 1.447 School ha 0.692 Stormwater Management Pond ha 1.010 0.3m Reserves ha 0.021 Road Allowance ha 2.579 Total Area of Submission ha 9.058 PAGE 5 4.4 In November 1989, Council adopted a resolution suspending all decisions on existing and future subdivision and rezoning applications north of Nash Road pending the results of a Need and Route Study for the extension of Adelaide Avenue. The 1991 Durham Regional Official Plan recognized this need by identifying Adelaide Avenue as an arterial road, extending from Townline Road to Courtice Road. This was duplicated in the Clarington Official Plan approved in 1996. However, the alignment for the future Adelaide was not certain. 4.5 In June 2004, the Region of Durham initiated a Municipal Class Environmental Assessment for the extension of Adelaide Avenue from Townline Road to Trulls Road. The purpose of the Study was to assess the need for the extension, identify the environmental impacts of alternative solutions and the design alternatives, and finally to identify the preferred alternative. The Study was filed with the Ministry of Environment (MOE) in November 2005 and recommended the construction of a three lane urban /semi -urban road extension from Townline Road to Trulls Road with a culvert bridge crossing over Harmony and Farewell Creeks. The section of Adelaide Avenue between Trulls Road and Courtice Road was recommended to be deleted. The existing McLean Road right -of -way was incorporated into the proposed Adelaide Avenue right - of -way. Both draft plans of subdivision include a portion of Adelaide Avenue as recommended in the Environmental Assessment. 4.6 In December 2005, a "bump -up" request was submitted to the Minister of Environment by a local resident. If a given project is "bumped -up ", it is subject to an additional review and approval process, including the possibility of a formal public hearing. The primary concerns identified in the request were the crossing of the road through a provincially significant wetland, roads that may cause groundwater contamination and land pollution by spreading invasive species into environmentally sensitive areas and the use of culverts instead of free span bridges in proximity to fish spawning grounds. On May 27, 2008 the MOE denied the "bump -up" request and issued their approval to the project as laid out in the EA Study and subject to conditions of said Study. 8 -5 REPORT NO.: PSD- 016 -11 PAGE 6 4.7 An Environmental Impact Study (EIS) was prepared by Aquafor Beech Limited assessing both the "Kingsberry" and "Tonno" developments. The draft EIS was presented to the public on November 1, 2007 and the final report was completed in December, 2007. The findings of the EIS were presented in detail through public meeting report PSD- 012 -08 on February 4, 2008. Revisions have been made to the "Kingsberry" and "Tonno" developments in response to the recommendations of the EIS report. In addition, conditions of draft approval have been included implementing the recommendations of the EIS and subsequent scoped reviews as described in Sections 10.3 and 10.4. 5.0 SITE CHARACTERISTICS AND SURROUNDING USES 5.1 The subject lands are currently vacant. Less than half of the site is covered with mature trees. The balance of the site which had been cleared more than twenty years ago is in a state of re- generation. A tributary of Farewell Creek runs through the northwest corner of the site. 5.2 Surrounding Uses (Attachment 3) North - Existing large -lot residential units on lots of record and vacant lands outside the limits of the Courtice Urban Area South - Urban Residential — Kassinger Subdivision East - Urban Residential (Courtice Homestead Subdivision Plan 40M -2419) West - Urban Residential and Environmental Protection Area - Existing large -lot residential units on lots of record within the Courtice Urban Area; Farewell Creek and associated valleylands 6.0 PROVINCIAL POLICY 6.1 Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) The subject applications were submitted prior to the release of the 2005 PPS and prior to the release of the 1997 PPS. At the time of the original application a PPS regarding land use planning and management of natural heritage resources had not been issued. 6.2 Growth Plan The subject applications were submitted prior to the Growth Plan coming into effect (June 16, 2006). While under the legislation, the subject applications shall continue as if the Plan had not come into effect, the subject draft plans of subdivision were reviewed against the Growth Plan policies to provide a perspective on the changing policies. The subject draft plans of subdivision are within a designated greenfield area. Greenfield areas are to be designed as complete communities offering a range of residential and employment uses that support various modes of transportation, provide high quality open spaces and create vibrant neighbourhoods. REPORT NO.: PSD- 016 -11 PAG E 7 The designated greenfield area of each upper -tier (i.e. across the Region of Durham) will be planned to achieve a minimum density target that is not less than 50 residents and jobs combined per hectare. For discussion purposes, the subject developments combined would achieve a density of approximately 34 residents and jobs per hectare. While this density appears low, this calculation was performed for these developments in isolation of all other developments in the greenfield area. The density target is to be calculated on a Regional level which would average the varying types of residential and employment developments across the broader greenfield area land base. The proposed draft plans of subdivision are satisfying the current Official Plan policies relating to low and medium density developments and the population and housing projections for the neighbourhood. 7.0 OFFICIAL PLAN POLICIES 7.1 Durham Regional Official Plan The lands are designated Living Area within the Durham Regional Official Plan. Lands designated as Living Area permit the development of communities with defined boundaries, incorporating the widest possible variety of housing types, sizes and tenure. The proposed developments conform to the Durham Regional Official Plan. 7.2 Clarington Official Plan The subject lands are predominantly designated Urban Residential. There is also an Environmental Protection Area designation related to a branch of the Farewell Creek. The Medium Density symbols and a Public Elementary School symbol are also identified on the subject lands. The lands are within the Highland Neighbourhood, which has a population target of 4,100 people and a housing target of 1,400 units. The extension of Adelaide Avenue is designated as a Type 'C' Arterial and generally forms the north boundary of the urban residential designation. In accordance with Map B2, a Collector Road in the vicinity of Street "A" is to connect Adelaide Avenue with George Reynolds, which is also a Collector Road. The remaining streets within the proposed plan of subdivision are classified as Local Roads. Low Density residential uses shall be developed at a density of 10 -30 units per net residential hectare. The predominant housing form shall be single detached, semi- detached and duplex to a maximum height of 2.5 stories. Medium Density residential uses shall be developed at 31 -60 units per net residential hectare. The predominant housing form shall be townhouses, triplex/quadraplex, and low -rise apartments to a maximum of four storeys. The Clarington Official Plan requires the minimum site area for future elementary schools on full municipal sewers to be approximately 2.5 hectares in size. The proposed school block is 2.36 ha in area divided between the two subject subdivision applications. M REPORT NO.: PSD- 016 -11 PAGE 8 Official Plan policies require an Environmental Impact Study (EIS) be undertaken for development applications located on lands within or adjacent to a Natural Heritage Feature. Map C identifies the lands to be on the Lake Iroquois Beach. An EIS is also required for development proposals within 120 metres of the boundary of a wetland or wetland complex. Map 'C' identifies the branch of the Farewell Creek as a cold water stream with significant valleys as well as wetlands along the north limits of the submissions. An EIS has been completed in accordance with the policies of the Clarington Official Plan. The proposed developments conform to the Clarington Official Plan. 8.0 ZONING BY -LAW CONFORMITY 8.1 Within Comprehensive Zoning By -law 84 -63 as amended the lands are zoned "Agricultural (A) ". Amendments to the Zoning By -law are required in order for development to proceed. 9.0 PUBLIC MEETINGS AND COMMENTS RECEIVED 9.1 Previous public meetings were held on November 20, 1989, April 2, 1990, July 3, 2000, March 4, 2002 and February 4, 2008 to review the previous submissions. An Open House for the Environmental Impact Study (EIS) was held on November 1, 2007. The Open House was attended by approximately 40 residents. 9.2 Numerous inquiries and submissions have been received since the applications were submitted in 1989. Concerns and comments expressed to date focus on the following matters: Natural Environment • Development impacts • Opposing residential development of the lands • Requesting additional lands be protected • Adequacy of natural mapping and buffer areas • Implementation of transplant plan and compensation areas • Impacts on wells in the area School Site Both for and against the school site Subdivision Construction and Design • Timing of development • Construction traffic, noise and dust • Consistency with neighbouring development • Need for trails • Sustainability of the development — unit mix :1 REPORT NO.: PSD- 016 -11 PAG E 9 Trespassing • Fencing should be installed by the developer to discourage trespassing upon sensitive lands and the privately held valley lands in order to minimize associated liability. Stormwater Management & Erosion along Farewell Creek • Stormwater Management Pond design should be visually pleasing • Ponding north of Islay Court and flooding of basements in the area • Direction of stormwater flows • Potential erosion and destabilization of the Farewell Creek valley wall due to increased flows • Properties owners to the west of the "Tonno" subdivision in opposition to the developments have concerns relating to the existing conditions of the watercourse and the impacts of further development: ➢ concerns that the watercourse runs at the toe of a marginally stable valley wall; ➢ concerns of slope failure and potential subsequent liability; and ➢ suggest acquisition of drainage easements (with full indemnification) or outright acquisition and transfer of major portions of the valley lands into public ownership. 10.0 SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION 10.1 Adelaide Avenue Environmental Assessment As noted in the Background section of this report, the Adelaide Avenue Environmental Assessment began in 2004 and concluded in 2008. MOE issued their approval of the preferred alignment subject to conditions relating to noise and construction mitigation. The road construction must be implemented in the manner it was developed and designed as set out in the Environmental Study Report, inclusive of all mitigating measures. Because of the natural features in the area of the alignment, Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority and the Ministry of Natural Resources will be involved in the detailed design phase. Permits will be required prior to construction. 10.2 Aquafor Beech Ltd. Environmental Impact Study In March 2006 Aquafor Beech Limited was retained by the Municipality to conduct a joint Environmental Impact Study (EIS) for the "Kingsberry" and "Tonno" proposals. The expense for the study was borne by the applicants. The consultant examined the site in the spring, summer and fall of 2006. The draft EIS findings were presented to the public at an open house on November 1, 2007 at the Courtice Community Complex. The conclusion of the EIS supports development provided the design compensates for and /or avoids impacts where possible to; amphibian breeding, significant plant species, the riparian wetland feature, and the small wetland on the north side of the Adelaide Avenue extension and on adjacent lands. The report identified the need to compensate for wetland habitat which must interconnect with upland forest habitat to [CK REPORT NO.: PSD- 016 -11 PAGE 10 support amphibian habitats. The provision of a 30 metre setback is required to act as a buffer from the Provincially Significant Wetland. Regionally and locally rare plant species are to be transplanted in either the buffer area or wetlands to the north. EIS mapping shows the location of the proposed buffer areas with opportunity for wetland creation. Several recommendations relating to subdivision design were provided. A copy of the Environmental Constraint Map from the EIS is included as Attachment 4. 10.3 Scoped Environmental Impact Study — Proposed Amphibian/Wetland Compensation Plan and Plant Salvage Plan The Aquafor Beech EIS noted the need for a further review by an environmental consultant to ensure the EIS recommendations are addressed. In October 2008, Niblett Environmental Associates Inc. submitted a report which examined plans for compensatory amphibian breeding ponds, the potential for hydrological impact on the remaining wetlands and plans for the transplant of rare plant species into the wetland buffer area. While the plant salvage plan was generally accepted by CLOCA, it was noted that additional work was required for the amphibian /wetland compensation area. 10.4 Amphibian/Wetland Compensation Plan In May 2010 Niblett Environmental Associates Inc. submitted a subsequent report for the required amphibian /wetland compensation. While approximately 0.53 ha of pocket wetlands would be impacted by the residential development, additional pocket wetlands were found within the limits of Adelaide Avenue road allowance and would require compensation. For this reason, and insufficient land available south of Adelaide Avenue, the report recommends the creation of two new ponds, north of Adelaide Avenue, having a total minimum area of not less than 0.67 ha which represents the total amount of compensation required for the development, including the construction of Adelaide Avenue as a local road. The report provides design features for the ponds and recommends specific construction techniques. 10.5 Erosion Assessment An erosion assessment was prepared to assess erosion impacts of the stormwater management pond and outfall location on the both the tributary and a portion of the main branch of the Farewell Creek. The branch and tributary were deemed to be in a stressed or transitional state under existing conditions. The report concludes by determining that stormwater contributions from the proposed subdivision are not expected to exacerbate rates of erosion beyond existing conditions. 10.6 Slope Stability Report A slope stability study, as revised, was completed for the sloped lands located west and south of the stormwater management pond. The study concluded that the stormwater management pond must be constructed behind the Long -Term Stable Slop Line derived using an 8.0 metre toe erosion allowance. The report offers recommendations to be followed during the development of the lands to ensure the slope does not fail and indicates that an impermeable geosynthetic clay liner or a 1.0 m thick soil clay liner be installed for pond construction. 8 -10 REPORT NO.: PSD- 016 -11 PAGE 11 10.7 Stormwater Drainage and Conceptual Servicing Report A joint report was submitted which addresses all local and regional servicing issues. The report includes a site servicing and stormwater management plan that identifies the extension of services required to proceed with the developments. Water and sanitary services will be extended from the south to service the lots. A stormwater management pond will be constructed in the southwest corner of the "Tonno" subdivision and will accommodate stormwater from both subdivisions. A portion of foundation drainage from the "Kingsberry" development will drain south to an existing stormwater management pond in an adjacent plan of subdivision. 10.8 Historical Studies A number of studies and reports were submitted with the original applications, including an Environmental Impact Analysis, a Hydrogeological Evaluation and a preliminary Stormwater Management Study. While these have provided useful background information, these have been superseded over time. 11.0 AGENCY COMMENTS 11.1 Clarington Emergency and Fire Services, Clarington Operations, Rogers Cable, Durham Region Transit and Hydro One offered no objections to the proposal. Bell Canada and Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. offered no objections to the proposal and requested standard conditions of draft approval. 11.2 The Clarington Engineering Services Department has offered the following comments relating to the "Kingsberry" development. The attached conditions of draft approval include conditions relating to: Adelaide Avenue Extension The northerly limit of the proposed development is designated in the current Official Plan as the location for a future mid -block arterial road commonly referred to as Adelaide Avenue. All aspects of the construction of Adelaide Avenue must conform to the requirements of the approved Environmental Assessment, the Region of Durham and the Municipality of Clarington. The Municipality of Clarington will not be cost sharing in the construction of Adelaide Avenue. • Stormwater Management The majority of stormwater will be accommodated by the stormwater management pond to be constructed as part of the "Tonno" development. Should the "Kingsberry" development proceed in advance of the "Tonno" lands, arrangements must be made for the construction of the pond on the adjacent lands. A portion of stormwater drainage from the proposed subdivision will be tributary to a stormwater management facility situated in the adjacent Kassinger Subdivision (Plan 10M -809). The Municipality is required to collect an appropriate share of the cost of any oversize or external works from benefiting 8 -11 REPORT NO.: PSD- 016 -11 PAGE 12 developers. Since the developer is benefitting from the downstream Kassinger pond, they will be required to pay their appropriate share of the works. Grading and Drainage The applicant's engineer will be required to prepare a Master Grading and Drainage Plan that details the configuration of the on -site storm sewer system (minor system) and the conveyance of the overland flow (major system) from the subject development. The required Plan must identify all tributary watershed areas, outfall locations and proposed stormwater management facilities. The Engineering Services Department is generally satisfied with the servicing scheme and further review will take place during the detailed design stage. A condition of draft plan approval has been included which requires the approval of engineering drawings at the local and regional level prior to development. Cash -in -Lieu of Parkland A cash -in -lieu of parkland payment is required in accordance with the Planning Act and By -law 95 -104. Standard Technical Comments The developer must also satisfy other standard technical requirements relating to 0.3 metre reserves, sight triangles, utilities, removal of a temporary turning circle, entering into a subdivision agreement, preparation and approval of a phasing plan, and complying with design criteria and standard drawing provisions. 11.3 The Clarington Engineering Services Department has offered the following comments relating to the "Tonno" development. The attached conditions of draft approval include conditions relating to: • Adelaide Avenue Extension Same as above. • Street A The owner is responsible for the acquisition and construction of a small segment of roadway that is the connecting link between Street A and George Reynolds Drive. • Stormwater Management All stormwater will be accommodated by the stormwater management pond to be constructed in the southwest corner of the development. Appropriate arrangements will be made between the two developers for the construction of the pond. • Grading and Drainage Same as above. • Cash -in -Lieu of Parkland Same as above. 8 -12 REPORT NO.: PSD- 016 -11 Standard Technical Comments Same as above. PAGE 13 11.4 The Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority has reviewed all supporting documentation and has provided their concurrence on the findings of the reports, including the servicing and stormwater management report, all work relating to environmental impacts, and the erosion and slope stability reports. In response to the findings of the erosion assessment, Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority recommends that the developers undertake erosion monitoring on the tributary and a portion of the main branch of the Farewell Creek. The required monitoring plan will identify potential measures to correct potential erosion problems as a result of the proposed development in the event such erosion occurs. The attached conditions of draft approval for each subdivision include conditions relating to: • Stormwater management; • Relocation of rare plant species; • Construction of the proposed amphibian /wetland compensation feature; • Monitoring of the amphibian /wetland feature post- construction; and • Monitoring of erosion conditions of the tributary of Farewell Creek and a portion of the main branch. 11.5 The Region of Durham has no objection to the approval of the two draft plans of subdivisions and has offered conditions of approval. Regional services are available and the requirements of the Adelaide Avenue Environmental Assessment have been highlighted, including the preparation of a noise study to identify impacts from Adelaide Avenue. The Region would be able to cost -share in the construction of Adelaide Avenue and for the construction of wetland /amphibian compensation areas attributed to Adelaide Avenue, subject to the Region's Cost Sharing Policy. The Region also reiterated the need to obtain CLOCA's approval on the EIS. 11.6 Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board is satisfied with the school site proposed for the neighbourhood through the acquisition of a partial school block from each subdivision. The school board has provided a number of conditions for inclusion in the conditions of draft approval for each subdivision. 12.0 STAFF COMMENTS 12.1 The subject applications have been on file for over 20 years and have been reviewed against applicable provincial, regional and municipal land use policies. Since the completion and approval of the Adelaide Avenue Environmental Assessment, the developers have been addressing concerns raised by staff, agencies and the public. 12.2 As part of the registration of the "Tonno" plan of subdivision, the Open Space block which includes the watercourse, wetland areas and a 30 metre buffer, will be dedicated to the Municipality of Clarington and will form part of the municipal open space system. 8 -13 REPORT NO.: PSD- 016 -11 PAGE 14 At this time, there are no plans for a trail system, but as lands continue to be dedicated /acquired in the area, recreational opportunities may arise. 12.3 Conditions of draft approval have been imposed relating to the implementation of the findings of the Environmental Impact Study and the detailed reviews relating to the relocation of sensitive plant species and the creation of wetland /amphibian compensation areas. These conditions will ensure that development proceeds in a manner which will have the least environmental impact on sensitive lands. 12.4 During the public consultation process, several comments were received. Staff have spent a considerable amount of time addressing concerns raised from the public and are of the opinion that the proposed draft plans of subdivision strike a balance between planned growth and environmental protection: • Input received from the members of the public to date focus on preserving the subject lands in a natural state. At the same time, these lands are within the Urban Boundary and are designated for residential development in both the Clarington Official Plan and Region of Durham Official Plan. The Urban Boundary was established to provide areas for urban growth in an effort to curb urban sprawl into surrounding rural areas. • Although neighbouring landowners considered the proposed density too high, the proposed housing mix satisfies the applicable Official Plan policies by offering a mix of low and medium density units in keeping with the approved density targets for the neighbourhood. The density is lower than required through the Growth Plan, however, these applications pre -date said policy and are not bound by the newer legislation. Concerns have also been raised relating to erosion along Farewell Creek, slope stability and liability. Staff has held several meetings attended by the developers, their consulting team and concerned residents on this matter. Detailed work was done by professional engineers relating to erosion and slope stability and the developer has demonstrated that the proposed development will be outside the stable slope limit. The pond will also have a clay or geosynthetic liner which will increase the imperviousness of the pond and prevent potential failure. The recommendations have been accepted by Staff and CLOCA and the developers will be required to undertake erosion monitoring of portions of Farewell Creek. They will also be responsible, financial and otherwise, for developing plans for mitigating areas of concern should they arise. • Area residents also expressed concerns regarding ponding and the flooding of basements in the vicinity of Islay Court. As part of the detailed engineering review the applicants must demonstrate that post development flows will not impact neighbouring property owners from a stormwater drainage perspective. • The need for another public elementary school site was questioned by the residents. At this time, Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board has confirmed the need for a school site within the neighbourhood. While the plans of subdivision have provided for school blocks, it may be quite some time before a school will be built. There is 8 -14 REPORT NO.: PSD- 016 -11 PAGE 15 also a possibility that the demand for a school would decrease and the school board may not proceed with this site at all. Issues regarding future trespassing have been managed by adding conditions of approval that would require fencing along the westerly limits of the stormwater management facility and signage along the westerly limits of the open space block. Signage across the open space block is preferred by both Staff and CLOCA since it is less likely to impede wildlife movement and less likely to impact flows within the watercourse. It was requested during the public process that the stormwater management facility be treated as an amenity feature. A preliminary concept has been approved by the Engineering Services Department which provides for buffer plantings, a continuous hard surface trail (combined with the maintenance access) and a lookout feature with seating, a ledgerock retaining wall and decorative fencing. Final details will be resolved through the final approval process and a condition of approval has been added in that regard. Should the approved developments interfere with the well or private water supply of an area landowner, the developer is required to either connect the affected party to the municipal water supply system or provide a new well or private water system so that water supplied to the affected party shall be of quality and quantity at least equal to the quality and quantity of water enjoyed by the affected party prior to the interference. It is the current practice of the Region of Durham to install a water service to the affected owners' property limit, where feasible. It would be developer's responsibility to compensate the property owner for associated private installation and connection costs. 12.5 The subject lands are designated for a mix of low and medium density residential development subject to meeting the development policies of the Regional and Clarington Official Plans. A school block and environmental protection areas are also identified. The supporting documentation and Staff and agency comments have all demonstrated that the applications can be approved as the provisions of the Official Plans have been satisfied, subject to the conditions of draft approval. 12.6 The proposed developments are interconnected from a servicing and transportation perspective, Staff will be involved in reviewing the required phasing plans to ensure that development proceeds in a logical and orderly fashion. 12.7 At this time, the Region of Durham is not planning to construct Adelaide Avenue, construction is subject to their budgeting process. From the Municipality's perspective, both the "Kingsberry" and "Tonno" developments rely on the portions of Adelaide Avenue that cross the two subdivisions. Therefore, it will be the developer's responsibility to build Adelaide Avenue at a local road standard subject to cost - sharing arrangements with the Region of Durham and in accordance with the approved Environmental Assessment. Those portions of Adelaide Avenue will be dedicated to the 8 -15 REPORT NO.: PSD- 016 -11 Municipality of Clarington until such time as the Region proceeds with the full construction of the arterial road. PAGE 16 12.8 It is recommended that the residential portion of the subject lands be placed in the "Holding - Urban Residential Exception ((H)R2 -58) Zone" and the "Holding - Urban Residential Exception ((H)R2 -60) Zone" to allow for the layout of the 10.0 metre and 12.0 metre lots, while the "Holding — Urban Residential Exception ((H) R3 -40) Zone" would allow for the 7.0 metre street townhouse lots. The zones applied reflect current standards seen in newer subdivisions with respect to lot coverage and setbacks. The Holding provision will be utilized to ensure adequate access and services are in place prior to development and will be lifted by Council when the appropriate conditions are met. The open space block and stormwater management facility will be zoned Environmental Protection (EP). The proposed Zoning By -law Amendments are included as Attachment 6 and Attachment 9. 12.9 Each applicant has provided their concurrence with the Conditions of Draft Plan Approval as set out in Attachment 5 and Attachment 8. The conditions include those referenced above and those which are standard and apply to all development in the Municipality of Clarington. 12.10 All taxes payable to the Municipality of Clarington have been paid in full. 13.0 CONCLUSIONS 13.1 In consideration of the findings of all supporting studies, comments received from circulated agencies and area residents, and based on review of the proposal, staff recommends that the "Kingsberry" Draft Plan of Subdivision and Zoning By -law Amendment and the "Tonno" Draft Plan of Subdivision and Zoning By -law Amendment be approved. Staff Contact: Anne Taylor Scott Attachments: Attachment 1 - "Kingsberry" Key Map Attachment 2 - "Tonno" Key Map Attachment 3 - Air Photo of the "Kingsberry" & "Tonno" Subdivisions Attachment 4 - Aquafor Beech EIS Environmental Constraint Map Attachment 5 - "Kingsberry" Conditions of Draft Approval and Draft Plan Attachment 6 - "Kingsberry" Zoning By -law Amendment Attachment 7 - "Kingsberry" By -law Authorizing Subdivision Agreement Attachment 8 - "Tonno" Conditions of Draft Approval and Draft Plan Attachment 9 - "Tonno" Zoning By -law Amendment Attachment 10 - "Tonno" By -law Authorizing Subdivision Agreement 8 -16 REPORT NO.: PSD- 016 -11 Interested parties to be notified of Council and Committee's decision: Mark Foley Cora Tonno Bob Annaert Rocco Berlino Michael Smith Brenda & Louie Strumenikovsky Ronald Whalley Michael Kirkus Linda Garrett Nigel Sullivan Johanne Joly Doris Reid Mike Munce Fred Gilmour Philip John Armstrong Timothy & Beverly Collins Darlene &Phil Yahn Bill & Evelyn Mason Peter & Julie Guimond Michael & Deborah Rogan Lorraine & Larry Barlow Daniel Mallen & Donna Lamb Lorraine & Jim Porter Robin Thomas Keith S. & P. Sweeny Mark & Shannon Handy Klaus & J. Bockhop Scott & K. Barriball Paul & Stacey Barta Brad & Carolyn Mullin Emily Pardy Daniel Sharp Derek Hampson & Mary McCracken Bill & D. Nott Scott McConnell Henry & M. McTear Scott Devlin Cheryl & Paul Kelly Scott & Tricia Mitchell Brian Broadbend & Joelle Dove David Ross & Amy Wilson -Ross John & Norma Hardy Scott Millar & Milanie Campbell Joel Perron & Katherine Ross Arthur Mann Sean Cumming & Charlene Kay Marcel & Joan LaPointe Kerry Meydem Erhard Witzke Ivan Kehoe Bill Rothman Cliff Curtis Brad Greentree Nick Mensnik Darlene Smith John Sklavos Mike & Carolyn Pennell Gary Norwick David Tonkin Don & Doreen Hicks Lianne Dixon Bob & Joan Blackburn Libby Racansky William & Margaret Todd Jane DeShane & Allan Harrison Peter Slofstra Donna MacMillan Joyce O'Connell S. Pustil Colleen Konoby David & Kimberly Elliott PAM= 17 4 E:� 00 1 0D 0 m 0 �D C/)� 3. C3 rn0 1 � Property Location Map (Courtice) N /v N Subject Site ADELAIDE AVENUE 0.K51 taKw Y !LK 8 1 I LORY Mtt'T . 7 9 1 - ! 6. f s 26 27 28 s BLK 48 SCHOOL 10 1 B 5 11 L 4 1 4 12 1 < 3 13 1 s S s s 1 1 : s 29 30 31 32 Q � �` • i 9 ' 3 j® x� t4 It g 1 _ 33 ! 2 t5 1 16 2 : 35 i 1 1 36 i i s •, s 37 = e 25 s 38 1 39 id S MAX ' iK1a ! 17 ! 16 19 1 20 21 2 23 24 i : 40 DEV 90 -007 Zoning By -law Amendment DAISEYFILED AVENUE 18T -90003 IT Lu Draft Plan of Subdivision cFok CUO) c o o�os Owner: Kingsberry Properties 0 m 0 �D C/)� 3. C3 rn0 1 � om | CID —i o CD CD cm Property Location Map (Courtice) IV Subject Site ADELAIDE AVENUE 75.1X62 BLK 64 WEN SPACE 22 SCHOOL 30 in Ems 0 31 32 29 25 P2 SLK 61 COURT IV SWm POND 7S ,, _ . - ., - 53 35 39 40 TA2- n- n- DEV 89-067 Zoning By-law Amendment ISLAY COURT GEORGE REYNOLDS DRIVE 18T-89055 Draft Plan of Subdivision Owner: William Tonno Construction Ltd. JURA COURT ARRAN COURT —i o CD CD cm n Ago K. 0 _ ., iz gr Y P f� • 44, 1 Wt�.k NIS ,fir► �IL ji - Vii= � _� j�; ,•� � `.' � � �� � �� 21 Arm VIAp� '�� rte} lr'} IP'!ib %� $ r� ,i `. P I 4 g t " ` rg .+• ✓ _._ To �' •k� �� , - ,,��� r ���S;�b` ���I� � � ,Q'�Z.y 4„r.711� i '.*�����Mi1t�i�F.`e.��' +. r 4 !? ti,e .. f 4 En ►vironmentral Con:stnaint sm .K, y 'r rY E e+}•, .�•tr� ..e ,��!' t * '! a +R.� ,� h �• .sir � w j�i. � . v r rr 10 H"9�` •*� 4 + �; v w ,- .; y rt. ti ' } -t • ' "P AVWl .iS �- - `i .'..� «' _ •. try' �4" '. 4 *t ±. Legend a r « f1E + A Regionally Significant Flora ® Provincially Significant Wetlands ` , �1„• Beggars Ticks r� Opportunities for Wetland Creation Fringed Gentian Adelaide Extension ROW td H Slendeeaved Agalius 4�. 30m Offset to PSW Boundary j ,.�•- Locally Significant Flora study-Area ---� °_• ,' z '"• 0 Bottle Gentian O ...�.: ,* � - � - - • y 0 Wild Geranium f +� _ Woodland Horsetail ! _ $ Area-Sensitive Bird Species O Alder Flycatcher Figure ure 6 ;31 D Q Ma g nolia Warbler Environmental Constraint QO 0 j o 3 N _► CD � O ,A Attachment 5 To Report PSD- 016 -11 CONDITIONS OF DRAFT APPROVAL FILE NO.: 18T -90003 PLAN IDENTIFICATION The Owner shall have the final plan prepared on the basis of approved Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T -90003 prepared by D.G. Biddle & Associates Limited identified as project number 93055, dated May 2009 and last revised September 2010, and further red -line revised, which illustrates 40 single detached dwelling lots, 7 blocks for 30 street townhouse dwelling units, a 1.67 ha partial school block, a 0.042 ha partial development block, roads and 0.3 metre reserves on a total of 6.218 hectares. REQUIRED RED -LINE REVISIONS 1. The proposed draft plan of subdivision shall be revised to add 0.3 m reserves along the entire frontage adjacent to Adelaide Avenue and along Block 48 and Mallory Street. FINAL PLAN REQUIREMENTS 2. The Owner shall dedicate the road allowances included in this draft plan as public highways on the final plan. 3. The Owner shall name road allowances included in this draft plan to the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Durham and the Municipality of Clarington. 4. The Owner shall convey a 0.3 metre reserve across the entire frontage of the draft plan along Adelaide Avenue shown as Blocks 50 and 51 to the Municipality of Clarington. 5. The Owner shall convey a 0.3 metre reserve across the entire frontage of Block 48 along Daisyfield Drive and Firwood Avenue shown as Blocks 53, 54 and 55 to the Municipality of Clarington. 6. The Owner shall convey a 0.3 metre reserve across the width of Adelaide Avenue at the western limits of the proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision 187- 90003 shown as Block 52 to the Municipality of Clarington. The 0.3 metre reserve described as Block 52 shall be lifted upon the completion of Adelaide Avenue over proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T -89055 subject to the approval of the Director of Engineering Services. 7. The Owner shall convey sight triangles at the intersection and corners of streets within the draft plan to the Municipality of Clarington. Page 1 of 14 (18T- 90003) 8 -22 February 18, 2011 8. The Owner shall terminate any deadends and /or open sides of road allowances created by this draft plan in 0.3 metre reserve(s) to be conveyed to the Municipality of Clarington to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services. 9. The Owner shall obtain, municipal approval of the zoning for the land uses shown on the approved draft plan in accordance with the provisions of the Planning Act. 10. Prior to final approval of the plan, the Owner shall confirm that the stormwater management pond satisfies the Municipality's Design Criteria as amended from time to time and can be accommodated wholly within Block 61, Plan 18T- 89055. Minor adjustments to the limits of Block 61 may be considered subject to the approval of the Director of Engineering Services and the Director of Planning Services. Prior to final approval of the plan, the Owner's Environmental consultant shall confirm that the boundary of the stormwater management pond maintains a minimum 30 metre setback from the limits of the Provincially Significant Wetland. REQUIREMENTS TO BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO REGISTRATION OF THE PLAN 11, The Owner shall prepare an Environmental Sustainability Plan, prior to final approval, for approval by the Director of Planning Services and the Director of Engineering Services. This plan shall identify specific measures on how development in Plan 18T -90003 will ensure the protection, conservation and enhancement of air, water, and ecological features and functions, energy and other resources and heritage resources. As a minimum, the report shall address; i) Energy conservation measures for new homes, such as the construction and operation of new residential building to a minimum rating of 80 or more in accordance with Natural Resources Canada "EnerGuide for New Houses" or equivalent certification system; ii) Water conservation measures for new homes such as the Water Sense program or equivalent program; iii) Use of environmentally friendly materials or finishes in the dwellings; iv) Use of energy efficient infrastructure, such as LED lighting, which .would have the effect of reducing energy costs and light pollution; and v) The preparation of a community education hand -book on the environmentally sensitive areas in the neighbourhood. 12. The Owner, together with the Owner of Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T- 89055, shall prepare a Community Theme and Urban Design Implementation Plan, prior to final approval, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning Services and Director of Engineering Services. This Plan shall confirm and control the intended pattern of development in plans 18T -90003 and 18T- 89055. The Plan shall include the proposed network of roads, transit, pedestrian and bicycle routes, the location of specific features, sites and residential lots within the neighbourhood such as corner lots, and T- intersections that require specific lot and building Page 2 of 14 (18T- 90003) February 18, 2011 8 -23 placement, orientation and architectural features, design concepts for community theming" including gateway treatments, landscape treatments, lighting fixtures, fencing details and related design issues for the overall design, location and configuration of trails and open space buffers. 13. The Owner shall submit to the Municipality of Clarington and the Regional Municipality of Durham, for review and approval, an acoustic report (and addendum, where applicable) prepared by an acoustic engineer based on projected traffic volumes provided by the Durham Region Planning Department and recommending noise attenuation measures for the draft plan in accordance with the Ministry of the. Environment guidelines. The Owner shall agree in the Municipality of Clarington subdivision agreement to implement the recommended noise control measures. The agreement shall contain a full and complete reference to the noise report (i.e. author, title, date and any revisions /addenda thereto) and shall include any required warning clauses identified in the acoustic report. The Owner shall provide the Region with a copy of the subdivision agreement containing such provisions prior to final approval of the plan. 14. The Owner shall engage a qualified professional to carry out to the satisfaction of the Ministry of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation, a Stage 2 Archaeological Assessment of the entire development property and mitigate, through preservation or resource removal and documentation, adverse impacts to any significant archaeological resources found. No demolition, grading or other soil disturbances shall take place on the subject property prior to the Ministry of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation confirming that all archaeological resource concerns have been met including . licensing and resource conservation requirements. 15. The Owner shall retain a professional engineer to prepare and submit a Master Drainage and Lot Grading Plan to the Director of Engineering Services for review and approval. All plans and drawings must conform to the Municipality's Design Criteria as amended from time to time. 16. The Owner shall retain a professional engineer to prepare and submit a Servicing Plan to the Director of Engineering Services for review and approval. In the event that development within Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T -90003 proceeds in advance of Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T- 89055, the Servicing Plan shall provide for suitable service connections and easements over lands within Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T- 89055. All plans and drawings must conform to the Municipality's Design Criteria as amended from time to time. .17. The Owner shall retain a professional engineer to prepare and submit a Street Lighting Plan, including photometric details on a street layout, to the Director of Engineering Services for review and approval. All plans and drawings must conform to the Municipality's Design Criteria as amended from time to time. Page 3 of 14 (18T- 90003) February 18, 2011 8 -24 18. The Owner shall submit plans showing the proposed phasing to the Region of Durham and the Municipality of Clarington for review and approval if this subdivision is to be developed by more than one phase. Full development of the draft plan will require all external accesses to be constructed, including access to Adelaide Avenue. The specific number of lots available for building permits in any single phase of the development will be determined at the engineering stage and may require the construction of suitable service connections over lands within Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T -89055 and in accordance with the approved Servicing Plan. The approval of the phasing plan shall be at the sole discretion of the Director of Engineering Services. The Municipality shall require the preparation of a subdivision agreement for each phase of development. 19. The Owner shall retain a professional engineer to prepare and submit plans to the Municipality of Clarington and the Region of Durham detailing the design and construction of Adelaide Avenue in accordance with the findings and recommendations of the approved Class Environmental Assessment under the Environmental Assessment Act. The Owner shall be responsible for fulfilling the conditions imposed by the Ministry of Environment and shall be responsible for all permits and approvals prior to construction. 20. The Owner shall retain a qualified landscape architect to prepare and submit a Landscaping Plan to the Director of Engineering Services and the Director of Planning Services for review and approval. The Landscaping Plan shall reflect the design criteria of the Municipality as amended from time to time. 21. In the event that development within Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T -90003 proceeds in advance of Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T- 89055, the Owner shall prepare a Landscape Plan for the stormwater management pond for review and approval of the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority and the Municipality of Clarington. The stormwater management pond is to be treated as an amenity feature. 22. Prior to registration of any portion of the subject draft plan the Owner must demonstrate how perpetual maintenance of any blocks identified as "Part Lots or Blocks" will be undertaken. All part lots will be pre - serviced with water, sanitary and storm sewers to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services. Further, the Owner agrees that until such time as the necessary lands are acquired to complete Block 49, these lands shall be maintained in accordance with the Municipality of Clarington's Property Standards By -law, as amended from time to time. 23. Prior to any on -site grading, and /or construction associated with the proposed plan of subdivision, the Owner shall provide confirmation to the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority and the Director of Planning Services that the regionally significant plant species identified on -site have been relocated in accordance with the requirements of the Tonno /Kingsberry Proposed Page 4 of 14 (18T- 90003) February 18, 2011 8 -25 Amphibian/Wetland Compensation Plan and Plant Salvage Plan prepared by Niblett Environmental Associates Inc., dated October 2008. 24. Prior to any on -site grading, and/or construction associated with the proposed plan of subdivision, the Owner shall submit to and obtain approval of the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority and the Municipality of Clarington for plans detailing the proposed amphibian /wetland compensation feature in accordance with the Tonno /Kingsberry Proposed Amphibian/Wetland Compensation Plan completed by Niblett Environmental Associates Inc., dated May 2010. 25. Prior to the removal of the existing amphibian wetland areas within the proposed plan of subdivision, the Owner shall provide confirmation that construction of the proposed amphibian /wetland compensation features within the approved areas north of the Adelaide Road extension have been completed and have been allowed to establish for one growing season to the satisfaction of the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority and the Director of Planning Services. 26. The Owner agrees to submit for review and approval of the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority and the Director of Planning Services, and undertake, a monitoring plan for the proposed amphibian /wetland compensation feature, which will assess the works undertaken in regards to productivity of the feature. The submitted monitoring plan shall also identify the length of time required to assess the productivity of the constructed feature. 27. The Owner agrees to submit for review and approval of the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority and the Director of Engineering Services, and be 100% responsible financial and otherwise for undertaking, an erosion monitoring plan on the tributary of Farewell Creek, as approved, from the outfall of the stormwater management facility, up to and including a portion of the main branch of the Farewell Creek, to monitor erosion conditions. The monitoring plan shall identify an appropriate length of time to undertake such monitoring as well as identify potential measures to correct potential erosion problems, as a result of the proposed development. The monitoring plan will derive a cost estimate for the identified measures and the Owner shall provide for securities equal to 100% of the costs to complete such work, subject to the approval of the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority and the Director of Engineering Services. 28. The Owner shall remove all existing buildings and structures that do not comply with the Zoning By -law requirements prior to commencement of the construction of the Plan of Subdivision. REQUIREMENTS TO BE INCLUDED IN SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT 29. All land dedications, easements, sight triangles and reserves as required by the Municipality of Clarington for this development must be granted to the Municipality of Clarington free and clear of all encumbrances and in a form satisfactory to the Municipality's solicitor. rage 5 of 94 (9UT- 90003) 8 -26 February 18, 2011 30. In the event that development within Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T -90003 proceeds in advance of Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T- 89055, the Owner shall construct the necessary stormwater services, including the stormwater management pond with Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T- 89055, to service the development subject to the approval of the Director of Engineering Services. The Owner shall be responsible for 100% of the construction of the necessary stormwater pond and services subject to cost sharing agreements with the abutting land owner of Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T- 89055. 31. Foundation drainage from lots within Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T -90003 will be tributary to an existing stormwater management pond (Registered Plan of Subdivision 10M -809) and the Owner therefore agrees to contribute the appropriate share of the cost of any oversized or external works that benefit Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T -90003 subject to the approval of the Director of Engineering Services. 32. The Owner shall dedicate Adelaide Avenue at a width of 20.0 metres to the Municipality of Clarington, inclusive of sight triangles and 0.3 metre reserves. The design and construction of Adelaide Avenue will be determined at the engineering stage subject to the approval of the Director of Engineering Services and the approved Environmental Assessment. The Owner shall be responsible for 100% of the construction of Adelaide Avenue, subject to cost sharing agreements with the Region of Durham and abutting land owner of Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T- 89055. 33. The Owner shall be responsible for 100% of the cost of the removal of the temporary turning circle located on Daisyfield Drive. 34. Temporary turning circles may be required depending upon the phasing of the development. The need for any additional temporary turning circles and frozen lots will be determined at the engineering stage solely at the discretion of the Director of Engineering Services. 35. The Owner shall provide a cash -in -lieu of parkland payment in accordance with the Planning Act based on the value of the lands on the day before draft approval. 36. The Owner shall grant such easements as may be required for utilities, drainage and servicing purposes to the appropriate authorities. 37. The Owner shall provide and install sidewalks, street lights, temporary turning circles etc., as per the Municipality's standards and criteria. 38. The Owner shall cause all utilities, including hydro, telephone, Cable TV, etc., to be buried underground. Page 6 of 14 (18T- 90003) February 18, 2011 8 -27 39. The Owner agrees to ensure the Builder includes a disclosure in all purchase and sale agreements advising home buyers of Municipal parking regulations, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning Services. 40. The Owner shall submit a detailed tree preservation plan to the satisfaction of the Municipality of Clarington. No trees shall be removed until such time as this program has been approved except as authorized by the Municipality. 41. That prior to the issuance of building permits, access routes to the subdivision must be provided to meet Subsection 3.2.5.2(6) of the Ontario Building Code and, that all watermains and hydrants are fully serviced and the Owner agrees that during construction, fire access routes be maintained according to Subsection 2.5.1.2 of the Ontario Fire Code, storage of combustible waste be maintained as per Subsection 2.4.1.1 and open burning as per Subsection 2.6.3.4 of the Ontario Fire Code. 42. The Owner shall be 100% responsible for the cost of any architectural. design guidelines specific to this development, as well as 100% of the cost for the "Control Architect" to review and approve all proposed models and building permits, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning Services. 43. No building permit shall be issued for the construction of any building on any residential lot or block on said plan, until the architectural control guidelines for the development and the exterior architectural design of each building and the location of the building on the lot has been approved by the Municipality of Clarington. 44. No residential units shall be offered for sale to the public on said plan until such time architectural control guidelines and the exterior architectural design of each building has been approved by the Director of Planning Services. 45. Where the well or private water supply of any person is interfered with as a result of construction or the development of the subdivision the Owner shall, at his /her expense, either connect the affected party to municipal water supply system or provide a new well or private water system so that water supplied to the affected party shall be of quality and quantity at least equal to the quality and quantity of water enjoyed by the affected party prior to the interference. 46. The Owner shall provide the Municipality, at the time of execution of the subdivision agreement unconditional and irrevocable, Letters of Credit acceptable to the Municipality's Treasurer, with respect to Performance Guarantee, Maintenance Guarantee, Occupancy Deposit and other guarantees or deposit as may be required by the Municipality. Page 7 of 14 (18T- 90003) 8 -28 February 18, 2011 47. The Owner shall pay to the Municipality, the development charge in accordance to the Development. Charge By -law as amended from time to time, as well as payment of a portion of front end changes pursuant to the Development Charge Act if any are required to be paid by the Owner. 48. The Owner shall supply on disk, in a CAD format acceptable to the Municipality, a copy of the proposed Plan of Subdivision as Draft Approved and each 40M Plan proposed for registration. 49. In the event that development within Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T -90003 proceeds in advance of Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T- 89055, the Owner shall make arrangements for the conveyance of the lands needed for the Stormwater Management Pond being Block 61 on adjacent Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T- 89055 to the Municipality of Clarington. 50. The Owner agrees to carry out the requirements and recommendations of the approved Environmental Impact Study prepared by Aquafor Beech Limited, dated December 2007; the Tonno /Kingsberry Proposed Amphibian/Wetland Compensation Plan and Plant Salvage Plan prepared by Niblett Environmental Associates Inc., dated October 2008; and the Tonno /Kingsberry Proposed Amphibian/Wetland Compensation Plan prepared by Niblett Environmental Associates Inc., dated May 2010. The Owner shall be responsible for the monitoring of the proposed amphibian /wetland compensation feature in accordance with the approved monitoring plan. 51. In the event that development within Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T -90003 proceeds in advance of Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T- 89055, the Owner shall make arrangements for the construction of a wetland compensation area in accordance with Condition 24. The Owner shall be responsible for 100% of the cost of the construction of compensation area, subject to cost sharing agreements with the Region of Durham and abutting land owner of Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T- 89055. An easement shall be provided in favour of the Municipality of Clarington over the lands for compensation and including a suitable access to Adelaide Avenue to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services and the Director of Planning Services. 52. The Owner agrees to carry out the requirements and recommendations of the Slope Stability Study prepared by Soil Engineers Ltd., dated April 6, 2010 and revised May 7, 2010. 53. Prior to any on -site grading or construction or final registration of the plan, the Owner shall submit and obtain approval from the Municipality of Clarington, and the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority for reports describing the following: Page 8 of 14 (18T- 90003) February 18, 2011 • a) the intended means of conveying stormwater flow from the site, including use of stormwater techniques which are appropriate and in accordance with the provincial guidelines; b) the anticipated impact of the development on water quality, as it relates to fish and wildlife habitat once adequate protective measures have been taken; c) the means whereby erosion and sedimentation and their effects will be minimized on the site during and after construction in accordance with the provincial guidelines. The report must outline all actions to be taken to prevent an increase in the concentration of solids in any water body as a result of on- site or other related works, to comply with the Canada Fisheries Act. 54. Prior to any on -site grading, construction, or final registration of the plan, the Owner shall submit a Stormwater Management Report which shall be approved by the Municipality of Clarington. The Report shall clearly demonstrate that adjacent property owners will not be impacted by runoff /stormwater from the subject development. 55. The Owner shall satisfy all financial requirements of the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority. This shall include Application Processing Fees and Technical Review Fees as per the approved Authority Fee Schedule. 56. In the event that development within Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T -90003 proceeds in advance of Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T- 89055, the Owner shall make arrangements for the installation of a chain link fence having a height of 1.2 m around the perimeter of the stormwater management facility (Block 61) where it abuts any lands in private ownership. 57. Prior to the execution of a Subdivision Agreement between the Municipality of Clarington and the Subdivider for the first phase of development in either. plan of subdivision 18T- 89055 or 18T- 90003, the Subdivider for the first registration between either Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T -89055 or 18T -90003 shall enter into an option agreement with the Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board for the potential acquisition of Block 62 in draft plan 18T -89055 and Block 48 in draft plan 18T -90003 for Elementary School purposes. 58. That all Subdivision Agreements for the subject draft plan between the Municipality of Clarington and the Subdivider contain a requirement that all Purchase and Sale Agreements for all phases of the approved draft plan contain a warning clause as outlined in Condition 75(g)(i). 59. Prior to the execution of an option agreement with the Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board, the Subdivider for the first registration in either Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T -89055 or 18T -90003 shall provide a copy of a stormwater management report for both draft plans to the satisfaction of the Kawartha Pine Page 9 of '14 (18T- 90003) 8 -30 February 18, 2011 Ridge District School Board that indicates that all stormwater quality and quantity facilities for the proposed school block will be accommodated outside of the proposed school block. 60. ' Prior to the execution of an option agreement with the Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board, the Subdivider for the first registration in either Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T -89055 or 18T -90003 shall provide a copy of a geotechnical soils study to the satisfaction of the Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board that indicates that the soils in Block 62 in draft plan 18T -89055 and Block 48 in draft plan 18T -90003 are suitable for the construction of an Elementary School. 61. Prior to the execution of an option agreement with the Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board, the Subdivider for the first registration in either Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T -89055 or 18T -90003 shall provide a copy of a Record of Site Condition(s) filed with the Ministry of the Environment to the satisfaction of the Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board that applies to the proposed Elementary School site (Block 62 in draft plan 18T -89055 and Block 48 in draft plan 18T- 90003) indicating that the soils in Block 62 in draft plan 18T -89055 and Block 48 in draft plan 18T -90003 are suitable for the construction of an Elementary School. 62. Prior to the execution of an option agreement with the Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board, the Subdivider for the first registration in either Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T -89055 or 18T -90003 shall provide to the satisfaction of the Kawartha Pine Ridge District School the proposed grading and servicing plans for the proposed Elementary School Block for review and approval. 63. No topsoil or fill stockpiling, no construction storage or construction use of any kind shall be carried out by the Subdivider on the proposed Elementary School Block in either Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T -89055 or 18T- 90003. 64. The Subdivider shall install along all residential lot lines that are common with the proposed school block a 1.8 m high galvanized chain link fence that is to be situated 150 mm within the school block site. The 1.8 m high galvanized chain link fence may be a lower height only if required to comply with the Municipality's zoning by -law. The fence is to be installed by the Subdivider simultaneously with the topsoil and sodding of the Block 49 having the common lot line with the proposed Elementary School block. 65. The Owner shall satisfy all requirements, financial and otherwise, of the Municipality of Clarington. This shall include, among other matters, the execution of a subdivision agreement between the Owner and the Municipality of Clarington concerning the provision and installation of roads, services, drainage, other local services and all internal and external works and services related to this proposal. Page 10 of 14 (18T- 90003) February 18, 2011 8 -31 -- 66. The Owner shall provide for the extension of such sanitary sewer and water supply facilities which are external to, as well as within, the limits of this plan that are required to service this plan. In addition, the Owner shall provide for the extension of sanitary sewer and water supply facilities within the limits of the plan which are required to service other developments external to this subdivision. Such sanitary sewer and water supply facilities are to be designed and constructed according to the standards and requirements of the Regional Municipality of Durham. All arrangements, financial and otherwise, for said extensions are to be made to the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Durham, and are to be completed prior to final approval of this plan. 67. Prior to entering into a subdivision agreement, the Regional Municipality of Durham shall be satisfied that adequate water pollution control plant and water supply plant capacities are available to the proposed subdivision. 68. The Owner shall grant to the Region of Durham, any easements required for provision of Regional services for this development and these easements shall be in location and of such widths as determined by the Region of Durham. 69. The Owner shall satisfy all requirements, financial and otherwise, of the Regional Municipality of Durham. This shall include, among other matters, the execution of a subdivision agreement between the Owner and the Region concerning the provision and installation of sanitary sewers, water supply, roads and other regional services. 70. The Owner agrees that prior to commencing any work within the Plan, the Owner must confirm that sufficient wire -line communication /telecommunication infrastructure is currently available within the proposed development to provide communication /telecommunication service to the proposed development. In the event that such infrastructure is not available, the Owner may be required to pay for the connection to and /or extension of the existing communication/ telecommunication infrastructure. If the Owner elects not to pay for such connection to and /or extension of the existing communication /telecommunication infrastructure, the Owner shall be required to demonstrate to the Municipality that sufficient alternative communication /telecommunication facilities are available within the proposed development to enable, at a minimum, the effective delivery of communication /telecommunication services for emergency management services (i.e. 911 Emergency Services). 71. The Owner shall agree in the Agreement, to grant to the telecommunication provider any easements that may be required for telecommunication services. Easements may be required subject to final servicing decisions. In the event of any conflict with existing facilities or easements, the Owner shall be responsible for the relocation of such facilities or easements. Page 11 of 14 (18T- 90003) 8 -32 February 18, 2011 72.- The Owner agrees to coordinate the preparation -of -an overall utility distribution plan to the satisfaction of all effected authorities. 71 The Owner shall grade all streets to final elevation prior to the installation of the gas lines and provide the necessary, field survey information required for the installation of the gas lines, all to the satisfaction of the natural gas provider. 74. The Owner shall ensure that all natural gas distribution systems are installed within the proposed road allowances. 75. The subdivision agreement between the Owner and the Municipality of Clarington shall contain, among other matters, the following provisions: a) The Owner agrees to include provisions whereby all offers of purchase and sale shall include information that satisfies Subsection 59(4) of the Development Charges Act, 1997. b) The Owner agrees that no construction, filling, grading, or alteration to the water course shall occur on the property without the prior written approval of the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority. C) The Owner agrees to carry out the works referred to in Conditions 23 -27, Conditions 50 -53, and Condition 55 to the satisfaction of the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority. d) The Owner agrees to maintain all stormwater management and erosion and sedimentation control structures operating and in good repair during the construction period, in a manner satisfactory to the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority. e) The Owner agrees to advise the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority 48 hours prior to commencement of grading or the initiation of any on -site works. f) That the Builder include a disclosure in all purchase and sale agreements advising home buyers of municipal parking regulations, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning Services. g) The Owner agrees to place the following in all agreements of purchase and sale between the Developer and all prospective home buyers: i) "While an Elementary School site has been reserved within the approved Draft Plan of Subdivision for the Kawartha Pine Ridge District School that it may not be constructed and used as an Elementary School site. All potential purchasers are further advised that an existing Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board Page 12 of 14 (18T- 90003) February 18, 2011 8 -33 school(s) will be used -to accommodate -all public- board - elementary- --- pupils until such time as any new Elementary School can be constructed within the approved draft plan. If a new Elementary School is not constructed within the approved draft plan, then all Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board pupils will be accommodated at an existing public board Elementary School(s)." h) The Owner agrees to post the standard approved "Notice to Parents" identified in Condition 75(g)(i) in all sales representation centres. i) The Owner agrees to strictly adhere to the site servicing plan as submitted by D.G. Biddle & Associates Limited, titled "Conceptual Servicing Plan" in support of Draft Plan of 18T- 90003. j) The Owner agrees to implement those noise control measures recommended in the Noise Report required in Condition 13. 76. Prior to final approval of this plan for registration, the Director of Planning Services for the Municipality of Clarington shall be advised in writing by: a) Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority, how Conditions 23 -27, Conditions 50 -53, and Condition 55 have been satisfied; b) Durham Regional Planning Department how Conditions 3, 13, 14, 18, and 66 -69 have been satisfied; and, C) Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board how Conditions 57 -64 have been satisfied. NOTES TO DRAFT APPROVAL If final approval is not given to this plan within three years of the draft approval date, and no extensions have been granted, draft approval shall lapse and the file shall be CLOSED. Extensions may be granted provided valid reason is given and is submitted to the Director of Planning Services for the Municipality of Clarington well in advance of the lapsing date. 2. As the Owner of the proposed subdivision, it is your responsibility to satisfy all conditions of draft approval in an expeditious manner. The conditions of draft approval will be reviewed periodically and may be amended at any time prior to final approval. The Planning Act provides that draft approval, may be withdrawn at any time prior to final approval. 3. All plans of subdivision must be registered in the Land Titles system within the Regional Municipality of Durham. rage 13 of 14 (18T- 90003) 8 -34 February 18, 2011 4. Where agencies' requirements are required to be included in the local municipal subdivision agreement, a copy of the agreement should be sent to the agencies in order to facilitate their clearance of conditions for final approval of this plan. The addresses and telephone numbers of these agencies are: a) Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority, 100 Whiting Avenue, Oshawa, ON, LIH 3T3, 905 - 579 -0411 b) Durham Regional Planning Department, 605 Rossland Road East, P.O. Box 623, Whitby, ON, L1 N 6A3, 905 - 668 -7721 c) Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board, 1994 Fisher Drive, Peterborough, ON, K9J 7A1, 705 - 742 -9773 Page 14 of 14 (18T- 90003) February 18, 2011 8 -35 OD w M r Attachment 6 To Report PSD- 016 -11 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BY -LAW NO. 2011- being a By -law to amend By -law 84 -63, the Comprehensive Zoning By -law for the Corporation of the former Town of Newcastle WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington deems it advisable to amend By -law 84 -63, as amended, of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington for DEV 90 -007; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT, the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington enacts as follows: 1. Schedule "4" to By -law 84 -63, as amended, is hereby further amended by changing the zone designation from: "Holding — Urban Residential Type One ((H)R1) Zone" to "Holding — Urban Residential Exception ((H)R2 -71) Zone "; "Agricultural (A) Zone" to "Holding — 'Urban Residential Exception ((H)R2 -71) Zone' "Agricultural (A) Zone" to "Holding — Urban Residential Exception ((H)R2 -72) Zone'; "Agricultural (A) Zone" to and "Holding — Urban Residential Exception ((H)R3 -40) Zone "; and "Agricultural (A) Zone" to and "Holding — Urban Residential Type One ((H)R1) Zone "; as illustrated on the attached Schedule "A" hereto. 2. Schedule "A" attached hereto shall form part of this By -law. 3. This By -law shall come into effect on the date of the passing hereof, subject to the provisions of Section 34 of the Planning Act. BY -LAW read a first time this day of 2011 BY -LAW read a second time this day of 2011 BY -LAW read a third time and finally passed this day of 2011 Adrian Foster, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk 8 -37 This is Schedule "A" to By -law 2011- , passed this day of 12011 A.D. � e_� "Inn r o 1 r °Iq� ,�e�� /III 1111► mr _ ��ii/ /III9�� �� ® �� �■.. II Clllllltl �.: III 1 _i -- M 11111111111111 -1 8 -38 BIGATE ADELAIDE AVENUE _ MALLORY ST LU 00 DAISEYFIELD AVENUE r y s 0 gJ I QP N o� Zoning Change From "(H)R1' "' To "(H)R2 -71" ® Zoning Change From "A" To "(H)R1" ® Zoning Change From "A" To "(H)R2 -71" Zoning Change From "A" To "(H)R2 -72" Zoning Change From "A" To "(H)R3 -40" Adrian Foster, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk � e_� "Inn r o 1 r °Iq� ,�e�� /III 1111► mr _ ��ii/ /III9�� �� ® �� �■.. II Clllllltl �.: III 1 _i -- M 11111111111111 -1 8 -38 Attachment 7 To Report PSD- 016 -11 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BY -LAW NO. 2011- being a By -law to authorize entering into an Agreement with the Owner(s) of the Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T- 90003, any Mortgagee who has an interest in the said Lands, and the Municipality of Clarington, in respect of 18T- 90003. WHEREAS the Owner of Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T -90003 has received Draft Approval and intends to proceed to Final Approval and enter into a Subdivision Agreement with the Municipality; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT, the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington enacts as follows: 1. THAT the Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized to execute, on behalf of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington, and seal with the Corporation's seal, an Agreement between the Owner of Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T- 90003. 2. That the Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized to accept, on behalf of the Municipality of Clarington, the said conveyances of Lands required pursuant to the aforesaid agreement. BY -LAW read a first time this day of 2011 BY -LAW read a second time this day of 2011 BY -LAW read a third time and finally passed this day of 2011 Adrian Foster, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk 8 -39 Attachment 8 To Report PSD- 016 -11 CONDITIONS OF DRAFT APPROVAL FILE NO.: 18T -89055 PLAN IDENTIFICATION The Owner shall have the final plan prepared on the basis of approved draft plan of subdivision 18T -89055 prepared by D.G. Biddle & Associates Limited identified as project number 86219, dated December 2007 and last revised on September 15, 2010, and further red -line revised, which illustrates 53 single detached dwelling lots, 6 blocks for 24 street townhouse dwelling units, a 1.45 ha open space block, a 0.692 ha partial school block, a 1.01 ha stormwater management pond, a 0.042 ha future development block, 0.22 ha to be retained by the owner, roads and 0.3 metre reserves on a total of 9.058 hectares. REQUIRED RED -LINE REVISIONS 1. The proposed draft plan of subdivision shall be revised to add 0.3 m reserves along the entire frontage adjacent to Adelaide Avenue and along Blocks 62 and 63. 2. The proposed draft plan of subdivision shall be revised to amend the total number of units from 78 to 77 units. FINAL PLAN REQUIREMENTS 3. The Owner shall dedicate the road allowances included in this draft plan as public highways on the final plan. 4. The Owner shall name road allowances included in this draft plan to the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Durham and the Municipality of Clarington. 5. The Owner shall convey a 0.3 metre reserve across the entire frontage of the draft plan along Adelaide Avenue shown as Blocks 65 and 66 to the Municipality of Clarington. 6. The Owner shall convey a 0.3 metre reserve across the entire frontage of Block 62 along Daisyfield Drive shown as Block 67 to the Municipality of Clarington. 7. The Owner shall convey sight triangles at the intersection and corners of streets within the draft plan to the Municipality of Clarington. 8. The Owner shall terminate any deadends and /or open sides of road allowances created by this draft plan in 0.3 metre reserve(s) to be conveyed to the Municipality of Clarington to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services. Page 1 of 14 (18T- 89055) M February 18, 2011 9. - The Owner shall obtain municipal approval of the zoning for the land uses shown - on the approved draft plan in accordance with the provisions of the Planning Act. 10. Prior to final approval of the plan, the Owner shall confirm that the stormwater management pond satisfies the Municipality's Design Criteria as amended from time to time and can be accommodated wholly within Block 61, Plan 18T- 89055. Minor adjustments to the limits of Block 61 may be considered subject to the approval of the Director of Engineering Services and the Director of Planning Services. Prior to final approval of the plan, the Owner's Environmental consultant shall confirm that the boundary of the stormwater management pond and all lots maintain a minimum 30 metre setback from the limits of the Provincially Significant Wetland. REQUIREMENTS TO BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO REGISTRATION OF THE PLAN 11. The Owner shall prepare an Environmental Sustainability Plan, prior to final approval, for approval by the Director of Planning Services and the Director of Engineering Services. This plan shall identify specific measures on how .development in Plan 18T -89055 will ensure the protection, conservation and enhancement of air, water, and ecological features and functions, energy and other resources and heritage resources. As a minimum, the report shall address; i) Energy conservation measures for new homes, such as the construction and operation of new residential building to a minimum rating of 80 or more in accordance with Natural Resources Canada "EnerGuide for New Houses" or equivalent certification system; ii) Water conservation measures for new .homes such as the Water Sense program or equivalent program; iii) Use of environmentally friendly materials or finishes in the dwellings, iv) Use of energy efficient infrastructure, such as LED lighting, which would have the effect of reducing energy costs and light pollution; and v) The preparation of a community education hand -book on the environmentally sensitive areas in the neighbourhood. 12. The Owner, together with the Owner of Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T- 90003, shall prepare a Community Theme and Urban Design Implementation Plan, prior to final approval, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning Services and Director of Engineering Services. This Plan shall confirm and control the intended pattern of development in plans 18T -89055 and 18T- 90003. The Plan shall include the proposed network of roads, transit, pedestrian and bicycle routes, the location of specific features, sites and residential lots within 'the neighbourhood such as corner lots, and T- intersections that require specific lot and building placement, orientation and architectural features, design concepts for community theming include gateway treatments, landscape treatments, lighting fixtures, fencing details and related design issues for the overall design, location and configuration of trails and open space buffers. Page 2 of 14 (18T- 89055) February 18, 2011 8 -41 -13. - The Owner shall submit to the Municipality of- Clarington and the Regional - Municipality of Durham, for review and approval, an acoustic report (and addendum, where applicable) prepared by an acoustic engineer based on. projected traffic volumes provided by the Durham Region Planning Department and recommending noise attenuation measures for the draft plan in accordance with the Ministry of the Environment guidelines. The Owner shall agree in the Municipality of Clarington subdivision agreement to implement the recommended noise control measures. The agreement shall contain a full and complete reference to the noise report (i.e. author, title, date and any revisions /addenda thereto) and shall include any required warning clauses identified in the acoustic report. The Owner shall provide the Region with a copy of the subdivision agreement containing such provisions prior to final approval of the plan. 14. The Owner shall engage a qualified professional to carry out to the satisfaction of the Ministry of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation, a Stage 2 Archaeological Assessment of the entire development property and mitigate, through preservation or resource removal and documentation, adverse impacts to any significant archaeological resources found. No demolition, grading or other soil disturbances shall take place on the subject property prior to the Ministry of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation confirming that all archaeological resource concerns have been met including licensing and resource conservation requirements. 15. The Owner shall retain a professional engineer to prepare and submit a Master Drainage and Lot Grading Plan to the Director of Engineering Services for review and approval. All plans and drawings must conform to the Municipality's Design Criteria as amended from time to time. 16. The Owner shall retain a professional engineer to prepare and submit a Servicing Plan to the Director of Engineering Services for review and approval. In the event that development within Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T -89055 proceeds in advance of Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T- 90003, the Servicing Plan shall provide for suitable service connections and appropriate easements over lands within Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T- 90003, if applicable. All plans and drawings must conform to the Municipality's Design Criteria as amended from time to time. 17. The Owner shall retain a professional engineer to prepare and submit a Street Lighting Plan, including photometric details on street layout, to the Director of Engineering Services for review and approval. All plans and drawings must conform to the Municipality's Design Criteria as amended from time to time. 18. The Owner shall submit plans showing the proposed phasing to the Region of Durham and the Municipality of Clarington for review and approval if this subdivision is to be developed by more than one phase. Full development of the draft plan will require all external accesses to be constructed, including access to Adelaide Avenue. The specific number of lots available for building permits in any Page 3 of 14 (18T- 89055) 8 -42 February 18, 2011 single phase of the development will be determined at the engineering stage and - - - may require the construction of suitable service connections over lands within adjacent Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T -90003 and in accordance with the approved Servicing Plan. The approval of the phasing plan shall be at the sole discretion of the Director of Engineering Services. The Municipality shall require the preparation of a subdivision agreement for each phase of development. 19. The Owner shall retain a professional engineer to prepare and submit plans to the Municipality of Clarington and the Region of Durham detailing the design and construction of Adelaide Avenue in accordance with the findings and recommendations of the approved Class Environmental Assessment under the Environmental Assessment Act. The Owner shall be responsible for fulfilling the conditions imposed by the Ministry of Environment and shall be responsible for all permits and approvals prior to construction. 20 The Owner shall retain a qualified landscape architect to prepare and submit a Landscaping Plan to the Director of Engineering Services and the Director of Planning Services for review and approval. The Landscaping Plan shall reflect the design criteria of the Municipality as amended from time to time. 21. The Owner shall prepare a Landscape Plan for the stormwater management pond for review and approval of the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority and the Municipality of Clarington. The stormwater management pond is to be treated as an amenity feature. 22. Prior to registration of any portion of the subject draft plan the owner must demonstrate how perpetual maintenance of any blocks identified as "Part Lots or Blocks" will be undertaken. All part lots will be pre - serviced with water, sanitary and storm sewers to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services. Further, the Owner agrees that until such time as the necessary lands are acquired to complete Block 60, these lands shall be maintained in accordance with the Municipality of Clarington's Property Standards By -law, as amended from time to time. 23. Prior to registration of any portion of the subject draft plan the owner must provide proof of ownership of Block 225 on adjacent Registered Plan of Subdivision 10M -826. 24. Prior to any on -site grading, and /or construction associated with the proposed plan of subdivision, the Owner shall provide confirmation to the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority and the Director of Planning Services that the regionally significant plant species identified on -site have been relocated in accordance with the requirements of the Tonno /Kingsberry Proposed Amphibian/ Wetland Compensation Plan and Plant Salvage Plan prepared by Niblett Environmental Associates Inc., dated October 2008. Page 4 of 14 (18T- 89055) February 18, 2011 8 -43 - - 25. - Prior -to any on -site grading, and /or construction associated with the proposed plan of subdivision, the Owner shall submit to and obtain approval from the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority and the Municipality of Clarington for plans detailing the proposed amphibian /wetland compensation feature in accordance with the Tonno /Kingsberry Proposed AmphibianNVetland Compensation Plan completed by Niblett Environmental Associates Inc., dated May 2010. 26. Prior to the removal of the existing amphibian wetland areas within the proposed plan of subdivision, the Owner shall provide confirmation that construction of the proposed amphibian /wetland compensation features within the approved areas north of the Adelaide Road extension have been completed and have been allowed to establish for one growing. season to the satisfaction of the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority and the Director of Planning Services. 27. - The Owner agrees to submit for review and approval of the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority and the Director of Planning Services, and undertake, a monitoring plan for the proposed amphibian /wetland compensation feature, which will assess the works undertaken in regards to productivity of the feature. The submitted monitoring plan shall also identify the length of time required to assess the productivity of the constructed feature. 28. The Owner agrees to submit for review and approval of the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority and ' the Director of Planning Services, and be 100% responsible financial and otherwise for undertaking, an erosion monitoring plan on the tributary of Farewell Creek, as approved, from the outfall of the stormwater management facility, up to and including a portion of the main branch of the Farewell Creek, to monitor existing erosion conditions. The monitoring plan shall identify an appropriate length of time to undertake such monitoring as well as identify potential measures to correct potential erosion problems, as a result of the proposed development. The monitoring plan will derive a cost estimate for the identified measures and the Owner shall provide for securities equal to 100% of the costs to complete such work, subject to the approval of the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority and the Director of Engineering Services. 29. - The Owner shall remove all existing buildings and structures that do not comply with the Zoning By -law requirements prior to commencement of the construction of the Plan of Subdivision. REQUIREMENTS TO BE INCLUDED IN SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT 30. All land dedications, easements, sight triangles and reserves as required by the Municipality of Clarington for this development must be granted to the Municipality of Clarington free and clear of all encumbrances and in a form satisfactory to the Municipality's solicitor. Page 5 of 14 (18T- 89055) 8 -44 February 18, 2011 31. In the event that the Owner develops Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T -89055 in advance of Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T- 90003, and prior to any on -site grading, and /or construction associated with the proposed plan of subdivision, the Owner shall be 100% responsible for securing a construction easement, access or roadway over adjacent Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T -90003 from the limits of Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T -89055 to Trulls Road subject to approval by the Director of Engineering Services. 32. The Owner shall dedicate Adelaide Avenue at a width of 30.0 metres to the Municipality of Clarington, inclusive of sight triangles and 0.3 metre reserves. The design and construction of Adelaide Avenue will be determined at the engineering stage subject to the approval of the Director of Engineering Services and the approved Environmental Assessment. The Owner shall be responsible for 100% of the construction of Adelaide Avenue, subject to cost sharing agreements with the Region of Durham and abutting land owner of Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T- 90003. 33. The Owner shall be responsible for 100% of the cost of constructing the connecting collector street roadway between George Reynolds Drive and the southerly limit of the draft plan over Block 225 on adjacent Registered Plan of Subdivision 10M -826. 34. The Owner shall be responsible for 100% of the cost of the removal of the temporary turning circle located on Daisyfield Drive. 35. Temporary turning circles may be required depending upon the phasing of the development. The need for any additional temporary turning circles and frozen lots will be determined at the engineering stage solely at the discretion of the Director of Engineering Services. . 36. The Owner shall provide a cash -in -lieu of parkland payment in accordance with the Planning Act based on the value of the lands on the day before draft approval. 37. The Owner shall grant such easements as may be required for utilities, drainage and servicing purposes to the appropriate authorities. 38. The Owner shall provide and install sidewalks, street lights, temporary turning circles etc., as per the Municipality's standards and criteria. 39. The Owner shall cause all utilities, including hydro, telephone, Cable TV, etc., to be buried underground. 40. The Owner agrees to ensure the Builder includes a disclosure in all purchase and sale agreements advising home buyers of Municipal parking regulations, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning Services. Page 6 of 14 (18T- 89055) February 18, 2011 8 -45 - 41. The Owner shall submit a detailed tree preservation plan to the satisfaction of the -- -- Municipality of Clarington. No trees shall be removed until such time as this program has been approved except as authorized by the Municipality. 42. That prior to the issuance of building permits, access routes to the subdivision .must be provided to meet Subsection 3.2.5.2(6) of the Ontario Building Code and, that all watermains and hydrants are fully serviced and the Owner agrees that during construction, fire access routes be maintained according to Subsection 2.5.1.2 of the Ontario Fire Code, storage of combustible waste be maintained as per Subsection 2.4.1.1 and open burning as per Subsection 2.6.3.4 of the Ontario Fire Code. 43. The Owner shall be 100% responsible for the cost of any architectural design guidelines specific to this development, as well as 100% of the cost for the "Control Architect" to review and approve all proposed models and building permits, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning Services. 44. No building permit shall be issued for the construction of any building on any residential lot or block on said plan, until the architectural control guidelines for the development and the exterior architectural design of each building and the location of the building on the lot has been approved by the Municipality of Clarington. 45. No residential units shall be offered for sale to the public on said plan until such time as architectural control guidelines and the exterior architectural design of each building has been approved by the Director of Planning Services. 46. Where the well or private water supply of any person is interfered with as a result of construction or the development of the subdivision the Owner shall, at his /her expense, either connect the affected party to the municipal water supply system or provide a new well or private water system so that water supplied to the affected party shall be of quality and quantity at least equal to the quality and quantity of water enjoyed by the affected party prior to the interference. 47. The Owner shall provide the Municipality, at the time of execution of the subdivision agreement, unconditional and irrevocable Letters of Credit acceptable to the Municipality's Treasurer, with respect to Performance Guarantee, Maintenance Guarantee, Occupancy Deposit and other guarantees or deposit as may be required by the Municipality. 48. The Owner shall pay to the Municipality, the development charge in accordance to the Development Charge By -law as amended from time to time, as well as payment of a portion of front end changes pursuant to the Development Charge Act if any are required to be paid by the Owner. Page 7 of 14 (18T- 89055) 8 -46 February 18, 2011 -49. The Owner shall supply on disk, in a CAD format acceptable to the Municipality a -- - copy of the proposed Plan of Subdivision as Draft Approved and each 40M Plan proposed for registration. 50. The Owner shall convey the lands needed for the Stormwater Management Pond being Block 61 to the Municipality of Clarington. 51. The Owner agrees to carry out the requirements and recommendations of the approved Environmental Impact Study prepared by Aquafor Beech Limited, dated December 2007; the Tonno /Kingsberry Proposed AmphibianNVetland Compensation Plan and Plant Salvage Plan prepared by Niblett Environmental Associates Inc., dated October 2008; and the Tonno /Kingsberry Proposed AmphibianMetland Compensation Plan prepared by Niblett Environmental Associates Inc., dated May 2010. The Owner shall be responsible for the monitoring of the proposed amphibiantwetland compensation feature in accordance with the approved monitoring plan. 52. The Owner agrees to construct a wetland compensation area in accordance with Condition 25. The Owner shall be responsible for 100% of cost of the construction of compensation area, subject to cost sharing agreements with the Region of Durham and abutting land owner of Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T- 90003. An easement shall be provided in favour of the Municipality of Clarington over the lands for compensation including a suitable access to Adelaide Avenue to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services and the Director of Planning Services. 53. The Owner agrees to carry out the requirements and recommendations of the Slope Stability Study prepared by Soil Engineers Ltd., dated April 6, 2010 and revised May 7, 2010. 54. Prior to any on -site grading or construction or final registration of the plan, the Owner shall submit and obtain approval from the Municipality of Clarington, and the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority for reports describing the following: a) the intended means of conveying stormwater flow from the site, including use of stormwater techniques which are appropriate and in accordance with the provincial guidelines; b) the anticipated impact of the development on water quality, as it relates to fish and wildlife habitat once adequate protective measures have been taken; c) the means whereby erosion and sedimentation and their effects will be minimized on the site during and after construction in accordance with the provincial guidelines. The report must outline all actions to be taken to prevent an increase in the concentration of solids in any water body as a result of on- site or other related works, to comply with the Canada Fisheries Act. Page 8 of 14 (18T- 89055) February 18, 2011 8 -47 55. Prior to any on -site grading, construction, or final registration of the plan, the Owner shall submit a Stormwater Management Report which shall be approved by the Municipality of - Clarington. The Report shall clearly demonstrate that adjacent property owners will not be impacted by runoff/stormwater from the subject development. 56. The Owner shall satisfy all financial requirements of the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority. This shall include Application Processing Fees and Technical Review Fees as per the approved Authority Fee Schedule. 57. The Owner shall install a chain link fence having a height of 1.2 m around the perimeter of the stormwater management facility (Block 61) where it abuts any lands in private ownership. 58. The Owner agrees to install a chain link fence having a height of 1.2 m along the open space block (Block 64) where it abuts any residential lot created by the approved draft plan of subdivision. 59. The Owner agrees to install signage along the westerly limits of Block 64 that would inform users of the Open Space block the limits of the lands owned by the Municipality of Clarington. All signage shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning Services and the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority and in accordance with the Municipality of Clarington Sign By -law, as amended from time to time. 60. * Prior to the execution of a Subdivision Agreement between the Municipality of Clarington and the Subdivider for the first phase of development in either plan of subdivision 18T -89055 or 18T- 90003, the Subdivider for the first registration between either Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T -89055 or 18T -90003 shall enter into an option agreement with the Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board for the potential acquisition of Block 62 in draft plan 18T -89055 and Block 48 in draft plan 18T -90003 for Elementary School purposes. 61. That all Subdivision Agreements for the subject draft plan between the Municipality of Clarington and the Subdivider contain a requirement that all Purchase and Sale Agreements for all phases of the approved draft plan contain a warning clause as outlined in Condition 78(g)(i). 62. Prior to the execution of an option agreement with the Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board, the Subdivider for the first registration in either Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T -89055 or 18T -90003 shall provide a copy of a stormwater management report for both draft plans to the satisfaction of the Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board that indicates that all stormwater quality and quantity facilities for the proposed school block will be accommodated outside of the proposed school block. Page 9 of 14 (18T- 89055) February 18, 2011 8 -48 63. Prior to the execution of an option agreement with the Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board, the Subdivider for the first registration in either Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T =89055 or .18T -90003 shall provide a copy of a geotechnical soils study to the satisfaction of the Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board that indicates that the soils in, Block 62 in draft plan 18T -89055 and Block 48 in draft plan 18T -90003 are suitable for the construction of an Elementary School. 64. Prior to the execution of an option agreement with the Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board, the Subdivider for the first registration in either Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T -89055 or 18T -90003 shall provide a copy of a Record of Site Condition(s) filed with the Ministry of the Environment to the satisfaction of the Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board that applies to the proposed Elementary School site (Block 62 in draft plan 18T -89055 and Block 48 in draft plan 18T- 90003) indicating that the soils in Block 62 in draft plan 18T -89055 and Block 48 in draft plan 18T -90003 are suitable for the construction of an Elementary School. 65. Prior to the execution of an option agreement with the Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board, the Subdivider for the first registration in either Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T -89055 or 18T -90003 shall provide to the satisfaction of the Kawartha Pine Ridge District School the proposed grading and servicing plans for the proposed Elementary School Block for review and approval. 66. No topsoil or fill stockpiling, no construction storage or construction use of any kind shall be carried out by the Subdivider on the proposed Elementary School Block in either Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T -89055 or 18T- 90003. 67. The Subdivider shall install along all residential lot lines that are common with the proposed school block a 1.8 m high galvanized chain link fence that is to be situated 150 mm within the school block site. The 1.8 rm high galvanized chain link fence may be a lower height only if required to comply with the Municipality's Zoning By -law. The fence is to be installed by the Subdivider simultaneously with the topsoil and sodding of the residential lots having the common lot line with the proposed Elementary School block. 68, The Owner shall satisfy all requirements, financial and otherwise, of the Municipality of Clarington. This shall include, among other matters, the execution of a subdivision agreement between the Owner and the Municipality of Clarington concerning the provision and installation of roads, services, drainage, other local services and all internal and external works and services related to this proposal. 69. The Owner shall provide for the extension of such sanitary sewer and water supply facilities which are external to, as well as within, the limits of this plan that are required to service this plan. In addition, the Owner shall provide for the extension of sanitary sewer and water supply facilities within the limits of the plan Page 10 of 14 (18T- 89055) February 18, 2011 [13MV which are required to service other developments external to this subdivision. Such sanitary sewer and water supply facilities are to be designed and constructed according to the standards and requirements of the Regional Municipality of Durham. All arrangements, financial and otherwise, for said extensions are to be made to the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Durham, and are to be completed prior to final approval of this plan. 70. Prior to entering into a subdivision agreement, the Regional Municipality of Durham shall be satisfied that adequate water pollution control plant and water supply plant capacities are available to the proposed subdivision. 71. The Owner shall grant to the Region of Durham, any easements required for provision of Regional services for this development and these easements shall be in location and of such widths as determined by the Region of Durham. 72. The Owner shall satisfy all requirements, financial and otherwise, of the Regional Municipality of Durham. This shall include, among other matters, the execution of a subdivision agreement between the Owner and the Region concerning the provision and installation of sanitary sewers, water supply, roads and other regional services. 73. The Owner agrees that prior to commencing any work within the Plan, the Owner must confirm that sufficient wire -line communication /telecommunication infrastructure is currently available within the proposed development to provide communication /telecommunication service to the proposed development. In the event that such infrastructure is not available, the Owner may be required to pay for the connection to and /or extension of the existing communication/ telecommunication infrastructure. If the Owner elects not to pay for such connection to and /or extension of the existing communication /telecommunication infrastructure, the Owner shall be required to demonstrate to the Municipality that sufficient alternative communication /telecommunication facilities are available within the proposed development to enable, at a minimum, the effective delivery of communication /telecommunication services for emergency management services (i.e. 911 Emergency Services). 74. The Owner shall agree in the Agreement, to grant to the telecommunication provider any easements that may be required for telecommunication services. Easements may be required subject to final servicing decisions. In the event of any conflict with existing facilities or easements, the Owner shall be responsible for the relocation of such facilities or easements. 75. The Owner agrees to coordinate the preparation of an overall utility distribution plan to the satisfaction of all effected authorities. Page 11 of 14 (18T- 89055) 1 February 18, 2011 76. The Owner shall grade all streets to final elevation prior to the installation of the gas lines and provide the necessary field survey information required for the installation of the gas lines, all to the satisfaction of the natural gas provider. 77. The Owner shall ensure that all natural gas distribution systems are installed within the proposed road allowances. 78. The subdivision agreement between the Owner and the Municipality of Clarington shall contain, among other matters, the following provisions: a) The Owner agrees to include provisions whereby all offers of purchase and sale shall include information that satisfies Subsection 59(4) of the Development Charges Act, 1997. b) The Owner agrees that no construction, filling, grading or alteration to the water course shall occur on the property without the prior written approval of the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority. c) The Owner agrees to carry out the works referred to in Conditions 24 to 28, Conditions 51 -54, and Condition 56 to the satisfaction of the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority. d) The Owner agrees to maintain all stormwater management and erosion and sedimentation control structures operating and in good repair during the construction period, in a manner satisfactory to the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority. e) The Owner agrees to advise the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority 48 hours prior to commencement of grading or the initiation of any on -site works. f) The Builder shall include a disclosure in all purchase and sale agreements advising home buyers of municipal parking regulations, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning Services. g) The Owner agrees to place the following in all agreements of purchase and sale between the Developer and all prospective home buyers: i) "While an Elementary School site has been reserved within the approved draft plan of subdivision for the Kawartha Pine Ridge District School that it may not be constructed and used as an Elementary School site. All potential purchasers are further advised that an existing Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board school(s) will be used to accommodate all public board elementary pupils until such time as any new Elementary School can be constructed within the approved draft plan. If a new Elementary School is not constructed within the approved draft plan, then all Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Page 12 of 14 (18T- 89055) February 18, 2011 8 -51 Board pupils will be accommodated at an existing public board Elementary School(s)." h) The Owner agrees . to post the standard approved "Notice to Parents" identified in Condition 78(g)(i) in all sales representation centres. i) The Owner agrees to strictly adhere to the site servicing plan as submitted by D.G. Biddle & Associates Limited, titled "Conceptual Servicing Plan" in support of Draft Plan of 18T- 89455. j) The Owner agrees to implement those noise control measures recommended in the Noise Report required in Condition 13. 79. Prior to final approval of this plan for registration, the Director of Planning Services for the Municipality of Clarington shall be advised in writing by: a) Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority, how Conditions 24 to 28, Conditions 51 -54 and Condition 56 have been satisfied; b) Durham Regional Planning Department how Conditions 4, 13, 14, 18, and 69 -72 have been satisfied; and, c) Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board how Conditions 60 -67 have been satisfied. NOTES TO DRAFT APPROVAL 1. If final approval is not given to this plan within three years of the draft approval date, and no extensions have been granted, draft approval shall lapse and the file shall be CLOSED. Extensions maybe granted provided valid reason is given and is submitted to the Director of Planning Services for the Municipality of Clarington well in advance of the lapsing date. 2. As the Owner of the proposed subdivision, it is your responsibility to satisfy all conditions of draft approval in an expeditious manner. The conditions of draft approval will be reviewed periodically and may be amended at any time prior to final approval. The Planning Act provides that draft approval, may be withdrawn at any time prior to final approval. 3. All plans of subdivision must be registered in the Land Titles system within the Regional Municipality of Durham. 4. Where agencies' requirements are required to be included in the local municipal subdivision agreement, a copy of the agreement should be sent to the agencies in order to facilitate their clearance of conditions for final approval of this plan. The addresses and telephone numbers of these agencies are: Page 13 of 14 (18T- 89055) 8 -52 February 18, 2011 a) Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority, 100 Whiting Avenue, Oshawa, ON, LIH 3T3, 905 - 579 -0411 b) Durham Regional Planning Department, 605 Rossland Road East, P.O. Box 623, Whitby, ON, L1 N 6A3, 905 - 668 -7721 c) Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board, 1994 Fisher Drive, Peterborough, ON, K9J 7A1, 705 -742 -9773 Page 14 of 14 (18T- 89055) February 18, 2011 8 -53 00 I cn 4Pk Attachment 9 To Report PSD- 016 -11 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BY -LAW NO. 2011- being a By -law to amend By -law 84 -63, the Comprehensive Zoning By -law for the Corporation of the former Town of Newcastle WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington deems it advisable to amend By -law 84 -63, as amended, of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington for DEV 89 -067; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT, the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington enacts as follows: 1. Schedule "4" to By -law 84 -63, as amended, is hereby further amended by changing the zone designation from: "Agricultural (A) Zone" to "Holding — Urban Residential Exception ((H)R2 -71) Zone; "Agricultural (A) Zone" to "Holding — Urban Residential Exception ((H)R2 -72) Zone'; "Agricultural (A) Zone" to and "Holding — Urban Residential Exception ((H)R3 -40) Zone "; "Agricultural (A) Zone" to and "Holding — Urban Residential Type One ((H)R1) Zone; and, "Agricultural (A) Zone" to "Environmental Protection (EP) Zone "; as illustrated on the attached Schedule "A" hereto. 2. Schedule "A" attached hereto shall form part of this By -law. 3. This By -law shall come into effect on the date of the passing hereof, subject to the provisions of Section 34 of the Planning Act. BY -LAW read a first time this day of 2011 BY -LAW read a second time this day of 2011 BY -LAW read a third time and finally passed this - day of 2011 Adrian Foster, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk 8 -55 This is Schedule "A'' to By -law 2011- , passed this day of , 2011 A.D. MIN WIMP NEI! Arm- Zoning Change From "A" To "EP" Zoning Change From "A" To "(H)R1" Zoning Change From "A" To "(H)R2 -71" Zoning Change From "A" To "(H)R2 -72" Zoning Change From "A" To "(H)R3 -40" Adrian Foster, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk 8 -56 Attachment 10 To Report PSD- 016 -11 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BY -LAW NO. 2011- being a By -law to authorize entering into an Agreement with the Owner(s) of the Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T- 89055, any Mortgagee who has an interest in the said Lands, and the Municipality of Clarington, in respect of 18T- 89055. WHEREAS the Owner(s) of Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T -89055 has received Draft Approval and intends to proceed to Final Approval and enter into a Subdivision Agreement with the Municipality; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT, the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington enacts as follows: 1. THAT the Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized to execute, on behalf of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington, and seal with the Corporation's seal, an Agreement between. the Owner of Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T- 89055. 2. THAT the Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized to accept, on behalf of the Municipality of Clarington, the said conveyances of Lands required pursuant to the aforesaid agreement. BY -LAW read a first time this day of 2011 BY -LAW read a second time this day of 2011 BY -LAW read a third time and finally passed this day of 2011 Adrian Foster, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk 8 -57 • Leading the Way REPORT PLANNING SERVICES Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: February 28, 2011 Resolution #: By -law #: Report #: PSD- 017 -11 File #: ZBA 2010 -0022 (X -REF: COPA 2010 -0004) Subject: PROPOSED ZONING BY -LAW AMENDMENT TO PERMIT THE DEVELOPMENT OF A FOOD STORE OF 2,829M2 AND TWO SMALLER BUILDINGS OF 783M2 AND 185M2 RESPECTIVELY FOR RETAIL/SERVICE COMMERCIAL USES — 680 LONGWORTH AVENUE, BOWMANVILLE APPLICANT: 1804603 ONTARIO INC. RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report PSD- 017 -11 be received; 2. THAT the rezoning application submitted by 1804603 Ontario Inc., be approved and that the proposed Zoning By -law contained in Attachment 4 to Report PSD- 017 -11 be passed; 3. THAT the interested parties listed in Report PSD- 017 -11 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. Submitted by: David J. Crome, MCIP, RPP Director of Planning Services DJ /FL/df 22 February 2011 Reviewed by: 6z,_Z�_ -Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T (905)623 -3379 F (905)623 -0830 8 -58 REPORT NO.: PSD- 017 -11 1.0 APPLICATION DETAILS 1.1 Applicant: 1804603 Ontario Inc. PAG E 2 1.2 Rezoning: To change the zoning from Holding - Urban Residential Type Three Exception ((H) R3 -25) to an appropriate zone to permit the proposed development of a food store of 2,829M2 and second and third buildings of 783m2 and 185m2 respectively for retail /service commercial uses, and to implement the recently adopted Official Plan Amendment. 1.3 Location: 680 Longworth Avenue, located on the northeast corner of Longworth Avenue and Scugog Street, Bowmanville. 1.4 Site Area: 1.43 Hectare (3.53 Acres). 2.0 BACKGROUND 2.1 On August 4, 2010, the applications submitted by 1804603 Ontario Inc. for an Official Plan and Zoning By -law amendment for a parcel on the northeast corner of Longworth Avenue and Scugog Street, Bowmanville, to permit the development for retail /service commercial uses, were deemed complete. 2.2 The applicant also submitted the following background studies in support of development applications: • Planning Rationale Report, prepared by R.G. Richards & Associates; • Supermarket Impact Analysis, prepared by UrbanMetrics Inc.; • Traffic Study, prepared by HDR Corporation; and • Noise Impact Study, prepared by Swallow Acoustic Consultants Ltd. 2.3 The statutory Public Meeting with respect to the Official Plan amendment and rezoning applications was held on September 13, 2010. This was followed by an Open House with residents of the neighbourhood on September 23, 2010 and a staff recommendation report (PSD- 111 -10) on October 4, 2010 with respect to the application to amend the Official Plan. 2.4 Council received and approved report PSD- 111 -10 which included the Official Plan Amendment No.79 to permit a "Neigbourhood Centre" designation on the site. 2.5 A recommendation report on the rezoning of the site was to be brought back to Council subsequent to a further open house with the residents and a resolution on site plan matters. 2.6 A second open house with residents was hosted by the applicant on Thursday, November 25, 2010 at St. Stephen Catholic Secondary School. 8 -59 REPORT NO.: PSD- 017 -11 3.0 STAFF COMMENTS PAGE 3 3.1 Prior to the second Open House, Staff held an urban design session with the proponent and his architect. The meeting focused on the Municipal expectations regarding the development of the site (e.g. traffic, pedestrian movements, parking, landscaping) and the design quality of the building (e.g. elevations, massing, materials, facade articulation). The expectations were developed based on Official Plan policies, neighbourhood character, Council and community input. 3.2 The second Open House was held on November 25, 2010. It was attended by approximately 28 people. The Open House format consisted of a panel display followed by a PowerPoint presentation and a question and answer period. The applicant presented a revised site plan concept with some minor improvements to the site plan concept and the elevations. The applicant also presented colour drawings of the building elevations and landscape plan. Some residents expressed the opinion that the street facades of the food store, particularly the roof design and the high building walls along Scugog Street and Longworth Avenue, needed improvement. They also reiterated that the location of this development proposal within a residential area warranted a compatible design with the character of the surrounding neighbourhood and which is different to the conventional grocery store design typically found in commercial districts. 3.3 Based on further input at the second Open House and follow -up discussions and meetings between Staff and the developer during December 2010, the applicant made additional revisions to the elevations. The most recent revisions include a pitch roof over the grocery store entrance, more articulation (recessions and progressions of the facade) along the street elevations and better integration of certain design elements (e.g. pillars around the building). The site plan concept has been revised to incorporate tree planting on the west side of Scugog Street to provide off -site landscape buffering to address compatibility with the adjacent residential uses. Copies of the latest site plan, elevation and landscape drawings are contained in Attachment 3. 3.4 Staff are generally satisfied with the latest modifications to the site plan drawings as they create a more uniform architectural theme, enhance the appearance of the principal building on the site and provide a more prominent and attractive landmark to compliment the corner site and the neighbourhood. 3.5 Staff are of the opinion that the latest site plan and elevations generally address the resident's concerns, and enhances the development proposal. It implements the key urban design components contained in the adopted Official Plan amendment, therefore the rezoning can be finalized. Any additional details are being addressed as part of the site plan review process. The applicant made a formal site plan submission on December 24, 2010. The site plan process will be finalized after the successful completion of the rezoning of the lands. REPORT NO.: PSD- 017 -11 PAG E 4 3.6 Official Plan Amendment No.79 contains a policy requiring the implementing Zoning By- law to contain performance standards to ensure that the new development will be compatible with the physical character of the established residential neighbourhood. Staff drafted a site specific Zoning By -law amendment in accordance with the latest site plan concept which contains regulations on built form and other site plan elements. The proposed Zoning By -law Amendment provides for: • A variety of appropriate commercial uses and potential second storey residential uses above grade (the latter is not proposed at this time); • Basic site layout restrictions; • A requirement for a publicly accessible square; • Facade and roof requirements along Longworth Avenue and Scugog Street; • A minimum of 960 m2 of smaller commercial retail units to serve the local neighbourhood; • Allows outdoor patios for restaurants that don't serve alcohol; and • Prohibits drive - throughs. 4.0 CONCLUSION 4.1 The above report, with the approved Official Plan amendment supported by PSD -111- 10, provides the necessary basis and merits for the approval of the site specific Zoning By -law. It is recommended that the Zoning By -law enclosed as Attachment 4 to this Report be approved. Staff Contact: Dean Jacobs Attachments: Attachment 1 — Key Map Attachment 2 — The adopted Official Plan Amendment: Amendment No.79 Attachment 3 — Proposed Site Plan, Elevations and Landscape Plan Attachment 4 — Zoning By -law List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Erik & Kathrene Peterson R.G. Richards & Associates Kelly August Zelinka Priamo Ltd. Jennifer Remillard Metro Ontario Inc. Valerie Kowal Christina Rose Shaun Asselstine and Kim Sullivan Michele Wynne Amanda Kocklay and Nathan Cook Neil Murray 8 -61 Michael and Donna Stephens Sam McBride and Amanda Hyde Carl Pokoski Marie O'Hare Triston Hymus Ken and Maria Hilts Michael Webber and Jennifer Tremain Gordon and Lucille Sturrock Dale and Don Sturrock Andre Bos Tom Keen Andrew and Lindsay Wray REPORT NO.: PSD- 017 -11 Corey Robbins and Lindsay Highmore Jason & Jody Coulas Joseph & Sharon Reader Shirley McLean Robert & Amanda Hall Heather Beveridge Wayne Moores Gerry & Luise Lens Ken Lee Steven O -melia Raymond Scimone Dawn Tighe Geoff Bryann Bob Harty Gerry & Diane Harness Francis Williams E. Greenham Kelly Rainey Melissa Pallant PAG E 5 8 -62 k 60 Property Location Map (Bowmanville) N Retail NPR o� 3 $ Subject Site Nr� N � OUq DALEY A z� Cou �C HU 4� ?_? 3 O U Cn 0 0° ° ZBA 2010 -0022 Zoning By -law Amendment Grocery ,,Store SPA 2011 -0002 Site Plan Approval COPA 2010 -0004 Retail nr P�erue Clarington Official Plan Amendment V00, Applicant: 1804603 Ontario Ltd 0 O -4.D Trt =' o3 �CD Attachment 2 To Report PSD- 017 -11 AMENDMENT NO. 79 TO THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON OFFICIAL PLAN PURPOSE: The purpose of this amendment is to introduce a Neighbourhood Centre designation on the north -east comer of Longworth Avenue and Scugog Street to permit 'a grocery store and a multi - tenant building. for retail and service commercial uses. BASIS: The application is based on an Official Plan Amendment application (COPA 20010 -0004) submitted by .1804603 Ontario Inc. ACTUAL AMENDMENT:' The Municipality of Clarington Official Plan is hereby.amended as follows: 1. By including an exception. to Section 23.14 to create. Sub- section 23.14.14 as follows: "23.14.14 Notwithstanding Sections 10:6.1 and 10.6.4 c), the lands. located at 680 Longworth Avenue and described by assessment roll number 181702002015000 shall be developed with: A grocery store having a maximum. gross floor area of 3100 ml with the main pedestrian access within 18.5 metres of Scugog Street;. • A public square in accordance with the policies of- Section 10:6.5, which shall be located adjacent to the intersection of Scugog Street and Longworth Avenue; • A 'use intended to complement and interact with the public square having a maximum gross floor area of 200m2 , either as part of, the food store. or as an independent business establishment. Said use shall face Scugog Street and have the main pedestrian access at the Longworth Avenue and. Scugog Street intersection; A multi- tenant building. for retail, personal services and business, professional and /or administrative offices, with a minimum gross floor area of 700 m2 and a maximum gross floor area of 790 m2. The maximum size of an individual business establishment shall not exceed 250 M2, with. the exception of an eating establishment- of which the gross floor area shall not exceed 350 m2; and 8 -64 • Residential dwelling units are encouraged as an accessory use either as stand alone or part of a mixed use building. The site specific Zoning By -law associated with the development of this site shall only be. considered after site plan and elevation drawings for this Neighbourhood Centre have been prepared to the satisfaction of the Municipality. The site plan and elevation . drawings . shall address the following urban design principles: a) Compatibility: The commercial development shall be. compatible with the established neighbourhood. b) Focal Point: The commercial buildings located at the intersection of Scugog. Street and Longworth Avenue should be treated as a focal point. It shall. include articulated building elements that emphasize the focal point nature of these buildings. c) Building Design: The commercial development should. incorporate high quality architectural treatments, building materials that provide visual interest at the scale of pedestrians, reduces building mass. impacts, and respects the character..of the established neighbourhood. d) Landscaping: Landscaping will be integrated in the development to visually enhance the site, to soften hard edges, to screen parking and loading areas, to mitigate potential conflicts arising from noise, emissions and visual impacts and to ' . contribute towards - environmental sustainability. e) Active Street Life: The commercial building located at the intersection of Scugog Street and Longworth Avenue shall include a specific area dedicated to contribute to an active street life and. public square. f) . Pedestrian Network: Interior walkways and private connections will be designed to complement and extend, but not replace, the role of the street as the main place for pedestrian activity. They should be accessible, comfortable, safe and integrated into the local pattern of pedestrian movement with direct, universal physical and visual access from the public sidewalk and clear path- finding within the site.. The. developer will be required to provide off -site landscape buffering to address compatibility with the adjacent residential neighbourhoods: The implementing Zoning By -law will contain performance standards to ensure that the new development will be compatible with the physical character of the established residential neighbourhood. IMPLEMENTATION: The provisions set forth in the Ciarington Official Plan as. amended, regarding the implementation of the Plan shall apply in regard to this amendment. INTERPRETATION: The provisions set forth in the Clarington Official Plan as- amended, regarding the interpretation of the Plan shall apply in regard to this amendment. AM Exhibit "A ", Amendment No. 79 -To the Municipality of Clarington Officlal Plan, . Map. A3, Land Use, Bowmanville Urban Area i z ,w � O J M LM & mr-a LLI N M m O J o . V . v SPECIAL POLICY AREA E CONCESSION STREET O Attachment 3 To Report PSD- 017 -11 mQyS � 4m0"0 g 0 o oc Z c` r N\ _D x o p m 2 po ap Z ZZ 2 GC i D m 3mp a m 4S (� J dab OoA� �� N o m o W 0 -A m M i 3 N �+`m O 9 N m D {. 3 L. J m j N f m V D N N IwJ N� m V r�r z N m d m a 70 3 3 3 0 Z m U) T v ,t �33 mom wX 0 D m N N O O p 0$ O a > ce gm m �" 0870 o N °1. I c N W T ODam w °DD 3�� N O %1 z LONGWORTH AVENUE fig P 3-IM ,J MA 5.716 CO 5.700 y if - >� /77 a I c N W T ODam w °DD 3�� N O %1 z LONGWORTH AVENUE fig P 3-IM s � \\ ��. � «< � ©\ �«\ : � ( .3q\ »{q �M. § : |- \ \ ~ \\ §�( ; ■ t \\ am ( \\ OW � ƒ � ( � \� \ Via\ F�\ L \\ -70 Attachment 4 To Report PSD- 017 -11 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BY -LAW NO. 2011- being a By -law to amend By -law 84 -63, the Comprehensive Zoning By -law for the Corporation of the former Town of Newcastle WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington deems it advisable to amend By -law 84 -63, as amended, of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington for ZBA 2010 -0022; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT, the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington enacts as follows: Section 16.5 SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS — GENERAL COMMERCIAL (C1) ZONE is hereby amended by introducing a new Sub - Section 16.5.56 as follows: "16.5.56 GENERAL COMMERCIAL EXCEPTION (C1 -56) ZONE Notwithstanding the provisions of Sections 3.13 c., 1. 6.1, 16.2 and 16.3, those lands zoned "C1 -56" on schedule "A" of this By -law shall be used subject to the following definitions and permitted uses: a. Definitions Corner Building shall mean a building sited close to the intersection of Scugog Street and Longworth Avenue and designed with translucent glass on all street and public square facades and a door on the street facade of the building. Drive - Through Facility shall mean the use of land, buildings or structures, or part thereof, to provide or dispense products or services, either wholly or in part, through a window or an automatic machine, to customers remaining in motor vehicles, which are located in a stacking lane. A drive - through facility may be established in combination with other permitted non - residential uses. Public Square. shall mean an area of at least 400 m2 established and designed to provide a community gathering space and shall be open to the public at all times. b. Residential Uses Dwelling units as part of a building containing non - residential use(s). c. Non - Residential Uses business, professional or administrative office; ii) commercial school; iii) convenience store; iv) day nursery; V) dry cleaners distribution centre; vi) eating establishment; vii) eating establishment, take -out; viii) laundry — coin- operated; ix) library; X) medical or dental clinic; xi) place of worship; xii) retail commercial establishment; 8 -71 xiii) service shop, light; xiv) service shop, personal; xv) supermarket; and xvi) veterinary clinic. d. Regulations for Non - Residential Uses i) Non - residential uses shall consist of the following: a) A Supermarket b) A minimum of 960 m2 of non - supermarket uses c) A public square ii) Floor Area, Total a) Supermarket (maximum) 31 00m b) An eating establishment (maximum) 350mz c) Any individual business establishment other than the supermarket or eating establishment (maximum) 250m2 iii) A drive - through facility is not be permitted. iv) Yard requirements: a) Front Yard (maximum) 3.5 metres Front Yard (minimum) 2.5 metres b) Exterior Side Yard (i) Stand- alone.multi- tenant building (maximum) 3 metres (ii) Supermarket (minimum) 5 metres (iii) Corner Building (a) to the closest point of building 2.5 metres (b) to the furthest point of building 7.5 metres C) Interior Side Yard (i) Other building(s) (minimum) 5 metres (ii) Supermarket (minimum) 22 metres d) Rear Yard (minimum) v) Lot Coverage of all buildings (maximum) vi) Landscaping 3 metres 27% a) Landscaped Open Space (minimum) 21% b) All parking areas shall be separated from abutting public streets and adjacent residential uses.by a landscape strip having a minimum width of 3 meters. vii) Building Height (minimum) 5.5 metres (maximum) 12 metres viii) No building may be used as a supermarket unless the Corner Building is constructed on the lands zoned C1 -56. ix) Garbage areas shall be fully enclosed within a roofed structure and outdoor storage is prohibited. x) The Corner Building is exempt from on -site loading space requirements. xi) An Outdoor Patio associated with an easting establishment shall not be permitted if the easting establishment has a license to serve alcohol. xii) Building elevations a) The roofline on the elevations of the building containing the grocery store facing Longworth Avenue will contain three triangular pediments; 8 -72 xii) Building Fagade Materials a) A minimum area of 9% of the street fagade of. the building containing the supermarket facing Longworth Avenue, between finished grade and the elevation up to a height of 3 metres shall be required to be constructed of spandrel glazing. b) A minimum area of 50% of the street fagade of the Corner Building between finished grade and the elevation up to a height of 3 metres shall be required to be constructed of transparent glazing. 2. Schedule "3" to By -law 84 -63, as amended, is hereby further amended by changing the zone designation from "Holding — Urban Residential Exception ((H) R3 -25) Zone " to "Holding - General Commercial Exception ((H) C1 -56) Zone" as illustrated on the attached Schedule "A" hereto. 3. Schedule "A" attached hereto shall form part of this By -law. 4. This By -law shall come into effect on the date of the passing hereof, subject to the provisions of Section 34 of the Planning Act. BY -LAW read a first time this day of 2011 BY -LAW read a second time this day of 2011 BY -LAW read a third time and finally passed this day of 2011 Adrian Foster, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk 8 -73 A C� This is Schedule "A to By -law 2011- , passed this day of , 2011 A.D. NO NN w W N � O� �G O � O O U N LONG .$ORS N ® Zoning Change From "(H)R3 -25' To "(H)C1 -56" Adrian Foster, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk 8 -74 arm n Leading the Way REPORT PLANNING SERVICES Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: February 28, 2011 Resolution #: By -law M N/A Report M PSD- 018 -11 File #: PLN 6.1 Subject: GENERAL ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES (2011 UPDATE) RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report PSD- 018 -11 be received; 2. THAT the General Architectural Control Guidelines (2011 Update), prepared by John G. Williams, Architect be adopted; and 3. THAT all interested parties listed in Report PSD- 018 -11 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. Submitted by: Davi `Crome, MCIP, RPP Director of Planning Services CS /CP /df /ah 22 February 2011 Reviewed by: ranklin Wu, -Ile Chief Administrative Officer CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T (905)623 -3379 F (905)623 -0830 8 -75 REPORT NO.: PSD- 018 -11 1.0 BACKGROUND PAG E 2 1.1 In September 2002, the General Architectural Design Guidelines were approved by Council. This provided the introduction of a formal architectural review process in the Municipality. The guidelines together with an architectural review process has been successful in achieving enhanced streetscapes and improved house designs for new residential development in Clarington. 1.2 Periodic review of the guidelines is necessary to address unforeseen issues such as changes in construction practices or market demands and to ensure the guidelines are kept current and effective. 1.3 John G. Williams, Architect was retained to review and update the General Architectural Design Guidelines with the intent of achieving higher quality built form standards than the 2002 guidelines. The Guidelines have been reviewed and updated based on a tour of constructed local communities in Clarington and other municipalities in Durham to determine the strengths and weaknesses of the current guidelines and discussions regarding the current architectural design process. Staff also met with the local builders and developers for input. 2.0 AN OVERVIEW OF THE CHANGES TO THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES 2.1 Generally, the changes to the guidelines are minor yet sufficient enough to improve the architectural design quality for new residential development in Clarington. The document itself is easier to read. Additional pictures and graphics are used to help illustrate and interpret the guidelines. Other relevant changes to the guidelines are summarized below. Supplementary Guidelines An Urban Design Brief will be required for small stand alone or infill subdivisions The design brief will identify priority lots for special design requirements and any variations from the architectural standards, for example special architectural themes. A Community Design Brief will be required for major developments to articulate a cohesive community vision, identify special character areas, treatment of the public realm, and describe architectural themes. Guidelines in Exterior Architectural Design The exterior appearance of new homes has a great impact on streetscape. The guidelines require improvements to front, rear and side yard elevations for homes. Main entry stairs greater than three risers are required to be poured in place, or precast with a brick veneer. Restrictions are placed on porch height. Articulation in rear wall elevation is encouraged to limit straight line walls in an attempt to minimize monotonous rear yards. Simplified roof lines are encouraged to allow for the future installation of solar panels. [Mn REPORT NO.: PSD- 018 -11 PAGE 3 In the past, primary or corner lots were required to be masonry, now the review of design elements on primary or corner lots is identified as more important than building material selection. Guidelines for Attached and Detached Garages Changes to the criteria for attached and detached garages have been included. The revisions limit garage openings relative to lot size and identifies the minimum lot size which permits double car garages. Garage projection provisions are also more restrictive. Guidelines for Priority Lot Dwellings Upgraded building designs for homes on window streets are encouraged. A window street is a street that abuts and is parallel to an arterial road but does not provide a vehicular connection. Pedestrian connections and views into the neighbourhood are provided through window streets. Where it is determined that dwellings have limited or no visibility from public areas, for example homes backing onto a dense woodlot, upgrading to the rear elevation will no longer be required. Guidelines for Siting of Dwellings Repetition of poplar models /elevations is acceptable provided it does not conflict with the requirements for variety within the streetscape. A maximum of 3 distinctly different elevations of the same model may be sited side by side. The developer /builders shall provide information on all streetscape elements such as community mailboxes, entry features, transformers, light standards and street trees, to the control architect in order to minimize conflict between these elements and house siting. Paved driveways for single and semi - detached are not required. However, driveways related to a block of townhouses are required to be paved or hard surfaced. All driveway aprons shall continue to be paved. 3.0 CONSULTATION WITH THE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT INDUSTRY 3.1 Following the completion of a draft of the revised guidelines, staff forwarded the document to the Durham Chapter of Building Industry and Land Development Association (BILD), and the Durham Region Home Builders Association ( DRHBA) for comment. 3.2 In November 2010, Staff met with representatives from BILD, and the DRHBA as well as Gary Watchorn, from Watchorn Architects who was retained by Metrus Developments Inc. to review the draft guidelines. Generally, the building industry is supportive of revisions to the architectural control guidelines. However, some members raised concerns with proposed changes related to the exterior finishes of the building such as poured in place front steps, maximum 8 -77 REPORT NO.: PSD- 018 -11 PAG E 4 porch heights, finishes around the final grade and improvements to rear elevations. The main reason for concern is the increase in cost of the home resulting from the changes. Not all concerns raised were unanimous within the group and as such remain in the guidelines. The revisions are also consistent with architectural control guidelines used in neighbouring Durham municipalities. After the discussion with the builders and developers, items such as house numbering, lighting, corner lot landscaping treatments and paved driveways were removed from the draft guideline, as it was felt that these items are personal preferences left to the individual home owner. In addition, guidelines related.to sustainability and accessibility were also removed as they are largely covered under the Ontario Building Code. 3.3 The location of utility and service elements such as hydro meters, gas meters, water bibs and telephone /cable boxes on townhouse dwellings remains a concern. Ideally, these services should be located discretely on the wall faces perpendicular to the street or in an interior side yard wall. The location or solution from an architectural control perspective often conflicts with the location standards of the utility company. Staff will continue to work with the various utilities to identify a design solution where the meter or boxes can be hidden or screened. 4.0 CONTROL ARCHITECTS 4.1 Architectural control guidelines and the use of control architects are common practice with many municipalities in the GTA. The role of the control architect is to ensure that the homes in registered plans of subdivision meet with the intent of the architectural control guidelines. Control architects provide architectural design expertise for the municipality in reviewing building drawings submitted by builders for building permits. The Municipality will not release a building permit within a registered plan of subdivision unless the proposed exterior design has been approved by the control architect. In the case where there is a dispute between the control architect and builder /developer, the Director of Planning Services may appoint another control architect to provide an impartial opinion. In either situation, the use of a control architect or alternate control architect is on a full cost recovery basis for the Municipality. 4.2 John G. Williams, Architect has been the Control Architect for the Municipality of Clarington since 2002. Through the recent consultation with local builders, the use of other control architects was raised. Staff has no objections to using alternative control architects provided they are licensed with the Ontario Association of Architects. The control architect must demonstrate their experience in writing, including the ability to implement architectural control guidelines. The firm /individual shall not be engaged to prepare designs for a builder or developer on the subject project or other projects to ensure impartiality. REPORT NO.: PSD- 018 -11 5.0 STAFF COMMENTS PAGE 5 5.1 The guidelines have been reviewed and updated to newer standards. They take into consideration changes in the development and building industry. They have also been updated to reflect various amendments to the zoning by -law. 5.2 The guidelines will "raise the bar" for new residential development in Clarington without making it overly onerous on the developers and builders. The guidelines do not preclude any builder or developer from providing a housing product, a streetscape or community that exceeds the requirements in the guideline. 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6.1 The revised architectural design guidelines combined with the control architect will continue to be effective in improving streetscape in new developments in Clarington. It is recommended that the General Architectural Design Guidelines (2011 Update) be adopted. Staff Contact: Cynthia Strike Attachments: Attachment 1 - General Architectural Design Guidelines (2011 Update) List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Rebecca Evans, Durham Region Home Builders Association Mara Samardzic, Building Industry and Land Development Association (BILD) Gary Watchorn, Watchorn Architects Tom Albani, Metrus Developments Inc. David Stewart, John G. Williams, Architect E:Ms7 M. General Architectural Design Guidelines (2011 Update) Leading the Way prepared for: Municipality of Clarington prepared by: John G. Williams Limited Architect February 2011 0 x (D O �D C/)v 0 o� ao CD EAL ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES (2011 UPDATE) TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................... ..............................1 1.1 BACKGROUND (2010 UPDATE) ................................................................. ..............................1 1.2 PURPOSE AND INTENT OF GUIDELINES ............................................... ..............................1 1.3 CONTROL ARCHITECT .................................................................................. ..............................2 1.4 ORIENTATION MEETING .............................................................................. ..............................2 1.5 SUPPLEMENTARY GUIDELINES ................................................................ ..............................2 i) Urban Design Brief ........................................................................... ..............................2 ii) Community Design Plan ................................................................. ..............................2 1.6 APPLICATION OF GUIDELINES .................................................................. ..............................3 1.7 COMPLIANCE ................................................................................................... ..............................3 1.8 PERIODIC REVIEW OF GUIDELINES ......................................................... ..............................3 2.0 DESIGN GUIDELINE OBJECTIVES ........................................ ..............................4 2.1 OBJECTIVES ...................................................................................................... ..............................4 3.0 ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN CRITERIA ................................... ..............................5 3.1 COMMUNITY SAFETY ................................................................................... ..............................5 3.2 ARCHITECTURAL STYLE .............................................................................. ..............................6 3.3 ELEVATIONS ..................................................................................................... ..............................7 GARAGE WIDTH LIMITATIONS ................................................................. .............................21 i) Front Elevations ................................................................................. ..............................7 4.3 ii) Rear Elevations ................................................................................... ..............................7 iii) Side Elevations ................................................................................... ..............................7 3.4 MAIN ENTRANCES ......................................................................................... ..............................8 3.5 COVERED MAIN ENTRY FEATURES .......................................................... ..............................8 3.6 MAIN ENTRY STAIRS ..................................................................................... .............................10 3.7 ROOFS ................................................................................................................ .............................11 3.8 WINDOWS ........................................................................................................ .............................12 3.9 WALL CLADDING .......................................................................................... .............................13 COMMUNITY GATEWAY DWELLINGS ................................................... .............................27 i) General Requirements for Wall Cladding ................................ .............................13 5.3 ii) Requirements for Primarily Siding -Clad Dwellings ............. .............................14 3.10 EXTERIOR COLOURS .................................................................................... .............................15 3.11 ARCHITECTURAL DETAILING ................................................................... .............................16 3.12 FOUNDATION WALLS .................................................................................. .............................17 3.13 UTILITY AND SERVICE ELEMENTS .......................................................... .............................17 3.14 ADVERSE GRADE CONDITIONS .............................................................. .............................18 3.15 MUNICIPAL ADDRESS SIGNAGE .............................................................. .............................18 3.16 CORNER LOT FENCING ................................................................................ .............................19 4.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR GARAGES .................................. .............................20 4.1 GENERAL CRITERIA FOR ATTACHED GARAGES ................................ .............................20 4.2 GARAGE WIDTH LIMITATIONS ................................................................. .............................21 4.3 GARAGE PROJECTION LIMITATIONS ..................................................... .............................22 4.4 TREATMENT OF REAR YARD GARAGES ................................................. .............................23 4.5 DROPPED GARAGE CONDITIONS ........................................................... .............................24 5.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR PRIORITY LOT DWELLINGS ..... .............................25 5.1 CORNER LOT DWELLINGS .......................................................................... .............................26 5.2 COMMUNITY GATEWAY DWELLINGS ................................................... .............................27 5.3 COMMUNITYWINDOW DWELLINGS .................................................... .............................28 5.4 VIEWTERMINUS DWELLINGS .................................................................. .............................28 5.5 UPGRADED REAR AND SIDE ARCHITECTURE .................................... .............................29 6.0 GUIDELINES FOR SITING OF DWELLINGS .......................... .............................30 6.1 BUILDING SETBACKS FROM THE STREET LINE .................................. .............................30 6.2 MODEL REPETITION ..................................................................................... .............................30 i) Single- Detached and Semi - Detached ...................................... .............................30 ii) Townhouses ....................................................................................... .............................31 6.3 MASSING AND CLUSTERS .......................................................................... .............................31 i) Single- Detached and Semi- Detached ...................................... .............................31 ii) Townhouses ....................................................................................... .............................32 6.4 DRIVEWAYS ...................................................................................................... .............................33 6.5 CO- ORDINATION OF HOUSE SITINGS WITH STREETSCAPE ELEMENTS .................33 OD I 00 JOHN G. WILLIAMS LIMITED, ARCHITECT page i olio NERAL ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES (2011 UPDATE)GOP# oi1 N 7.0 DESIGN REVIEW AND APPROVAL PROCESS ...................... .............................34 7.1 PRELIMINARY REVIEW ................................................................................. .............................34 7.2 FINAL REVIEW AND APPROVAL .............................................................. .............................34 i) Working Drawings ........................................................................... .............................34 ii) Site Plans ............................................................................................. .............................34 iii) Streetscape Drawings ..................................................................... .............................34 iv) Exterior Colour Packages .............................................................. .............................34 7.3 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS ................................................................. .............................35 7.4 REQUIRED APPROVALS .............................................................................. .............................35 7.5 MONITORING FOR COMPLIANCE ........................................................... .............................35 7.6 DISPUTE RESOLUTION ................................................................................ .............................36 7.7 MONITORING EFFECTIVENESS OF CONTROL ARCHITECT ........... .............................36 JOHN G. WILLIAMS LIMITED, ARCHITECT page 11 t!l AL DESIGN GUIDELINES (2011 UPDATE) la AL 1'11 ton Iry I& s" 1.0 INTRODUCTION Modify the architectural design review process to ensure greater municipal input. 1.1 BACKGROUND (2010 UPDATE) The Municipality of Clarington is located about So kilometres east of Toronto, within the Greater Toronto Area, and covers an area of approximately 608 square kilometres. This primarily rural municipality contains 4 urban communities: • Bowmanville • Courtice • Newcastle Village • Orono In May 2002 the Municipality of Clarington adopted "General Architectural Design Guidelines" and the requirement for a privately- administered architectural design review process for all new housing within the Municipality - a process similar to that used by most other municipalities within the GreaterToronto Area. The architectural control process has been considered largely successful in achieving an enhanced streetscape quality and improving the design of housing for new residential developments within Clarington. However, as recommended in the "General Architectural Design Guidelines" (May 2002) a periodic review of the document and the architectural control process is required to ensure they are kept current and effective in meeting Clarington's civic design objectives with respect to new residential built form. John G. Williams Limited Architect was retained by the Municipality to review and update the General Architectural Design Guidelines based upon: • Touring recently constructed local communities to determine strengths and weaknesses with current Guidelines and review process. • Adjusting architectural design criteria to be more effective in producing desired results. • Adding more stringent architectural design criteria where necessary. • Providing better graphic representation of design concepts. • Consultation with the local development industry and with municipal staff. Although the format and graphics provide a new look for Clarington's General Architectural Design Guidelines, the majority of the content remains pertinent and thus unchanged from the original May 2002 document. 1.2 PURPOSE AND INTENT OF GUIDELINES The Municipality of Clarington Official Plan states: "Excellence in urban design will be pursued to contribute to a sense of place, ensure physical safety, promote social interaction and enjoyment, provide human scale to the urban environment and promote the integration of land uses." To ensure that municipal objectives are -achieved, Clarington Council requires a full architectural review process to be applied throughout Clarington. The integration of good urban design principles, including planning, architecture and landscape architecture initiatives, will help to promote healthy, attractive, livable communities with a positive identity. The purpose of Architectural Design Guidelines is to encourage the design and construction of houses which harmonize with their surroundings and which demonstrate a high standard of quality. They are intended to establish a community design vision for new residential development throughout the Municipality of Clarington and to provide the guidance necessary to achieve that vision. It is important for Guidelines to take into consideration geographic location and to recognize that Clarington's target market is often drawn from the Greater Toronto Area, attracted by affordable housing. It is also necessary to recognize the role that the automobile plays in suburban society today. The challenge is to create transit oriented design in appropriate locations in keeping with the framework of Places to Grow legislation. OD I OD JOHN G. WILLIAMS LIMITED, ARCHITECT W page 1 • I ': >ESIGN GUIDELINES (201 1 UPDATE) clE]'�''t##0]1 co bw l�,. .� 1.3 CONTROL ARCHITECT • Community design vision/ neighbourhood identity Every plan of subdivision shall be required to have a Control Architect. Qualified architects must be registered with the Ontario Association of Architects and must not have any conflict of interest in their role as Control Architect. In order to qualify, architects shall demonstrate relevant experience in the field of architectural control within the GTA. The selection of the Control Architect will be made by the Developer and must be acceptable to the Municipality. The architectural review process by the Control Architect will be conducted expeditiously and fairly. It shall generally comprise the following steps: Preparation of Supplementary Urban Design Documents; Model review and approval; and • Monitoring for compliance. These Guidelines and their interpretation by the Control Architect are intended to provide for sufficient flexibility to encourage design creativity and innovation. Proposed designs which are not in total compliance with the guidelines will be considered by the Control Architect, based on their merits, and may be approved where the spirit and intent of the guidelines is maintained. Builder's are responsible for paying all required fees directly to the Control Architect. Further information on the design review and approval process is described in Section 7.0 of these Guidelines. 1.4 ORIENTATION MEETING Prior to the review of housing designs, a meeting shall occur between the Municipality, the Control Architect and the Applicant (developer / builder / architectural or urban design consultant) to discuss the design vision for the new development. The purpose of this meeting is to encourage dialogue on the expectations of each stakeholder and to ensure the Municipality's civic design objectives are being appropriately fulfilled. During this meeting the Municipality and the Control Architect can provide feedback and guidance on the initial development proposal. The meeting should cover the following subjects: • Proposed Architecture • Proposed Landscaping • Proposed Final Site Grades • Supplementary Guidelines (Urban Design Brief / Community Design Plan) 1.5 SUPPLEMENTARY GUIDELINES In addition to the design criteria contained in the MunicipalityofClarington General Architectural Design Guidelines, each new development will require a site - specific document to be prepared for review and approval by the Director of Planning Services. The content of these supplementary guidelines is dependant upon the nature and scale of the proposed development and may take the form of an "Urban Design Brief" or "Community Design Plan ". i) Urban Design Brief Small stand -alone subdivisions or infill sites will require a 1 -2 page "Urban Design Brief' that will include the following: • A brief description of the property including location and community context. A Priority Lot Map, indicating lots which have special design requirements due to their location and degree of public visibility, (i.e. community gateways, corner lots, park lots, etc.). • Any proposed variations from the architectural standards as stated within the Municipality of Clarington General Architectural Design Guidelines (i.e. a special architectural theme). ii) Community Design Plan Major development areas, such as large -scale subdivisions or Secondary Plan Areas, will require a "Community Design Plan" to articulate a cohesive community vision that will include the following: A description of the property(s) including location and community context. • Community urban design vision (to apply to all subdivisions and JOHN G. WILLIAMS LIMITED, ARCHITECT page 2 GENERAL ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES (2011 UPDATE) developers within the community)." • Unified treatmentof public realm elements throughout the community (i.e. gateway / community edge treatments, fencing, street furniture, lighting, etc.). • Treatment of special character areas and feature streets, including connections of walkways and bicycle trails within the community, where applicable. • Description of architectural themes with flexibility to allow for different architectural styles. • A Priority Lot Map, indicating lots which have special design requirements due to their location and degree of public visibility, (i.e. community gateways, corner lots, park lots, etc.). • Any proposed variations from the architectural standards as stated within the Municipality of Clarington General Architectural Design Guidelines (i.e. a special architectural theme). Since large scale communities are often comprised of a group of several different developers commencing at varying times, it is important that the "Community Design Plan" provide sufficient flexibility to accommodate for change and innovation. 1.6 APPLICATION OF GUIDELINES These Guidelines shall apply to every plan of subdivision within the Municipality of Clarington save and except for the following: • Industrial plans of subdivision; • Country residential (Estate) or Hamlet Residential plans of subdivision, unless requested by the Municipality; These Guidelines are intended for use by the initial builder of the dwelling and will not bind the homeowner or subsequent homeowners from making any alterations to the dwelling, provided they comply with all other governing regulations. 1.7 COMPLIANCE c?I'� clgton r.,d ng the WAY In addition to the provisions of the Zoning By -law, the Conditions of Draft Approval, the Subdivision Agreement and all other applicable agreements and legislation, Developers and Builders are required to comply with these Guidelines and the Policy on New Home Sales Facilities throughout the design, marketing and construction process. Approvals by the Control Architect do not release the Builder from complying with the requirements of the Municipality of Clarington, the Project Engineer or any other approval authority. Only those dwelling designs which have been given approval by the Control Architect shall be offered for sale. 1.8 PERIODIC REVIEW OF GUIDELINES Over the course of time, further modifications to these General Architectural Design Guidelines may be necessary to address unforeseen issues (Le changes to current construction practices). A periodic review of these Guidelines will be conducted by the Municipality of Clarington to ensure they are kept current and effective. ao I CD JOHN G. WILLIAMS LIMITED, ARCHITECT V7 page 3 °o �GEENERAL ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES (2011 UPDATE) ao M 2.0 DESIGN GUIDELINE OBJECTIVES 2.1 OBJECTIVES The objectives of the Guidelines are: • To encourage harmonious and attractive streetscapes through attention to the exterior architectural quality and appearance of new housing. • To encourage safe, pedestrian - friendly streetscapes by promoting the principles of CPTED (Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design). • To diminish the visual prominence of the garage within the streetscape. • To encourage a variety of attractive, cost effective and innovative building designs which combine the best of contemporary and traditional design thinking. • To establish the appropriate siting of buildings within the limitations of the zoning by -law having regard for dwelling type, size, architectural style and location within the community. claf oon [_NNW • To establish design requirements for buildings in highly visible locations. • To assist Builders in the preparation of acceptable building designs. • To establish procedures for: - submission, review and approval of building designs; - monitoring construction for compliance with the Guidelines; - monitoring the effectiveness of the Control Architect; and - dispute resolution. • To establish processes that ensures that the Municipality's civic design objectives are being met. This will include an orientation meeting between the Muncipality, the Developer / Builder and the Control Architect. JOHN G. WILLIAMS LIMITED, ARCHITECT page 4 OD I co v IJKRAL ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES (2011 UPDATE) 3.0 ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN CRITERIA 3.1 COMMUNITY SAFETY In order to promote. safe, pedestrian - friendly communities, dwelling designs should incorporate principles of CPTED (Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design), including the following: • A clear definition between public and private space should be provided through the design and placement of buildings, fencing and landscaping. • Avoiding garage dominated streetscapes. • Ample fenestration facing public areas should be provided to encourage casual surveillance (eyes on the street). • Site planning and building design should strive to maximize visual on- look of public spaces. • Large, usable front porches should be included in the design of dwellings to promote interactive outdoor spaces. • The front door should be visible from the street. • All entries to the dwelling should be well lit. JOHN G. WILLIAMS LIMITED, ARCHITECT claripgton r' Well scaled street lighting 11. 4_'Eyes on the street' F EntrieAht� BUILDINGS SHOULD BE DESIGNED TO PROVIDE "EYES ON THE STREET" AND PROMOTE COMMUNITY SAFETY SITEPLANNINGAND BUILDING DESIGN SHOULD ALLOW FOR VISUAL ON -LOOK OF PUBLIC SPACES page 5 RCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES (2011 UPDATE) co 3.2 ARCHITECTURAL STYLE Clarington has many fine examples of traditional heritage homes which offer architectural design references for new construction within the Municipality. While it is not the intent of these guidelines to dictate specific architectural styles, Builders will be encouraged to employ a variety of architectural styles and building forms adapted from local architectural influences. The design of any building should have distinguishing elements characteristic of a single architectural style. Mixing discordant architectural styles within a single building is to be avoided. Specific architectural styles should be addressed by the Developer / Builder in the supplementary guidelines. The goal is to ensure design compatibility among architectural styles within each individual subdivision and to establish a positive visual character for each new residential neighbourhood. To ensure this goal is achieved, the following design criteria will apply: • Builders should employ a palette of architectural styles and building forms to ensure visual interest and continuity within the streetscape. Architectural variety needs to be balanced with harmony. • Builders will be encouraged to provide architectural styles which help foster neighbourhood identityand senseof place within Clarington. The architectural style of buildings within the streetscape, in conjunction with the streetscape elements found within the public realm, plays a vital role in establishing the character of a street, a neighbourhood and a community. LAIAT Of wa, EXAMPLES OF HISTORICAL ARCHITECTURE IN CLARINGTON (BOWMANVILLE) ARCHITECTURAL STYLES SHOULD BE SELECTED TO CREATE INTERESTING STREETSCAPES THAT PROMOTE NEIGHBOURHOOD IDENTITY JOHN G. WILLIAMS LIMITED, ARCHITECT page 6 GENERAL ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES (2011 UPDATE) 3.3 ELEVATIONS i) Front Elevations The exterior appearance of new housing will have the greatest impact on theoverall qualityof newresidential developments. Attractive, harmonious streetscapes are essential in creating a vibrant, livable community with a positive identity. To ensure this goal is achieved, the following design criteria will apply: • Variety of architectural expression among publicly exposed elevations is encouraged. Further information on Model Repetition is described in Section 6.2 of these Guidelines. • Each model is encouraged to have an alternative elevation. Popular models may require more than two elevations to avoid repetition and monotony within the streetscape. • Individual buildings should combine to create visual harmony when sited together within the streetscape. This can be reinforced by use of complementary, but not identical, exterior materials, colours and architectural elements. • Publicly exposed elevations shall incorporate adequate massing, proportions and wall openings (i.e. window, doors, porches, etc.) to avoid large, blankfa4ades. ii) Rear Elevations Rear elevation monotony should be avoided by limiting model designs with flat, uninteresting rear facades. To ensure this goal is achieved, the following is encouraged: • The majority of dwellings proposed by each builder within a neighbourhood shall have variation of the rear wall plane. This can be achieved through the use of wall articulation such as wall jogs, bay windows, box -out windows or covered rear porches. • Further enhancement will be required where rear elevations are exposed to public view (refer to Section 5.5). iii) Side Elevations Side elevations facing the interior side lot line require no special design enhancement unless they are exposed to public view (refer to Section 5.5). JOHN G. WILLIAMS LIMITED, ARCHITECT claI11#0011 �w�• EXAMPLE OFALTERNATE ELEVATIONS OF THE SAME MODEL INDIVIDUAL BUILDINGS SHOULD COMBINE TO CREATE VISUAL HARMONY WHEN SITED TOGETHER WITHIN THE STREETSCAPE REAR WALL ARTICULATION IS REQUIRED FOR THEMAJORITYOF DWELLINGS page 7 I NERAL ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES (2011 UPDATE) W CD 3.4 MAIN ENTRANCES The main entrance to the dwelling should act as the focal point of the dwelling and be given appropriate design emphasis. The following design criteria for main entrances will apply: • The main entrance to the dwelling shall be directly visible from the street. • A variety of front door styles will be encouraged, including some with glazing. • Decorative door architraves, or surrounds, are encouraged, particularly if a covered entry feature has not been provided. • The use of glazed sidelights and transoms at the main entrance is encouraged. MAIN ENTRANCES SHOULD BE DESIGNED AS A FOCAL FEATURE OF THE DWELLING 3.5 COVERED MAIN ENTRY FEATURES Covered main entry features include: • Front porches • Porticos • Verandahs • Recessed entries ciallton Lvediag NM Wir These features help promote safe, socially interactive and pedestrian - friendly streets by providing outdoor amenity areas which allow for views along the street and by providing a linkage between the public and private realm. In addition to providing shelter, covered main entry features located closer to the street can help to diminish the impact of the garage within the streetscape. WRAPAROUND PORCH / VERANDAH PORTICO RECESSED ENTRY COVERED PORCH WITH BALCONY EXAMPLES OF COVERED MAIN ENTRY FEATURES JOHN G. WILLIAMS LIMITED, ARCHITECT page 8 00 I c� f GENE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES (2011 UPDATE) The following design criteria for covered main entry features will apply: • A covered entry feature is required for at least 50% of model designs offered by each Builder. (If reductions to this percentage. are contemplated due to a specific architectural theme, such as Georgian or Colonial, it must be addressed in the Supplementary Guidelines). • Wraparound porches /verandahs are encouraged for Community Gateway Dwellings and Corner Lot Dwellings. • Enhancements to emphasize the main entry are encouraged and may include pilasters, architraves or masonry surrounds. • Covered front porch and /or verandah sizes should be maximized wherever possible. A minimum depth of 1.8m (6 -0 ") should be provided (unless constrained by zoning provisions) to comfortably accommodate chairs, however a variety of deeper porches are encouraged and expected. • Porch column styles and widths should be consistent with the character of the house and should typically be no less than 200m (8 ") square or diameter. • An exposed beam /frieze is required at the top of the support columns on the underside of the soffit. • Handrailings should be consistent with the character of the house. The use of maintenance -free pre- finished aluminum, vinyl, composite, iron or painted wood is preferred. • Unpainted pressure- treated wood railings are prohibited on front or flanking porches or balconies. • Ground -level wood porches on front or flankage elevations are discouraged. • A 1 00m (4 ") min. porch slab sill, projecting about 25mm (1 ") in front of the vertical wall face beneath, is to be provided for all front and flanking ground level porches. • For porches or porticos greater than 3 risers in height, the main wall cladding or other acceptable finish material should generally extend to within 300mm of finished grade on front and sides of porch to limit exposed foundation walls. • Theentryporch should generally belimitedtoaheightofapproximately 1 metre above average finished grade to maintain a pedestrian scale. Exceptions may be considered based on their design merits. JOHN G. WILLIAMS LIMITED, ARCHITECT EXPOSED BEAM / FKIEZE KAILINGS COMPATIBLE WITH DWELLING STYLE VARIETY OF COLUMN STYLES BRICK VENEER TO WITHIN 300mm OF FIN. GRADE TYPICAL PORCH DETAIL quialligton LakffiV the 1Wy }-1.8m MIN. PORCH DEPTH —} WRAPAROUND PORCHES ARE ENCOURAGED FOR RAILINGSAND COLUMNS SHOULD BE TREATED COMMUNITY GATEWAYAND CORNER LOT DWELLINGS AS AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE DWELLING page 9 C O GENERAL ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES (2011 UPDATE) co N 3.6 MAIN ENTRY STAIRS • Stairs accessing the main entrance to the dwelling should be designed as an integral component of the dwellings fa4ade. • Large concentrations of stairs leading to the front or flanking entrance of the dwelling should be avoided wherever feasible, subject to site grading conditions. • Where more than 3 risers are required to access the porch, stairs should either be: - poured -in -place concrete with masonry veneer on the exposed sides; - Precast stairs with an integrated ledge to accommodate masonry veneering on the side (i.e. Parsons Precast "Brick Step "). • Recessing or insetting 1 or 2 risers can help to eliminate the number of precast stairs at the main entrance. • Where more than 6 risers are necessary in a single run, poured -in -place concrete are required. • Detailed treatment of main entry steps should be clearly stated on the model working drawings and on the lot grading plan. U,fft ble «�• STAIRS SHOULD BE DESIGNED AS AN INTEGRAL COMPONENT OF THE DWELLING'S FACADE MASONRY VENEER SHALL BE APPLIED TO THE SIDE OF MAIN ENTRY STAIRS, WHERE MORE THAN 3 STEPS AREREQUIRED. JOHN G. WILLIAMS LIMITED, ARCHITECT page 10 ENERAL ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES (2011 UPDATE) 3.7 ROOFS Roofs play a significant role in the massing of a dwelling and the overall built form of a residential development. Roofs shall display the following design criteria: • A variety of traditional roof types and forms are encouraged, particularly for alternate elevations of a model. • Within the design of a streetscape, attention should be paid to the relationships of adjacent roof forms to ensure appropriate transitions. • Flat main roofs are not permitted, unless a component of a mansard roof. • 2- storey dwellings shall have a main roof pitch of: - front and rear facing slopes: 5.9:12 minimum; - side slopes in profile to the street: 7.9:12 minimum; • Bungalows shall have a main roof pitch of 7.9:12 min. (both front to back and on sides) to assist in massing compatibility with 2- storey dwellings. • Side - gabled roofs and roof dormers are also encouraged for bungalows to assist in massing compatibility with 2- storey dwellings. • Steeper pitches than the minimums stated are encouraged and expected, particularly on side slopes to ensure roof form variety within the streetscape. VARIETY OF ROOF FORMS HELPS CREATE VISUAL INTEREST IN THE STREETSCAPE 00 I co JOHN G. WILLIAMS LIMITED, ARCHITECT W clangton • Lower roof slopes may be considered where authentic to the dwelling style (i.e. Arts & Crafts, Prairie Georgian and higher density built forms). The use of lower roof slopes will be at the discretion of the Control Architect on an individual basis and will be dependant upon the architectural style of the dwelling. • All roofs shall have a 150mm -300mm (6 " -12 ") overhang. • Where possible, gables within the main roof should have pitches steeper than the main roof pitch. • All vent stacks, gas flues and roof vents should be located on the rear slope of the roof wherever possible and should be prefinished to match the roof colour. • The preferred location of skylights, if proposed, is on the rear or side slope of the roof. Also, they should have a flat profile. • Roof design should take into consideration the ability to allow for solar panels. In this regard, the overuse of dormers and gables should be avoided in order to provide opportunities for solar panel placement (refer to Section 7.0). 1z 5.9:12 7.9 (min.) 12 7.9 (mo.) 7.9:12 2-STOREY BUNGALOW EXAMPLES OF MINIMUM ROOF PITCH page 11 °D GENERAL ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES (2011 UPDATE) cfl 3.8 WINDOWS Ample fenestration, consistent with the dwelling's architectural style, is required for publicly exposed elevations to enhance a dwelling's appearance and to promote "eyes on the street ". Windows shall display the following design criteria: • All windows on front, flanking and other high exposure elevations should be thermally - sealed, double glazed and either casement or single -hung type. • Windows on low exposure elevations may be horizontal sliders provided the glass is set within a sash. • Basement windows on publicly exposed elevations should generally match the style of main floor windows. Slider -type structural basement windows are permitted where grade conditions do not permit installation of taller windows. • Maintenance -free windows are encouraged. • Vertical window proportions are preferred to reflect traditional architectural styles; • Windows should have a consistent and stylistically appropriate sill and lintel treatment. • Integrated muntin bars are encouraged on publiclyexposed elevations (taped muntin bars are not permitted). • Large ground floor windows are encouraged where feasible. • A variety of bay window styles is encouraged. • Where windows and doors are set into siding, casings having a minimum width of 150mm (6 ") are required (100mm (4 ") on low exposure side and rear elevations). • Where shutters are used, they should be half the width of the window opening. • Windows must comply with any noise attenuation requirements as stipulated in the applicable Noise Report. claripown BAY WINDOW BOXED -OUT WINDOW DORMER WINDOW (0 O CASEMENT CASEMENT SINGLE -HUNG ACCENT WINDOWS (WITH ROUND -TOP (WITH GOTHIC TRANSOM (WITH SHUTTERS AND TRANSOM a STANDARD & HERITAGE STYLE CROSSHEAD) MUNTIN BARS) MUNTIN BARS) EXAMPLES OF WINDOW STYLE VARIETY JOHN G. WILLIAMS LIMITED, ARCHITECT page 12 00 I co v, NERAL ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES (2011 UPDATE) cladpo".. 11 L" dir� the Sin - 3.9 WALL CLADDING • Gateway /Primary Corner Dwellings and Primary Street Dwellings should generally incorporate a masonry component. Use of all- siding A high standard of design, detail and variety of main wall cladding materials dwellings in these locations may be considered on their design merits. should be employed to achieve a cohesive mixture of texture and colour • Chimneys located on an exterior wall should be clad with the main wall within the streetscape, including: material. Brick (clay or calcite) • Stone (natural or manufactured) • Siding (vinyl or pre- finished composite wood in clapboard or board + batten profiles) • Stucco i) General Requirements For Wall Cladding The following general requirements for wall cladding will apply: • The choice of exterior cladding material should be compatible with the architectural style of the house. • Main wall cladding is encouraged to be consistent on all elevations of the house to avoid the effect of a false fa4ade. • Wall cladding materials must comply with any noise attenuation requirements as stipulated in the applicable Noise Report. • Where changes in materials do occur they should happen at logical locations such as a change in plane, wall opening, downspout or corner detail that will be reviewed on design merit. • The front fa4ade material should return a minimum of 1200mm (4' -0 ") along the side of the house. • Material changes which help to articulate the transition between the base, middle and top of the building are appropriate. • The use of secondary materials which blend harmoniously with the primary cladding material are encouraged. • When siding is used as a secondary material on any elevation of the house it shall be framed with minimum 150mm (6 ") aluminum clad trim boards on the top, bottom, sides, corners and at all openings (i.e. windows, doors, etc.). Trim boards should be accentuated by using a contrasting but compatible colour to that of the siding colour. JOHN G. WILLIAMS LIMITED, ARCHITECT BRICK STUCCO STONE SIDING page 13 I ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES (2011 UPDATE) ii) Requirements for Primarily Siding -Clad Dwellings In addition to the Sec. 3.9 i) above, the following requirements for dwellings clad primarily in siding will apply: • Special consideration is required for dwellings clad primarily in siding to ensure they incorporate acceptable massing and proportions to avoid large flat planes exposed to public view. • A masonry plinth may be provided where consistent with the architectural style of the dwelling. • Provide minimum 150mm (6 ") aluminum clad cornertrim and window/ door surrounds, accentuated by using a contrasting but compatible colour. • Provide a minimum 150mm (6 ") continuous frieze board at all roof soffits and where siding abuts any masonry wall. • Distinctive detailing shall be provided on elevations exposed to public view. The following are some suggested methods of achieving acceptable enhanced treatments: - incorporate accent materials (i.e. scalloped shingles, crezone panels) and decorative trim detailing (i.e. gable posts, shutters, brackets, louvered vents, etc.) - provide a variety of boxed -out and /or bay window treatments, particularly on the second storey; - provide significant porch and second - storey balcony treatments; - provide decorative window crossheads; Laid*dw11W. DISTINCTIVE DETAILING SHALL BE PROVIDED ON ELEVATIONS EXPOSED TO PUBLIC VIEW A MASONRY PLINTH SHOULD BE PROVIDED JOHN G. WILLIAMS LIMITED, ARCHITECT page 14 GENERAL ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES (2011 UPDATE) 3.10 EXTERIOR COLOURS A sufficient variety of exterior colour packages shall be offered by each Builder to avoid monotony within the streetscape. It is also important that individual exterior colour packages combine to create a visually harmonious streetscape appearance. In this respect, jarring colour contrasts will be discouraged. Exterior colours shall display the following design criteria: • Compatible material colours are required within each individual colour package. • Soffit, eaves, fascia and frieze board should be the same colour within the individual colour package. • The use of accent brick for quoining, banding, etc. should be used sparingly. Its colour should be subtle and blend harmoniously with the main wall cladding colour. • Where siding is used, the colour of the corner trim and window /door casings should generally be a different but harmonious colour to that of the main siding colour, usually matching the soffit /eaves /fascia colour); • All flashing is to be prefinished to complement the roof or adjacent wall cladding colour. • The roof colour should complement the colour of main wall cladding. The use of lighter shingle colours such as white, light grey, rainbow red or rainbow green should be avoided. • No two dwellings which have adjacent frontage or flankage, shall have the same main wall cladding colour. • No more than 3 identical colour packages will permitted within any group of 10 dwellings and these should be separated by at least 3 dwelling units. • Where identical front elevations are used in any group of 10 dwellings, such units shall have a distinctly different colour package. cladygtoll Typical Exterior Material and Colour Schedule PROJECT NAME / BUILDER NAME Material Item Manufacturer Package #I Package #2 Package #3 Brick Stone Stucco (Main) Stucco Accent Siding y Roof Shingles Aluminum Rain goods (� Entry Door Paint Garage Door Paint Trim Paint Shutters Railings Windows Mortar Tint General Notes: 1. This chart indicates the typical materials and colours which shall be identified by the Builder where applicable. 2. The number of colour packages required for each Builder shall be determined on a project by project basis. 3. All exterior colour selections are subject to approval by the Control Architect. 4. All roof vents and flashings to be prefinished or painted to match roof colour. TYPICAL EXTERIOR MATERIAL AND COLOUR SCHEDULE OD I CCD JOHN G. WILLIAMS LIMITED, ARCHITECT page 15 I GENERAL ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES (2011 UPDATE) co iWENhL 00 3.11 ARCHITECTURAL DETAILING The use of masonry, painted wood and composite architectural details characteristic to the style of the dwelling help to enhance its appearance. Architectural detailing shall display the following design criteria: • A variety of trim detailing is encouraged where architecturally appropriate, including: - bargeboard, gable posts, louvers, brackets, dentils, pilasters, scalloped shingles, etc. • A variety of brick detailing is encouraged where architecturally appropriate, including: - quoining, window /door headers, pilasters, banding, soldier coursing, base corbelling, etc. • A variety of precast stone detailing is encouraged where architecturally appropriate, including: - keystones, sills, accents, imposts, etc. • All masonry detailing should be accentuated by projecting about 12mm (1/2 ") from the wall face. • A frieze board (or brick soldier course cornice) is required on all exposed elevations and should run along the entire courtyard side of any projecting garage returning a minimum of 1200mm (4' -0 ") along elevations facing the interior sideyard. • Siding and stucco clad dwellings shall always provide trim around door and window openings and include a continuous 150mm (6 ") frieze board detail under soffits. • Where masonry banding is used on the front elevation it shall return a minimum of 1200mm (4' -0 ") along elevations facing the interior sideyard. clarfigtoll FRIEZE BOARD UNDER SOFFIT WINDOW SURROUNDS GABLE POST BRICK HEADERS BRICK SOLDIER COURSING BRICKQUOINING JOHN G. WILLIAMS LIMITED, ARCHITECT page 16 'ALAR DESIGN GUIDELINES (2011 UPDATE) 3.12 FOUNDATION WALLS • Exposed foundation walls are to be avoided. • The main wall cladding material shall be within 300mm (12 ") of finished grade on front and exterior side yard (flankage) elevations and within 500mm (20 ") on side and rear elevations. • Special attention to this is required particularly on front and flanking elevations, porches and verandahs, on the sides of garages which project from the dwelling and on detached garages. • Foundation walls must be a aro riatel check -ste ped along sloping grade. VENEER MUST BE STEPPED TO FOLLOW SLOPING GRADE 3.13 UTILITY AND SERVICE ELEMENTS Utility and service elements (hydro meters, gas meters, telephone boxes and CAN boxes) shall be located discreetly on wall faces perpendicular to the street in the interior sideyard. • Corner lot detached dwellings are encouraged to have hydro and gas meters located on the interior side yard wall face. • For corner lot dwellings where utility meters must be located on street facing walls, they should either be screened architecturally or with landscaping, or placed in an unobtrusive location, such as at a wall jog, in order to reduce their negative visual impact upon the streetscape. • Townhouses (interior and flankage units) shall be designed with recessed or screened utility meters. • Design of recessed meters shall comply with Utility Authority regulations and the intent of the Architectural Design Guidelines. • Air conditioning units are discouraged from being located in the front or flankage yard of any dwelling unless appropriately screened with landscaping or fencing. clarigtall LAdkig I& UTILITYMETERSSHOULD BELOCATED ON WALLS FACING INTERIOR SIDE YARDS WHEREVER FEASIBLE I Preferred Locati n ForAIC Units (Rear Yard) Utility Meters on Flankage Wall Should be Architecturally Preferred Location Integrated or Screened For Utility Meters (Int. Side Yard) CORNER DWELLINGS SHOULD HAVE UTILITYMETERS SCREENED FROM STREET VIEW EXAMPLE OF RECESSED GAS METER EXAMPLE OF RECESSED HYDRO METER OD I co JOHN G. WILLIAMS LIMITED, ARCHITECT co page 17 00 R ' GENERAL ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES (2011 UPDATE)�r?I'I11a1i �.. _ 4 0 0 3.14 ADVERSE GRADE CONDITIONS • Where severely sloping grade conditions exist, the Builder shall provide models designed or modified to adapt to sloping sites. This is particularly important for lots having back to front sloping grade conditions (full or partial front walk -out condition) to ensure an appropriate relationship between the dwelling, the garage and the street is maintained. • Elevated main front entrances and large concentrations of stairs should be reduced, wherever feasible, by: dispersing the steps over a larger area (i.e. within walkway); turning the steps to face the driveway; - incorporating some risers inside the dwelling (i.e. sunken foyer); • In order to maintain an appropriate scale of the main entrance to the pedestrian, a relationship where the main floor is within approximately 1.0m of finished grade is preferred, wherever feasible. • The design of the garage may require modification to limit its massing on steeply sloping lots. This may be achieved by lowering the roof form of the garage and /or enhancing architectural detailing over the garage. Refer to Section 4.5 for further design criteria related to impact of adverse grade conditions upon garages. • For walk-up dwelling types that locate the firstfloor substantially above grade (i.e. Brownstones), exterior steps should be limited to a height of approximately 1.5m. Remaining steps should be located internally. JOHN G. WILLIAMS LIMITED, ARCHITECT 3.15 MUNICIPAL ADDRESS SIGNAGE It is critical that the municipal address is legible from the street, particularly in emergency situations. For this reason the following criteria shall apply: - It shall be located prominently on the front fa4ade of the dwelling or garage. - It shall be in a well -lit area. - Numbering shall be a minimum of 100mm (4 ") tall and in a simple, legible font face. Consideration to a themed / coordinated approach to municipal address numbers should be provided by the builders. For example, a similar style throughout the neighbourhood provides a unifying urban design element which helps define neighbourhood character. � �Kwrrt� jaw 4 �%d 373 l_GAMBIA-- ROAD 8 lax EXAMPLES OFMUNICIPAL ADDRESS SIGNAGE page 18 OD CD . ENERAL ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES (2011 UPDATE) 3.16 CORNER LOT FENCING • The design of fencing visible from the public realm shall be compatible throughout the community. • Corner lot fencing shall be provided by the developer /builder for all corner dwellings. The design of this fencing shall be compatible throughout the neighbourhood. • Corner lot fencing is intended to screen private rear yards otherwise exposed to flanking streets and must be: - designed by the developer's consulting landscape architect; - be no greater that 1.8m in height; unless otherwise specified in a Noise Attenuation Study - consistent with the' design, materials and details of other community fencing (i.e. Noise Attenuation Fence); - in compliance with applicable noise fencing requirements and municipal standards; - located on private property; - follow the lot line to a point approximately 1500 mm beyond the corner of the dwelling and then return to within 1350 mm of its flanking face to accommodate a gate. • All fencing shall comply with the Municipality of Clarington fencing requirements and by -laws JOHN G. WILLIAMS LIMITED, ARCHITECT clal�'�11(�!>1 lAft „We rkr iii Condition One: Backing onto Side Lot Line of Adjacent Dwelling FENCE TYPE AS SPECIFIED BYTHEMUNICIPALITY Park, School - i Open Space 7^ " etc. Privacy Fence Condition Two: Backing onto Other Land Uses PRIVACY FENCE - ---i FENCE BY THE MUNICIPALITY PARK, SCHOOL, OPEN SPACE, ETC. Condition Three: Back to Back Corner Lots CONCEPTUAL LOCATIONS OF CORNER LOT PRIVACY FENCING page 19 II° AL A CHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES (2011 UPDATE) clafIlt Ol) lnaJwW rkr u'rn• O N 4.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR GARAGES The automobile plays an important role within modern suburban communities, hence the garage is a necessity for most homeowners. Typically, dwellings on wider frontage lots are proportionately larger than the garage while the reverse is true for homes on smaller lots. It is important for these Guidelines to minimize the visual impact of the car on the streetscape, particularly those with narrower lot frontages. 4.1 GENERAL CRITERIA FOR ATTACHED GARAGES The following general design criteria for the treatment of attached garages shall apply: • Attached garages should not dominate the massing of the street - facing dwelling facade. In general, the massing of the garage should be minimized by: - Giving the habitable portion of the dwelling a larger and more dominant mass. - Integrating the massing of the garage into the main massing of the dwelling. - Positioning the main front wall and porch face closer to the street. - Limiting the projection of the garage. • Garages should be complementary in character and quality to the principal dwelling. • Glazing in overhead garage doors is encouraged, particularly doors wider than 2.5m (8' -0 "). • Garage doors should be paneled, sectional roll -up types and have a variety of header /lintel treatments above. THE STREETSCAPE SHOULD NOT BE DOMINATED BYGARAGES JOHN G. WILLIAMS LIMITED, ARCHITECT i4_1 DWELLINGS SHOULD BE DESIGNED TO MINIMIZE THE VISUAL IMPACTOF THE GARAGE page 20 OD I CA) GENERAL ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES (2011 UPDATE) The streetscape should include a variety of garage door styles to avoid monotony and repetition of a single garage door style. The use of tandem garages is encouraged, where feasible, to limit the width of the garage yet provide parking and storage opportunities. Where the garage projects in front of the ground level wall or porch face, a window in the courtyard side of the garage consistent with the height and style of the front elevation windows, may be required. .0111 low. ■■■ ■�■ ..■■ ■■N noon noon ■■■ ■■■ noon ■■■� I oho 0 0 109111H.10111 d ■■ ■1 bb. I I I I I ■■■ I ■■■ ■■ ■■ soon I I i ■■ ■ ■■■ DDa,D�a HO BUILDERS ARE ENCOURAGED TO PROVIDEA VARIETY OF GARAGE DOOR STYLES JOHN G. WILLIAMS LIMITED, ARCHITECT 4.2 GARAGE WIDTH LIMITATIONS � 'lc?�'11t ton Garage widths should relate to the width of the lot to ensure a proportional balance between the habitable portion of the dwelling and the garage is achieved. Garage size shall complywith the applicable Municipality of Clarington Zoning By -laws. Outlined below are garage width guidelines based on dwelling type and lot frontage. The use of wider garages may be considered in consultation with Municipality staff and Control Architect where wider lot frontages have been provided and where it does not contravene the by -law. - Townhouses and Semi- Detached dwellings (attached above grade) shall be restricted to a single -car garage per unit having a maximum garage door width of 3.1 m (10'). - Linked Semi - Detached dwellings (attached below grade) and Single Detached dwellings having lot frontages less than 10.0m shall be restricted to a single -car garage per unit having a maximum garage door width of 3.1 m (10'). - Single Detached dwellings having lot frontages of 10.Om to 11.2m shall be restricted to a garage with an outside width that is a maximum of 40% of the width of the dwelling. - For lots having frontages of 11.3m or greater 2 -Car garages will be permitted. The use of single bay garage doors separated by a pier, rather than a single 5.Om (16') wide garage door, will be encouraged wherever feasible. - For lots having frontages of 18.3m or greater 3 -car garages will be permitted. Single -bay garage doors should be used and the front fa4ade of the garage should be stepped (ie: outside bay setback at least 2' -O "). The zoning by -law requires single- detached and semi - detached dwellings, regardless of lot size, to have a minimum of 2 outdoor parking spaces per dwelling. Where the width of the driveway exceeds the width of the garage, the driveway should be no greater than 4.6m wide to accommodate 2 vehicles "side -by- side ". Where "side by side" parking is used for single- detached and semi- detached dwellings with narrow lot frontages, care should be taken in the design of the dwelling to ensure conflict between the parking area and the porch /stairs is minimized. page 21 °D ENERAL ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES (2011 UPDATE) cic?1'I11 .011 0 -9h. 4.3 GARAGE PROJECTION LIMITATIONS • Garages that project beyond the main front wall or porch face of the dwelling tend to have a negative impact on the streetscape appearance of new residential communities. �w� ► . i " • Garage projection shall comply with the applicable Municipality of �, J Clarington Zoning By -laws. • The majority of all dwelling units proposed withn a community should have garageswhich are eitherflush with or recessed behind the ground floor front wall or covered main entry feature (i.e. porch or portico). F 7 • The maximum garage projection shall be 1.5m (5' -0 ") in front of either the ground floor front wall or covered main entry feature (i.e. porch or portico) unless this conflicts with the zoning by -law. • At least 60% of the second storey wall face above the garage must not AF-i be setback further than 2.5m (8' -21 from the front face of the garage. • The overuse of flush wall faces above the garage (i.e. second storey wall face flush with garage wall face) shall be limited. • Where "wide /shallow" lot types are proposed the garage should be RECESSED GARAGE FLUSH GARAGE PROJECTING GARAGE either flush with or recessed behind the ground floor front wall or covered main entry feature. • In addition to the above -noted garage projection limitations, a variety of garage options should be pursued by builders with lot sizes 183m DWELLING WITH DWELLING WITH (60') or greater as outlined in the diagram below: PROJECTING GARAGE FLUSH / RECESSED GARAGE - Opt. 1: 3 -car garage; - Opt. 2: recessed garage; - Opt. 3: rear yard detached garage; SECOND -_ - - - SECOND - Opt. 4: rear yard attached garage; -� - -_ - -, STOREY STOREY OVER OVER - Opt. 5:3 -car tandem garage. GARAGE GARAGE Opt r — z oPt s Opt 4 0p s - - - - - - - - - - - - - - r - - -- r - - -- r--- - - - - -� GARAGE GARAGE I I I I I I I I I .A I IE I FACE FACE I AA I I I I ❑I I I I ..�I I MAIN BUILDING FACE MAIN BUILDING FACE L _ L__ OR PORCH FACE OR PORCH FACE GARAGE PROJECTION CRITERIA GARAGE OPTIONS FOR LARGER LOTS JOHN G. WILLIAMS LIMITED, ARCHITECT page 22 I O l &ENERAL ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES (2011 UPDATE) [i�I@0011 11Yk11fkq 11}e' iii. 4.4 TREATMENT OF REAR YARD GARAGES • Pairing of garages within the laneway should occur when appropriate. • The municipal address shall be provided on lane- accessed garages in Rear yard garages that are located in the rear yard and accessed across the a well lit location facing the lane. front or flanking side yard or from a rear lane are encouraged wherever . Garage doors should be sectional roll -up type. possible to minimize the visibility of the garage from the street. The following design criteria for rear yard garages shall apply: • Rear yard garages may be attached or detached from the main dwelling. • Rear yard garages should be of a complementary design quality, material and colour to the main dwelling. • The siting of these garages should be as close to the minimum setbacks as possible to maximize the rear yard amenity area. • The minimum roof pitch for detached garages shall be 5.9:12 with a variety of steeper pitches encouraged. • Rear yard garages on corner lots or other high exposure lots should be oriented to the minor street and will be of increased design quality consistent with the main dwelling. This will include: additional fenestration; introduction of gables and trim detailing; main wall cladding which is the same as the main dwelling. w w ti STREET REAR LANE REAR YARD GARAGEACCESSED FROM LANE am —1 F_ 7 F 7 aD Detached Attached Rear Yard Garage Rear Yard Garage Attached Rear Yard Garage/ REAR YARD GARAGEACCESSED FROM STREET JOHN G. WILLIAMS LIMITED, ARCHITECT REAR YARD GARAGEACCESSED FROM LANE REAR YARD GARAGEACCESSED FROM STREET page 23 CD G r • ENERAL ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES (2011 UPDATE) cii]]�]]IQ]� 0 Cn 4.5 DROPPED GARAGE CONDITIONS Dropped garages generally occur where rear -to -front sloping grade conditions exist. This often creates "top- heavy" garage massing resulting from additional brick between the garage door opening and the soffit. Where the slab of the garage drops more than 600mm (2' -0 ") below what is indicated on the working drawings, an alternative design treatment must be submitted for architectural review and shown on the streetscape. The preferred alternative design treatments for dropped garages include: • lowering the garage roof by adjusting its pitch; • lowering or extending decorative gable louvres /windows; • providing additional detailing or brick banding and soldier coursing; • adding a habitable scale window above the garage doors; • increasing the height of the garage door from T -0" to 8' -0 "; • providing arched headers above the garage doors; • positioning light fixtures above the garage doors; JOHN G. WILLIAMS LIMITED, ARCHITECT DROPPED GARAGE SLAB (UNACCEPTABLE) TREATED BY LOWERING GARAGE ROOF Excess BdckAbove Garage Doors Negatively Impacts the Streetscape ACCEPTABLE ALTERNATIVE TO LOWERING GARAGE ROOF EXAMPLE OF DROPPED GARAGE CRITERIA page 24 11111111 11111111 _ 11111111 _ 11111111 _ ACCEPTABLE ALTERNATIVE TO LOWERING GARAGE ROOF EXAMPLE OF DROPPED GARAGE CRITERIA page 24 I 0 O J 0 NERAL ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES (2011 UPDATE) a(ktw9n to taadir�¢ 5.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR PRIORITY LOT DWELLINGS Dwellings in prominent locations, or "Priority Lots ", have a higher degree of visibility within the public realm. Special design consideration is required for the publicly exposed elevations of these dwellings. Every plan of subdivision will require a "Priority Lot Map" indicating lots which have special design requirements due to their location and degree of public visibility, (i.e. community gateways, corner lots, park lots, etc.). This will form part of the "Supplementary Guidelines" to be prepared for the development and to be approved by the Director of Planning Services (refer to Section 1.5). i i 3 r i • i i � I� T z � +L • w o ' • c� Ii VACANT A COUETOR ROAD IT N'HOOD PARK w 0 w o: SCHOOL I I • COLLECTOR ROAD J i VIIII • • T T -- W I I • • PARKETTE , z �r 1 COMMERCIAL L - -- TYPICAL PRIORITYLOT PLAN ME= MENW E� JOHN G. WILLIAMS LIMITED, ARCHITECT - — - - - — - — - — J ,. ARTERIAL ROAD r� VACANT (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL) LEGEND • Corner Lot Dwellings Community Gateway Dwellings 4C—c.w.-�> Community Window Dwellings T View Terminus Dwellings - - - - - -- Upgraded Rear and/or Side Architecture "SAMPLE" SCHEDULE W PRIORITY LOT MAP GENERAL ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON page 25 C 0 ' NERAL ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES (2011 UPDATE) claf 1gan 8 _ _ LvMing Nk �� O CD 5.1 CORNER LOT DWELLINGS Corner Lot Dwellings play a significant role in setting the image, character and quality of the street. Corner Lot Dwellings shall address both street frontages in a consistent manner and incorporate ground level detailing (porches, windows, entries, etc.) which reinforces the pedestrian scale of the street. Buildings should be sited close to the street to help define the street edge. Builders will be encouraged to market designs prepared specifically for use on corner lots. Dwellings designed for internal lots may be used on corner lots provided they incorporate a sufficient amount of fenestration and upgraded flanking wall design treatment. • The preferred design is with the main entrance facing the long side of the lot (side entry) or the daylight triangle (angled entry). • The main entrance may face the front lot line provided appropriate attention is paid to the design of the flanking wall through the use of bay windows and /or a secondary entrance. Special attention to the massing, height, articulation, fenestration, material finish and detailing is required for all exposed elevations of a Corner Lot Dwelling. The following architectural elements are required: • Wall cladding treatment which is consistent on all 4 elevations (i.e. no false brick fronting with siding on sides and rear). • A prominent porch or portico is encouraged (wraparound porches are preferred). • Sufficient fenestration on front and flanking elevations displaying balanced proportions. • Highly articulated flanking elevations are required to avoid flat, blank, uninteresting facades. • Gables, dormers, or tower features are desirable to articulate and enhance the roof form. • The rear elevation of the Corner Lot Dwelling shall be upgraded to include detailing and window treatment consistent with the front and flanking elevations. JOHN G. WILLIAMS LIMITED, ARCHITECT f i ii i Upgraded Rear Elevation Fencing Does Not Hide Side Elevation Highly Articulated Facades Walkway to Sidewalk a Entry Facing Flanking Side Prominent Porch Ld(Wraparound Preferred) Garage Located Away y From Intersection PLAN OFCORNER LOT DWELLING CONCEPTUAL IMAGES OF CORNER LOT DWELLING page 26 00 I co VERAL ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES (2011 UPDATE) 5.2 COMMUNITY GATEWAY DWELLINGS Community Gateway Dwellings are located at the entrances to the community from the external road system. These dwellings play an important role in expressing the image, character and quality of the community to residents, visitors and passersby. A high degree of architectural design quality will be expected for all elevations of Community Gateway Dwellings. In addition to the design characteristics stated in Section 5.1 above, the following shall apply: • The main entrance should be oriented to the higher order street or to the daylight triangle unless this conflicts with any noise attenuation requirements (berm /fence) or with a community gateway entryfeature (fence /gate /wall). • The garage should be recessed or flush with the front porch or wall face. • A wraparound porch or other similarly dominant design feature shall be provided. • Porches shall be sufficiently setback from any community gateway entry feature to avoid conflicts. • Distinctive architectural elements such as turrets, tower features, projecting bays, masonry chimneys, precast detailing, shutters and gables shall be employed where architecturally appropriate. • Special attention to the exterior colour package is required with the use of upgraded materials such as stone and precast details being strongly encouraged. • The dwelling design, materials and colours should be coordinated with the community gateway entry feature. • The design of the community gateway entryfeature(s) and landscaping should be detailed within the Supplementary Guidelines. Every effort should be made to ensure these features are designed in a coordinated manner throughout the community in coordination between the Town and developer's Landscape Architect. JOHN G. WILLIAMS LIMITED, ARCHITECT PLAN OF COMMUNITY GATEWAY DWELLINGS claf#!#oll L. %dirig frn-11ay Upgraded Rear Elevation Fencing Should Not Hide Side Elevation Highly Articulated Facades/ Upgraded Materials (Stone, Precast, Stucco) Entry Facing Flanking Side (Unless Conflicting with Noise Requirements) Wraparound Porch (Where suitable to Arch Style) (Porch shall not conflict with entry feature wall) Possible Gateway Identity Feature (As Per Community Theme Plan). Heightened Massing at Comer (Projecting bay, tower feature, etc.) Garage Flush or Recessed CONCEPTUAL IMAGE OF A GATEWAY LOT DWELLING page 27 co • i N ERAL ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES (2011 UPDATE)c?j'jj�Qj� L kif Ltd* the W" 0 5.3 COMMUNITY WINDOW DWELLINGS Community Window Dwellings front onto a service road parallel to an arterial /collector road but are separated from it by a boulevard or buffer. Due to the high degree of public visibility of these dwellings which face a major road, the following requirements will apply: • The majority of houses within the Community Window streetscape should have a covered front porch. • Dwellings which flank onto an external arterial road, but which are not corner lots, will require side and rear elevation upgrades. • Dwellings with front projecting garages should be minimized. • Upgraded building designs are encouraged. rLAN Ur LUMOUNII Y WINUUW UWtLLINGS CONCEPTUAL IMAGE OF COMMUNITY WINDOW DWELLINGS JOHN G. WILLIAMS LIMITED, ARCHITECT 5.4 VIEW TERMINUS DWELLINGS View Terminus Dwellings occur at the top of a'T' intersection, where one road terminates at a right angle to the other and at street elbows. These dwellings play an important role in the streetscape by terminating a long view corridor. Corner lots opposite these dwellings should frame the view from the street. Because of their prominence View Terminus Dwellings should include such enhancement features as: • Driveways should be located to the outside of a pair of View Terminus Dwellings to increase landscaping opportunities and reduce the prominence of the garage. • A greater front yard setback from adjacent dwellings is encouraged where lot depth permits. • Architectural treatments which provide visual interest will be required for V lew Terminus Dwellings E\ E E T E APPROACH APPROACH � T i a T= T- NTERSECTION'DWELLMGS 1='STREET- ELROW'DWELLINGS VLAN Ur VILW I LKMINUS DWELLINGS CONCEPTUAL IMAGE OF VIEW TERMINUS DWELLINGS page 28 i rLAN Ur LUMOUNII Y WINUUW UWtLLINGS CONCEPTUAL IMAGE OF COMMUNITY WINDOW DWELLINGS JOHN G. WILLIAMS LIMITED, ARCHITECT 5.4 VIEW TERMINUS DWELLINGS View Terminus Dwellings occur at the top of a'T' intersection, where one road terminates at a right angle to the other and at street elbows. These dwellings play an important role in the streetscape by terminating a long view corridor. Corner lots opposite these dwellings should frame the view from the street. Because of their prominence View Terminus Dwellings should include such enhancement features as: • Driveways should be located to the outside of a pair of View Terminus Dwellings to increase landscaping opportunities and reduce the prominence of the garage. • A greater front yard setback from adjacent dwellings is encouraged where lot depth permits. • Architectural treatments which provide visual interest will be required for V lew Terminus Dwellings E\ E E T E APPROACH APPROACH � T i a T= T- NTERSECTION'DWELLMGS 1='STREET- ELROW'DWELLINGS VLAN Ur VILW I LKMINUS DWELLINGS CONCEPTUAL IMAGE OF VIEW TERMINUS DWELLINGS page 28 00 I GEAL ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES (2011 UPDATE) 5.5 UPGRADED REAR AND SIDE ARCHITECTURE Upgraded rear and side architecture is required where these elevations are exposed to public view. This occurs in the following situations: • Reverse frontage lots which back or flank onto a public road. • Lots which back or flank onto highly visible public uses such as open space, roads, parks, schools, storm water management ponds, public walkways, institutional uses, commercial uses. • Where severe stepping of units on street curves causes exposure to the side wall. The exposed side and /or rear elevations of these dwellings shall have a level of quality and detail consistent with the front elevation of the dwelling. This should include, but not be limited to, features such as: • Enhanced window style, muntin bars, shutters, frieze board, quoining/ pilasters, decorative panels /louvres and brick detailing consistent with the front elevation. • Introduction of gables, dormers and /or bay windows. • Additional fenestration on the exposed side elevation. • Some variety among rear yard setbacks or rear wall articulation is encouraged for lots having long stretches of high exposure rear elevations. • The level of upgrading should be consistent with the level of public exposure. For example, houses backing onto a park or road will be quite visible to an area of frequent public use and will require a higher level of upgrading than dwellings backing onto open space or commercial uses. • Where it is determined that dwellings will have limited or no public visibility (i.e. backing onto dense woodlots), there will be no requirement for upgrading. JOHN G. WILLIAMS LIMITED, ARCHITECT clang ton LAiding the 144y FIGURE 5.5A -CONCEPTUAL IMAGES OF UPGRADED SIDE ARCHITECTURE CONCEPTUAL IMAGES OF UPGRADED REAR ARCHITECTURE page 29 °O HITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES (2011 UPDATE) clacI1Ioon � ' Laadial� flee fli+ti� N 6.0 GUIDELINES FOR SITING OF DWELLINGS 6.1 BUILDING SETBACK FROM THE STREET LINE A well- defined, strong street edge helps to reinforce the pedestrian - oriented goals of the community. Well- articulated dwellings with entrances and front porches sited close to the street will be encouraged. The criteria for building setback from the street line are: • Houses should generally be sited with controlled, orderly setbacks to provide variety, visual interest and a human scale to the street. • Controlled variety among setbacks from the street line is desirable along long, straight street lengths wherever dwelling designs and lot depths permit. Haphazard stepping of units is to be avoided. HOUSES SHOULD BE GENERALLY SITED WITH A CONSISTENT SETBACKTO THE STREET. WHERE LOT DEPTHS PERMIT, CONTROLLED VARIATION OF SETBACKIS DESIRABLE JOHN G. WILLIAMS LIMITED, ARCHITECT 6.2 MODEL REPETITION Repeating popular models /elevations is acceptable provided it doesn't conflicts with the requirement for variety within the streetscape. Additional elevations will be required for popular models. i) Single- Detached and Semi- Detached The following siting criteria will apply for single- detached and semi- detached dwellings: • The siting of identical elevations side by side or directly opposite is prohibited. • Identical front elevations of a model shall be separated bya minimum of 2 dwellings (or pairs of semi - detached dwellings) and cannot comprise more than 30% of a street block or be sited greater than 3 times within any row of 10 dwellings. Such elevations must use a different exterior colour package. • A maximum of 3 distinctly different elevations of the same model (i.e. A, B, C elevations) may be sited side by side. • Flanking elevations must be different from those flanking elevations on lots abutting or directly opposite. Tr od -�- MAX.3 ALTERNATE ELEVATIONS OF SAME MODEL PERMITTED TOGETHER -� -� -� I ;- I >P I m I ^P I Po I I IDENTIC KITTY - C PERMITTMIN. IDENTICAL MODEL ELEVS. IDENTICAL MODEL ELE S. MUST BE SEPARATED BY ARE NOT PERMITTED 2 UNITS DIRECTLY OPPOSITE PP-'EVS60N 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 f0 ELEVATIONS ARE NOT PERMITTED ON ADJACENT OR DIRECTLY OPPOSING CORNER LOTS IDENTICAL ELEVATIONS PERMITTED MAX. 3 TIMES IN A ROW OF 10 UNITS. MODEL REPETITION AND FACADE VARIETY CRITERIA (SINGLE DETACHED AND SEMI- DETACHED DWELLINGS) page 30 OD I J w GENERAL ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES (2011 UPDATE) • There must be at least 3 different models (different building footprint), regardless of elevation type, within any row of 10 dwellings on a street. ii) Townhouses The repetition requirements stated for single- detached and semi - detached dwellings will not apply for townhouses. Since townhouses are comprised of individual units grouped into a larger architectural form, the massing and design of each townhouse block rather than the individual units, will be reviewed and approved based upon the design merits of the block. • Appropriate design variety between adjacent blocks should be provided. • Townhouse blocks may vary in size from 3 to 8 units although blocks should generally contain 6 units or less. • When designing townhouse elevations, the composition of the entire townhouse block should be taken into consideration. • Consideration shall be given to building form, massing, and proportions, relative to the number of units within the specific block. 6.3 MASSING AND CLUSTERS i) Single- Detached and Semi- Detached The arrangement of houses within a street block is a key component in providing an attractive streetscape. The overall impression created by the grouping and massing of dwellings within a block will have a greater visual impact than the detailing of an individual dwelling. The following design objectives shall be observed to ensure harmonious massing within the streetscape: • Compatibility in height and massing between adjacent dwellings is encouraged. • Extreme variations in building heights and size shall be avoided. • Where bungalows, raised bungalows or 1 -1/2 storey dwellings are sited amongst 2- storey dwellings they shall: JOHN G. WILLIAMS LIMITED, ARCHITECT clang toll r., afiw the May THE APPROPRIATE ARRANGEMENT OF HOUSES IS A KEY COMPONENT IN PROVIDING AN ATTRACTIVE STREETSCAPE BUILDING MASSING OBJECTIVES FOR SINGLES AND SEMIS WITHIN THE STREETSCAPE page 31 / � ,,. __ r/•rte` W u u TL s Bungalow 2Storey — — + — ..- — — Bungalow 3Storey Bungalow 25torey — .- W e. -. .f r ..- -,.- — .— ..- a W U '2 Storey'Grouping 'Bugalow'Grouping '2 Storey'Grouping Mlnimurre2Units Mlnimum:2Units Mtnimurn: 2 Units LU _ ____ _ -- __ —_ -- } 41 a RL,AFT-U 17T-M Lurp Erxa� '2 Storey'Grouping '3 Storey'Grouping 25torey'6rouping Miwmunc2 Units Minimom:2 Units Miimum2 Units BUILDING MASSING OBJECTIVES FOR SINGLES AND SEMIS WITHIN THE STREETSCAPE page 31 OD ENE 'k ARC, TECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES (2011 UPDATE) comprise groupings of at least 2 adjacent units; - employ raised front facades, steeper roof pitches and increased roof massing (side gables /dormers where appropriate) to provide an acceptable transition between these house types. • Suitably designed single bungalows may be sited on corner lots. • 2- storey dwellings sited amongst bungalows shall comprise groupings of at least 2 adjacent units. • 3 storey dwellings shall not be sited beside bungalows. ii) Townhouses Townhouse blocks are comprised of individual dwelling units grouped together into a single, larger building form. They provide diversity of built form, streetscape character and housing choice within the community. The design of townhouse elevations shall achieve a standard equal to that of adjacent detached housing in scale, form, composition, detail and appearance. Townhouse designs shall satisfy the same general design criteria set out for single detached housing and the following additional guidelines: • The design should provide a variety of visual elements and details, which break up the massing and create distinctive character for the individual blocks. • Variation in height within the townhouse block is encouraged. For example, buildings designed with 2- storey end units combined with 3- storey interior units can produce an attractive built form. • Townhouse blocks should exhibit design and massing compatibility with neighbouring buildings. • Variation in facade elements such as front entries, plane variation and bay and dormer designs appropriate to the particular house style are encouraged to add individual unit identity and variety to the streetscape. • Roofscapes within individual townhouse blocks should vary where possible to contribute to the creation of interesting streetscapes and compatibility with adjacent detached dwellings. • The main front entry should be clearly identifiable for each townhouse unit. It should be oriented to the front lot line for interior lot units and JOHN G. WILLIAMS LIMITED, ARCHITECT should face the flanking lot line for corner units. af clng on l.ud1'W Ae Kw • The side elevation of exposed corner units shall be specifically designed to respond to public exposure and the additional light source by means of articulated building faces, fenestration, and detailing equal to that of the front elevation. • Where a firewall is necessary it should be located unobtrusively and integrated into the design of the townhouse block to limit its visual impact. • Due to limited opportunities for the placement of utility meters on townhouse dwellings, care should be taken to ensure they are not visually prominent within the streetscape. CONCEPTUAL IMAGES OF TOWNHOUSES page 32 00 I GENERAL ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES (2011 UPDATE) 6.4 DRIVEWAYS A mix of paired and unpaired driveway combinations is desirable to contribute visual interest along the street and also helps to provide sufficient space for boulevard trees. • Driveway locations shall be pre- determined on the Project Engineer's site servicing plans. The Control Architect shall review / comment on proposed driveway locations with regards to priority locations and prominent views within the community prior to the servicing plans being submitted. • Driveways should be located as far as possible from open space, institutional uses, commercial sites, walkways, transit stops and intersections; • Corner lot driveways should be oriented to the short side of the lot or to the minor street; • Driveways should be located to the outside of a pair of View Terminus Dwellings at the top of a "T "- Intersection. • The slope of the driveway between the garage and the street is to be kept to a minimum wherever possible and in accordance with municipal standards. • The builder may pave driveways or provide pavers which allow for water infiltration for single detached and semi - detached units. All driveways for townhouse units shall be paved. 6.5 CO- ORDINATION OF HOUSE SITINGS WITH STREETSCAPE ELEMENTS In coordinating the house sitings with streetscape elements such as community mailboxes, entry features, transformers, light standards, street trees, and other street furniture, the Builder shall ensure these elements are shown on the site plans submitted for the approval of the Control Architect. It is the Builder's complete responsibility to ensure there are no conflicts in the siting of their dwellings with any street furniture or other streetscape elements. JOHN G. WILLIAMS LIMITED, ARCHITECT clad #011 I"Idirw clad ##011 SITE PLAN ILLUSTRATING DRIVEWAYLOCATIONS page 33 i RCHITEiES41.GN GUIDELINES (2011 UPDATEDc�1'111011 Q" 7.0 DESIGN REVIEW AND APPROVAL PROCESS 7.1 PRELIMINARY REVIEW • Preliminary model design sketches which are in conformity with these Guidelines and which demonstrate sufficient design quality, variety and the use of appropriate exterior materials will be submitted to the control architect for review. • Exterior building materials and colours will also be submitted at this time, • Floor plans will have a dashed line with dimensions indicating the second floor wall face where it varies from the first floor wall line. • Sale of models cannot commence until after preliminary approval is given by the control architect. • The control architect is to review models with Municipality staff prior to giving final approval. 7.2 FINAL REVIEW AND APPROVAL i) Working Drawings • Working drawings must depict exactly what the builder intends to construct. • All exterior details and materials must be clearly shown on the drawings. • Special elevations, where required for dwellings on priority lots (upgraded rear and side), walkout lots and grade- affected garage conditions, must be shown on the working drawings. • A master set of all front, flanking and corner lot rear elevations which have been given final approval is to be submitted to the control architect as soon as possible after model approval is given. This should be on 1 sheet for each dwelling type if possible. JOHN G. WILLIAMS LIMITED, ARCHITECT ii) Site Plans • Engineer certified site plans are to be submitted to the control architect at a minimum scale of 1:250 and may be submitted on single 8 -1/2" x 14" sheets. • In addition to the required grading details, the proposed siting of each unit must clearly show: - model and elevation type; - a special note indicating a dropped garage condition (greater than 450m (1' -6 ") drop from location approved on working drawings); - a special note indicating rear or side upgrades, where applicable. • Approvals of Site Plans by fax will be permitted. iii) Streetscape Drawings To assist in the review process a streetscape drawing (blackline) must accompany each request for siting approval. • Streetscape drawings are to accurately represent the proposed dwellings in correct relation to each other and to the proposed finished grade. • In the review of streetscapes, minor elevational changes may be required. • The onus is on the builder to ensure that these required changes are implemented in the construction of the dwellings. • Approvals of Streetscapes by fax will be permitted. iv) Exterior Colour Packages • Prior to the submission of site plans, the builder will be required to submit typed colour schedules and sample boards which include the colour, type and manufacturer of all exterior materials. • Colour package selections for individual lots and blocks should be submitted at the same time as site plans and streetscapes. page 34 OD 1 J J GENERAL ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES (2011 UPDATE) 7.3 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS 7.4 REQUIRED APPROVALS • The builder is required to submit to the control architect for final review and approval, the following: - 5 sets of engineer approved site /grading plans; - 3 sets of working drawings; - 3 sets of streetscapes; - 2 sets of colour schedules; - 1 set of colour sample boards (to be returned to the builder); - 1 set of colour board photographs. • The control architect will retain one set of the foregoing other than the colour sample boards. • The applicant should allow up to 5 working days for final approvals. • Any minor redline revisions made by the Control Architect to site plans, working drawings, streetscapes and colour schedules must be incorporated on the originals by the Builder's design architect. • Any revisions to an existing approval requested by the Builder will be considered on their merits and if acceptable will be subject to re- approval by the Control Architect. • It is the Builders' complete responsibility to ensure that all plans submitted for approval fully comply with these Guidelines and all applicable regulations and requirements including zoning provisions. • The Builder is responsible for the pick -up and delivery of all materials to and from the Control Architect's office and the Municipality as necessary. JOHN G. WILLIAMS LIMITED, ARCHITECT clarI114011 �kisdw • All site plans, working drawings, streetscapes and colour packages must be submitted for review and approved by the control architect and the project engineer (site plans only), as required, prior to submission to the Municipality of Clarington for building permit approval. • Building permits will not be issued unless all plans bear the required Final Approval stamp of the control architect and project engineer (site plans only). • Approvals by the Control Architect and the Project Engineer do not release the builder from complying with the requirements and approvals of the Municipality of Clarington and /or any other governmental agency. 7.5 MONITORING FOR COMPLIANCE • The Control Architect will conduct periodic drive -by site inspections to monitor development. • Any visible deficiencies or deviations in construction from the approved plans which are considered by the control architect to be not in compliance with the Architectural Review Guidelines will be reported in writing to the Builder and Municipality. • The Builder will respond to the control architect in writing within 7 days of notification of their intention to rectify the problem after which the developer and the Municipality will be informed of the Builder's response or lack of response. • The developer and /or Municipality may take appropriate action to secure compliance. page 35 00 GENERAL ARCHITECTURAL �OESIGN GUIDELINES (2011 UPDATE) �?I'i1t 011 !, aw"Y co 7.6 DISPUTE RESOLUTION Where there is a dispute between the control architect and the Builder concerning the interpretation or application of these guidelines or the failure to process plans expeditiously, then the following dispute resolution procedure shall apply: • The aggrieved party shall notify the control architect and Director of Planning Services of the specific reasons and basis for the dispute. • The control architect shall respond in writing to the Director of Planning Services and the aggrieved party. • Where the Director of Planning Services feels there is reasonable cause for concern, then the dispute and related correspondence will be referred to an alternate control architect appointed by Developer and acceptable to the Municipality. • The alternate control architect, whose decision will be final, will promptly review the dispute, make all necessary decisions and advise in writing all parties concerned of the reasons and actions decided upon. • The fees for the alternate control architect will be paid directly by the builder. 7.7 MONITORING EFFECTIVENESS OF CONTROL ARCHITECT • Municipality of Clarington staff will also monitor development on a periodic basis to ensure compliance with the Architectural Design Guidelines. • Should inadequate enforcement by the Control Architect be evident, the Municipality will discuss the situation with the Control Architect. • If the Municipality is not satisfied with the outcome of the discussions, it may cease to accept drawings stamped by the Control Architect and retain another Control Architect, at the expense of the owner. • A sufficient notice period of 3 -4 weeks will be given by the Municipality to the original Control Architect prior to the transition. JOHN G. WILLIAMS LIMITED, ARCHITECT page 36 • Leading the Way REPORT PLANNING SERVICES Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: February 28, 2011 Resolution #: By -law #: Report #: PSD- 019 -11 File #: ZBA 2010 -0025 Subject: PROPOSED ZONING BY -LAW AMENDMENT TO PERMIT INCREASED GARAGE WIDTHS; INCREASED GARAGE PROJECTIONS; AND, INCREASED LOT COVERAGE ON LOTS WITH ONE STOREY DWELLINGS — COURTICE APPLICANT: HALMINEN HOMES RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report PSD- 019 -11 be received; 2. THAT the rezoning application submitted by Halminen Homes be approved, in part, and that the proposed Zoning By -law contained in Attachment 2 to Report PSD- 019 -11 be passed; and 3. THAT all interested parties listed in Report PSD -019 -11 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. Submitted by: Dav d J rome, MCIP, RPP Director, Planning Services MM /CP /df /ah 23 February 2011 Reviewed by: 4 Fra klin Wu Chief Administrative Officer CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T (905)623 -3379 F (905)623 -0830 8 -119 REPORT NO.: PSD- 019 -11 PAGE 2 1.0 APPLICATION DETAILS 1.1 Owner /Applicant: Halminen Homes 1.2 Proposal: To permit increased garage widths on all lots, increased garage projections on some lots and increased lot coverage on lots with one storey dwellings. 1.3 Site Area: 21.985 ha 1.4 Location: North of Meadowglade Road and east of Prestonvale Road, Courtice — Part of lots 31, 32 and 33, Concession 2 and part of the road allowance between lots 32 and 33, Concession 2 — 40M -2426, 40M -2430 and 18T -95028 (Attachment 1). 2.0 BACKGROUND 2.1 On August 24, 2010, Halminen Homes submitted an application to the Municipality of Clarington for rezoning of the lands within the Urban Residential Exception R2 -58, R2- 59, R2 -60 and R2 -61 zones, north of Meadowglade Road and East of Prestonvale Road in Courtice. The purpose of the application is to permit increased garage widths, increased garage projections and increased lot coverage on lots with one storey dwellings. The application did not detail the specific requests when it was first received; it took some time for the necessary details to be provided and the application was not deemed complete until December 24, 2010. 2.2 The applicant submitted a letter in support of the requested changes. In summary, the letter states that wider garages are being sought since most homeowners in Clarington have multiple vehicles. Wider garages create a long, narrow area within the home, adjacent to the garage, where the garage is required to be flush with, or recessed from, the dwelling wall or covered porch. This long, narrow area is difficult to design in a manner that creates useful or desirable space to prospective purchasers. The applicant's letter suggests a solution is to allow garage projections on some lots. In addition, the builder has been developing land north of the subject lands and wishes to continue to offer some of the models in this development. Lastly, increased lot coverage is being sought for lots with one storey dwellings to achieve desirable layouts and floor area comparable to a two storey home while complying with the Architectural Design Guidelines. 2.3 The subject lands were rezoned on May 6, 2008 from Agricultural (A) to the current Urban Residential Exception zones to allow residential development within draft approved plans of subdivision 18T -95028 and S -C- 2007 -0009 to proceed. At the time of draft approval and rezoning, the lands were under different ownership. Phase I and Phase II have now been registered. There are a total of four phases proposed in this subdivision project. E:�ii el REPORT NO.: PSD- 019 -11 PAGE 3 3.0 LAND CHARACTERISTICS AND SURROUNDING USES 3.1 The subject site is 21.985 hectares in size, much of which is affected by this rezoning application. The above mentioned (section 2.1) zone categories comprise most of the land within this subdivision. There is some land within this site that has Environmental Protection zoning or zoned for a medium density block. These lands are not the subject of this application. The land has been cleared and the site prepared for development to occur and some houses are under construction in Phases I and II. 3.2 The surrounding uses are as follows: North - Urban residential South - Rural residential lots and vacant land East -Vacant land West - Prestonvale Road /Urban residential 4.0 PROVINCIAL POLICY 4.1 Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) The 2005 PPS states that all new development should occur adjacent to the existing built -up area and have compact form. There should be efficient use of infrastructure including water and sanitary services and existing road networks. Development should be phased to ensure the orderly progression of development within a designated growth area. This rezoning application for lands within a draft approved plan of subdivision conforms with the PPS. 4.2 Provincial Growth Plan This application is for a technical rezoning within a draft approved plan of subdivision. The type and density of housing is not proposed to change through this application and therefore it is deemed to conform to the Provincial Growth Plan. 5.0 OFFICIAL PLANS 5.1 Durham Regional Official Plan The Durham Regional Official Plan designates the land "Living Areas ". Lands designated "Living Areas" shall be predominantly used for housing purposes. Development in urban areas shall have regard for: compact urban form; the use of good urban design principles; use a grid street pattern; provide for parks; access to transit; the capacity of existing services; and, balance energy efficiency with cost. 5.2 Clarington Official Plan The Clarington Official Plan designates the land "Urban Residential" and "Environmental Protection Area ". The draft approved plan of subdivision is comprised of low density development, consistent with the Clarington Official Plan. The Plan states that subdivisions should generally provide a mixture of housing forms and densities. In 8 -121 REPORT NO.: PSD- 019 -11 PAGE 4 addition, houses should be sited with a consistent setback to provide a human scale to the street. House designs should incorporate features such as prominent entrances and front porches to encourage social interaction and allow for views along the street. Garages should be planned so that they are not the dominant feature of,the streetscape or the house. 6.0 ZONING BY -LAW 6.1 Zoning By -law 84 -63 zones the subject lands Urban Residential Exception R2 -58, Urban Residential Exception R2 -59, Urban Residential Exception R2 -60 and Urban Residential Exception R2 -61. The applicant has applied to rezone the subject lands to permit increased garage widths on all lots, increased garage projections on some lots and increased lot coverage on lots with one storey dwellings. The current zoning is site specific to implement typical development standards with respect to lot coverage and garage projections for new residential subdivisions. 7.0 PUBLIC NOTICE AND SUBMISSIONS 7.1 Public notice was given by mail to each landowner within 120 metres of the subject properties and two public meeting notices were installed on the site. The public meeting was held February 7, 2011. Only the applicant appeared at the public meeting and no members of the public have expressed an interest in the application. 8.0 AGENCY COMMENTS 8.1 In consideration of the nature of the rezoning application and the relatively recent Draft Approval and rezoning, a limited circulation was undertaken. 8.2 The Regional Municipality of Durham and the Clarington Building Services Division advised they have no concerns with this application. 8.3 Clarington Engineering has advised that the increased lot coverage for one storey dwellings should not have a negative impact on the stormwater management plan and that they are satisfied and have no concerns. 9.0 STAFF COMMENTS 9.1 Concerns have been raised previously that with narrow lots, builders develop at or close to the maximum permitted lot coverage, thus requiring homeowners to obtain a minor variance for the construction of a deck or shed. In addition, garages tend to dominate the streetscape in some instances where the builder is constructing homes with two car garages on narrow lots. Staff believe that it is advantageous to avoid these situations. The current zoning specifies a maximum lot coverage for the dwelling and maximum lot coverage for all structures, including the dwelling, which is 5 percent greater (see 8 -122 REPORT NO.: PSD- 019 -11 PAGE 5 Attachment 2 to this Report for examples). In addition, it limits the maximum permitted garage width, relative to the lot width or dwelling width, and lastly requires the garage door to be in line with or behind the front wall of the dwelling or covered front porch. 9.2 Staff have worked diligently with the applicant to address concerns and refine the requested amendments to the Zoning By -law. The attached Zoning By -law amendment achieves the majority of the initial requests by the applicant while addressing design issues raised in the public meeting report. Table 1 simplifies the applicant's requested amendments to the Zoning By -law. Table 1 — Applicant's reauested amendments Zone Permitted use I Proposed amendment 10m sin le detached • No garage projection . Increased lot coverage for one storey R2 -58 . Garage width 40% of dwellings frontage 0 Garage projections of 2.0m on 33% percent of dwellings • Increased garage width 11 m single detached • 11 m single detached • Increased lot coverage for one storey R2 -59 . No garage projection dwellings • Garage width 40% of 0 Garage projections of 2.0m on 33% dwelling width percent of dwellings Increased garage width 12 m single detached • 12 m single detached . Increased lot coverage for one storey R2 -60 . No garage projection dwellings • Garage projections of 1.25 m on 50% percent of dwellings 9 m single detached • 9 m single detached • Increased lot coverage for one storey R2 -61 . No garage projection dwelling • Garage width 40% of • Garage projections of 1.25 m on 50% frontage percent of dwellings • Increased garage width 9.3 Garage proiections 9.3.1 The purpose of limiting garage projection is twofold. First, garages that project from dwellings tend to dominate the streetscape. The more significant the projection, the more the garage will dominate. Second, it is advantageous for front porches and front doors to dominate the streetscape to encourage social interaction and allow for views along the street. 9.3.2 Staff do not support the request to permit garage projections of up to 2.0 metres in the R2 -58 and R2 -59 zones as it would allow the garages to dominate the streetscape, reduce social interaction and limit the usual (self) policing of the street by residents. 8 -123 REPORT NO.: PSD- 019 -11 PAG E 6 9.3.3 The applicant had applied to allow garage projections of up to 1.25 metres on 50% of lots within each of the R2 -60 and R2 -61 zones. The request also included that the measurement for the garage projection be taken from the front wall of the dwelling, rather than the covered porch, in the R2 -60 zone. This would allow dwellings with living space above the garage to have a larger garage projection beyond the front porch. 9.3.4 Staff worked with the applicant to refine the request, taking into account the house models being offered for sale in this subdivision. The applicant has further agreed to refine the requested garage projection on the R2 -60 lots to 50% of the lots beyond Phase I effectively reducing the number of lots impacted by the rezoning by 36. The applicant is seeking a smaller deviation from the existing R2 -61 zoning that originally applied for as well. Specifically, the applicant concurs that only a 1.0 metre projection on 33% of the lots is required based on the models available and anticipated sales. Staff support the proposed amendment for lots within the R2 -60 zone of these draft approved plans but only if the measurement for garage projection is measured from the covered porch and not the front wall above the garage. Staff also support the proposed amendment for lots within the R2 -61 zone of these draft approved plans to permit a maximum 1.0 metre garage projection on up to 33% of those lots. 9.4 Garage widths 9.4.1 The maximum permitted garage width provision in the R2 -59 zone is an issue that Staff agree is a practical problem for the applicant. The current zoning does not allow the applicant to construct certain models in the R2 -59 zone that fit on the smaller 10 metre lots in the R2 -58 zone, due to the garage width requirement. 9.4.2 There are two distinctions between the R2 -58 and the R2 -59 zones. First, minimum required lot frontage is 1 metre wider in the R2 -59 zone than in the R2 -58 zone. . Second, the maximum outside garage width is 40% of the dwelling width in the R2 -59 zone compared to 40% of the lot width in the R2 -58 zone. Practically, on a 10 metre wide interior lot in the R2 -58 zone, a 4 metre garage is permitted. On an 11 metre wide interior lot in the R2 -59 zone, the maximum permitted outside garage width is 3.68 metres when the dwelling is constructed to the maximum width possible. Staff recommend that lots zoned R2 -59 be rezoned to R2 -58 so that all 10 metre and 11 metre lots will be treated equally in terms of the maximum permitted garage width. The effect of this amendment will be that, for example, an 11 metre interior lot could have a dwelling with a maximum garage width of 4.4 metres compared to the 3.68 metres currently permitted. Although wider, this would not provide for a two car garage. 9.4.3 The applicant is requesting that lots zoned R2 -61 be permitted to have a maximum garage width of 50% of the lot rather than the maximum of 40% currently permitted. The maximum width was set at 40% to ensure that a larger portion of the front of the dwelling will be comprised of the front porch /front door. This is more stringent than the existing Architectural Design Guideline standards; however, Report PSD- 018 -11, the update to the Architectural Design Guidelines, recommends more rigid standards which have been taken into consideration for this application. The applicant is proposing to maintain a single car garage for dwellings in the R2 -61 zone, however is looking to provide a wider, more useable garage space for his purchasers. The models proposed 8 -124 REPORT NO.: PSD- 019 -11 PAGE 7 are currently being offered in the development immediately to the north and the garage widths are less than maximum width permitted in the current Architectural Design guidelines. Staff support the requested change. 9.5 Increased lot coverage 9.5.1 As mentioned above, there are a total of nine lots within the two draft approved plans zoned R2 -59. Six of the nine lots are corner lots. Dwellings requiring the maximum permitted lot coverage are rarely applied for on corner lots due to the larger size of these lots. By their nature, corner lots can accommodate dwellings that have a larger footprint. Staff and the applicant concur that the request for increased lot coverage for one storey dwellings is not required since most of the lots subject to this portion of the application are corner lots, hence they can accommodate a dwelling with a larger footprint. 9.5.2 The applicant has applied to rezone the lands within the R2 -60 and R2 -61 exception zones to allow for increased maximum permitted lot coverage for one storey dwellings to 45% for the dwelling and 50% total for all buildings and structures, rather than 40% for the dwelling and 45% total for all buildings and structures currently permitted. Staff support this portion of the application that will allow one storey homes with increased lot coverage. 10.0 CONCLUSION 10.1 The application has been reviewed in consideration of comments received from the circulated agencies, the policies of the Clarington Official Plan, the Zoning By -law regulations and Architectural Design Guidelines (existing and proposed). In consideration of the comments contained in this report, Staff respectfully recommend that the proposed Zoning By -law Amendment contained in Attachment 2 be approved. Staff Contact: Mitch Morawetz Attachments: Attachment 1 - Key Map Attachment 2 - Zoning By -law Amendment List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Janice Robinson Katrina Metzner 8 -125 C R; CD -0 0 �D -o o� .CD •.-- • • i•' • M ` �� VIII ►I ��I� ' ��� -- -- ._...�i,' �111 • 1111'' �' r '` '_ � =` ,', „' '' '1'"'' 11, r c• . � � 1119 �� o� - �•_ = �1�1111111-� �-11111/�_ - • �..... � �� a "”, ; �. ��� AM �►,'da -_ = r►ti ►•��� ,, • - = - __ _ =11�III�I111�I= �1 �� ��■�' � ■.�..� �� / �� �." iii- ��,. 1111 Ililll1111111= _������� _ -_ __ `- ; , _ UIIIII '� • - • � ��� � �mmmmmmmom0mmo o ■ , ' y-� . . ��•• ����� ooh � � o �Illll : ,, =, __ ;��� /� � o00 % �mmmmmmmmmmmm jjjj WN®, ME -,o Millie- koompoo ORONO R; CD -0 0 �D -o o� .CD Attachment 2 To Report PSD- 019 -11 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BY -LAW NO. 2011- being a By -law to amend By -law 84 -63, the Comprehensive Zoning By -law for the Corporation of the former Town of Newcastle WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington deems it advisable to amend By -law 84 -63, as amended, of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington for ZBA 2010 -0025; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED_ THAT, the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington enacts as follows: 1. Section 13.4 "Special Exceptions — Urban Residential Type Two (R2) ZONE" is hereby amended by adding thereto, the following new Special Exception zone 13.4.75 as follows: "13.4.75 Urban Residential Exception (R2 -75) Zone Notwithstanding the provisions of 3.1 j. i), iii), .13.2 a., b., c. i), ii), iii), e. g, and h. those lands zoned "R2 -75" on the Schedules to this By -law shall be subject to the following regulations: a. Lot Area (minimum) b. Yard Requirements i) Front Yard ii) . Exterior Side Yard 360 square metres 6.0 metres to private garage or carport; 4.0 metres to dwelling; 2.0 metres to porch 6.0 metres to private garage or carport; 4.0 metres to dwelling; 2.0 metres to porch iii) Interior Side Yard with private garage or carport 1.2 metres on one side, 0.6 metres on the other side; without private garage or carport, 3.0 metres on one side, 0.6 metres on the other side d. Lot Coverage (maximum) One Storey i) Dwelling 45% ii) Total of all buildings and structures 50% All Other Residential Units i) Dwelling ii) Total of all buildings and structures 40% 45% e. Garage Requirements. i) All garage doors shall not be located any closer to the street line than the dwellings first floor front wall or exterior side wall or covered porch projection except that 50% of the lots zoned "R2 -75" may 8 -127 have garage doors project to a maximum of 1.25 metres. from the dwellings first floor front wall or exterior side wall or covered porch f. Height (maximum) i) 1 Storey dwelling ii) All other residential units 8.5 metres 10.5 metres Section 13.4 "Special Exceptions — Urban Residential Type Two (R2) ZONE" is hereby amended by adding thereto, the following new Special Exception zone 13.4.76 as follows: "13.4.76 Urban Residential Exception (R2 -76) Zone Notwithstanding the provisions of 3.1 j. i), iii), 13.2 a., b. c. i), ii), iii), e. and h. those lands zoned "R2 -76" on the Schedules to this By -law shall be subject to the following regulations: a. Lot Area (minimum) 270 square metres b. Lot Frontage (minimum) i) Interior Lot ii) Exterior Lot C. Yard Requirements i) Front Yard ii) Exterior Side Yard iii) Interior Side Yard 9 metres 12 metres 6.0 metres to private garage or carport; 4.0 metres to dwelling; 2.0 metres to porch 6.0 metres to private garage or carport; 4.0 metres to dwelling; 2.0 metres to porch with private garage or carport; 1.2 metres on one side, 0.6 metres on the other side without private garage or carport; 3.0 metres on one side, 0.6 metres on the other side d. Lot Coverage (maximum) One Storey i) Dwelling 45% ii) Total of all buildings and structures 50% All Other Residential Units i) Dwelling 40% ii) Total of all buildings and structures 45% e. Driveway width (maximum) 4.6 metres f. Garage Requirements i) All garage doors shall not be located any closer to the street line than the dwellings first floor front wall or exterior side wall or covered porch projection except that 33% of the lots zoned "R2 -76" may have garage doors project to a maximum of 1.0 metres from the dwellings first floor front wall or exterior, side wall or covered porch ii) The outside width of the garage shall be a maximum of 50% of the width of the lot frontage. 8 -128 2. Schedule "4" to By -law 84 -63, as amended, is hereby further amended by. changing the zone designations from: "Urban Residential Exception (R2 -59) Zone" to "Urban Residential Exception (R2- 58) Zone" "Urban Residential Exception (R2 -60) Zone" to "Urban Residential Exception (R2- 75) Zone" "Urban Residential Exception (R2 -61) Zone" to "Urban Residential Exception (R2- 76) Zone" "Holding Urban Residential Exception (H)(R2 -59) Zone" to "Holding Urban Residential Exception (H)(R2 -58) Zone" "Holding Urban Residential Exception (H)(R2 -60) Zone" to "Holding Urban Residential Exception (H)(R2 -75) Zone" "Holding Urban Residential Exception (H)(R2 -61) Zone" to "Holding Urban Residential Exception (H)(R2 -76) Zone" 3. Schedule "A" attached hereto shall form part of this By -law. 4. This By -law shall come into effect on the date of the passing hereof, subject to the provisions of Section 34 of the Planning Act. BY -LAW read a first time this day of 2011 BY -LAW read a second time this day of 2011 BY -LAW read a third time and finally passed this day of 2011 Adrian Foster, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk 8 -129 8 -130 This is Schedule "A" to By -law 2011- , passed this day of $ 2011 A.D. LE W Y O ISBN ENO; i OwlRO, Zoning Change From "R2 -59" To "R2 -58" Zoning Change From "(H)R2 -59" To "(H)R2 -58" Zoning Change From "R2 -60" To "R2 -75" 0 Zoning Change From "(H)R2 -60" To "(H)R2 -75" ® Zoning Change From "R2 -61" To "R2 -76" Zoning Change From "(H)R2 -61" To "(H)R2 -76" N 8 gso Zoning To Remain "(H)R3" ® Zoning To Remain "R1" Zoning To Remain "R1 -70" ® Zoning To Remain "R2 -58" Zoning To Remain "R2 -60" Zoning To Remain "A" Zoning To Remain " EP" Adrian Foster, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk • 1 arm n Leading the Way REPORT PLANNING SERVICES Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: February 28, 2011 Resolution # By -law#: N/A Report #: PSD- 020 -11 File #: PLN 7.11 Subject: 2010 ANNUAL REPORT ON APPLICATIONS FOR PLANS OF SUBDIVISION AND PLANS OF CONDOMINIUM RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report PSD- 020 -11 be received; and 2. THAT the Region of Durham Planning Department be forwarded a copy of Report PSD- 020 -11 and Council's decision. Submitted by: DavioA. Crome, MCIP, RPP Director, Planning Services February 22, 2011 MH *CP *av Reviewed by: axz'u 50— Flwhklin Wu Chief Administrative Officer CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T (905)623 -3379 F (905)623 -0830 8 -131 REPORT NO.: PSD- 020 -11 1.0 PURPOSE PAGE 2 The purpose of this report is to provide the General Purpose and Administration Committee with an update of the subdivision and condominium activity that occurred during the 2010 calendar year within the Municipality; and to advise the Region of Durham Planning Department of the status of all plan of subdivision and condominium applications as of December 31, 2010. Delegation of Subdivision Approval was accepted by the Municipality of Clarington October 1, 2001. Under the terms and provisions of the Memorandum of Understanding, the Municipality agreed to provide the Region of Durham with an annual statistical report on the following: • The number and status of draft plans of subdivision and condominium; and • The number and types of units approved and registered, during the previous calendar year. Any residential development applications or approvals which occur outside of the Plan of Subdivision or Condominium Approval process are not included in the tables, charts and calculations found in this report. A separate Site Plan Activity report which was received by Council on February 14, 2011 summarized, in part, residential development requiring site plan application. 2.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY • No applications for Draft Plan of Subdivision were submitted in 2010; • Two (2) Plan of Subdivision applications were granted Draft Approval in 2010, consisting of 596 dwellings units; • Four (4) Plans of Subdivision were final approved and registered in 2010, consisting of 152 dwelling units; • By year end, a total of 512 building permits were issued for units within registered plans (this number does not include properties outside of a Plan of Subdivision); • There is approximately a 10.5 year supply of units that are draft approved and /or vacant registered lots as of December 31, 2010; • As of December 31, 2010, the distribution of unit type for all active Plan of Subdivision applications in various stages of the development process, consisted of 64% single detached units and semi - detached units, 22% townhouse (multi) units and 14% apartment units; and • Two (2) new Plan of Condominium applications were submitted in 2010, consisting of 167 units. 8 -132 REPORT NO.: PSD- 020 -11 Table 1 Subdivision Activity — a 3 Year Comparison (activity between Januafy 1 and December 31, 2010 2010 2009 2008 # Units Proposed 0 166 0 # Units Draft Approved 596 477 1,991 # Units Registered 1 152 0 443 3.0 STATUS OF ACTIVE PLANS OF SUBDIVISION PAG E 3 Attachments 1 through 4 provide an inventory of all active Plan of Subdivision applications within various stages of the development approval process (received, draft approved or registered) as of December 31, 2010. Each summary table corresponds to one of four defined areas within the Municipality of Clarington: • Bowmanville (Attachment 1) • Courtice (Attachment 2) • Newcastle Village (Attachment 3) • Hamlets and rural areas of Darlington and Clarke Townships (Attachment 4) 3.1 Plan of Subdivision Applications under review As of December 31, 2010, there were 13 Plan of Subdivision applications under review containing a potential 2,857 residential units; these proposed plans /units have not yet been granted Draft Approval, and are subject to change throughout the review process. Within the year 2010, there were no new Plan of Subdivision applications submitted for the Municipality's consideration. Three (3) of the Plan of Subdivision applications actively under review are currently before the Ontario Municipal Board. One hearing has been held for S -C- 2002 -0002 (Port Darlington Land Corporation) where both the Municipality and the applicant have reached a settlement. Although the general terms for approval were agreed upon, the conditions of Draft Approval have not been finalized. The remaining two (2) applications (S -C- 2005 -003 & S -C- 2005 -004) have had several pre- hearing conferences. At this time the Board is awaiting direction from Counsel for both the applicant and the Municipality to set the next hearing date at such time as all issues are resolved, or an impasse is reached: The Municipality and the applicant continue to work together to resolve all outstanding issues. Table 2 shows the geographic distribution of all proposed residential units actively under review, as of December 31, 2010. While 56% of all proposed units under review are located within the Bowmanville Urban Area, an unusually large percentage are located in Newcastle (36 %) due to the large proposals in the North Village area. E:�k%3 REPORT NO.: PSD- 020 -11 PAGE 4 Table 2 Distribution of Proposed Units by Geographic Area for active files under review as of Dec. 31, 2010 Geographic Area Single Semi /Link Townhouse Apartment Total # Units Bowmanville 202 20 705 676 1,603 Courtice 131 2 54 0 187 Newcastle 503 210 318 0 1,031 Hamlet/Rural 36 0 0 0 36 Total 872 232 1,077 676 2,857 Figure 1 illustrates the distribution of all proposed units, by unit type. The dominant unit type among all proposed Plans of Subdivision under review in Clarington by year end 2010 is the townhouse unit. This is a significant change from past years, when single detached dwellings were the dominant unit type within proposed Plans. Single detached dwellings accounted for 41 % of proposed units in 2008, 33% of proposed units in 2009 and now 30% of proposed units in 2010. Figure 1 Distribution of Proposed Units by Type (for active files under review as of December 31, 2010) Apart 24° Townhouse (multi.) 38% Single Detached 3.2 Draft Approved Plans of Subdivision 30% Semi - Detached 8% As of December 31, 2010, there were 34 active Draft Approved Plan of Subdivision applications having a total of 5,379 residential units, which had not yet been included within a registered Plan of Subdivision. Two (2) Plan of Subdivision applications were granted Draft Approval in 2010. Application S -C- 2005 -0002, submitted by Far Sight Investments Limited, was Draft Approved on September 28, 2010. It is located on the east side of Bowmanville, south of Concession Street, and is comprised of 273 single detached dwellings and 268 townhouse /multi -unit dwellings. 8 -134 REPORT NO.: PSD- 020 -11 PAG E 5 Application S -C- 2003 -001, submitted by Courtice Woods Inc. was Draft Approved on August 16, 2010. It is located north of Nash Road and east of Courtice Road in Courtice, and is comprised of 55 single detached dwellings Table 3 shows the geographic distribution of all Draft Approved units which had not yet been registered, as of December 31, 2010. Approximately 68% of all Draft Approved units are located within the Bowmanville Urban Area, and 54% of all Draft Approved units are single detached units. Table 3 Distribution of Draft Approved Units by Geographic Area for active files as of Dec. 31, 2010 Geographic Area Single Semi /Link Townhouse Apartment Total # Units Bowmanville 1,826 444 904 509 3,683. Courtice 404 100 112 50 666 Newcastle 608 85 0 250 943 Hamlet/Rural 87 0 0 0 87 Total 2,925 629 1,016 809 5,379 Figure 2 illustrates the distribution of all Draft Approved Units not yet registered, by unit type. Figure 2 Distribution of Draft Approved Units by Type (for active files as of December 31, 2010) Apartrr 15% Townhouse (multi.) 19% Se Detu1.... 12% 3.3 Registered Plans of Subdivision Single etached 54% By December 31, 2010, there were a total of 33 registered plans that remained active, whereby there exists 903 vacant lots for which building permits can still be obtained. By year end, 31 % of the total number of lots within active registered plans remained vacant (see Attachments 1 through 4 for details). 8 -135 REPORT NO.: PSD -020 -11 PAGE 6 In 2010, four (4) Plans of Subdivision were registered, consisting of 152 single detached dwelling units. Registered Plans 40M -2426 and 40M -2460 for two phases of development (Prestonvale Developments Inc.) are located north of Bloor Street and east of Prestonvale Road. Both phases have a combined total of 113 single detached dwellings. A total of 230 units remain unregistered within the Draft Approved Plan. Registered Plan 40M -2419 (Courtice Homestead Land Corporation), located on the east side of Trulls Road and north of George Reynolds Drive was registered on August 30, 2010 for 55 single detached dwellings. Registered Plan 40M -2411 (Barr Developments) located within Bondhead, was final approved and registered on April 19, 2010 for eight (8) single detached dwellings. Table 4 shows the geographic distribution of all registered lots which remain vacant as of December 31, 2010, and for which building permits can be obtained (includes part lots). In total, 44% of all vacant registered lots are located within the Bowmanville Urban Area, 36% are located within the Courtice Urban Area, 17% are located in Newcastle Village and only 3% are located within Hamlets and Rural Areas. Table 4 Distribution of Registered, Vacant Lots by Geographic Area for active plans as of December 31, 2010 Geographic Area Single Semi /Link Townhouse Apartment Total # Units Bowmanville 223 14 80 82 399. Courtice 202 50 72 0 324 Newcastle 96 46 .12 0 154 Hamlet/Rural 26 0 0 0 26 Total 547 110 164 82 903 Figure 3 illustrates the distribution of all units within active registered plans as of December 31, 2010, by type. It would appear that 69% of all units within active registered plans are single detached dwellings, compared to 74% in 2009. By year end, the single detached dwelling remains the dominant dwelling type within active registered plans in Clarington. 8 -136 REPORT NO.: PSD- 020 -11 . Figure 3 Distribution of Registered Units by Type (for all active plans as of December 31, 2010) Townhouse Apartment (multi 1 1 I% Semi - Detached 15% 4.0 STATUS OF ACTIVE PLANS OF CONDOMINIUM Single etached 69% PAGE 7 4.1 Attachment 5 provides an inventory of all Plan of Condominium applications received, Draft Approved and Registered as of December 31, 2010. In 2010, there were two (2) new Plan of Condominium applications submitted consisting of 167 townhouse units. Both developments were granted Site Plan Approval prior to submitting a Plan of Condominium application. There were no Plans of Condominium Draft Approved in 2010, however the two applications received in 2010 were Draft Approved early in 2011. As of December 31, 2010, there remain 144 Draft Approved condominium units which have not yet been registered, comprised of 126 apartment condominium units and 18 townhouse condominium units. A total of 18 condominium units were registered in 2010 all of which are located in Newcastle Village. As listed in Attachment 5, it would appear that all proposed, Draft Approved and Registered Condominium units in Clarington are either located within the urban area of Bowmanville, or Newcastle Village — 73% in Bowmanville and 27% in Newcastle Village. 5.0 HOUSING TARGETS The Municipality of Clarington Official Plan states that the Municipality will ensure an adequate supply of housing on a municipal wide basis by maintaining a minimum of a 3 year supply of residential land in combination of draft approved and /or registered plans of subdivision and condominium. In addition, the Official Plan indicates that the Municipality seeks to achieve a mix of housing types within each urban community — Bowmanville, Courtice and Newcastle. 8 -137 REPORT NO.: PSD- 020 -11 5.1 Housinq Supply PAGE 8 Table 5 demonstrates the overall supply of residential units within Clarington by calculating the total number of units which have been Draft Approved and not yet registered, as well as those units within registered plans which have not yet been built as of December 31, 2010 (Please note that proposed units within plans which have not yet been approved were not included in these calculations, as they may be revised any number of times during the review process). Table 5 Supply of Draft Approved and Registered Units for active plan s as of Dec. 31, 2010 Status Single Semi /Link Townhouse Apartment Total # 64% Townhouse Multi. 20% .22% Units Registered Units 547 110 164 82 903 on Vacant lots Draft Approved 2,925 629 1,016 809 5,379 Units (not yet registered) Total 3,472 739 1180 891 6,282 When reviewing the historical comparison of building permits issued, the five year average (2005 -2009) for residential growth within Clarington is approximately 595 residential units per year. Using this assumption, as of December 31, 2010, the Municipality will have an approximate 10'2 year supply of Draft Approved units and registered units on vacant lots. In 2010, a total of 512 building permits were issued for new residential units within registered Plans of Subdivision in Clarington — compared to a total of 273 building permits issued in 2009, which included permits for new units outside of registered Plans of Subdivision. The number of permits issued in 2010 was very close to the 5 year average for building permits issued for new units which is 595 permits a year. 5.2 Housing Mix Table 6 compares the targeted housing mix as set out in the Official Plan, to the actual housing mix within all active plans of subdivision in all stages of the approval process as of December 31, 2010. Table 6 Mix of Housing Types in all Stages of Approval (for active files as of Dec. 31, 2009) Housing Type Target, Actual Sin le Detached and Semi - Detached 70% 64% Townhouse Multi. 20% .22% Apartments 10% 14% 8 -138 REPORT NO.: PSD- 020 -11 PAGE 9 The housing mix appears to have a slightly higher number of townhouse and apartment units and a lower number of ground - related single detached and semi - detached dwelling units than what has been targeted in the Official Plan. This deviation could be due in part to more recent policy direction from the Province over the last few years, encouraging better use of infrastructure, and the establishment of higher residential densities. However, it is more likely due to the high percentage of waterfront - related subdivisions that are part of the inventory at the present time. When the housing targets were first established by the Municipality, proposed Plans of Subdivision were predominantly developments comprised of only single detached and semi - detached dwellings. Over the last few years, the findings of this annual report have shown a trend towards greater densities and a greater mix of housing forms throughout Clarington. 5.3 Built Boundary and Intensification In upcoming years, the Municipality will begin to track the number of units being proposed, Draft Approved and registered within and outside of existing built -up areas of Clarington (as defined by the Province). Currently the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe stipulates that within Greenfield areas (outside of Built Boundary, but still within urban boundary) a minimum density target of 50 jobs /residential units per hectare shall be achieved Region wide. In addition, as a general rule, 40% of all development is to occur within Built -up areas of Durham by 2015. Clarington's target is set at 32% by the Regional Official Plan or slightly more than 6100 units. In 2010, 30% of all building permits issued for registered units were located within the built -up areas of Bowmanville, Courtice and Newcastle. This appears surprisingly high but it is the result of the fortuitous definition of the Built Boundary which included some Greenfield areas under development. In coming years, it will become increasingly harder as the "low hanging fruit" is used up. 6.0 CONCLUSION 6.1 Ground - related dwelling units (singles, semis, townhouses) are the focus of development in Clarington and will continue to be for years to come. The Municipality will struggle to move to a greater percentage of apartment dwellings. Only in waterfront neighbourhoods is there a willingness and perceived market to move in this direction. 6.2 Bowmanville continues to maintain its status as the dominant urban centre of Clarington, by accounting for 56% of all proposed residential units under review, and 68% of all Draft Approved units as of December 31, 2010. There were however no registered Plans of Subdivision in Bowmanville in the year 2010. In the spring of 2010 the Region of Durham advised that there were unanticipated sanitary sewer constraints in the Bowmanville Urban Area which had an impact on subdivision activity as a whole. After completing an analysis of the sewage capacity in the Port Darlington Water Pollution Control Plant, which serves Bowmanville, it was determined that an additional 500 units of capacity can be accommodated at this time. This is in addition to the 903 units of capacity believed to represent the maximum plant capacity last spring. 8 -139 REPORT NO.: PSD- 020 -11 PAGE 10 6.3 Based on the current number of Draft Approved units and registered units on vacant lots, Clarington continues to maintain a good supply of housing (10 Y2 years) well above the minimum 3 year supply as required by the Official Plan. Overall it would appear that the Municipality has continued to implement the housing targets through the year 2010. Staff Contact: Meaghan Harrington Attachment 1 - Subdivision Activity Report - Bowmanville Urban Area Attachment 2 - Subdivision Activity Report - Courtice Urban Area Attachment 3 - Subdivision Activity Report - Newcastle Urban Area Attachment 4 - Subdivision Activity Report - Rural Areas and Hamlets Attachment 5 - Condominium Activity Report — Clarington List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Regional Municipality of Durham, Planning Department 8 -140 BOWMANVILLE URBAN AREA SUBDIVISION ACTIVITY REPORT - STATUS DECEMBER 31 2010 APPLICATIONS SUBMITTED •'• Pending OMB Approval DRAFT APPROVED Total Units 1 1603 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON RESIDENTIAL DATES PLAN NAME RESIDENTIAL UNITS - FROM PROPOSED PLAN Ingle RESIDENTIAL PART LOT UNITS - FROM PROPOSED PLAN TOTAL NAME TOTAL Deemed Red Line Lot Con. M -Plan Registered Total Unit Permits Issued Other Permits Issued Total Unil Permits Issue Total Units Permits Issue tl Total Units Permits Issued TOTAL Permits File No. Lot Con. Complete Revisions Single Semi Multi. (. (bads) Total Units Single Semi Multi. t. Other (beds) Total Units PLAN William Tonno Construction Limited 16T -95027 15 2 03/27195 12/15/09 122 - 233 112 355 182 173 g Hellowa Holdings Lid. (Valiant Property Management) NIT Port Darlington Land Corporation— SC -2002 -0002 5/6!718 BFC 06/10/02 09114/10 424 426 850 102 100 2 806806 Ontario Limited 18T -87089 0 112 829426 Ontario Inc SC- 2007 -0010 15116 1 10/05/07 23 10 49 250 787 250 1 Eiram Development Corporation - Phase 6 18T -89041 10 2 0 850 Green Martin Holdings LlmB ed S-C- 2009 -0002 17 1 02/19/10 12/11/01 12 20 136 271 57 32 18T -90032 17 1 40M -212 11/05/02 8 6 0 50 2 5 Lambs Road School Pro erl Limited S- C- 2009 -0003 7 2 04/12110 68 35 48 Vermont Village Homes Limited - Napa Phase 4 18T -90036 116 2 40M -233 10/19/06 97 88 178 170 0 32 Head ate Developments 1ST -89044 12 2 09/19/90 12104107' 21 28 25 17 1 74 1 0 •'• Pending OMB Approval DRAFT APPROVED Total Units 1 1603 REGISTERED PLANS Total Units 3683 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON RESIDENTIAL DATES PLAN NAME RESIDENTIAL UNITS - FROM DRAFT PLAN Ingle RESIDENTIAL PART LOT UNITS - FROM DRAFT PLAN TOTAL NAME TOTAL Draft Red Line Lot Con. M -Plan Registered Total Unit Permits Issued her Permits Issued Total Unil Permits Issue Total Units Permits Issue tl Total Units Permits Issued Total Units Permits File No. Lot Con. Approval Revisions Single Semi Muhl. t. (beda) Total Units Sin le Semi Multi. t. Other (beds) Total Units PLAN Towchester Develo meM alianl Pro art Mana ement 1OT -82037 11112 2 03/07/89 07/10/00 - 112 112 182 173 g Hellowa Holdings Lid. (Valiant Property Management) UNITS Hellowa Holdings Ltd. (Valiant Property Management) 18T -87087 12 2 02/23/90 09/l)6/b7 15 15 102 100 2 806806 Ontario Limited 18T -87089 0 112 806806 Ord. Ltd. 18T -87089 13/14 2 01/02191 23 10 49 787 82 1 Eiram Development Corporation - Phase 6 18T -89041 10 2 0 15 West Bowmanvllle Developments 18T -88046 15/16 1 02121/91 12/11/01 136 271 57 271 18T -90032 17 1 40M -212 11/05/02 8 6 1 1 83 83 Lincoln Holdings - 18T -89021 12 2 10/10/90 59 35 45 Vermont Village Homes Limited - Napa Phase 4 18T -90036 45 2 40M -233 10/19/06 97 88 178 170 48 7 Head ate Developments 1ST -89044 12 2 09/19/90 12104107' 21 28 25 17 1 74 1 0 Head ate Investments 18T -90043 14 2 03/10/97 Fairhaven Investments inc. 2 34 1 40M -2294 Ot/26 /06 106 104 36 1 75 Green -Martin Holdings he Kaitlin Group) 18T -90051 17 1 11/22/05 08/05109 2 42 9 32 30 44 3 6 0 36 Home Land Development Group 18T -92004 10 2 02103/06 40M -2094 07/05/02 40 33 40 14 47 1 85 74 9 53 Marchetti & DeMinico 1BT -95030 9 2 08/19/96 116 42 32 62 192 3 8 76 5 3 50 Ankara Rea_ Ltd SC- 20050001 10 1 06/26/08 04/02107 1 95 96 44 157 8 200 Municipality of Cladn ton S-C- 20050005 13 1 05112108 19 Total Units 1629 1230 19 0 2084165 Ont. Ltd. SC -2007 -0004 13114 3 06 /19 /08 855 52 267 126 1300 0 19 Kem 6 Cartuthem SC -2007 -0005 12 2 06/23/08 290 74 364 0 30 1300 West Diamond Pro ertiea Inc. SG2004 -0004 17 2 12/10109 181 148 94 423 0 Far Sight Investments lJmOetl SG2005 -0002 7 1 9/2812010 273 268 541 0 423 0 1 541 REGISTERED PLANS Total Units 3683 00 I 0 N CD 0 �D 00 . o3 N (D O � MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON DATES RESIDENTIAL UNITS - FROM REGISTERED PLAN NAME I I Ingle Semi Townhouse Apartment Part LM TOTAL File No. Lot Con. M -Plan Registered Total Unit Permits Issued Total Unit Permits Issued Total Unil Permits Issue Total Units Permits Issue tl Total Units Permits Issued Total Units Permits Intraco ibert Crossing) 18T -87027 11 2 40M-22 02/03106 - 782 173 - Issued Vacant Intraco (Liberty Crossing) 18T -87021 11 2 40M -2341 0"27,07 702 100 - 182 173 g Hellowa Holdings Lid. (Valiant Property Management) 18T -87067 12 2 40M -2363 11/20/07 187 128 102 100 2 806806 Ontario Limited 18T -87089 13M4 2 40M -233 12114/06 136 79 787 128 59 Eiram Development Corporation - Phase 6 18T -89041 10 2 40M -238 11/19108 59 35 136 79 57 Daniels /Corbo Karlin Group) 18T -90032 17 1 40M -212 11/05/02 8 6 15 15 59 35 24 Vermont Village Homes Limited - Napa Phase 4 18T -90036 10 2 40M -233 10/19/06 97 88 178 170 48 48 23 23 21 2 2 Darlington Green a Kaitlin Group) 18T -90051 17 1 40M- 237 06/16/08 144 90 306 0 Fairhaven Investments inc. 18T -93008 11/12 1 40M -2294 Ot/26 /06 106 104 144 90 54 Mearns East Developments Inc. - Dunbu Meadows 2 18T -95005 8 2 40M -220 08/07/86 12 9 32 30 40 35 106 104 2 Penwest Development Limited 18T -97003 9 1 40M -2094 07/05/02 40 39 40 36 1 85 74 11 Green -Martin Holdings he Kaitlin Grou 18T -90051 17 1 40M -240 11/17/2009 119 1 44 62 1 1 81 76 5 201 44 157 Total Units 1629 1230 399 00 I 0 N CD 0 �D 00 . o3 N (D O � 00 I N COURTICE URBAN AREA SUBDIVISION ACTIVITY REPORT - STATUS DECEMBER 31.2010 APPLICATIONS SUBMITTED Total Units 1 187 1 DRAFT APPROVED MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON DATES RESIDENTIAL UNITS - FROM PROPOSED PLAN RESIDENTIAL PART LOT UNITS - FROM PROPOSED PLAN TOTAL NAME File No. Lot Con. Deemed Complete Red Line Revision vs Sin le Semi Multi. Apt. Other (beds) Total Units Single Semi Multi. Apt. Other (beds) Total Units UNITS William Tonno Constructi on Limited 18T -89055 32 3 05/17/89 _ 0(1/30/09 53 04/26/99 24 16 90 77 17 1 0 77 Kingsberry Properties 18T -90003 31 3 01118/90 06/30/09 40 3 30 6 77 70 24 9 4 1 1 1 0 70 Bonn don Limited 18T -90022 30 2 04/23/90 07/07/92 15 1 79 72 35 15 5 2 1 32 7 22 Head ale Developments Limited S-C- 2009 -0001 27 3 11/17110 1 18 2 5 05/07/03 167 1B 18 55 48 42 0 18 Total Units 1 187 1 DRAFT APPROVED Total units( 866 1 REGISTERED PLANS Y OF CLARINGTON DATES RESIDENTIAL UNITS - FROM DRAFT PLAN RESIDENTIAL PART LOT UNITS - FROM DRAFT PLAN TOTAL NAME Lot Con. Draft Approval Red Line Revisions Sin le Semi Multi. I. Other (beds) Total Units Single Semi Multi. Apt. Other (beds) Total Units UNITS Richard Gay Vacant Lots 29-30 2 08/24/96 04/26/99 1 16 90 89 17 1 1 18 Courtice Heights 118T-94027 27 3 07/28/99 3 3 6 77 50 24 9 4 - 4 13 Courtice Heights 31 28 3 07/28/99 1 79 72 35 35 84 151 1 32 1 152 289143 Ontario Ltd. 102 33 -34 1 10/04/96 2 5 05/07/03 167 50 18 55 48 42 0 55 708545 Ontario Ltd. 27 31 -32 2 12/23199 06126108 132 07/05/06 37 21 169 6 6 175 First Tech Mechanical S- C-2001 -0002 31 2 1 10104107 3 3 03/15107 9 14 12 0 16 Prestonvale Hei his Limited S-C -2007- 0007 34 2 11/12/08 3 90 09/08108 66 33 156 0 708545 Ontario Limited S- 0-2007 -0009 33 2 06/16/08 2 7 12111/08 55 52 7 5 p V23g Head ate Group Inc. S- C- 2004 -0002 27 3 12!04/09 3 23 08,/30/10 31 4 23 0 31 Courtice Woods S-C- 2003 - 0001 34 3 08/16/10 2 55 10/25/10 57 4 55 0 5 Total units( 866 1 REGISTERED PLANS O x CD O N 63 N (D O O � N MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON DATES RESIDENTIAL UNITS - FROM REGISTERED PLAN NAME File No. Lot Con, I M -Plan Re islered Sin les Semi Townhouse Apartments Part Lot Total Total Units jPermits Issued Total Units Permits Issued Total Units Permits Issued Total Units Permits Issued Total Units Permits Issue Total Units Permits Issued Vacant Lots Stol (Robinson Ridge 1ST -89037 - 35 1 40M -2201 06/28/03 90 89 90 69 1 Courice Heights 18T -92014 27 3 40M -2364 12/04/07 77 50 24 20 - 101 70 31 289143 Ontario Ltd. Freedman 18T -95023 33-34 1 40M -2361 11/06107 35 35 84 48 98 32 217 115 102 Prestonvale Heights Limited 18T -95026 33-34 2 40M -2148 05/07/03 167 156 18 8 48 42 233 206 27 Black Creek Developments 1BT -95029 29 -30 3 40M -2317 07/05/06 23 21 23 21 2 1370304 Ontario Ltd. McLellan Court) 1ST -98012 32 -33 3 40M -2349 03/15107 16 14 16 14 2 Black Creek Developments S- C- 2006 -0001 29 3 40M -2384 09/08108 48 33 48 33 15 Prestonvale Road Land Corp. S- C- 2007 -0003 32 -33 2 40M -2391 12111/08 55 52 5 60 52 8 Courtice Homestead Land S- 0-2007 -0002 30 3 40M -2419 08,/30/10 31 4 31 4 P7 Prestonvaie Developments Inc. - Phase I S- - 2007 -0009 8 1 BT -95028 33 31 -32 2 40M -2426 10/25/10 57 4 57 4 53 Prestonvale Developments Inc. - Phase It S-C- 2007 -0009 & 18T -95028 3 31 -32 2 40M -2450 12/23/10 56 56 0 56 Total Units 932 608 324 O x CD O N 63 N (D O O � N NEWCASTLE VILLAGE URBAN AREA SUBDIVISION ACTIVITY REPORT - STATUS DECEMEBER 31 2010 APPLICATIONS SUBMITTED - MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON DATES RESIDENTIAL UNITS - FROM PROPOSED PLAN RESIDENTIAL PART LOT UNITS - FROM PROPOSED PLAN TOTAL NAME Deemed Red Line Other , Singles File No. Lot Con. Complete Revisions Sin le Semi Multi. Apt. (beds) Totai Units Single Semi Multi. Apt. Other (beds) Total Units Plan Units Smooth Run Developments S -C-2005 -003 27 -28 2 09!22/05 05/01/10 346 136 214 696 6 20 Brookfield Homes S- 0-2005 -004 27 -28 2 09122/05 05101/10 124 74 76 274 26 27 8 35 722 309 Total Units 1031 DRAFT APPROVED Total Units 943 REGISTERED PLANS MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON DATES RESIDENTIAL UNITS - FROM DRAFT PLAN RESIDENTIAL PART LOT UNITS -FROM DRAFT PLAN TOTAL NAME Draft Red Line , Singles File No. Lot Con. Approval Revisions Single Semi Multi. I Apt. Other Total Units Single Semi MulB. A t. Other (beds) Total Units Plan Units Foster Creek Developments Ltd. 18T -89059 29 -30 2 04/12/07 580 85 665 Total Kaitlin Group 18T -96013 28 -31 BFC 12/09197 06/22/06 250 250 865 Patricia J. Stephenson -C- 2007 -000 31 2 08/19/08 28 28 Total Units 250 Total Permits Total Units Permits Issued Total Units 28 Total Units 943 REGISTERED PLANS 0 M 0 �D C/)v 0s og N O (D _'� =3 � W MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON DATES RESIDENTIAL UNITS - FROM REGISTERED PLAN NAME Singles Semi Townhouse Apartments Part Lot Total Total Units Permits Total Units Permits Issued Total Units Permits Issued Total Permits Total Units Permits Issued Total Units Permits Issued Vacant File No. Lot Con. M-Plan Re islered Lots Kaitlin Group 1ST -91004 28-30 BFC 40M -2253 05/31/05 12 Port of Newcastle Phase 2 18T -96013 28-31 BFC 40M-2327 48 34 22 12 12 0 12 Port of Newcastle Phase 2 West Stage 3 18T -96013 29-30 BFC 40M -2373 03/18/08 58 14 36 70 46 24 Port of Newcastle Phase 2 West Sta e 4 18T -96013 30 BFC 40M -2375 05/16/08 38 94 14 80 - 38 0 38 Total Units 214 60 154 0 M 0 �D C/)v 0s og N O (D _'� =3 � W 00 '" RURAL AREAS & HAMLETS SUBDIVISION ACTIVITY REPORT - STATUS DECEMBER 31, 2010 APPLICATIONS SUBMITTED Total Units( 36 1 DRAFT APPROVED MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON DATES RESIDENTIAL UNITS - FROM PROPOSED PLAN RESIDENTIAL PART LOT UNITS - FROM PROPOSED PLAN TOTAL NAME File No. Lot Con. Townshi Hamle eem Complete Red Line Revisions Ingle Semi Multi. Apt. Other (beds) Total Units Single Semi Multi. A - Other (beds) Total Units PLAN UNITS Moffatt 18T -88017 27 4 Clarke 03/05186 03/18/88 10 7 - 18T -86012 9 10 Clarke 40M -2365 12112107 6 0 10 Rowan 1BT -89012 18 8 Danin ton 04/01/05 08/05/92 26 28 Van Andel 18T -87078 15 28 9 1 11/07/05 5 0 28 Total Units( 36 1 DRAFT APPROVED Total Unitsl 87 REGISTERED PLANS MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON DATES DATES - FROM REGISTERED PLAN RESIDENTIAL UNITS - FROM DRAFT PLAN RESIDENTIAL PART LOT UNITS - FROM DRAFT PLAN TOTAL NAME File No. Lot Con. Township/ Hamlet Draft Approval a rte Revisions Single Semi Multi. Apt. Other (beds) Sin le Semi Multi. A . Other (beds) Total Units PLAN UNITS Schwarz 18T -86009 22 2 Darlin ton Total Units Permits Issued 7 - 18T -86012 9 7 Clarke 40M -2365 12112107 6 0 7 Ouaddllium 18T -87083 8 1 Newtonville 08/05/92 6 28 Van Andel 18T -87078 15 3 M21 40M -2279 11/07/05 5 0 28 Clarke 18T -89007 1 1 Clarke 0721192 5 19. Westlake 1BT -89038 25 6 Solina 40M -1897 11/08/97 35 0 19 Valid 18T -89048 7 1 Clarke 05117105 35 19 Valid 1BT -89048 7 - 1 Newtonvllie 40M -2357 10/01/07 15 0 19 Reld(Re naert 18T -90001 15 7 Clarke 06 /12/92 15 14 Allin 18T -94008 19 2 Clarke 40M- 2255 06/02/05 14 0 14 Total Unitsl 87 REGISTERED PLANS i CD 0 �D �0 o3 N O CD .p MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON DATES RESIDENTIAL UNITS - FROM REGISTERED PLAN NAME File No. Lot Con. Township/ Hamlet M -Plan Registered Sin les Semi Townhouse Apartments Pen Lot Total Total Units Permits Issued Total Units Permits issued Total Units Permits Issued Total Units Permits Issued Total Units Permits Issued Total Units Permits Issued Vacant Lots Henning 18T -86012 9 7 Clarke 40M -2365 12112107 7 6 7 6 1 Van Andel 18T -87078 15 3 Darlington 40M -2279 11/07/05 8 5 6 5 1 Westlake 1BT -89038 25 6 Solina 40M -1897 11/08/97 40 35 40 35 5 Valid 1BT -89048 7 - 1 Newtonvllie 40M -2357 10/01/07 20 15 20 15 5 Allin 18T -94008 19 2 Clarke 40M- 2255 06/02/05 21 14 21 14 7 Bar Developments H S -C -2026 -0002 27 BF Clarke 40V-_241 I_JL 04/19/10 8 1 8 1 7 Total Units 102 76 26 i CD 0 �D �0 o3 N O CD .p CLARINGTON CONDOMINIUM ACTIVITY REPORT - STATUS DECEMBER 31 2010 APPLICATIONS SUBMITTED NAME 2231231 Ontario Limited MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON DATES RESIDENTIAL UNITS TOTAL File No. C -C- 2010 -0001 Lot 11 Con. 2 Urban Area Bowmanville Submitted 10/15/10 Townhouse 48 Apartment PLAN UNITS 48 Aspen, Heights Limited C- C- 2010 -0002 17 1 Bowmanville 10/28/10 119 102 119 Total 167 DRAFT APPROVED NAME MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON I DATES RESIDENTIAL UNITS TOTAL File No. Lot Con. Urban Area Con. Townhouse Apartment PLAN UNITS Aspen Heights II Limited C -C- 2006 -0003 PT 15/16 1 Bowmanville F04/08/08 PT 15/16 102 102 1709599 Ontario Limited CCCC Durham East Limited C -C- 2007 -0001 C -C- 2009 -0001 PT 1 PT 28/29 10 BFC Bowmanville Newcastle 18 1 24 18 24 144 REGISTERED PLANS NAME MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON DATES UNITS TOTAL File No. Lot Con. Urban Area Condo Plan Registered Townhouse Apartment Industrial PLAN UNITS Aspen Heights Limited C -C- 2002 -001 PT 15/16 1 Bowmanville 2/20/03 90 Aspen. Heights II Limited C -C- 2003 -001 16 1 Bowmanville 187 6/2/05 108 90 108 Aspen Heights II Limited C -C- 2003 -001 16 1 Bowmanville 187 1/17/05 72 Port of Newcastle Developments Incorporated C- C- 2003 -002 PT 29 BFC Newcastle 192 1/23/06 18 72 Port of Newcastle Developments Incorporated C -C- 2003 -002 PT 29 BFC Newcastle 192 12/19/06 36 18 426718 Ontario Inc. C -C- 2004 -001 PT 8 BFC Bowmanville 186 12/24/04 13 36 Port of Newcastle Reserve Limited C- C- 2004 -002 PT 29 BFC Newcastle 200 7/17/06 19 13 Port of Newcastle Reserve Limited C -C- 2004 -002 PT 29 BFC Newcastle 200 12/14/07 17 19 Port of Newcastle Marina C -C- 2005 -0001 PT 28/29 BFC Newcastle 205 4/12/07 36 17 Port of Newcastle Marina C -C- 2005 -0001 PT 28/29 BFC Newcastle 205 9/12/07 36 36 St. Stephen's Estates C- C- 2006 -0002 8 2 Bowmanville 207 5/1/07 40 36 Aspen Heights II Limited C- C- 2006 -0003 PT 15/16 1 Bowmanville 209 7/4/07 60 40 Bowmanville Arms Residents C -C- 2008 -0001 PT 15/16 1 Bowmanville 217 8/1/08 72 60 Halminen Urban Communities Incorporated C -C- 2008 -0002 11 2 Bowmanville 220 9/29/08 27 72 CCCC Durham East Limited - Phase I C- C- 2009 -0001 PT 28/29 BFC Newcastle 228 7/21/10 12 27 CCCC Durham East Limited - Phase I C- C- 2009 -0001 PT 28/29 BFC Newcastle 228 10/13/10 1 12 6 6 662 Coo I C.n O X 0) O �D �v 03 03 N CD O O (t� REPORT PLANNING SERVICES Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: February 28, 2011 Resolution #: By -law #: Report #: PSD- 021 -11 File #: ZBA2011 -0003 Subject: APPLICATION FOR REMOVAL OF PART LOT CONTROL APPLICANT: CARRINGTON HOMES (COURTICE) LIMITED RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: THAT Report PSD- 021 -11 be received; 2. THAT the request for Removal of Part Lot Control with respect to Lots 68, 69, 73, 80, 81 and 83 of Plan 40M -2364 be approved and that the Part Lot Control By -law contained in Attachment 2 of PSD- 021 -11 be passed pursuant to Section 50 (7.1) of the Planning Act; and 3. THAT all interested parties listed in Report PSD- 021 -11 and any delegations and the Regional Municipality of Durham Planning Department be advised of Council's decision. Submitted by: Dav' J. C ome, MCIP, RPP Director, Planning Services 16 February 2011 MM /CP /df Reviewed by: 6, Franklin Wu Chief Administrative Officer CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T (905)623 -3379 F (905)623 -0830 8 -146 REPORT NO.: PSD- 021 -11 1.0 APPLICATION DETAILS 1.1 Applicant: Carrington Homes (Courtice) Limited PAG E 2 1.2 Location: Part Lot 27, Concession 3, Former township of Darlington (See Site Location Map - Attachment 1) 2.0 BACKGROUND 2.1 On February 7, 2011, Staff received an application for the Removal of Part Lot Control with respect to Lots 68, 69, 73, 80, 81 and 83 of 40M -2364 (see Attachment 1). Plan 40M -2364 was originally registered on December 4, 2007. It allowed for the development of 77 single detached dwelling lots and 12 semi - detached /linked lots (24 units). An application for Removal of Part Lot Control was originally considered and approved in March, 2008. By -law 2008 -031 was approved with an expiry period of three (3) years and will expire on March 3, 2011. 2.2 The registered plan originally contained 12 semi - detached /link lots, half of which have been developed at this time. Carrington Homes (Courtice) Limited have closings scheduled for one of the semi - detached /link units later in March and another in April. In order to facilitate said closings and transfer of the land a new by -law allowing for exemption from Part Lot Control is required. 3.0 COMMENTS 3.1 Staff has no objection to the approval of a by -law exempting the subject lands from Part Lot Control. Attached is a by -law (Attachment 2) to exempt the subject lands from Section 50(5) of the Planning Act. The by -law could be in force for a three (3) year period following Council approval, ending March 7, 2014. 3.2 In accordance with the procedures established in the delegation of Part Lot Control By- laws, Planning Staff will forward to the Regional Planning Department the "Unit Type and Number Summary Table" (Attachment 3) along with a copy of the Part Lot Control By -law. 3.3 The Finance Department advises that the taxes have been paid in full. 4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 4.1 It is recommended that Council approve this application and adopt the attached Part Lot Control By -law for the exemption of Lots 68, 69, 73, 80, 81 and 83 of Plan 40M -2364. 5tatt Contact: Meaghan Harrington 8 -147 REPORT NO.: PSD- 021 -11 PAGE 3 Attachments: Attachment 1 - Site Location Key Map and Lands Affected by Part Lot Control Removal Attachment 2 - By -law for Removal of Part Lot Control Attachment 3 - Unit Type and Number Summary Table List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Carrington Homes (Courtice) Limited c/o Robert Fernicola Durham Region Planning Department c/o Brian Bridgeman 8 -148 00 1 co X cu -0 0 �D C1 =. 03 cu 0 Property Location Map (Courtice) N GEORGE REYNOLDS DR Subject Site M3 I 0 a o o i w > o 0 Y U O Q" _ r a x r r O O BROOME AV ® Lots Affected By Part Lot Control 0 0 y H R CT TABB AV Registered Plan 40M - 2364 ZBA 2011 -0003 Removal Of Part Lot Control /V Owner: Carrington Homes (Courtice) Limited NASH ROAD X cu -0 0 �D C1 =. 03 cu 0 Attachment 2 To Report PSD- 021 -11 THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALTY OF CLARINGTON BY -LAW NO. 2011- being a By -law to exempt a certain portion of Registered Plan 40M -2364 from Part Lot Control WHEREAS, the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington deems it advisable to exempt from Part Lot Control, Lots 68, 69, 73, 80, 81 and 83 of 40M -2364, registered at the Land Titles Division of Whitby; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington enacts as follows: 1. That Subsection 5 of Section 50 of the Planning Act shall not apply to those lands described in paragraph 2 within the By -law. 2. That this By -law shall come into effect upon being approved by the Municipality of Clarington and thereafter Subsection .5 of Section 50 shall cease to apply to the following lands: a) Lots 68, 69, 73, 80, 81 and 83 of 40M -2364. 3. Pursuant to Subsection 7.3 of Section 50 of the Planning Act, this By -law shall be in force for a period of three (3) years ending on March 7, 2014. BY -LAW read a first time this day of 2011 BY -LAW read a second time this day of 2011 BY -LAW read a third time and finally passed this day of 2011 Adrian Foster, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk 8 -150 TABLE 4 PART LOT CONTROL EXEMPTION BY -LAW Unit Type and Number Summary Table Registered Plan #: 40M -2364 By -law: Attachment 3 To Report PSD- 021 -11 J$ t 4 �-B -�! t try jx° -a...T 1 '' E-t 3 4 . -F' h v P r,✓rk M ,Y d °r - Z ;k e�, i MF { %} '� tY.7 rl �,,.#. p a4h�+.`y$✓i 'e�t'e I! ` f s 9 �' w 't q otrs���ocks � 3e t Result of Q�rt L,ot God #rol �� 15, A # cted Unit T e antl Nurmb& ^�;� = ' GYP . .... -..� Exem .t1 on omUnit.T a Lots 68, 69, 73, 80, Semi - detached /link No increase in units 81 and 83 Total: Six (6) No increase in units 8 -151 1 arm � Leading the Way REPORT PLANNING SERVICES Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: February 28, 2011 Resolution #: By -law #: Report #: PSD- 022 -11 File #: ZBA 2010 -0028 Subject: REMOVAL OF HOLDING (H) SYMBOL APPLICANT: 1557366 ONTARIO INC. RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report PSD- 022 -11 be received; 2. THAT the application Submitted on behalf of 1557366 Ontario Inc., to remove a Holding (H) Symbol be approved and that the By -law, contained in Attachment 2 to Report PSD- 022 -11 be passed; and 3. THAT all interested parties listed in Report PSD- 022 -11 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. or Submitted by: David rome, MCIP, RPP Director of Planning Services RP /CS /ah /df /ah February 22, 2011 Reviewed by: ranklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T (905)623 -3379 F (905)623 -0830 8 -152 REPORT NO.: PSD- 022 -11 1.0 APPLICATION DETAILS 1.1 Applicant: 1557366 Ontario Inc. 1.2 Owner: 1557366 Ontario Inc. 1.3 Agent: Ronald J. Hawkshaw 1.4 Proposal: To remove a Holding (H) Symbol 1.5 Area: 0.76 ha PAGE 2 1.6 Location: Part Lot 15, Concession Broken Front, former Township of Darlington 2.0 BACKGROUND 2.1 The subject site is located near the southwest corner of Baseline Road and Martin Road. The property has frontage onto Martin Road to the east and backs onto the Westside Creek to the west. 2.2 The subject site was previously created through severance in 2006. At that time a 1.45 ha lot with a commercial building located at 2445 Baseline Road West was severed to create a vacant 0.76 ha lot for development, and a 0.6 ha lot conveyed to the Municipality for parkland dedication. 2.3 The Municipality's Comprehensive Zoning By -law 84 -63, as amended, zones the severed site as "Holding — Special Purpose Commercial ((H)C5) zone". An application for Removal of Holding and Site Plan Control will be required prior to any development occurring on the subject site. 2.4 At this time, the Owner does not have a specific development proposal for this site. However, the Owner has stated that the presence of the holding symbol is inhibiting the sale of the subject property to prospective developers. On December 16, 2010, an application was received for the Removal of Holding. 3.0 OFFICIAL PLAN 3.1 The Clarington Official Plan states that, prior to development, holding provisions may be used to ensure that services and Municipal works including roads, measures to protect natural areas, and that execution of appropriate agreements have been addressed and approved to the satisfaction of the Municipality. 8 -153 REPORT NO.: PSD- 022 -11 PAGE 3 4.0 ZONING BY -LAW 4.1 Zoning By -law 84 -63 zones the subject lands as "Holding- Special Purpose Commercial ((H) C5) zone" and "Environmental protection (EP) zone ". 4.2 The Zoning By -law states that a Holding (H) Symbol may be removed once Council is satisfied that services, adequate access, and the associated financial agreements have been executed with both the Municipality of Clarington and the Regional Municipality of Durham. 5.0 AGENCY COMMENTS 5.1 The Engineering Services Department has no objections, to the application for the removal of holding. 5.2 Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority ( CLOCA) staff have noted that the western boundary of the property appears to coincide with the floodplain of the Westside Creek which was established through the design and construction of the existing stormwater management facility. Consequently CLOCA staff has no objections to the removal of the Holding (H) Symbol. Once the removal of holding is approved, the applicant wishes to pursue development through a site plan application, CLOCA would review and comment on the proposed development. 5.3 The Durham Region Works Department has stated that municipal water supply and sanitary sewers are available to the subject site from the 300 mm watermain and 600 mm sanitary sewer on Martin Road (south of Baseline Road). The developer will be required to pay for watermain and sanitary sewer frontage charges when a servicing proposal is submitted and to enter into a Servicing Agreement for the installation of service connections (from the main line system to property line). Regional Development charges (in effect at the time an application is submitted) will be applicable. 5.4 The Finance Department has confirmed that the taxes on this property are current. 6.0 STAFF COMMENTS 6.1 The intent of the Holding Zone policies and regulations within the Official Plan and Zoning By -law are to ensure that development proceeds in an orderly fashion without a negative impact on surrounding properties and infrastructure. Matters stated by the Clarington Official Plan regarding measures to protect the natural areas, services and municipal works including roads have been addressed by the agencies. Additional conditions such as the execution of appropriate agreements can be dealt with through the site plan process. As noted above, the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority ( CLOCA), Clarington Engineering Services Department and the Durham Region Works Department have no objections to the application. 8 -154 REPORT NO.: PSD- 022 -11 PAG E 4 6.2 Should this application be approved and the Owner proceed through the Site Plan process for further development of the site, all departments and agencies have reserved the right to provide more detailed comments outlining specific requirements at that time. 7.0 CONCLUSIONS 7.1 In consideration of the comments noted above, Staff recommends that the application submitted on behalf of 1557366 Ont. Inc., to remove a Holding (H) Symbol be approved and that the By -law contained in Attachment 2 to Report PSD- 022 -11 be passed. Staff Contact: Ruth Porras Attachments: Attachment 1 - Key Map Attachment 2 - By -law List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Ronald J. Hawkshaw 1557366 Ontario Inc. Durham Region Planning Department Municipality Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) 8 -155 v E .0 U �o Q N N Property Location Map (Bowmanville) ZBA 2010 -0028 Zoning By -law Amendment Owner: 1557366 ONTARIO INC to LO I 00 Attachment 2 To Report PSD- 022 -11 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BY -LAW NO. 2011- being a By -law to amend Zoning By -law 84 -63 of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington deems it advisable to amend By -law 84 -63, as amended, of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington for ZBA 2010 -0028; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT, the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington enacts as follows: 1. Map Schedule "A" to By -law 84 -63, as amended, is hereby further amended by changing the zone designation from "Holding — Special Purpose Commercial ((H) C5) Zone" to "Special Purpose Commercial (C5) Zone ", as illustrated on the attached Schedule "A" hereto. 2. Schedule "A" attached hereto shall form part of this By -law. 3. This By -law shall come into effect on the date of the passing hereof, subject to .the provisions of Section 34 of the Planning Act. BY -LAW read a first time this 7th day of March, 2011 BY -LAW read a second time this 7th day of March, 2011 BY -LAW read a third time and finally passed this 7th day of March, 2011 Adrian Foster, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk 8 -157 Leading the Way ClarjR60R REPORT PLANNING SERVICES Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: February 28, 2011 Resolution #: By -law #: N/A Report #: PSD- 023 -11 File #: PLN 29.10 Subject: SOLAR ENERGY PROJECTS IN URBAN VALLEYLANDS RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: Part 1 THAT Report PSD- 023 -11 be received; 2. THAT FIT Fund Solar Corporation be advised that Clarington does not support their current proposal for a Class 3 Solar Project in the Soper Creek valleylands and that they be encouraged to meet with staff to consider alternate locations in Clarington for a solar energy project or projects; and 3. THAT the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority, FIT Fund Solar Corporation and all interested parties listed in Report PSD- 023 -11 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. Part 2 THAT the following resolution be adopted by a separate resolution: "WHEREAS the Municipality of Clarington supports the responsible expansion of renewable energy as a means of placing Ontario on a more sustainable path for the future; WHEREAS municipalities in the Greater Golden Horseshoe are subject to the Growth Plan which encourages the efficient use of land and infrastructure and greater densities of urban growth; CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T (905)623 -3379 F (905)623 -0830 8 -159 REPORT NO.: PSD- 023 -11 PAGE 2 WHEREAS unlike Class 1 and Class 2 solar installations, Class 3 ground- mounted solar installations greater than 12 kW may require a significant land area and would be contrary to the policies of The Provincial Growth Plan for the efficient use of serviced land and the mandated density of development; WHEREAS urban valleylands are key ecological features that need protection from development and should be the focus of restoration efforts to enhance the ecological attributes and value to the community as outdoor amenity areas, particularly as communities are intensified; WHEREAS Regulation 359/09 as amended provides for consideration of a renewable energy project within natural heritage features, including within a significant valleyland or within 120 m of a significant valleyland if supported by mitigation measures in an environmental impact study prepared by the proponent, WHEREAS consideration of Class 3 solar facilities in urban valleylands will provide an incentive for developers to retain valleyland areas and could limit their dedication to municipalities as Open Space lands in the future; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Minister of Energy, the Minister of Natural Resources, the Renewable Energy Facilitation Office, FIT Fund Solar Corporation, and CLOCA be advised that the Municipality of Clarington does not support the consideration of Class 3 solar facilities in urban valleyland areas; and THAT this resolution be forwarded to all other municipalities in the Greater Golden Horseshoe "; Submitted by: David trome, MCIP, RPP Director of Planning Services LB /COS /sn /df February 24, 2011 " 8 -160 Reviewed by: Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer REPORT NO.: PSD- 023 -11 1.0 INTRODUCTION PAGE 3 The purpose of this staff report is twofold; to provide information to Council regarding the Provincial Renewable Energy Approvals process and to provide further information regarding a potential solar panel installation at the northeast corner of Baseline Road and Simpson Avenue in Bowmanville. These are in response to the delegation by Mr. Sebben and information item 1 -7 from the January 31, 2011 Council meeting. 2.0 RENEWABLE ENERGY APPROVALS 2.1 According to the Ministry of Energy's website (www.mei.gov.on.ca /en /energy/ renewable) Ontario's new approach to approving renewable energy projects offers benefits to project applicants and local communities while continuing to ensure rigorous protection of the natural environment, cultural heritage and public health and safety. Renewable energy projects include solar, wind, biomass and water projects. Many renewable energy projects in Ontario will require a Renewable Energy Approval (REA) from the Ministry of the Environment (MOE). This single approval has replaced the need for multiple Provincial Environmental Assessments, Certificates of Approval, and Permits to Take Water while introducing province -wide standards for setbacks and a six -month service guarantee for the REA review. It must be highlighted that renewable energy projects are no longer subject to municipal land use planning instruments under the Planning Act (e.g. Official Plans and Zoning By- laws). The Municipal role in renewable energy project approval has been reduced to consultative as a result of the Green Energy Act. Solar energy projects are divided into three classifications: • Class 1 Solar installations in any location less than 12 kW (micro - solar) • Class 2 Solar installation mounted on the roof or wall of a building greater than 12 kW • Class 3 Ground- mounted solar installations greater than 12 kW Class 1 and 2 solar projects may require a building permit. Only Class 3 projects require a Renewable Energy Approval. 2.2 Key Steps in the Renewable Energy Approvals(REA) Process 2.2.1 Pre - submission Work Before submitting an application for an REA to the Ministry of the Environment, the applicant must prepare a number of reports, drawings and diagrams to describe the facility and its location. The applicant must also assess and mitigate impacts and potential environmental effects associated with the project during 8 -161 REPORT NO.: PSD- 023 -11 PAGE 4 construction, design and operation and decommissioning. The applicant must demonstrate how the project will meet setbacks depending on the class of project as well as engage the public, municipalities and Aboriginal communities in discussions about the project. 2.2.2 Optional Consultation on Pre - submission Work Applicants are encouraged to contact the Ministry of the Environment or the Ministry of Natural Resources to clarify the requirements for their project. In most cases, a coordinated pre- submission meeting may be appropriate and is highly recommended where a project requires multiple approvals. The Renewable Energy Facilitation Office (REFO) can help the applicant set up this meeting. Additionally, this is a good time in the process to consult with other approving authorities, such as the federal government and conservation authorities. 2.2.3 Mandatory Consultation Requirements Consultation with the general public, aboriginal groups and local municipality(s) is a component of the REA process. Public Consultation includes contact with landowners within 120 metres, a notice in the local . newspaper and at least two public meetings. All of the studies and reports required as part of the REA process must be made available for public review prior to the last public meeting. Consultation with the Municipality is required for all renewable energy projects requiring an REA except for small wind projects (however they may still require a building permit). Consultation must begin at least 90 days prior to the date of the final public consultation meeting. This must also take place before the applicant submits an REA application. The MOE provides applicants with a form to document municipal feedback on matters related to municipal services and local infrastructure. The prescribed consultation form has multiple pages of questions for the Municipality to respond to. The questions seek information regarding: 1. Roads (access, Traffic Management Plans); 2. Service Connections (location of service connections other than roads); 3. Facility Other (landscape design, emergency procedures, easements); and 4. Project Construction (site rehabilitation, locations of buried and above ground utilities, building code issues, natural and cultural heritage features). A proponent must document what was learned through public consultation, including how the project was changed in response to municipal and public input. Through the REA process, a proponent consults with the Municipality, they do not seek approval. The only exception is when a renewable energy project requires the removal and use of aggregate materials. In this case, municipal approvals are sought for the aggregate license, not the REA. 8 -162 REPORT NO.: PSD- 023 -11 PAGE 5 In addition, although Planning Act approvals are not required as per the Green Energy Act, proponents require permits from Conservation Authorities in regulated areas to ensure that the development does not affect the control of pollution, flooding, erosion and dynamic beaches. Legislative requirements associated with the Federal Fisheries Act also remain applicable. 2.2.4 Complete Submission The applicant provides all of the required information for provincial ministry approvals. This includes an REA application form and supporting documents and reports to the Ministry of the Environment and any documents required by the Ministry of Natural Resources. Under the REA Regulation, the different types of renewable energy generation facilities are categorized by. class. Each class of project has unique requirements based on their nameplate capacity. The basic list of studies that need to be submitted in support of a REA application are: 1. Project Description Report 2. Construction Plan Report 3. Consultation Report 4. Design and Operations Report 5. Decommissioning Plan Report Additional documents will be required by the MOE depending on the project location, equipment, or technology being used to generate electricity. Also depending on the location of the project, archaeological, cultural heritage, environmental and noise studies may be required. Drafts of these documents, among others, must be made available to the public by the applicant at least 60 days prior to the date of their final public consultation meeting, which must occur prior to submission of an application for an REA. Mandatory consultation requirements must also be met for the application to be considered complete (including public meetings, municipal consultation and aboriginal groups.) 2.2.5 Public Notice to the Environmental Registry Once an application is made for an REA, a notice of a proposal is posted on the Environmental Registry by the Ministry of the Environment so the public can review and provide comments. The Municipality may provide comments at this stage as well. 8 -163 REPORT NO.: PSD- 023 -11 2.2.6 Decision PAGE 6 After considering an application for the issue or renewal of an REA and all public comments received through the Environmental Registry, the Ministry of the Environment Director may do either of the following: • Issue, renew or amend REA • Refuse to issue, renew or amend REA. A third party (other than the applicant or the issuing Authority) may seek a hearing, usually to offer an objection, with respect to a renewable energy approval by making a request to the Environmental Review Tribunal. The request must be made within 15 days of the posting of the notice of the approval on the Environmental Registry. The Tribunal must hold a meeting and make a decision within six months. 3.0 POTENTIAL SOLAR INSTALLATION IN BOWMANVILLE 3.1 Property Description The FIT Fund Solar Corp and Premier Solar have announced a proposal for a 200 kilowatt solar farm at the north east corner of Simpson Avenue and Baseline Road in Bowmanville (Attachment 1). Figure 1 — Subject Site 8 -164 REPORT NO.: PSD- 023 -11 PAGE 7 The subject property is approximately one hectare (2.5 acres) in size. The land uses to the north and west are residential, and to the east and south open space and with some industrial. The eastern limits of the property are tree covered and the Soper Creek enters the property near the southeast corner of the property. The entire property is completely within the flood plain of the Soper Creek. The subject property is designated Major Open Space in the Durham Regional Official Plan, Environmental Protection in the Clarington Official Plan, and is zoned Environmental Protection `EP' in Zoning By -law 84 -63. Clarington's Open Space System is comprised of Environmental Protection Areas, Natural Core Areas, Natural Linkage Areas, the Waterfront Greenway and Green Space. Unless otherwise provided in specific detailed policies within the Official Plan, development is discouraged within the.Open Space System. More specifically, within areas designated Environmental Protection, as is the subject property; no development is permitted (the exception being low intensity recreation, forest, fish and wildlife management and erosion control or stormwater management). The natural heritage features together with their functions collectively make up the Natural Heritage System in Clarington. The mapped features include significant valleylands, streams, woodlots and wetlands. The Clarington Official Plan identifies a portion of the subject property to be located within the significant valleyland of the Soper Creek. Hazard lands are lands that exhibit one or more hazards such as poor drainage, organic soils, flood susceptibility, erosion or steep slopes. Development on these types of lands could cause loss of life, property damage or the degradation of the natural environment. The subject site is identified as being Hazard Lands (due to being within the flood plain of the Soper Creek). 3.2 The Project According to Premier Solar, the proposed nameplate capacity of the solar project at Simpson Avenue is 200 kW. Given the generation capacity it is considered to be a Class 3 facility. Generally Class 3 solar facilities are ground mounted and generate over 10 kilowatts of power. For this project (using REFO /MOE websites) we identified the following possible studies that Premier solar will need to undertake as part of the REA process. They include: • a Noise Study, an Environmental Impact Study; and a Flood Plain Analysis. 8 -165 REPORT NO.: PSD- 023 -11 3.2.1 Noise Study PAGE 8 A noise study assesses the potential impacts at nearby noise receptors (e.g. residence) due to sound emitted by the solar facility's electrical equipment (e.g. inverters, transformers). The noise study is required to demonstrate that the facility, as designed, does not exceed a 40 decibel noise level (approximately the noise level experienced in a quiet office or library). The review engineer will assess the information submitted by the applicant to determine acceptable distance from the solar facility to the nearest residence or other receptor. 3.2.2 Environmental Impact Study The Province requires natural heritage features, parks and conservation reserves to be protected by a setback for all elements of a renewable energy project. For most natural heritage features the prescribed setback is 120 metres. A renewable energy project must also meet a minimum setback distance of 120 metres from any nearby water body (including a permanent or intermittent stream). In general, the parts of the project related to the transmission lines and associated structures and to the roads, docks, water crossings, culverts, etc. associated with the facility may be allowed within 30 metres of a water body or within the water body itself. However, parts of the project related to the generation equipment, storage facilities and transformer stations may not (see Figure 2). If the applicant wants to locate the project within a natural feature or within the prescribed setbacks, they will have to undertake and submit an environmental impact assessment study as part of the complete application. The REA Regulation requires that an impact assessment conducted as part of an REA is prepared in accordance with procedures established by MNR. The Impact Assessment must assess the construction, installation, use, operation, changing and retiring of the renewable energy facility. It must identify and assess any negative environmental effects of the project on the natural heritage features or water bodies and must identify mitigation measures in respect of those effects. .. REPORT NO.: PSD- 023 -11 3.2.3 Flood Plain Analysis PAGE 9 Renewable energy projects cannot generally be located in areas subject to hazards from flooding, erosion and /or dynamic beach action, or on hazardous sites. The subject property is entirely within the flood plain of the Soper Creek. The subject proposal will require an approval from the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority ( CLOCA). In January 2011, FIT Fund Solar submitted an application to CLOCA for approval under Ontario Regulation 42/06, the Authority's Regulation of Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses. At the time of writing this report, CLOCA has not made a decision with respect to granting a permit in support of this development. In conversation a representative of FIT Fund Solar it was indicated that they have not entered into the REA process yet. They are awaiting the outcome of the permit application to the CLOCA. 4.0 STAFF COMMENTS 4.1 Although the Provincial Regulation 359/09 as amended states that a renewable energy project is not permitted within floodplains, a natural heritage features or within a prescribed area around natural heritage features, there is really only a blanket prohibition on development within a provincially significant southern wetland, a provincially significant coastal wetland or a provincial park /conservation reserve. In regards to all other features, and the setback to the above referenced wetland and parks, the Regulation provides for environmental 8 -167 REPORT NO.: PSD -023 -11 PAGE 10 impact studies to assess any negative impact and identify mitigating measures that can be implemented to allow the project to proceed. This approach may be reasonable in some circumstances, for example for a wind turbine which has a highly constrained impact at the tower base. However, for a solar farm type installation (a Class 3 project), the area is blanketed with solar arrays and operating areas in between which must be maintained for ease of access by trucks and personnel. The impact is to remove and /or preclude the naturalization of the area. It would also increase hazard risk within the floodplain as the solar arrays mounts can catch material and have a dam -like effect. 4.2 Under municipal planning policy, there is a Land Use Plan that identifies the appropriate areas for different land uses. Under the Province's Green Energy Act, land use policy is irrelevant. Regardless of whether the municipality designates significant valleyland areas for preclusion from development with an Open Space designation, the Act and the regulations do not necessarily take into account land use plans. Renewable energy projects should not be encouraged to locate in lands set aside for open space purposes simply because this is the most lucrative land use for these areas. While other forms of development are precluded, renewable energy projects should not be permitted to do an "end -run" around the Planning process to settle on the lands containing natural heritage features. If Class 3 solar installations are permitted in natural heritage areas and their buffer areas, developers will be reluctant to dedicate such lands to the Municipality. There are no provisions in the Planning Act to compel, dedication of open space lands — it simply is the best option for developers given the lack of opportunity for alternative profit- making uses. 4.3 It should be noted that in the past, some valleyland areas were retained by developers — one in hope of getting a golf course designation; an application that has long since been withdrawn. If developers can retain urban valleyland areas for renewable energy projects, municipal objectives will again be thwarted. 4.4 Urban valleylands are significant natural features in urban areas. They are important for both their environmental benefits and their amenity benefits for residents, providing opportunities for trails, views of and access to natural areas. Even degraded sites offer opportunities for restoration of natural heritage features that are important to our quality of life. 4.5 The FIT Fund Solar project illustrates the potential for renewable energy projects to be located in inappropriate areas without strong oversight and direction. Larger Class 3 solar projects should not be located in an urban valleyland simply by default. There are other urban options for larger scale solar installations that take advantage of the large flat roofs on industrial building or recreation facilities. These types of installations are more in keeping with the Provincial Growth Plan and other planning policies which encourage the efficient use of land and infrastructure in urban areas. 8 -168 - REPORT NO.: PSD- 023 -11 5.0 CONCLUSION PAGE 11 5.1 FIT Fund Solar Corporation should be advised that the Municipality does not support the development of solar facilities in urban valleylands. However, they should be encouraged to consider other locations in the Municipality. Staff would be pleased to assist in the consideration of alternative locations. 5.2 It is also recommended that a resolution be passed to advise the Ministry of Energy of the Municipality's concern for Class 3 Solar installations in urban valleylands. This resolution can be circulated to other municipalities for support, as they could be facing the same issue. Staff Contact: Lisa Backus Attachments Attachment 1 — FIT FUND Solar Power Materials Interested parties to be notified of Council's decision: Dave Sebben Mario Veltri Petr Siemans Chris Darling, CLOCA 8 -169 FITDurham Power Project - Municipality of Clarington FUND January 11, 2011 Attention: Ron Albright, P. Eng. Manager, Infrastructure & Capital Works Renewable Energy Project - Municipality of Clarington The FIT Fund Solar Corp. is pleased to announce the Durham Power Project which will be located in the Municipality of Clarington - Town of Bowmanville. The Durham Power Project is scheduled for 200 kilowatts and will be located on a property at the northeast corner of Simpson Avenue and Baseline Road. The Durham Power Project will provide an economic stimulus to the community, both during the construction phase, and subsequently as jobs are created to manage the ongoing facility. The initial stage consists of a new R -Plan survey to define the legal boundaries of the property, and to participate with the Municipality of Clarington in negotiating the settlement of property transfer for their infrastructure requirements. 8 -170 to Report PSD- 023 -11 The results of this survey have been completed as of January 4, 2022, at which time copies have been provided to the Municipality. This survey has been undertaken by the landowner /solar developer at their own cost. Property Transfer Consideration It is the position of David Forbes, owner of Lot 10, Concession 1, Municipality of Clarington that the property easement required by the municipality will be transferred to the municipality without financial cost. In return for this consideration, Mr. Forbes is seeking the support of the municipality in development of this renewable energy project, and our bid to receive approval for this development from the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority. The FIT Fund Solar Corp. is preparing site design drawings, as well as 3D renderings to illustrate both the physical impact of the installation, as well as the visual aesthetics of the solar installation. It is our objective to develop this property in a manner that meets the requirements of all local jurisdictions, minimize environmental impact and create value for the owner. Durham Power Fund - Municipality of Clarington - Dec. 17, 2010 Page 1 of 3 Environmental Issues The key environmental issues that we have identified and addressed are: a. Topsoil disturbance - in order to minimize topsoil, we have designed an anchoring system that consists of using drilled -in helical piles. The use of these piles forgoes the use of concrete foundations, thus avoiding any site excavation. The installation of these piles has virtually no soil disturbance. See illustration right. b. Vegetation alteration - as the site vegetation is instrumental in absorbing excess moisture, either by rainfall or overflow flooding, we have designed our site installation to circumvent virtually all existing vegetation, with exception of one tree, which may have to be removed. It is located in the z3 center of the property, and its removal will have minimal affect on the site. All vegetation located near the creek banks will remain undisturbed. i c. Flooding displacement & drainage - as this property is located in a flood plain, our structures have been designed to have virtually no displacement value. The solar arrays are anchored to. the ground with about 4" diameter rods, and mounted on 8" diameter pipes. A flood of one meter on the property would be in excess of 8,624 cu. meters of s water, and the displacement of the solar mounts would be approximately 1.3 cu. meters, or less than .015 percent. t. Summary The Durham Power Project is a development fitting with the strong energy roots of the local community and its mandate to welcome renewable energy in all of its development plans. APPLIED LOAD f it w ._ The FIT Fund Solar Corp, is very sensitive to the environment impact of this project, and has worked hard to create a solar project that has minimal impact on the property. Illustrations • 3D Solar Illustration - site Durham Power Fund - Municipality of Clarington - Dec. 17, 2010 Page 2 of 3 8 -171 • 3D Illustration - pole mount pedestal and land anchors PREMIER REMIER PREMIER ='REMIER R PREMIE - Top view - site layout PREMIER PREMIER PREMIER R PREMIER PF iliraae €i l�iaon REMIER PREMIER PREMIER I Durham Power Fund - Municipality of Clarington - Dec. 17, 2010 8-172 �J! Page 3 of 3 Clarftwn REPORT OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: February 28, 2011 Resolution #: By -law#: N/A Report#: OPD -002 -11 File #: Subject: TENDER NO. CL2010 -23 DRIVEWAY TIE -INS - AMENDMENT RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report OPD- 002 -11 be received for information and confirmation of funding for additional work. Submitted by: 4L "V/7 Frederiq J. Ho ath, B.A., R.D.M.R., R.R.F.A. Director of Operations FJH:kr Reviewed by: Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T(905)623 -3379 F (905)623 -4169 10 -1 REPORT NO.: OPD- 002 -11 1.0 BACKGROUND AND COMMENT PAGE 2 1.1 At their meeting of June 21, 2010 Council passed a resolution approving the award of a contract to Melrose Paving Company, Etobicoke for the provision of driveway tie -ins with an annual value of $46,400.02. There is provision in the agreement to extend the contract for a second and third year subject to satisfactory service and acceptable pricing. A copy report COD - 034 -10 is attached as Schedule "A ". 1.2 In December 2010 it was discovered that the value of the contract had exceeded the amount stated in the original report COD - 034 -10 by a significant amount. This was a result of additional funds being approved for rural roads after the 2010 budget was approved. As noted the contract amount provided in the tender was $46,400.00 net of HST rebate and actual expenditures to date are estimated at $80,062.00 net of HST rebate. 2.0 ANALYSIS 2.1 For clarification, the original report COD - 034 -10 referenced a contract amount that was based on the estimated work proposed for 2010. However, the bid document made provision for an adjustment in quantities based on additional work that was required after award of the contract. By the same token the contract also alerted the bidders that we do not guarantee the amount of work listed in the estimates. 2.2 The purpose of this report is to provide updated information on the value of the contract not only for 2010 but also to advise that the subsequent years may also experience increased work. Should this occur the agreement will be closely monitored to ensure that adequate funding is in place and costs are allocated to the appropriate accounts. Where it is anticipated that budgets will be exceeded /depleted as a result of the extra work the required approvals will be sought in accordance with corporate policy. 10 -2 REPORT NO.: OPD- 002 -11 PAGE 3 2.3 Steps are being taken to improve the level of scrutiny that this type of contract is subjected to ensure that budgets are monitored and contractors do not complete additional work that is not in line with the approved budget. 3.0 FINANCIAL 3.1 A review of the expenditures, although in excess of the estimates provided in the contract, revealed that the funding for the extra work was authorized by the Operations Department budget as follows: Account Expenditure Total Expenditure against this contract $80,062.84 Funding Source Rural Road Resurfacing Account # 110 -36- 330 - 83680 -7401: $19,635.31 Resurfacing Pavement Account # 100 -36- 381 - 10250 -7163: $41,279.83 Bridge Maintenance 100 -36- 380 - 10200 -7112 $ 9,794.30 Catchbasin Repairs 100 -36- 380 - 10245 -7163 $ 6,427.80 Winter Maintenance — Other 100 -36- 383 - 10305 -7112 $ 2,925.60 Total $80,062.84 The invoices have been reviewed and expenses allocated to the correct accounts, as listed above. 4.0 CONCLUSION 4.1 The purpose of this report is to clarify the scope of contract for the driveway tie -in services contract. Although a value is provided for the purpose of award, the contract includes provision for the completion of additional work based on the 10 -3 REPORT NO.: OPD- 002 -11 PAGE 4 unit prices contained in the contract. There is also provision in the contract to protect the municipality should the quantity of work fall short of the estimate. 4.2 As noted in the Financial Section, funding is provided in the annual operating budget under the Pavement Resurfacing Account. However, when the driveway tie in is a result of the Capital rural road resurfacing contract than the funding for this extra work shall be taken from the capital program. 4.3 Queries with respect to department needs, specifications, etc., should be referred to the Director of Operations. 5.0 INPUTS FROM OTHER SOURCES 5.1 This report has been reviewed for recommendation by the Director of Finance and Purchasing Manager, with the appropriate departments and circulated as follows. Concurrence: Director of Finance Purchasing Manager Attachments: Schedule "A" — COD - 034 -10 10 -4 ATTACHMENT NO.: 1 REPORT NO.: OPD- 002 -11 cudon" REPORT CORPORATE SERVICES DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: June 21, 2010 Resolution #: Report #: COD- 034 -10 File # By -law # N/A Subject: TENDER NO. CL2010 -23 — DRIVEWAY TIE -INS Recommendations: It is respectfully recommended 'that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: THAT Report COD -034 -10 be received; 2. THAT Melrose Paving Company, Etobicoke, Ontario, with a total bid in the amount of $46,400.02 (net of H.S.T. Rebate), being the lowest responsible bidder meeting all terms, conditions and specifications of Tender CL2010 -23, be awarded the contract for Driveway Tie -Ins, as required by the Municipality of Clarington, Operations Department; 3. THAT pending satisfactory pricing and service the contract be extended for a second and third year; and 4. THAT the funds expended be drawn from the Operations Department Annual .Operating Budget Account 100 -36- 381 -10250 -7163 Pavement Resurfacing. Submitted by: Reviewed by: ie Marano, H.B.Sc., C.M.Q., aanllinu, Director of Corporate Services Chief Administrative Officer MMWDBIbh CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905-623 -3379 10 -5 REPORT NO.: COD - 034 -10 PAGE 2 1.0 BACKGROUND AND COMMENT 1.1 Tender CL2010 -23 Driveway Tie -Ins was advertised and issued with bids being received as per Schedule "A" attached. 1.2 The term of this contract is for a period of up to three years with annual renewal subject to acceptable pricing and the provision of satisfactory service. 2.0, ANALYSIS 2.1 After review and analysis of the bids by the Operations Department and Purchasing, it was mutually agreed that the low bidder Melrose Paving Company, Etobicoke, Ontario, be awarded the contract for Driveway Tie -ins. 2.2' Melrose Paving Company has provided similar services to the Municipality of Clarington for a number of years and the level of service has been satisfactory. 13 Queries with respect to the department. needs, specifications, etc. should be referred to the Director of Operations. 3.0 FINANCIAL 3.1 The total funds required for Tender CL2010 -23 Driveway Tie -Ins are included in the Operations Department Annual Operating Budget Account 100 -36- 381 -10250 -7163 Pavement Resurfacing. 3.2 For the information of Council, the unit pricing remains the same as the 2009 rate. 3.3 The contract will be monitored to ensure the service level is maintained and rates applied correctly. 10 -6 REPORT NO.: COD- 034 -10 4.0 CONCLUSION PAGE 3 4.1 To award the contract to Melrose Paving Company, Etobicoke, Ontario for the Driveway Tie -ins. 5.0� INPUT FROM OTHER SOURCES 5..1 This report has been reviewed by the Purchasing Manager, with the appropriate department and circulated as follows: Concurrence: Director of Operations Attachments: Attachment 1 —Schedule "A ", Bid Summary 10 -7 REPORT CORPORATE SERVICES DEPARTMENT Schedule "A" Bid Summary. Tender CL2010 -23 10 -8 f.. 41!• Melrose Paving•Company Limited $46,400.02 Etobicoke, ON Trison Contracting $49,758,10 Port Perry, ON Royalcrest Paving $50,900.15 Toronto, ON Al Asphalt Maintenance Limited $60,164.42 Burlington, ON 10 -8 Clar*wn REPORT OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: Feb. 28, 2011 Resolution #: By -law#: N/A Report#: OPD- 003 -11 File #: Subject: SPORTS FIELD USER FEES RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report OPD- 003 -11 be received; 2. THAT the user fee rates as set out in Attachment 1 be approved for the 2011 season; and 2. THAT all interested parties listed in Report OPD- 003 -11 be advised of Council's decision. Submitted by: Reviewed by: Frederi kiJ. Horvath Franklin Wu, B.A., R.D,M.R., R.R.F.A. Chief Administrative Officer Director o Operations FH /BG /sh CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905 - 623 -3379 10 -9 REPORT NO.: OPD -003 -11 PAGE 2 1.0 BACKGROUND AND CURRENT 1.1 In 2007 at the suggestion sports field user groups staff created a multi year fee schedule. This fee schedule was in effect for the period of 2007 to 2010 and is now up for review. The proposed fee schedule will be multi year (2011 to 2014) for this term of Council. In 2010 there were 11,707 hours of permitted to various groups with the breakdown as detailed in the following chart: User fees are used to offset the costs to maintain our sports fields and the revenue produced approximately $89,939.70 in revenue. 2.0 USER FEES 2.1 Staff continues to review existing fees and services as well as comparing these to our neighbourhing Municipalities. Staff is recommending an increase in the adult fees, lights, special events. Staff will be considering a new fee regarding practice time for 2012 after consultation with our sports field users. 10 -10 Soccer Baseball Parks Special Events Youth 2807.1 2743.9 157.3 182.6 Adult 1068.3 4747.8 TOTAL HRS 3875.4 7491.7 157.3 182.6 User fees are used to offset the costs to maintain our sports fields and the revenue produced approximately $89,939.70 in revenue. 2.0 USER FEES 2.1 Staff continues to review existing fees and services as well as comparing these to our neighbourhing Municipalities. Staff is recommending an increase in the adult fees, lights, special events. Staff will be considering a new fee regarding practice time for 2012 after consultation with our sports field users. 10 -10 Soccer Baseball Parks Special Events Youth $21,803.71 $13,300.89 $1,072.50 $1,390.00 Adult $14,024.64 $38,347.96 Total Revenue $35,828.35 $51,648.85 $1,072.50 $1,390.00 2010 Sports Field Revenue = $89,939.70 User fees are used to offset the costs to maintain our sports fields and the revenue produced approximately $89,939.70 in revenue. 2.0 USER FEES 2.1 Staff continues to review existing fees and services as well as comparing these to our neighbourhing Municipalities. Staff is recommending an increase in the adult fees, lights, special events. Staff will be considering a new fee regarding practice time for 2012 after consultation with our sports field users. 10 -10 REPORT NO.: OPD- 003 -11 2.2 Sports Field User Fees for the 2010 season were: 2010 User Fee Adults $16.00 /hr Youth $5.00 /hr Practice Time N/A Tournaments $150.00 /d /d Light Fee $26.00 /hr. Special Event $15.00 /hr. Special Events - Holidays $30.00 /hr. The following is the recommended fee schedule to the end of the 2014 season: PAGE 3 Schedule 1 2011 2012 2013 2014 Adults $17.00 /hr $18.00 /hr $19.00 /hr $20.00 /hr Youth $5.50 /hr $6.00 /hr $6.50 /hr $7.00 /hr Tournaments $150.00 /d /d $150.00 /d /d $150.00 /d /d $150.00 /d /d Light Fee $27.00 /hr. $28.00 /hr. $29.00 /hr. $30.00 /hr. Special Event $16.00 /hr. $17.00 /hr. $18.00 /hr. $19.00 /hr. Special Events - Holidays $30.00 /hr. $30.00 /hr. $30.00 /hr. $30.00 /hr. 3.0 SPORTS FIELD USER GUIDE 3.1 Staff will update and circulate the Sports Field User Guide (Attachment 1) to all permit holders. The guide provides an overview of our outdoor sports facilities, guidelines for their usage and permit fees. Included will be a new fee for booking practice times. This charge is necessary to offset the cost of administration. 10 -11 REPORT NO.: OPD- 003 -11 PAGE 4 4.0 USER GROUP MEETING 4.1 Staff has and will continue to meet with user groups at the beginning and end of every season. These meetings help to foster an open dialogue and enable staff to address issues raised in a timely fashion. The updated fee schedule and Sports Field User Guide will be introduced at the 2011 spring meeting scheduled for Thursday, March 31, 2011. Attachment 1 — Sports Field Permit Information Guide - 2011 10 -12 t t Sports Field Permit Information Guide � -I INDEX Purpose of Permits. ...................... ......................... . . ...1 Howto Apply--------------------------------- ------------------------- - - - --1 Who Gets What Facility Allocated Priorities ..........................2 Tournament Requests ............. 2 Lights. ............................................... ...................... .....2 Washrooms .............. 3 Parking.............. ................. ---- ----------------- -----=-------3 Curfew 3 Emergency After Hours .------------------------ 3 How Much Will It Cost 3 Payments, Cancellations and Refunds 4 Full Season Use Occasional Use Tournaments Rainouts Rules and Regulations _____ _______________________________ 5 ATTACHMENTS: Permit Application for Facility Use...... ............ ...... 6 Terms and Conditions ....... ........................ ....... 7 Municipal Fields & Parks 8 Orono Park Picnic Areas 12 Comments and suggestions are welcomed, with regard to our sports fields ie. play - ability, improvements and safety. Please forward all comments through your league representative. Suggestions pertaining to Capital renovations are requested in writing, to the Director of Operations prior to September 15. This will enable staff to review requests and formulate for budget submission. Safety concerns should be forwarded to the Parks Supervisor or his designate immediately for appropriate action. Last Revised. February 2011 10 -14 PURPOSE The Municipality of Clarington schedules the use of various municipally owned or operated facilities by issuing "facility permits ". The purpose of a facility permit is as follows: 1. Approves use of a specific facility for a defined purpose. 2. Ensures exclusive use of a specific facility by the permit holder on certain dates and times. 3. Assures that the facility will be in a safe condition. 4. Is an agreement, which binds the permit holder to certain conditions in return for the above provisions. HOW TO APPLY You are required to be 18 years of age or older to apply for a permit. To apply for the use of an outdoor facility you are required to complete a permit application form. The deadline for submitting applications for OCCASSIONAL USAGE, PICNICS, TOURNAMENT AND SPECIAL EVENT usage is one month in advance. The deadline for submitting FULL SEASON usage is the first Friday in March. Applications received on or before the established deadline will be reviewed according to the criteria outlined on page 2. Applications for OCCASIONAL USAGE (other than tournaments and special events) must be submitted a minimum of five (5) working days prior to the date(s) being requested. When completing the permit application, the following must be indicated clearly and accurately: a) The number of ball diamonds /soccer fields, etc. required at each facility requested; b) The date and full -time required at each facility; c) Whether or not you require the use of floodlights, where available; and d) Contact, name, address and telephone number. NOTE: INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE PROCESSED. 10 -15 WHO GETS WHAT Facility Allocation Priorities Applications will be processed according to previous usage and the judgment of the Operations Department. 1. Full - season youth league games. 2. Full- season adult league games. 3. Youth league tournaments. 4. Adult league tournaments. 5. Single game requests. 6. Adult invitational tournaments. 7. Youth practices. 8. Adult practices.. Tournament Reauests 1. Requests are allocated on a first come first served basis in accordance with the established priorities. 2. When an applicant submits more than a single request in a single category of priorities, the applicant shall indicate their preference as to which request shall be dealt with first. Otherwise, the appropriate staff shall decide. 3. In the event that the original date request is not available, applicants who provide alternative dates for their tournament requests will be considered before applicants in the same category of priorities who do not provide alternative dates. 4. Allocation in previous seasons for a tournament is not a guarantee for similar consideration in subsequent seasons. 5. Requests received after the established deadline date will be considered on a first come, first- served basis after all other requests have been allocated. LIGHTS Use of lights on the following diamonds is accessed through a key lock/push button system. Leagues with scheduled games will be able to push the "on" button to activate the lights. If mechanical light failure or inclement weather conditions render the diamond unsuitable for use, contact the Operations Department at 263 -2291 by the next business day. Groups not following this process will be charged for floodlights. There is a minimum charge of % hour. • Garnet B. Rickard Recreation Complex.(2) diamonds • Soper Creek Park (1) diamond • Memorial Park South (1) • Clarington Fields (5) = 1 football, 4 diamonds • Orono Park North (1) diamond • Kendal Community Park (1) diamond • Hydro Fields (2) Soccer • Courtice South Arena (1) Soccer N 10 -16 WASHROOMS All users should be aware in advance of facilities where portable washrooms are available. All groups are asked to inform their members and especially visiting team members of the washroom status of the facility. Please contact the Operations Department for location information. PARKING Facility users should be aware that parking space is limited. In recognition of this, all groups are asked to observe the following parking guidelines: a) Obey all "NO PARKING' signs; b) Do not park on /or block private property; c) Consider forming car pools where possible; and d) Make use of any available nearby off - street parking. CURFEW The lights will be turned off at 11:00 p.m. Soper Creek Park lights turn off at 10:30 p.m. Dusk is defined as 8:30 p.m. during the summer. Any games starting at 8:30 p.m. or later will be charged a light fee. The Operations Department recommends that on lit fields no innings start after 10:45 p.m. unless otherwise approved and on unlit fields no innings start after 8:30 p.m. EMERGENCY AFTER HOURS In the event of an after hours emergency, please call 623 -5126 (Fire Department Dispatch). HOW MUCH WILL IT COST Rental rates charged for the use of all Municipal Outdoor Facilities: The following is the recommended fees: Municipal Park Fees " ADULTS $17.00 /hr $18.00 /hr $19.00 /hr $20.00 /hr YOUTH $5.50 /hr. $6.00 /hr $6.50 /hr $7.00 /hr TOURNAMENTS $150.00 /d /d $150.00 /d /d $150.00 /d /d $150.00 /d /d LIGHT FEE $27.00 /hr. $28.00 /hr. $29.00 /hr. $30.00 /hr. Weddin s/S ecialOccasion Special Event $16.00 /hr. $17.00 /hr. $18.00 /hr. $19.00 /hr. Special Events - Holidays $30.00 /hr. $30.00 /hr. $30.00 /hr. $30.00 /hr. 3 10 -17 PAYMENTS, CANCELLATIONS AND REFUNDS Full- Season Use 1. Payments may be made by cash, cheque or debit card. Cheques are to be made payable to the Municipality of Clarington. Payment can be made at the Municipality of Clarington Administrative Centre, Finance - Department, 40 Temperance Street, Bowmanville. Leagues will be invoiced monthly if payment is not received prior to use. 2. Any requests for a refund or usage fees arising from cancellation by the permit holder MUST BE MADE IN WRITING AND RECEIVED BY THE OPERTIONS DEPARTMENT A MINIMUM OF FIVE (5) BUSINESS DAYS IN ADVANCE of any date affected. Refunds will be issued after the final permit date. 3. The fee for all services, lights and fields will be indicated on the permit at the start of the season. 4. PERMITS WILL NOT BE MAILED. If a permit is not signed for your league or group, you will not have permission to use the facilities. Unauthorized use of permitted parks may result in loss of existing permit or additional fees. 5. You will be advised on the availability and when to pick up your permits. Our office hours are Monday to Friday from 7:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m., telephone 905 -263 -2291 or fax 905 - 263 -4433 and the email address is shainik(cD-clarington.net. 6. Schedules including playoffs shall be submitted to the Operations Department no later than May 1St 7 Permits not signed by May 15 will be re- allocated. To cancel this permit or a day on the permit, the Operations Department must receive written notification no less than 5 business days prior to the date stated on the permit. Occasional Use 1. Payments may be made by cash, cheque or debit card at the Finance Department. Cheques are to be made payable to the Municipality of Clarington. Payment can be made at the Municipality of Clarington Administrative Centre, Finance Department, 40 Temperance Street, Bowmanville or the Hampton Operations Centre, 2320 Taunton Rd., Hampton (cheque or cash only). 2. Any requests for a refund or usage fees arising from cancellation by the permit holder MUST BE MADE IN WRITING AND RECEIVED BY THE OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT A MINIMUM OF FIVE (5) BUSINESS DAYS IN ADVANCE of any date affected. Refunds will be issued after the final permit date. 3. The fee for all services, lights and fields will be indicated on the permit. 4. PERMITS WILL NOT BE MAILED. If a permit is not signed for your group, you will not have permission to use of any facilities. Unauthorized use of permitted parks may result in additional fees. 5. You will be advised on the availability and when to pick up your. permits. 6. Permits not signed and paid for 5- business days prior to date of use will be re- allocated. To cancel this permit or a day on the permit, the Operations Department must receive written notification no less than 5 business days prior to the date stated on the permit. 4 10 -18 Tournaments 1. At the time of booking, tournament fees are due upon signing of the agreement. Payment is due 10 business days prior to the event date or the event will be cancelled. A schedule of games is also required at this time and a dragging schedule submitted. 2. In the event that inclement weather forces alteration and /or cancellation of your tournament, you are required to give full details of your schedule revisions, in writing, to the Operations Department no later than the Friday following your tournament. This will allow for appropriate fee adjustments to be made. If written notice is not received by the deadline, tournament fees will not be refunded. Rainouts (Full- Season Use, Occasional Use and Tournaments) �. in the event of rainouts or cancellations the Operations Department will keep a record. of these - the leagues /organizations are required to contact the Operations Department to inform them of rainouts to be recorded. As games are rescheduled the rainouts will be cancelled off of our records. 2. Permit holders have 24 hours or the next business day to contact the Operations Department in the event that they cancel a field due to poor weather conditions. Failure to do so will result in your organization being charged for the field use. RULES. AND REGULATIONS Permits must be issued for use of parks with 15 or more participants. The permit holder is required to abide by and to adhere to all Municipality of Clarington By -Laws and all Federal and Provincial Legislation and Regulations and Guidelines. The onus is on the Permit Holder to ensure that he or she is aware of such By -Laws, Legislation, or Regulations. • ALCOHOL IS NOT ALLOWED AT ANY OUTDOOR FACILITY THAT HAS BEEN ISSUED A PERMIT BY THE MUNICIPALITY UNLESS AUTHORIZED BY ALCOHOL AND GAMING COMMISSION (formerly LLBO). • OUTDOOR FACILITIES PERMITS WILL NOT BE ISSUED UNTIL THE SECOND WEEK IN MAY. • THIS MAY BE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED ON WEATHER CONDITIONS AND FIELD MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS. • USAGE PRIOR TO THIS.DATE IS NOT AUTHORIZED AND MAY BE UNSAFE TO THE USER. Terms and Conditions are listed on the back of your permit, which must be signed at the same time that you sign your Facility Booking Contract. A list of Terms and Conditions are on Page 7. Orono Park picnics are assigned a specific area. Please refer to map attached on Page 12. 10 -19 • Leading the Way OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT PERMIT APPLICATION FOR FACILITY USE MAIL TO: OR DELIVER TO: Department of Operations Department of Operations Municipality of Clarington 2320 Taunton Road 40 Temperance Street Hampton, Ontario LOB 1 JO Bowmanville, Ontario L1 C 3A6 Tel: 905 263 -2291 or Fax: 905 263 -4433 PURPOSE OF USE: FACILITY DATES TIMES RENTAL RATE'" ACCOMMODATION, SPECIAL EQUIPMENT and PRIVILEGES: GROUP NAME: CONTACT PERSON: MAILING ADDRESS: PHONE #: ALTERNATE CONTACT: PHONE #: (must be 18 yrs. of age or over) ESTIMATED NUMBER OF PEOPLE ATTENDING: Picnic Area: The permit holder agrees to be responsible for payment of any rental charge that becomes due to the Municipality of Clarington under this permit. Payment in advance with post dated cheques due before permit date. The permit for facility and rental dates is valid only when an authorized representative of the Operations Department signs the application. Signature.of Person -in- charge: DATE: OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT AUTHORIZATION: DATE ISSUED: 10 -20 Municipality of Clarington Terms and Conditions The applicant in consideration of the issuance of this permit covenants and agrees: 1. To comply with the regulations hereof and enforce such regulations. 2. To indemnify and save harmless the Municipality of Clarington from all claims therefore and upon request will lodge with the Municipality of Clarington confirmation of liability insurance in a form and amount satisfactory to the Municipality of Clarington. 3. To comply with all Federal, Provincial and Municipal laws and regulations. 4. To provide competent supervision of the facility and section. 5. To be responsible for all loss and /or damage arising out of the use of this facility or section. 6. That the keeping, use or sale of alcoholic beverages within the facility or section, except when specifically authorized by the Alcohol Gaming Commission (formerly LLBO) and Municipality of Clarington is prohibited. Note — As we all know, drinking in public parks without a license.from the Alcohol Gaming Commission (formerly LLBO) is illegal. We ask that you and your organization promote a zero tolerance from alcohol at your events. In the event of alcohol being consumed during your permitted event, the following will be our procedure to handle the situation: 1) 1st occurrence — letter to the permit holder; 2) 2 "d occurrence — suspension of that night for one week; and 3) 3r' occurrence — suspension of that night for the remainder of the season. 7. To comply with any orders and directions of the Operations Department Staff. Rowdiness, verbal or otherwise, will not be tolerated. 8. That no person shall use the facility except for the purpose specified herein. NO time, function, event or use shall be substituted without prior approval by the Department of Operations.. 9. To pay all associated charges relating to this permit. 10. That vehicles shall be parked in the designated spaces. 11. That this permit is not transferable. 12. That the Department of Operations reserves the right to cancel any permit temporarily or permanently. 13. That this permit is not valid unless signed by the appropriate Director or authorized representative of the Department. 14. To cancel this permit, the Operations Department must receive written notification no less than fifteen business days prior to the date stated on the permit. 15. To comply with and adhere to the Municipality of Clarington's By -Law 2006 -126 dealing with the use regulation, protection and government of parks in the Municipality of Clarington. Signature: Print Names: 7. 10 -21 SPORTS FIELDS & PARKS Clarington has more than 70 parks for you to enjoy both your active and passive leisure pursuits. The fields listed are maintained and permitted (where indicated) by the Municipality of Clarington. Permit applications for field use (seasonal, special events and /or tournaments) are available for pick up at 2320 Taunton Road, Hampton or call (905) 263 -2291. r.01IRTIC_F Map # Facility/Park Y =Youth M =Mini JJunior Diamond Soccer Field Lights Permits Rqd Tennis Baske tball Play- Washroom Splash A =Adult ground on Site Pad 101 Avondale Park 2X X X 102 Rick Gay Memorial X Parkette 103 Courtice Memorial Park 1M X 105 Courtice Community 1 M X X Complex 104 Courtice Secondary 1A X X School 113 Courtice South Arena 1A X X X X 2005 106 Courtice West Park 1Y X 107 Darlington Hydro Fields 8M 1J 2X X X *p 3A 108 Firwood Park X 109 Foxhun t Parkette X X " 110 Gatehouse Parkette X X 121 Cecil Found Parkette X 111 Glenabbey Parkette X X X 112 Hi hland Park 1Y 1M X X X 114 Mo se Parkette X X 115 Penfound Park 1A 1M X X 116 Pickard Gate Parkette X 122 Roswell Park 2007 1A 1M X X X X 118 Stuart Park 1A X X X X 119 White Cliffe Parkette X 120 Zion Park (Mitchells 1M 1A X X Corners BOWMANVILLE Map # Facility/Park Y =Youth M =Mini JJunior Diamond Soccer Field Lights Permits Tennis Baske Play- Washroom Splash A =Adult Rqd tball ground on Site Pad 201 Argent Park 1A X X Barlow Parkette 2006 X X 202 Baseline Park 1 M X X Baxter Park X X X X Bons Park X X X 301 Bowmanville Conservation Boat Ram 302 Bowmanville High School 1A X X 203 Bowmanville Memorial 2A X(1) X X X X Park 204 Burketon Park Burketon 1A 1A 1 M X X 205 Clarington Fields 4A 1 multi 4X X *p 2A 2 M 206 Darlington Sports Centre 1A X (Hampton) 305 East Beach Parkette 10 -22 307 Elephant Park 2Y X X X 208 Elliott Memorial Park (Hampton 311 1A 1A X X X X 209 Elliott Skateboard Park 217 Lord Elgin Park 2A X X 222 Garnet B..Rickard Recreation Complex 2A X X 1 M` X *P 309 Glanville Parkette 224 Optimist Park (Waverley Rd 1Y X X X 226 Green Park 1A 219 X X X X X 316 Guildwood Park 1A 221 X X X X X X 212 Haydon Hall Parkette Ha don X 313 Soper Creek Park 1A X X X Knox Christian School 2M Squire Fletcher Parkette 215 Landerville ParkPttP I 303 Tourism Parkette .. Permit intormation: Contact (905) 263 -2291 ext 527 * *May not be playable. 10 -23 216 Lions Parkette X 311 Lon worth Park 1A X X 217 Lord Elgin Park 2A X X X 312. Mearns Park 1 M` X X 224 Optimist Park (Waverley Rd 1Y 2M 1A X X X 219 Rhonda Park 1Y X X 221 _ffotary Park X X 313 Soper Creek Park 1A X X X X *P Squire Fletcher Parkette X 303 Tourism Parkette 315 Vincent Massey Public School 1Y X X 225 Westside Drive Park 1A X X X NEWCASTLE Map # Facility /Park Y =Youth M =Mini i-junior A =Adult Diamond Soccer Field Lights Permits Rqd Tennis Baske tball Play- ground Washroom on Site Splash Pad 401 Andrew Street Parkette X X 402 Bond Head Boat Launch X 403 Brookhouse Parkette X X 404 Clarke High School 1A X 405 Edward Street Park 1Y X X 406 Foster Creek Parkette X 408 Ina Brown Parkette X 407 Harvey Jackson Memorial Park 2A 1M X X *P 413 Newcastle Memorial Park 1M X * *414 Newcastle Public School 1Y 1Y X X 410 Pearce Farm Park 1A X X X X 419 Peters Pike Parkette I I I X 420 Pines Sr. Public School 1Y 1A 1M X 412 Walbridge Park 1A X X X 422 Westview Parkette X Area Parks Map # Facility/Park Y =Youth M =Mini J- Junior A =Adult Diamond Soccer Field Lights Permits Rqd Tennis Baske tball Play- ground Washroom on Site Splash Pad 418 Orono Park 1AY X X X X X X X 117 Solina Park 2A 2A X X X X 314 Tyrone Park 1A 1Y 1M 2A X X X 204 LBurketon Park 1A I 1A 1M I X X Permit intormation: Contact (905) 263 -2291 ext 527 * *May not be playable. 10 -23 r� m ww � . o a� a > W W Z w Z � UU � 0; S Z saw a. n_oo. p u & � o P V r � • � LL O ZQ s W a a a�Z N a •web pwen S t1e n roM .n lnwa0 ' eb.e Z ro ro o > a a F J azo aaf m� � N , > • Z —.n J "0 w [[� fe 0 t o m N a o ye w .n ^ J wM W N W w Zz U � � F 0 U 10 -24 O r 112 a 106 ° d X10 ° 0 a Nash R d °o 102 a �� ,6 114 18 101 100 11 Q Q c1 y Sham Dr Id ¢ 103 110 Li Roatl 22 -Boor 116 105 COURTICE 0 I N 11 10 -26 a--- Rutherford Woods Walk Exit Stc-ml 3t U) CY) Princ ss St 0 ALA o / a WASLUS, NOEROOM V I rB Oo j S , a ELT R F PARKING (ISO. LOT BLEACHERS / Its ) pS,ep; NORTH BASEBALL BATTING HO DIAMOND CAGE E P1 E (zao, 12 Clarftwa COMMUNITY REPORT SERVICES DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION Date: February 28, 2011 Resolution: By -law #: N/A Report#: CSD- 004 -11 File #: Subiect: 2011 COMMUNITY GRANT REQUESTS RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report CSD- 004 -11 be received; 2. THAT Council consider all submitted grant requests; and 3. THAT all interested parties listed in Report CSD- 004 -11 be advised of Council's decision. Submitted by: 6deph P. Caruana erector, Community Services J PC /sc /br /sm /Iw Reviewed by: �- y ---� Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T (905)623 -3379 F (905)623 -0830 12 -1 REPORT NO.: CSD- 004 -11 PAGE 2 1.0 BACKGROUND 1.1 The Community grant program is intended to provide financial assistance to not - for - profit, volunteer community organizations providing programs, services or events within the Municipality of Clarington. This program has proven to be an excellent vehicle to acknowledge and support the efforts of our local volunteer community and not - for - profit agencies that provide services which benefit the community in general. 1.2 The Community Grant Policy (Attachment 1) outlines the purpose, eligibility criteria and funding categories of the program. Applications are reviewed to ensure they meet the funding criteria and fall within one of the defined funding categories. 1.3 Individual allocations through the Community Grant process may not exceed $5,000 per request. 1.4 Historically, the allocation of funding for the Community Grant Program is established at $1.00 per capita. However, during the 2009 Municipal budget process, grant requests normally received from the Newcastle Community Hall, Community Care Durham - Clarington and the Clarington Older Adult Association and the associated funding, were redirected from the Community Grant Program to the Municipal budget process. In addition, in an effort to maintain the integrity of the Grant Policy while still supporting the Courtice Rotary Canada Day Celebrations, $5,000 was transferred from the Grant Program to the Corporate Services budget to be applied only to the assistance of funding the Canada Day Celebrations. Accordingly, a maximum amount of $60,000 has been established for award to eligible applications in 2011. 1.5 On March 8, 2010, Council allocated $42,750 to thirty -two organizations (Report CSD- 002 -10). A further $16,429.15 was allocated to nine supplementary requests which were considered by Council throughout the year. (Attachment 2) 1.6 Over the past several years staff has hosted an annual community meeting to introduce the Community Grant Program. The 2010 meeting was held on November 16th and twenty -six individuals, representing twenty -two community organizations attended. The meeting provided the opportunity for staff to update applicants on any changes or revisions to the grant process and also provided an opportunity for applicants to discuss their specific application. 1.7 This meeting has been productive in educating organizations on the objectives and merits of the Community Grant Program while sending the message that as the community continues to grow there will be increased demands on the program. Applicants were encouraged to review their requests and apply for support only when truly required. Consequently, the Clarington Girls Hockey Association and the Clarington East Food Bank both reviewed their financial situations and concluded that they would not be applying for a Community Grant in 2011. 12 -2 REPORT NO.: CSD- 004 -11 PAGE 3 1.8 An advertisement was placed in all local papers, on the municipal website and on the information screens located at the Municipal Administrative Centre and various facilities, announcing the program and deadline information. For 2011, grant applications were available from November 16, 2010, and the deadline for submissions was January 14, 2011. 1.9 A total of forty -two applications have been received for review and consideration, representing $121,254 in requested funding compared to thirty -three applications representing $87,066 in requested funding in 2010. 2.0 APPLICATION PROCESS 2.1 All applications received have been recorded on a summary sheet (Attachment 3) providing Council and staff with an overview of all applications being considered. 2.2 Each application is also presented on a one -page summary numbered from 11 -01 through 11 -42. The summaries provide the basic information necessary to determine the appropriate level of funding for each application. (Attachment 4) 2.3 Organizations who submitted incomplete applications were contacted and staff worked with them to ensure outstanding information was included. 3.0 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION 3.1 From time to time, various applicants provide comments through the application process or in other cases a Resolution of Council was previously approved that may affect how a particular application is dealt with. The following applications and associated comments are provided for Council's information. 3.2 Applicant 11 -10, Clarington Marketing Minds, hosted their initial "Art of Country Living Event" last June. The event was very successful attracting 1,500 people. This year's Art of Country Living Tour is scheduled for June 4th and 5th. They have applied under the Civic category, as a service promoting the Municipality of Clarington which could be expected to bring economic and /or public relations benefit to the municipality. 3.3 Applicant 11 -15, Architectural Conservancy of Ontario, Clarington Branch, organized the first Doors Open Clarington on June 6, 2010. The event was a great success with over 3,600 residents visiting fourteen local heritage sites. Doors Open Clarington 2011 is planned for June 11th 3.4 Applicant 11 -24, Clarington New Horizons Band, was formed in 2007 with twelve participants. Presently, they have sixty musicians and six different ensembles. They are requesting $1,860 in seed funding to develop a pilot project for a 12 -3 REPORT NO.: CSD- 004 -11 PAGE 4 Woodwind Ensemble. The funds will be used to rent practice space and to purchase music scores for the new ensemble. 3.5 Applicant 11 -37, Big Brothers and Sisters of Clarington, experienced a challenging year in 2010. There was a significant increase in demand for their programs and services, coupled with a decrease in funding from United Way. This led to a restructuring of their staff team which is ongoing. In addition, there were significant unexpected repair costs to the roof and foundation of their offices in 2010, with more clean up and repair costs being carried over to 2011. 4.0 FIRST TIME APPLICANTS 4.1 Applicant 11 -34, The Clarington Toro's Atom AAA, have successfully won the bid to host the Ontario Hockey Federation (OHF) Atom AAA Championships, being hosted at the Garnet B. Rickard Recreation Complex, April 8th through April 10th This will be the first OHF championship tournament hosted in Clarington and will see teams from Toronto, Hamilton and Kitchener- Waterloo competing. It will provide an opportunity to promote our community and local businesses. Grant funding will help offset the costs of facility rentals, the opening banquet and the cost of on -ice officials for this event. 4.2 Applicant 11 -36, Soper Valley Model Railroad has recently relocated to Newcastle Town Hall due to major renovations of their initial home at the Visual Arts Centre. Although, the Newcastle Town Hall affords them more space and a preferred location, the organization has new expenses such as rent and rebuilding costs for their train layout. Soper Valley Model Railroad was established in 1978 and has been self sufficient prior to this application. They are applying under the Recreational category. 4.3 Applicant 11 -39, Feed the Need in Durham, is a regional food distribution warehouse supporting forty -two regional agencies such as soup kitchens, food banks, shelters and breakfast feeding programs. Local agencies receiving support include Bethesda House, Bowmanville Salvation Army, Community Living, St. Vincent de Paul Society and Bowmanville SDA Church. Feed the Need did receive start up funding from Services Canada which will expire in March 2011. As a regional service they have also applied to the Region and the City of Oshawa for funding. They are requesting one time funding of $5,000 to assist in the transition from the Services Canada Stimulus Funding. 4.4 Applicant 11 -40, The Gathering Place, is a recently formed volunteer based organization whose purpose is to provide hot meals and connections for Bowmanville residents, focusing on low income families, seniors and individuals living in isolation. At their initial event in December 2010, the Gathering Place served over seventy -five meals. 12 -4 REPORT NO.: CSD- 004 -11 PAGE 5 5.0 APPLICATIONS THAT DO NOT MEET THE COMMUNITY GRANT PROGRAM CRITERIA 5.1 Application 11 -06, Bowmanville Garden Allotments. The Community Grant Policy statement of purpose reads in part: "The Community Grant program provides financial assistance to not - for - profit, volunteer community organizations to provide direct services, events or programs to the benefit of the residents of Clarington ". The policy further states that; "Applications will be accepted only from organizations with an elected executive ". Presently, the Bowmanville Garden Allotments is a project of a single individual and do not have not - for - profit status nor an elected executive. 5.2 Applicant 11 -07, Clarington Farmers' Market. The Market was established in 2005, as an initiative of the Clarington Board of Trade, to offer farmers of Clarington and the surrounding area a venue to sell their products. Their application indicates that they do not have not - for - profit status which is in contravention of the Community Grant Policy statement of purpose. The Clarington Farmers' Market last applied to the Community Grant Program in 2009, at which time their application was denied by Council. 5.3 Application 11 -29, Clarington Minor Lacrosse Association, is celebrating their tenth anniversary in 2011. They are requesting $5,000 to purchase commemorative mementos for each child that registers in 2011, and commemorative plaques for display at Clarington arenas. Their application is considered incomplete, as to date, they have not submitted their 2009 financial information as required. The organization has been contacted several times requesting the outstanding information. 5.4 Applicant 11 -42, Participation House Durham, is a regional service located in Oshawa providing support and services to youth and adults with physical and developmental disabilities. Participation House receives the majority of its funding through a Provincial Subsidy, the Ontario Disability Support Program and Durham Regional Housing Authority and as such would be considered the responsibility of another level of government. The Community Grant Policy, section 4, Purpose of Grant states: "The Community Grant Program is not intended to provide funding to organizations that provide services or programs that are the responsibility of another level of government ". Participation House last applied to the Community Grant Program in 2008, at which time their application was denied by Council. 6.0 COMMENTS 6.1 The Community Grant Program in Clarington ensures citizen involvement in recreational /leisure, civic, social and community hall boards thus enhancing community well being. 12 -5 REPORT NO.: CSD- 004 -11 PAGE 6 6.2 Each application is on file in the Community Services Department and will be made available during grant discussions, should further details of a particular application be required. Attachments: Attachment 1 - Community Grant Policy Attachment 2 - 2010 Supplementary Requests Attachment 3 - 2011 Grant Information Summary Attachment 4 - 2011 Individual Summaries of Grant Information 12 -6 Attachment 1 to Report CSD- 004 -11 s (itliir�; IAe' 14iry COMMUNITY GRANT POLICY 1. PURPOSE: The Municipality of Clarington acknowledges the efforts of our local volunteer community and believes that many services, events or projects are best provided through the volunteer efforts of local community organizations. Community Grant funding demonstrates Council's commitment to working with community organizations without eroding their strength and independence and encourages organizations to work toward financial self sufficiency. The Community Grant program provides financial assistance to not - for - profit, volunteer community organizations to provide direct services, events or programs to the benefit of the residents of Clarington. This policy establishes eligibility requirements and the application process. Applicants are further encouraged to pursue other opportunities for financial support. 2. ELIGIBILTY CRITERIA: The following may be eligible for a Municipality of Clarington Community Grant: 1) Not - for - profit or volunteer based organizations within the Municipality of Clarington or the Region of Durham delivering programs, events or services to the residents of Clarington. Regionally based organizations must provide details demonstrating how their service will directly benefit the residents of Clarington. 3. FUNDING CATEGORIES: 1) Recreation/Leisure • is defined as those organizations offering athletic or leisure opportunities not offered by the Municipality 2) Civic is defined as those organizations providing events or services promoting the Municipality of Clarington which could be expected to bring economic and /or public relations benefit to the Municipality 12 -7 3) Social Attachment 1 to Report CSD= 004 -11 is defined as those organizations offering a specific service (other than recreational /leisure) to residents of the Municipality, which is not considered to be the responsibility of another level of government 4) Boards of Council and Hall Boards • is defined as a group of individuals appointed by Council who manage and maintain a municipally owned facility. (Please note; grants will be considered for operational expenses only. Capital requests must be referred to the appropriate municipal representative for consideration during the annual municipal budget process) 4. PURPOSE OF GRANT: Grants may be provided to eligible applicants as defined above, for: • General operating and capital expenses (with the exception of Hall Boards who may only apply for general operating) up to a $5,000 maximum • Activities /events generally occurring within municipal boundaries; or • For programs, activities and events addressing a community need or contributing to the positive image of the municipality The Community Grant Program is not intended to provide funding: • In excess of $5,000 • To organizations with a political mandate, such as citizen ratepayers associations • To individuals • To organizations that provide services or programs that are the responsibility of another level of government • To organizations not in good financial standing with the Municipality of Clarington • To organizations that make donations; or • For debt repayment 5. COMMUNITY GRANT APPLICATION: Applications are available from the Municipal Administrative Centre or the Municipality's website as of November 1 st each year. Completed applications are due by early December or as outlined in the public notice published annually. Late submissions will be accepted pending the availability of funds. 1) Applications will be accepted only from organizations with an elected executive and one of the following: • A constitution, a mission statement, or a statement of purpose 12 -8 Attachment 1 to Report CSD- 004 -11 2) All requests for funding must be accompanied by a fully completed "Community Grant Application" and must be forwarded to the Community Services Department. 3) Applications must be legible, completed in full, signed and include all required documentation. 4) Successful applicants may be required to submit a year end accounting of all grant dollars received from the Municipality. 12 -9 N Attachment 2 to Report CSD- 004 -11 I 0 2010 Su lemeri. :. ta ` rajits ummAry Report Number Report Date Amount Balance $60,000.00 Grants Awarded CSD -002 - 10 March 8, 2010 $42,750.00 $17,250.00 Tyrone Hall Board C- #127 -10 March 22, 2010 $2,500.00 $14,750.00 Orono Amateur Athletic Association #1 GPA- #248 -10 Aril 26,2010 $2,500.00 $12,250.00 Newcastle Santa Claus Parade GPA- #249 -10 Aril 26,2010 $2,500.00 $9,750.00 Orono Amateur Athletic Association #2 GPA- #356 -10 June 14, 2010 $2,000.00 $7,750.00 Durham Central Agricultural Society C- #335 -10 July 12, 2010 $1,130.00 $6,620.00 Piontek Memorial Event C- #324 -10 July 12, 2010 $150.00 $6,470.00 Brownsdale Community Centre C- #375 -10 September 21, 2010 $2,500.00 $3,970.00 Hampton Community Association C - #397 -10 September 21, 2010 $2,500.00 $1,470.00 World Religion Da C- #459 -10 December 20,2010 $649.15 $820.85 Attachment 3 to Report CSD- 004 -11 2011 Grant Information Summary Appl. Organization Date Name Category 2009 2009 2010 2010 2011 Comments 2011 # Received Request Receipt Request Receipt Request Receipt 11 -01 Bowmanville 08/01/11 Vincent Civic $500.00 $500.00 $500.00 $500.00 $500.00 Ecology Garden Powers Bowmanville 11 -02 Horticultural 11/01/11 Joan Civic $500.00 $500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $500.00 Society Stevens Courtice 11 -03 Horticultural 14/01/11 Mark Civic $500.00 $500.00 $500.00 $500.00 $500.00 Society Stanisz Newcastle 11 -04 Horticultural 05/01/11 Pam Daley Civic $1,000.00 $900.00 $800.00 $500.00 $500.00 Society Orono 11 -05 Horticultural 12/01/11 Flora Civic $750.00 $600.00 $750.00 $50Q.00 $600.00 Society Sharpe Bowmanville 11 -06 Garden 14/01/11 Sher Civic $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1000.00 CSD - 004 -11 Allotments Leetooze , 5.1 11 -07 Clarington 14/01/11 Gordon Lee Civic $2,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Report CSD- 004 -11 Farmers' Market 5.2 Bowmanville 11 -08 Santa Claus 07/01/11 Marie Civic $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $3,000.00 Hammond Parade Newcastle Santa Karen 11 -09 Claus Parade 09/12/10 Bastas Civic $2,500.00 $2,000.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 11 -10 Clarington 11/01/11 Petra Civic $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 $500.00 $5,000.00 Report CSD - 004 -11 Marketing Minds Schwirtz 3.2 Music Night in the Yvonne 11 -11 14/01/11 Civic $1,500.00 $750.00 $1,500.00 $750.00 $1,500.00 Park Stefanin Newcastle 11 -12 05/01/11 Joyce Kufta Civic $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 Concerts 11 -13 Newcastle Art 14/01/11 Ann -Marie Civic $5,000.00 $1,000.00 $5,000.00 $1,000.00 Show Harley N I J Page 1 Attachment 3 to Report CSD- 004 -11 N ppl. # Organization Date Name Category 2009 2009 2010 2010 2011 Comments 2011 Received Request Receipt Request Receipt Re uest Receipt Newcastle Village 11 -14 & District 12/01/11 M pykean Civic $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 Historical Society Architectural 11 -15 Conservancy of Ontario 14/01/11 Grant Humes Civic $0.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 $2,500.00 $5,000.00 Report CSD- 004 -11 3.3 Clarington Branch 11 -16 Brownsdale Community 14/01/11 Tom Langmaid Hall Board $0.00 $0.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 11 -17 Hampton Hall 18/01/11 Amanda Townson Hall Board $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 Kendal 11 -18 Community 17/01/11 L1z Robinson Hall Board $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 Centre 11 -19 Newtonville Hall 14/01/11 Yvonne Stefanin Hall Board $3,500.00 $2,500.00 $3,500.00 $2,500.00 $3,500.00 11 -20 Orono Town Hall 12/01/11 Susan Dacosta Hall Board $5,000.00 $3,250.00 $5,000.00 $2,500.00 $5,000.00 Solina 11 -21 Community 14/01/11 Herb Tink Hall Board $4,000.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 Centre 11 -22 Tyrone Community Hall 10/01/11 Mark Canninq Hall Board $5,000.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $3,000.00 11 -23 Newcastle Arena 14/01/11 Gord Lee Hall Board $5,000.00 $3,500.00 $5,000.00 $2,500.00 $5,000.00 11 -24 Clarington New Horizons Band 11/01./ 11 Anthony Maxwell Recreation $1,000.00 $500.00 $3,500.00 $750.00 $1,860.00 Report CSD - 004 -11 3.4 11 -25 Clarington Concert Band 14/01/11 Colin Rowe Recreation $2,000.00 $750.00 $2,000.00 $750.00 $900.00 11 -26 Durham Girl's Choir 14/01/11 Jackie Nixon Recreation $500.00 $500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Clarington Arts 11 -27 and Music 14/01/11 Ron Collis Recreation $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Festival 11 -28 Driftwood Theatre 14/01/11 Jeremy Smith Recreation $0.00 $0.00 $1,500.00 $500.00 $1,500.00 Page 2 Attachment 3 to Report CSD- 004 -11 Appl. Organization Date Name Category 2009 2009 2010 2010 2011 Comments 2011 # Received Request_ Receipt Request Receipt Request Receipt Clarington Minor Rodney Report CSD- 004 11 -29 Lacrosse 05/01/11 Recreation $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 -11 Association Braun 5.3 11 -30 Clarington Swim 14/01/11 Cathy Barry Recreation $5,000.00 $1,000.00 $2,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,500.00 Club Courtice Kids Derrick 11 -31 14/01/11 Recreation $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,500.00 $1,000.00 Multis ort Series McKay 11 -32 Newcastle 14/01/11 JoAnne Recreation $4,000.00 $1,500.00 $4,000.00 $1,500.00 $5,000.00 Skating Club Raymond Orono Figure Melinda 11 -33 31/12/11 Recreation $4,000.00 $1,500.00 $4,000.00 $1,500.00 $4,000.00 Skating Club Andrews 11 -34 Clarington Toros 09/01/11 Steve Recreation $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 Report CSD - 004 -11 AAA Trou hton 4.1 Orono Amateur 11 -35 Athletic 14/01/11 Laverne Recreation $0.00 $2,500.00 $0.00 $4,500.00 $2,500.00 Boyd Association Soper Valley 11 -36 Model Railroad 1/13/2011 Gary Jeffery Recreation $0.00 $0 $0 $0 $4,994.00 ReportCSD- 004 -11 Association 4.2 Big Brothers and 11 -37 Sisters of 14/01/11 Darlene Social $3,000.00 $2,000.00 $3,000.00 $2,000.00 $5,000.00 Report CSD- 004 -11 Clarington Brown 3.5 11 -38 Distress Centre 12/01/11 Victoria Social $0.00 $0.00 $3,000.00 $1,000.00 $2,500.00 Durham Kehoe 11 -39 Feed the Need in 12/01/11 Sandy Social $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 ReportCSD - 004 -11 Durham Brittain 4.3 11 -40 The Gathering 14/01/11 Jackie Social $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 ReportCSD- 004 -11 Place DeHaas 4.4 Learning 11 -41 Disabilities 11/01/11 Shari Davis Social $750.00 $750.00 $2,000.00 $750.00 $900.00 Association of Peterborough The Participation 11 -42 House Project 14/01/11 Sandra Social $0.00 $0 $0 $0 $5,000.00 ReportCSD- 004 -11 (Durham) Aldcroft 5.4 $121,254.00 N I .L W Page 3 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Bowmanville Ecology Garden APPLICATION #: 11 -01 DATE RECEIVED: 1/8/2011 CONTACT NAME: Vincent Powers DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: Provide 35 garden plots which allows individuals and families of Clarington who would not be able to grow their own vegetables, the land, seeds, plants and garden.tools to do this. Also run a Children's Program which introduces young children to the skill sets of growing their own food along with promoting a healthy living. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: 12 -14 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Bowmanville Horticultural Society APPLICATION #: 11 -02 DATE RECEIVED: 1/11/2011 CONTACT NAME: Joan Stevens DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: Hold general meetings with guest speakers to promote horticulture. Promote streetscape beautification. Maintain local public flower beds and containers. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: 12 -15 2009 2010 2011 REVENUE $ 6,145.00 $ 6,419.00 $ 8,885.00 EXPENSES $ 6,942.00 $ 5,564.00 $ 9,485.00 NET ($ 797.00) $ 855.00 ($ 600.00) GRANTS $ _-500.0,0 $0 $ , 500.00 FINAL NET ($ 297.00) $ 855.00 ($ 100.00) DEFICIT SURPLUS DEFICIT 12 -15 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Courtice Horticultural Society APPLICATION #: 11 -03 DATE RECEIVED: 1/14/2011 CONTACT NAME: Mark Stanisz DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: Hold general meetings with guest speakers to promote horticulture. Promote streetscape beautification. Maintain local public flower beds and containers. In 2011 need to purchase new oak tree for Trulls Road/Hwy 2 planting to replace dead one. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: 12 -16 2009 2010 2011 REVENUE $ 584.65 $ 537.59 $ 712.59 EXPENSES $ 687.06 $ 545.00 $ 1,145.00 NET ($ 102.41) ($ 7.41) ($ 432.41) GRAI�Ifi $ 500 QQ = $ 500 QO $ r FINAL NET $ 397.59 $ 492.59 $ 67.59 SURPLUS SURPLUS SURPLUS 12 -16 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Newcastle Horticultural Society APPLICATION #: 11 -04 DATE RECEIVED: 1/5/2011 CONTACT NAME: Pam Daley DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: Hold general meetings with guest speakers to promote horticulture. Promote streetscape beautification. Maintain local public flower beds and containers. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: 12 -17 2009 2010 2011 REVENUE $ 3,897.00 $ 4,913.00 $ 5,125.00 EXPENSES $ 4,885.00 $ 5,048.00 $ 5,100.00 NET ($ 988.00) ($ 135.00) $ 25.00 GRANT:; = 900 OQ $ 500 U0' $ 500 00 , , FINAL NET ($ 88.00) $ 365.00 $ 525.00 L— DEFICIT SURPLUS SURPLUS 12 -17 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Orono Horticultural Society APPLICATION #: 11 -05 DATE RECEIVED: 1/12/2011 CONTACT NAME: Flora Sharpe DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: Hold general meetings with guest speakers to promote horticulture. Promote streetscape beautification. Maintain local public flower beds and containers. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: 12 -18 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY .OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Bowmanville Garden Allotments APPLICATION #: 11 -06 DATE RECEIVED: 1/14/2011 CONTACT NAME: Sher Leetooze DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: Give residents the opportunity to grow their own fruit and vegetables free from chemical sprays and additives. Garden plots would be available to Social Organizations who would rent a plot for a family /families who otherwise may not be able to afford to. Organization in planning stages. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: 12 -19 2009 2010 2011 REVENUE $0 $0 $ 5,500.00 EXPENSES $0 $0 $ 5,500.00 NET $0 $0 $0 GRANT $0 $0 $ 1,000.00 FINAL NET $0 $0 $ 1,000.00 SURPLUS 12 -19 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Clarington Farmers' Market APPLICATION #: 11 -07 DATE RECEIVED: 1/14/2011 CONTACT NAME: Gordon Lee DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: A weekly summer Farmers' Market providing farm fresh produce and specialty products to Clarington residents and visitors. Also provides a venue for the Clarington Agricultural Community to sell and promote their products and services. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: 12 -20 2009 2010 2011 REVENUE $ 4,300.00 $ 5,297.50 $ 6,571.20 EXPENSES $ 3,875.00 $ 2,926.30 $ 5,491.25 NET $ 425.00 $ 2,371.20 $ 1,079.95 GRANT $0 $0 $ 5,000.00 FINAL NET $ 425.00 SURPLUS $ 2,371.20 SURPLUS $ 6,079.95 SURPLUS 12 -20 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Bowmanville Santa Claus Parade APPLICATION #: 11 -08 DATE RECEIVED: 1/7/2011 CONTACT NAME: Marie Hammond DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: Organize a Christmas parade annually for the enjoyment of the residents of Clarington. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: 12 -21 2009 2010 2011 REVENUE $ 34,502.35 $ 38,509.57 $ 40,306.15 EXPENSES $ 13,339.21 $ 14,203.42 $ 16,000.00 NET $ 21,163.14 $ 24,306.15 $ 24,306.15 GRANT:.' 2,00:00 , $,Op0,00 3;Ob0 00° FINAL NET $ 23,163.14 $ 26,306.15 $ 27,306.15 SURPLUS SURPLUS SURPLUS 12 -21 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Newcastle Santa Claus Parade APPLICATION #: 11 -09 DATE RECEIVED: 12/9/2010 CONTACT NAME: Karen Bastas DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: Organize a Christmas parade annually for the enjoyment of the residents of Clarington. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: 12 -22 2009 2010 2011 REVENUE $ 7,514.04 $ 8,017.54 $ 9,815.00 EXPENSES $ 8,496.50 $ 8,989.00 $ 7,977.00 NET ($ 982.46) ($ 971.46) $ 1,838.00 GRANT $ 2Ofl0 00 $ 2,500100 $ 2,5170.01} FINAL NET $ 1,017.54 $ 1,528.54 $ 4,338.00 SURPLUS SURPLUS SURPLUS 12 -22 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Clarington Marketing Minds APPLICATION #: 11 -10 DATE RECEIVED: 1/11/2011 CONTACT NAME: Petra Schwirtz DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: Not - for - profit co- operative of Clarington Tourism providers. Goal of increasing the reach and effectiveness of the local tourism product in the Ontario market. Hosted their initial event 'The Art of Country Living' on June 5 & 6 and attracted 1,500 people. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: 12 -23 2009 2010 2011 REVENUE $ 7,582.00 $ 15,365.00 $ 16,965.00 EXPENSES $ 3,267.00 $ 15,900.00 $ 16,194.00 NET $ 4,315.00 ($ 535.00) $ 771.00 GRANT' $0 $ <500 00' 5,000 00, FINAL NET $ 4,315.00 ($ 35.00) $ 5,771.00 SURPLUS DEFICIT SURPLUS 12 -23 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Music Night in the Park APPLICATION #: 11 -11 DATE RECEIVED: 1/14/2011 CONTACT NAME: Yvonne Stefanin DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: Weekly music night entertainment in Newtonville throughout the summer months. All ages in the community gather free of charge, well attended community event. Ira 12 -24 2009 2010 2011 REVENUE $ 2,668.00 $ 2,360.50 $ 2,047.87 EXPENSES $ 3,500.00 $ 3,062.63 $ 3,085.00 NET ($ 832.00) ($ 702.13). ($ 1,037.13) R TT` 75 4 00 ,$,:750.00, 1"500.00 FINAL NET ($ 82.00) $ 47.87 $ 462.87 DEFICIT SURPLUS SURPLUS 12 -24 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Newcastle Concerts APPLICATION #: 11 -12 DATE RECEIVED: 1/5/2011 CONTACT NAME: Joyce Kufta DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: Weekly music night entertainment in Newcastle Parkette throughout the summer months. All ages in the community gather free of charge, well attended and enjoyed! Attendees are asked to support the East Clarington Food Bank and many bring food item donations. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: 12 -25 2009 2010 2011 REVENUE $ 4,066.76 $ 3,463.80 $ 3,029.74 EXPENSES $ 3,602.96 $ 3,434.06 $ 4,025.00 NET $ 463.80 $ 29.74 ($ 995.26) GRANT , $0 '' F� FINAL NET $ 463.80 $ 29.74 $ 4.74 SURPLUS SURPLUS SURPLUS 12 -25 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Newcastle Art Show APPLICATION #: 11 -13 DATE RECEIVED: 1/14/2011 CONTACT NAME: Ann -Marie Harley DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: Operate a registered not - for - profit art gallery which provides opportunity for local artists to display and sell their work. Provide music and art lessons for seniors. Offer a two day Art Show at Bond Head Parkette each summer which highlights artists and culture and attracts visitors to the Clarington area. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: 12 -26 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Newcastle Village & District Historical Society APPLICATION #: 11 -14 DATE RECEIVED: 1/12/2011 CONTACT NAME: Myno Van Dyke DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: Maintain and operate an Archive Room on Tuesdays and Saturdays with free access to the public. Maintain and operate a website. Provide a Historical Newsletter four times per year. Acquire Historical Speakers and Programs four times a year. Create a computerized data base of all information and artifacts in our possession. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: 12 -27 2009 2010 2011 REVENUE $ 356.00 ($ 1,314.00) ($ 2,239.00) EXPENSES $ 5,674.00 $ 4,375.00 $ 4,825.00 NET ($ 5,318.00) ($ 5,689.00) ($ 7,064.00) GRANT 1x500 {10 1;500.00 FINAL NET ($ 3,818.00) ($ 4,189.00) ($ 5,564.00) DEFICIT DEFICIT DEFICIT \ 12 -27 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Architectural Conservancy of Ontario Clarington Branch APPLICATION #: 11 -15 DATE RECEIVED: 1/14/2011 CONTACT NAME: Grant Humes DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: Help the community and owners preserve buildings and structures of architectural merit, and places of natural beauty or interest. Organize Clarington's second annual Doors Open event, which will benefit Clarington residents by giving them a greater awareness of Clarington's cultural heritage and bringing visitors to Clarington from outside of the Municipality. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: 12 -28 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Brownsdale Community Centre APPLICATION #: 11 -16 DATE RECEIVED: 1/14/2011 CONTACT NAME: Tom Langmaid DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: Provide meeting space for hall rentals, meetings and picnics. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: 12 -29 2009 2010 2011 REVENUE $ 5,550.00 $ 5,300.00 $ 5,315.00 EXPENSES $ 6,735.00 $ 6,985.00 $ 6,950.00 NET ($ 1,185.00) ($ 1,685.00) ($ 1,635.00) GIANT $o $2500 0 _ :sa a0 FINAL NET ($ 1,185.00) $ 815.00 $ 865.00 DEFICIT SURPLUS SURPLUS 12 -29 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Hampton Hall APPLICATION #: 11 -17 DATE RECEIVED: 1/18/2011 CONTACT NAME: Amanda Townson DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: Provide meeting space for Community Family Barbeque, Movie Nights, Euchre Nights, Earth Day Clean Up, New Life Group Meetings, Girl Guides, Soccer Registration, Children's Halloween Party, Harvest Dance, Christmas Tree Lighting and Breakfast with Santa. Also available for private rentals hourly, daily and weekends. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: 12 -30 2009 2010 2011 REVENUE $ 22,757.99 $ 11,838.49 $ 14,811.41 EXPENSES $ 24,816.53 $ 11,567.08 $ 13,550.00 NET ($ 2,058.54) $ 271.41 $ 1,261.41 GRANT $ 00-90-1` 2,500 00 , �` 2,500 00 FINAL NET $ 441.46 $ 2,771.41 $ 3,761.41 SURPLUS SURPLUS SURPLUS 12 -30 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Kendal Community Centre APPLICATION #: 11 -18 DATE RECEIVED: 1/17/2011 CONTACT NAME: Liz Robinson DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: Provide programs to the residents of Clarington, including: pre - school playgroup, darts, karate and a monthly newsletter mailed to the Kendal residents. Also have a membership and rentals. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: 12 -31 2009 2010 2011 REVENUE $ 43,666.77 $ 40,249.04 $ 46,149.80 EXPENSES $ 29,805.75 $ 20,949.24 $ 33,000.00 NET $ 13,861.02 $ 19,299.80 $ 13,149.80 GRANT' 1,5000 $ `2,500.00 $ .2,5110.00. FINAL NET $ 16,361.02 $ 21,799.80 $ 15,649.80 SURPLUS SURPLUS SURPLUS 12 -31 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Newtonville Hall APPLICATION #: 11 -19 DATE RECEIVED: 1/14/2011 CONTACT NAME: Yvonne Stefanin DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: Provide space for: Children events - Halloween Party; Adult Events - Ladies Night, Halloween Dance, Jive Classes; Seniors Events - Euchre, Country Dances; Community Events - BBQ, Music Nights, Tree Lighting; Rental facility for community use. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: 12 -32 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Orono Town Hall APPLICATION #: 11 -20 DATE RECEIVED: 1/12/2011 CONTACT NAME: Susan Dacosta DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: Provide meeting space, organize summer concert series, rental venue for social gatherings and organize many community events. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: 12 -33 2009 2010 2011 REVENUE $ 48,870.00 $ 49,443.00 $ 60,119.00 EXPENSES $ 39,313.00 $ 30,824.00 $ 32,325.00 NET $ 9,557.00 $ 18,619.00 $ 275794.00 GRANT 3 250 Oq .. $ 2,500.0{} $ ° S,Qaq Vp0 FINAL NET $ 12,807.00 $ 21,119.00 $ 32,794.00 SURPLUS SURPLUS SURPLUS 12 -33 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Solina Community Centre APPLICATION #: 11 -21 DATE RECEIVED: 1/14/2011 CONTACT NAME: Herb Tink DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: The Solina Community Centre Board is made of three committees, the hall, park and recreation committee. Provide recreation, sport and social activities for the community. Serve the greater Solina area and to provide service to anyone in Clarington who wishes to use the facilities. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: 12 -34 2009 2010 2011 REVENUE $ 29,805.45 $ 32,404.55 $ 25,390.93 EXPENSES $ 34,159.52 $ 49,397.66 $ 40,050.00 NET ($ 4,354.07) ($ 16,993.11) ($ 14,659.07) GRaivT 21500.00 2,500.00"-: $,So:oo FINAL NET, ($ 1,854.07) ($ 14,493.11) ($ 12,159.07) DEFICIT DEFICIT DEFICIT 12 -34 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Tyrone Community Hall APPLICATION #: 11 -22 DATE RECEIVED: 1/10/2011 CONTACT NAME: Mark Canning DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: Provide rental space for weddings, funerals, fundraisers, church events, community dances, elections, sports tournaments and community hardship fundraisers. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: 12 -35 2009 2010 2011 REVENUE $ 21,513.00 $ 24,123.00 $ 25,883.00 EXPENSES $ 27,680.00 $ 29,740.00 $ 34,800.00 NET ($ 6,167.00) ($ 5,617.00) ($ 8,917.00) , FINAL NET ($ 3,667.00) ($ 3,117.00) ($ 5,917.00) DEFICIT DEFICIT DEFICIT 12 -35 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Newcastle Arena APPLICATION #: 11 -23 DATE RECEIVED: 1/14/2011 CONTACT NAME: Gord Lee DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: Municipally owned arena, providing hockey, figure skating and pleasure skating, lacrosse, ball hockey, children's dance classes, meeting room rentals and the summer location for the Clarington Farmers' Market. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: 12 -36 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Clarington New Horizons Band APPLICATION #: 11 -24 DATE RECEIVED: 1/11/2011 CONTACT NAME: Anthony Maxwell DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: Provide existing programs including, Concert Band, Community Band, First Year Band Program, Swing Band, Studio Band and Dixieland Band. Requesting seed money for proposed Woodwind Ensemble program. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: 12 -37 2009 2010 2011 REVENUE $ 14,068.00 $ 18,746.00 $ 25,686.00 EXPENSES $ 1.4,676.00 $ 17,565.00 $ 25,625.00 NET ($ 608.00) $ 1,181.00 $ 61.00 GRANT : $ 500 00 � $ :'.7 0 00 , =; n$ 1,8 0 OQ FINAL NET ($ 108.00) $ 1,931.00 $ 1,921.00 DEFICIT SURPLUS SURPLUS 12 -37 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Clarington Concert Band APPLICATION #: 11 -25 DATE RECEIVED: 1/14/2011 CONTACT NAME: Colin Rowe DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: Perform concerts throughout the year in and around Clarington. Participate in annual parades in Orono, Newcastle and Bowmanville. Mentor and provide community volunteer hours for music students in the band. Represent Clarington at the Canadian Band Association Community Band weekend. Entertain seniors in local Residences and perform annually at the Beech Centre. Perform at fundraising events and entertainment for the Mayor's New Year's Levee. Recently endorsed as "The Official Band of Clarington". FINANCIAL SUMMARY: 12 -38 2009 2010 2011 REVENUE $ 45,023.97 $ 42,415.26 $ 37,242.20 EXPENSES $ 19,592.81 $ 20,123.06 $ 16,300.00 NET $ 25,431.16 $ 22,292.20 $ 20,942.20 GIANT $'150 00 $ 75 a o0 900 00 FINAL NET $ 26,181.16 $ 23,042.20 $ 21,842.20 SURPLUS SURPLUS SURPLUS 12 -38 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Durham Girl's Choir APPLICATION #: 11 -26 DATE RECEIVED: 1/14/2011 CONTACT NAME: Jackie Nixon DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: Promote an appreciation of the choral art. Build confidence and self - esteem for the leaders of tomorrow. Two local performances plus various events such as singing at Courtice Seniors Residence, Bowmanville Santa Claus Parade, Bowmanville Tree - Lighting Ceremony, Choir Fest, Oshawa Generals Games and many other events held in Clarington and abroad. Continue to promote our organization and the arts. All practices and concerts are held at Faith United Church in Courtice. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: 12 -39 2009 2010 2011 REVENUE $ 96,392.00 $ 2,401.00 $ 12,951.00 EXPENSES $116,964.00 $ 20,480.00 $ 21,203.00 NET ($ 20,572.00) ($ 18,079.00) ($ 8,252.00) GRANT _ $ ° 500.00_ $0 .5;000.00,' FINAL NET ($ 20,072.00) ($ 18,079.00) ($ 3,252.00) DEFICIT DEFICIT DEFICIT 12 -39 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Clarington Arts and Music Festival APPLICATION #: 11 -27 DATE RECEIVED: 1/14/2011 CONTACT NAME: Ron Collis DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: Festival to showcase and celebrate Clarington's creativity in arts, music, entertainment and food. 2006 hosted initial CAMFest at Soper Creek, 2011 will be at Orono Fair Grounds. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: 12-40 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Driftwood Theatre APPLICATION #: 11 -28 DATE RECEIVED: 1/14/2011 CONTACT NAME: Jeremy Smith DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: Produce an annual season of accessible, professional classical theatre made available to Clarington residents for a Pay -What- You -Can admission. The Bard's Bus Tour has been visiting the Clarington community since the company's inception in 1995 and will be performing at the VAC this August. IW IeF.1 Me- ". I WIljl lul I t4-V 12 -41 2009 2010 2011 REVENUE $145,168.00 $154,406.00 $188,484.00 EXPENSES $194,745.00 $199,609.00 $227,017.00 NET ($ 49,577.00) ($ 45,203.00) ($ 38,533.00) GRANT, $ 500.00 1,500 00' v FINAL NET ($ 49,577.00) ($ 44,703.00) ($ 37,033.00) DEFICIT DEFICIT DEFICIT 12 -41 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Clarington Minor Lacrosse Association APPLICATION #: 11 -29 DATE RECEIVED: 1/5/2011 CONTACT NAME: Rodney Braun DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: . Provides Junior C Box Lacrosse, Boys Box and Field Lacrosse and Girls Box Lacrosse to the children of the Municipality of Clarington. Second largest Lacrosse Association in Canada. Provide volunteer opportunities to members of public. This is the tenth anniversary of the CMLA. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: 12 -42 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Clarington Swim Club APPLICATION #: 11 -30 DATE RECEIVED: 1/14/2011 CONTACT NAME: Cathy Barry DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: Pre - Competitive and Competitive swim programs for youth through Masters. Emphasis on lifestyle through training in fitness, nutrition, self discipline and team building. Club encourages diversity and supports full athlete integration. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: 12 -43 2009 2010 2011 REVENUE $158,927.98 $140,758.22 $143,509.22 EXPENSES $162,944.76 $139,799.00 $141,760.00 NET ($ 4,016.78) $ 959.22 $ 1,749.22 GRANT:':$ 1,040 00 �' $ 1,000 00 : $ "15 0 ,0 00 FINAL NET ($ 3,016.78) $ 1,959.22$ 3,249.22 DEFICIT SURPLUS SURPLUS 12 -43 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Courtice Kids Multisport Series APPLICATION #: 11 -31 DATE RECEIVED: 1/14/2011 CONTACT NAME: Derrick McKay DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: The Courtice Kids of Steel Triathlon provides children the opportunity to participate in a one day fun event promoting health and fitness. Gives children an opportunity to build self confidence, self esteem and challenge themselves as individuals. Provides a chance for children who normally can not afford the opportunity to join a sport league or team to take part in a sporting event. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: 12 -44 2009 2010 2011 REVENUE $ 10,459.78 $ 10,427.69 $ 10,601.09 EXPENSES $ 10,058.09 $ 10,820.60 $ 11,276.00 NET $ 401.69 ($ 392.91) ($ 674.91) GRANT $ 1,000.00 $ 1,500.00 $ 1,000.00 FINAL NET $ 1,401.69 SURPLUS $ 1,107.09 SURPLUS $ 325.09 SURPLUS 12 -44 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Newcastle Skating Club APPLICATION #: 11 -32 DATE RECEIVED: 1/14/2011 CONTACT NAME: JoAnne Raymond DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: Offers various levels of Skate Canada's approved Learn to Skate programs for children 3 years of age and up to, and including, adult skaters. This includes CanSkate, StarSkate, CanPowerSkate, and Adult Skate. These programs have been developed by experts to teach the fundamentals of skating in a progressive and sequential manner. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: 12-45 2009 2010 2011 REVENUE $ 50,147.00 $ 49,956.00 $ 53,374.00 EXPENSES $ 49,517.00 $ 47,264.00 $ 52,466.00 NET $ 630.00 $ 2,692.00 $ 908.00 GRANT ` a $, ,1,500 00 $ :100 $ 5,000.00 FINAL NET $ 2,130.00 $ 4,192.00 $ 5,908.00 SURPLUS SURPLUS SURPLUS 12-45 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Orono Figure Skating Club APPLICATION #: 11 -33 DATE RECEIVED: 12/31/2011 CONTACT NAME: Melinda Andrews DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: Offers various levels of Skate Canada's approved Learn to Skate programs for children 3 years of age and up to, and including, adult skaters. This includes CanSkate, StarSkate, CanPowerSkate, and Adult Skate. These programs have been developed by experts to teach the fundamentals of skating in a progressive and sequential manner. I W IeKl.cy Ell WlinU r► El 1%116 12 -46 2009 2010 2011 REVENUE $102,553.81 $114,123.29 $119,073.29 EXPENSES $ 81,280.52 $ 83,200.00 $ 84,200.00 NET $ 21,273.29 $ 30,923.29 $ 34,873.29 FINAL NET $ 22,773.29 $ 32,423.29 $ 38,873.29 SURPLUS SURPLUS SURPLUS 12 -46 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Clarington Toros Atom AAA APPLICATION #: 11 -34 DATE RECEIVED: 1/9/2011 CONTACT NAME: Steve Troughton DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: To host the OHF AAA Champtionship which will benefit the residents of Clarington by bringing to their community the best Atom AAA hockey teams in the Province of Ontario. The five teams consisting of approximately 17 players each could bring families from the GTA, Hamilton, Kitchener - Waterloo. Would expect 250 -3)50 visitors per day of our event (Fri -Sun); the influx of tourist dollars will benefit the local businesses. This will be the first OHF event held in our community, making it the best possible will pave the way for others to follow. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: 12 -47 2009 2010 2011 REVENUE $0 $0 $ 18,000.00 EXPENSES $0 $0 $ 23,000.00 NET $0 $0 ($ 5,000.00) GRANT $0 $0' $ 5,000.00 FINAL NET $0 $0 $0 12 -47 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Orono Amateur Athletic Association APPLICATION #: 11 -35 DATE RECEIVED: 1/14/2011 CONTACT NAME: Laverne Boyd DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: Promote minor sports programs for Orono and the surrounding area. These include rep, house league and instructional hockey for four year olds, recreational soccer and other sports if numbers warrant. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: 12 -48 2009 2010 2011 REVENUE $218,312.00 $212,283.00 $230,869.00 EXPENSES $237,754.00 $226,563.00 $237,799.00 NET ($ 19,442.00) ($ 14,280.00) ($ 6,930.00) GRANT P .0"9: = $ 4,500.00 $ 2,504200 a. FINAL NET ($ 16,942.00) ($ 9,780.00) ($ 4,430.00) DEFICIT DEFICIT 12 -48 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Soper Valley Model Railroad Association APPLICATION #: 11 -36 DATE RECEIVED: 1/13/2011 CONTACT NAME: Gary Jeffery DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: Annual two day Model Railroad Show in October at Bowmanville High School for the past 24 years. Annual Model Railroad Flee Market in Newcastle, past 3 years. Open House in October at Newcastle Town Hall. Ability for everyone interested to become a member. Awareness for everyone to see the hobby first hand. Teaching the public how to become involved in the hobby. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: 12 -49 2009 2010 2011 REVENUE $ 11,777.43 $ 10,838.54 $ 9,912.88 EXPENSES $ 9,926.28 $ 11,245.66 $ 13,180.00 NET $ 1,851.15 ($ 407.12) ($ 3,267.12) GRANT .$0 00.E FINAL NET $ 1,851.15 ($ 407.12) $ 1,726.88 SURPLUS DEFICIT SURPLUS 12 -49 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Big Brothers and Sisters of Clarington APPLICATION #: 11 -37 DATE RECEIVED: 1/14/2011 CONTACT NAME: Darlene Brown DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: Adapt dynamic and innovative national youth mentoring programs to meet local community needs. Currently provide service through seven major programs: Child Safety Training, One -to -One Mentoring, Big Bunch, Champions of Change Leadership Camp, After School Program, and Go Girls! FINANCIAL SUMMARY: 12 -50 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Distress Centre Durham APPLICATION #: 11 -38 DATE RECEIVED: 1/12/2011 CONTACT NAME: Victoria Kehoe DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: Our 24 hour telephone helpline and Community Contact Call -Out is available free of charge to Clarington residents. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: 12 -51 2009 2010 2011 REVENUE $283,451.00 $291,928.00 $334,946.00 EXPENSES $267,287.00 $258,457.00 $319,985.00 NET $ 16,164.00 $ 33,471.00 $ 14,961.00 GRANT ­,, oa $ �, 0 2,soo a� FINAL NET $ 22,392.00 .$ 34,471.00 $ 17,461.00 SURPLUS SURPLUS SURPLUS 12 -51 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Feed the Need in Durham APPLICATION #: 11 -39 DATE RECEIVED: 1/12/2011 CONTACT NAME: Sandy Brittain DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: Region food distribution warehouse serving 42 emergency food providers across Durham. Role is to source, transport, sort, store and distribute food equitably to member agencies who serve the unemployed, homeless, underemployed and others in need of emergency assistance. Presently, eight Clarington agencies are served by Feed the Need Durham. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: 12 -52 2009 2010 2011 REVENUE $197,412.00 $323,313.00 $163,263.00 EXPENSES $143,822.00 $304,819.00 $308,000.00 NET $ 53,590.00 $ 18,494.00 ($144,737.00) FINAL NET $ 53,590.00 $ 18,494.00 ($139,737.00) SURPLUS SURPLUS DEFICIT 12 -52 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: The Gathering Place APPLICATION #: 11 -40 DATE RECEIVED: 1/14/2011 CONTACT NAME: Jackie DeHaas DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: Provide monthly community meals open to all Clarington residents. Facilitate community and relationship connections. Teach healthy meal planning and food preparation skills. Organized by a group of Bowmanville Churches and presently operating out of St. Paul's United Church. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: 12 -53 2009 2010 2011 REVENUE $0 $ 3,188.00 $ 6,347.00 EXPENSES $0 $ 391.00 $ 11,750.00 NET $0 $ 2,797.00 ($ 5,403.00) GRANT' $0 $0 '• $ 5,000 00 ... < FINAL NET $0 $ 2,797.00 ($ 403.00) $0.00 SURPLUS DEFICIT 12 -53 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: Learning Disabilities Association of Peterborough APPLICATION #: 11 -41 DATE RECEIVED: 1/11/2011 CONTACT NAME: Shari Davis DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: Provide resources and training in Clarington for persons with learning disabilities and for AD /HD and their families through office in Bowmanville. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: 12 -54 2009 2010 2011 REVENUE $ 64,976.00 $ 70,367.00 $ 70,862.00 EXPENSES $ 70,709.00 $ 71,117.00 $ 71,762.00 NET ($ 5,733.00) ($ 750.00) ($ 900.00) G1 AN`T` $ 750.00 $,,:,,750.00 $ _ 99Q', FINAL NET ($ 4,983.00) $0 $0 DEFICIT 12 -54 Attachment 4 to Report CSD- 004 -11 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF GRANT INFORMATION APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: The Participation House Project (Durham Region) APPLICATION #: 11 -42 DATE RECEIVED: 1/14/2011 CONTACT NAME: Sandra Aldcroft DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES: Provide a broad range of programs and services to the Region of Durham including: accessible, residential support (24 hours a day, 7 days a week); person- directed care and various supported living options; day service programs to our core group of clients and community; transition to independent living and life skills teaching; and respite opportunities for families in the Region. Also provides therapeutic, recreational and leisure activities. WIM -[41/\ rf.It"04-1►� /:"i_T 12 -55 2009 2010 2011 REVENUE $3,510,854.00 $3,535,840.00 $3,303,448.00 EXPENSES $3,511,906.00 $3,536,892.00 $3,532,000.00 NET ($ 1,052.00) ($ 1,052.00) ($228,552.00) GRANT $0" FINAL NET ($ 1,052.00) ($ 1,052.00) ($223,552.00) DEFICIT DEFICIT DEFICIT 12 -55 • �1I1 11 Leading the ITay REPORT CLERK'S DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: February 28, 2011 Report #: CLD- 008 -11 File #: By -law #: Subject: APPOINTMENT TO THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report CLD- 008 -11 be received; and 1►�C "N Submitted by: PLB *ag be appointed to the Committee of Adjustment. Reviewed by: Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905 - 623 -3379 F 905 - 623 -6506 13 -1 REPORT NO.: CLD- 008 -11 BACKGROUND PAGE 2 On January 24, 2011, the General Purpose and Administration Committee considered Report CLD- 004 -11 — Appointments to Various Boards and Committees 2011 -2014. A total of 23 applications were considered for the 6 citizen appointments to the Committee of Adjustment. Latifun Ashna Prasad was one of the successful applicants appointed by Council to the Clarington Committee of Adjustment. On February 9, 2011 the attached (Attachment 1) correspondence was received from Ms. Prasad advising that she regretfully resigned from this position, and apologizing for any inconvenience she may have caused. Following Council's appointments, all unsuccessful candidates were advised that their applications would remain on file for consideration should a vacancy occur. The applications on file, therefore, include: Brian Arsenault Valerie Aston John Murray Bate David Brandreth Gerald (Gerry) Brown Milton Dakin Barry A. James Robert Malone Allan McArthur Lynn McCullough Donna Naulls Norman W. Neads Andre O'Bumsawin Mike Sinclair Elwood G. Ward Anthony Wood Each of these applicants have been contacted and have confirmed they remain interested in being appointed to the Committee of Adjustment. There was one other candidate (Jean - Michel Komarnicki) who was contacted, but declined to have his name stand. Applications for the above -named applicants have been circulated under separate cover as the applications contain personal information about these applicants. Staff recommends that Council consider the applications and appoint a replacement member to the Committee of Adjustment. Attachments: Attachment 1 — Resignation Letter from Latifun ( Ashna) Prasad Attachment 2 — Applications (distributed under separate cover) Interested Parties: Applicants 13 -2 `1.1 EEB09 F,, , 1:20:11 ATTACHMENT -Z Tp REPORT # February 8, 2011 Mrs. Patti Barrie Clerk The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington 40 Temperance Street Bowmanville, Ontario L1 C 3A6 Dear Mrs. Barrie Re: Committee of Adiustment appointment I was advised on February 2, 2011 by Carlo Pellarin, Manager, Development Review Branch, Planning Services Department that I have been re- appointed to the Committee of Adjustment for another four year term. I regret that I will not be able to fulfill my commitment as a member of the Committee, for personal reasons, and therefore wish to resign from this position. Kindly accept my sincere regrets for any inconvenience caused by this decision. Yours truly, /�>� Latifun (Ashna) Prasad cc: Carlo Pellarin, Manager, Development Review Branch Planning Services Department DCStiT. PT9 ®? REVIEWED BY ORIGINAL TO: ❑ COUNCIL ❑ COUNCIL ❑ FILE DIRECTION INFORMATION COPY TO: ❑ MAYOR ❑ ME MIL! ERS ❑ CAD OF COUNCIL • COMMUNITY ❑ CORPORATE ❑ EMERGENCY SERVICES SERVICES SERVICES • ENGINEERING ❑ MUNICIPAL ❑ OPERATIONS SERVICES CLERK'S • PLANNING ❑ SOLICITOR ❑ TREASURY SERVICES • OTHER MUNICIPAL CLERK'S FILE 13 -3 Clarington REPORT CLERK'S DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: 28 February 2011 Resolution #: By -law #: Report#: CLD -009 -11 File #: Subiect: AMENDMENTS TO PROPERTY STANDARDS BY -LAW 2007 -070 RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report CLD- 009 -11 be received; and 2. THAT the By -law to amend Property Standards By -law 2007 -070, attached to Report CLD- 009 -11, as Attachment 1, be approved. Submitted by: Reviewed by: C Pr'e, CMO arie Marano, HBSc, CMO Cle rk Director of Corporate Services / Human Resources PLB /LC CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905 - 623 -3379 13 -4 REPORT NO.: CLD- 009 -11 PAGE 2 BACKGROUND AND COMMENT At the regular meeting of Council held on January 31 st this year, Council referred an issue of concern regarding the Clarington Property Standards By -law, 2007 -070 to staff to review. The concern revolved around a possible ambiguity in the wording of Section 2.11 of the By -law dealing with roof drainage and runoff on residential lots. Currently the section reads: 2.11 Downspouts used in conjunction with roof drainage shall be no less than 5.1 cm (2 inches) away from any shared lot line. All water drainage shall be directed away from the lot line. The intent of the section is to prevent property owners from discharging their roof drainage directly onto the neighbour's property in such a way as to cause an adverse effect for the neighbour. It is not to prevent an owner from discharging their drainage away from the building and allowing it to drain from the property. In the case which gave rise to the issue, a property owner in a subdivision was draining their rain water into the swale at the side of the house. The construction of roof dictated that the downspout come off the side of the house and not the front. The swale is an area which normally runs along the boundary of the property. Its purpose is to carry water runoff from the property toward the municipal ditch or storm drain and thus away from the properties. The amendment which was originally proposed at Council and contained in Resolution #C- 069 -11 would have prohibited setting a downspout close to the lot line and required that all drainage be directed away from the lot line regardless of the distance to the property line. Doing so would negate the use of the swale and force the water to run across an owner's lawn, driveway or septic bed, depending on the particular situation. 13 -5 REPORT NO.: CLD- 009 -11 PROPOSED AMENDMENT PAGE 3 In order to properly address the issue and remove any ambiguity, staff have recommended deleting and replacing Sections 2.08 to 2.12, the entire Sewage and Drainage chapter of the By -law, and reworking it into two separate parts, the first dealing exclusively with sewage and the second with drainage. Under the proposed amendments the prohibition on direct discharge onto adjoining properties remains. The setback for the downspout is increased to 30 cm. If there is a swale, the water is to be directed into the swale and eventually runoff. If there is no swale, the water is to be directed parallel to the property line CONCLUSION The proposed amendments will allow for easier and more precise interpretation without setting up unwanted barriers to compliance. These amendments have been reviewed with Engineering Services and the Municipal Solicitor who are in agreement with them. ATTACHMENTS Proposed By -law amendment. 13 -6 ATTACHMENT # TO THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON REPORT # BY -LAW NO. 2011 - Being a By -law to Amend By -law 2007 -070 being a by -law for prescribing standards for the maintenance of all property within the Municipality of Clarington WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington deems it appropriate and necessary to amend By -law 2007 -070 in order to better serve the needs of the citizens of the Municipality; NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington hereby enacts as follows: 1. Sections 2.08 up to and including 2.12 be deleted in their entirety and be replaced with the following: SEWAGE 2.08 Sewage shall be discharged into the sewage system. 2.09 Sewage shall not be discharged onto the surface of the ground. 2.10 All elements of the sewage system, including but not limited to, weeping tiles, septic beds and septic tanks shall be maintained in proper working order and drained, cleaned out or replaced as required. DRAINAGE 2.11 Roof or sump drainage shall not be discharged onto sidewalks, stairs, or directly onto adjacent property. 2.12(1) Subject to subsection (2), downspouts used in conjunction with roof drainage shall be no less than 30 cm (1 foot) from any shared lot line. (2) Where there is no drainage swale located on the shared lot line or where the downspout is within 30 cm (1 foot) of the shared lot line, all water drainage shall be directed parallel to the lot line. 13 -7 This By -law shall come into full force and effect on the date of its final passage and approval by council. BY -LAW passed in open session this th day of. Adrian Foster, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk WIM-13 HANDOUTS PRESENTATIONS INTRODUCTION General Architectural Design Guidelines (2 11 Update) ( i 40 Leading Me Way prepared fox: MunicipaIity of Clarington pr arQd : John G. Williams Limited Architect Fehi Diary 2011 General Architectural Design Guidelines clakligmn -� - Leading the Way John G. Williams Limited, Architect CONTROL ARCHITECT John G. Williams Limited, Architect • Architects and Urban Designers for over 35 years • Review of house models, sitings materials Currently Acting as Control Architects in: • Clarington, Ajax, Whitby, Oshawa, Port Perry • Aurora, Markham, Newmarket, Richmond Hill, Vaughan, East Gwillimbury, Stouffville • Barrie, Innisfil • Brampton, Caledon, Mississauga, Oakville, Hamilton • Toronto General Architectural Design Guidelines Leading the Way ��� _2_ John G. Williams Limited, Architect BACKGROUND ■ Prepared "Clarington General Architectural Design Guidelines" in 2002 to replace former design controls (Schedule'W') ■ All new housing developments since then have been subject to full Architectural Control ■ Retained by Clarington to conduct review and update of 2002 Guidelines • Tour of Local Housing Sites in Durham Region • Consultation with BILD, DRHBA, Other Design Consultants General Architectural Design Guidelines Leading the Way ��� _3_ John G. Williams Limited, Architect BACKGROUND . Municipality Objectives Li Update Guidelines to more current standards in accordance with periodic review /update provisions Li Achieve more comprehensive `community design vision' / supplementary guidelines Li Improved quality of housing design Li Provide greater municipal input in review process • Builder/ Developer Concerns Li Added costs imposed by proposed new design criteria Li Approval delays General Architectural Design Guidelines Leading the Way ��� _4_ John G. Williams Limited, Architect CURRENT PRACTICE General Architectural Design Guidelines (2002) o Administered by Qualified Control Architect (J. Williams) o Deals with: ■ Community Safety (CPTED) ■ Siting Criteria / Model Repetition • Garage Design Criteria ■ Priority Lot Dwellings • Model Design Criteria ❑ Gateway Dwellings ❑ Architectural Style /Elevations ❑ Corner Dwellings ❑ Entrances /Porches ❑ Community Window ❑ Roofs /Windows Dwellings ❑ External Materials /Colours ❑ View Terminus Dwellings ❑ Foundation Walls / Grade ❑ Exposed Rear / Side Conditions Architecture ❑ Utilities General Architectural Design Guidelines C"Zg* W y -5- John G. Williams Limited, Architect Lee Way HIGHLIGH'I'S OI' NEW GUIDELINES General Architectural Design Guidelines (2011) o Expand list of Architectural Control consultants o Orientation Meeting with Staff o Supplementary Guidelines / Design Vision / Theme o Provide more stringent guidelines consistent with GTA municipalities including: ■ Better detailing of rear elevations • Porches / stairs / handrailings • Sustainability / energy efficiency • Utility meters, municipal address signage, corner lot fencing • Garage design provisions (zoning by -law) • Townhouse design • Treatment of driveways rl General Architectural Design Guidelines �� John G. Williams Limited, Architect Leading fhe Way ARCHITECTURAL CONTROL PROCESS ■ Benefits To Municipality o Effective design controls similar to other municipalities in GTA • More municipal input on housing design • Improved design quality of new housing stock • Tailored to suit Clarington's needs • Provides level playing field for Builders • Administered Privately by Experienced Control Architects o Results oriented General Architectural Design Guidelines Leading the Way ��� _7_ John G. Williams Limited, Architect ARCHITECTURAL CONTROL PROCESS ■ Main Objectives Li Improved community design Li Opportunity for architectural theme / design vision Li Safe, pedestrian - friendly streets (CPTED) Li Reduce dominance of garage Li Aesthetically pleasing dwellings Li Harmonious streetscapes with variety of fagade treatments (11aFGeneral Architectural Design Guidelines igM gt e -�- John G. Williams Limited, Architect Leadingfhe ARCHITECTL?RAL CONTROL PROCESS ■ Dwelling Design Criteria o Architectural Styles /Elevations • Main Entrances/ Porches • Materials / Colours • Roof Form • Windows ❑ Architectural Details Ila r R ic Iz, k= Uffigm General Architectural Design Guidelines Leading fhe _9_ John G. Williams Limited, Architect ARCHITECTL "RAL CONTROL PROCESS ■ Garage Design Li Lessen visual impact by limiting projection Li Limiting width relative to lot width Pedestrian friendly streetscape Garage dominated streetscape General Architectural Design Guidelines Leading the (Zarigm -� 0- John G. Williams Limited, Architect ARCHITECTL "RAL CONTROL PROCESS ■ Priority Lot Dwellings Gateway Lot Dwellings Corner Lot Dwellings Not Permitted General Architectural Design Guidelines Lead �`°`� -11- John G. Williams Limited, Architect ingfhe Way ARCHITECTL?RAL CONTROL PROCESS ■ Priority Lot Dwellings (con't) Community Window Dwellings F.W Publicly Exposed Rear Elevations (Upgraded) General Architectural Design Guidelines -12- John G. Williams Limited, Architect Leading fhe Way ARCHITECTL "RAL CONTROL PROCESS ■ Priority Lot Map o Indicates location of lots requiring special design consideration affmigmn Leading the Way VACANT FUTURE RESIDENTIAL A- - - - -- T T • COLLECTOR ROAD • - °� • • • • T • T N TOOD PARK T z T - o z o T • • • • w I■ • T T SCHOOL � '� �I �• T T • �o z COLLECTOR ROAD W ■ • • PARKETTE ■ Z i T ■ o ......... OF • T • • T • i COMMERCIAL • • • • • _� �� -� • 1 C.W. • • .W. •_ i ■A ■ . --- T ARTERIAL_ ROAD _,� 3- General Architectural Design Guidelines John G. Williams Limited, Architect ARCHITECTL?RAL CONTROL PROCESS Design Review Process ■ Initial meeting with Developer /Builder & Municipality Li discuss architectural theme Lj review Community Design Vision • Initial review (prior to sales) o preliminary model designs o exterior colour packages • Final review and approval o model working drawings o individual lot sitings o colour package selections ■ Site Inspections to monitor compliance General Architectural Design Guidelines Leading the Way ��� -� 4- John G. Williams Limited, Architect pSIA .* 4 The Municipality of Clarington, General Purpose and Administration Committee DURHAM STRATEGIC ENERGY ALLIANCE February 28, 2011 In partnership with NAAA IDN is a member of ....:.:...... Ontario network of excellence oneinnovation.ca The Durham Strategic Energy Alliance Genesis • DSEA was formed in 2005 as an energy - friendly environment with its genesis in Durham Region • Moved to offices within Durham College Whitby campus in 2009 • Funding provided by Ministry of Research and Innovation, Ontario Centre of Excellence and Durham Region as well as through membership base pSrEA In partnership with ONAAA IDN is a member of • ..., '. ..' . .„. ..r.e.i .i .... Y..a • i , i�.s �.� a.'i • •,, r = •� '. • • . ...... 6 w .�iw ..i .. i i •.... ....... si t • � Ontario network of excellence oneinnovation.ca The Durham Strategic Energy Alliance • 11 Founding Members including the Region, lakeshore municipalities, academia, public and private sector creating partnership, commercialization and innovation • Grown to more than 70 members in Durham Region and beyond pSIA 4 _ In partnership with NAAA IDN is a member of • .......e...a is �i ii �� �• Ontario network of excellence oneinnovation.ca The Durham Strategic Energy Alliance Regional Innovation Centre: Innovation Durham Northumberland (IDN) • Initial submission of Expression of Interest in November 2009 • Durham Region Council Support • Collaboration with the Northumberland Manufacturers Association (NMA) • Matching funding from Ministry of Research and Innovation • Officially announced December 16, 2010 pSNA - e-,Ao In partnership with MNAAA.l IDN is a member of ••aa•a•a•a••• ii• �a ii �+ i'a •• :•a::• «:•:« � «+ ri i �i i sir' � +i • : : :: AS• :• :•i•i. ..: ontario network of excellence oneinnovation.ca The Durham Strategic Energy Alliance Implications to DSEA • Increased locations: co- located in UOIT, Durham College and with NMA: expanded reach and accessibility • Expanded Mandate • Sustained Core Funding • Expanded Services for members • Additional Resources and access to funding pSNA In partnership with MNAAA.l IDN is a member of ••aa•a•a•a••• ii• �a ii �+ i'a •• :•a::• «:•:« � «+ ri i �i i sir' � +i ontario network of excellence oneinnovation.ca pSIA The DSEA wishes to thank the Municipality of Clarington for your support and active participation. QUESTIONS?. In partnership with NAAA]. IDN is a member of ••aa•a•a•a••• ii• �a ii �+ i'a •• ••: ::.a::�: : :.� iii sai �� •• joi :•a::• «:•:« � «+ ri i �i i sir' � +i ontario network of excellence oneinnovation.ca Parking Concerns Windham Crescent, Courtice 0 INHIBITS SNOW REMOVAL REDUCES VISIBILITY WHEN DRIVING CREATES DANGEROUS CROSSING OF STREET Snow Removal Issues Prior to understanding the parking component to snow removal, this amount of snow left for us to shovel became frustrating. When left during thaw and refreeze during the winter months it causes a huge amount of water then ice at the bottom of our driveway causing issues for both vehicles and pedestrians. Parking on Boulevard Consistently during the overnight hours, the driveway prior to ours uses the entire ten feet of boulevard to park two vehicles sometimes hanging into the street. This situation creates immense difficulty for the Snow Removal Technician to plow the street without leaving up to six feet of snow on the street. Additionally, causing the plow to not capture the catch basin one driveway past ours. Alternatively, Street Parking When not on the boulevard, this is the neighbour's secondary parking infraction each week night well past the allotted three hours and most weekends. Rather than shifting vehicles in the driveway, this is his solution along with the parents black Jetta. Alternatively, Street Parkin Clearly, there is some room in this driveway for at least the Jetta. Visibility Issues with Street Parking ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (0 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- As automobiles fill the ,,,decreases dramatically. street, visibility... Visibility Issues with Street Parking Even more so when the work vehicle is .... ...parked between the vehicles. Visibility Issues with Street Parking ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- �-) (0 Parked vehicles cause a very long blind view of the street for vehicle operators and persons crossing the street. Dangerous Crossings ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ When crossing the street ....the closest driveway is to get to the sidewalk.... 65 feet away. s v, 4`.# 11 4 M e • This is an extremely dangerous crossing with two very young children in tow especially as we navigate the snow and ice on the street. Possible Solutions ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (0) • Consider more parking by -law enforcement staff for evenings and weekends possibly contract workers. • Increase the cost of initial tickets to better deter this constant behaviour. $15 is very minimal. • Add "NO PARKING" signs to entire curve of street. •Add an additional sidewalk component for crossing more directly and safely with "no parking" signs on either side for a specified distance. • Add a fire hydrant. • Send letters to repeat offenders attached to City Tax Bills. Possible Solutions, Cont'd • If all the information that is being collected by the By -law office could be examined and reported back to council, I believe you would notice this is a Clarington wide issue as personally witnessed when driving along the city streets. • Today, my concern is for my families safety on our street. • Thank you for your time and consideration, Mrs. Jacqueline B. Muccio TO nno- Kingsberry Site Sensitivity m AN 44 djjk.— W if AL Central Lake Ontario C oF~vatlon AuTo r 2 li*moamt Twain L"W Part of the only Black/ Farewell groundwater recharge area in GTA included within the urban boundary it'--s the end of ea that-e�s�- C-r r;2- The News, January 30th, 2008 i -tip-:_ rtCD 4C] � -L E r«3- • ..• C: CA K, 4DM17-r- 3�� P n -0 &ICS 3tI-L 9-- 4�3< L-f--K-Lt= a t- ]-a 4:4 - -- Amendment # 199 1979: ESAs .�r COURTICE MAJOR URBAN AREA I YV�•pNMEXMI sewsarrnn • ND.1e r wM a n• ' P �y ..rr.w L'] a � r nS rn 4� e }-` Y ro 'lry "n �"'r� o r rii+fr — O 1 M (7nO d !✓RTU 4L COURT ICE "M URBAN AREA /A/FILTR7�77C)A o l�-.C% .(),TO o/ ruu uee nwnwe ry 90 -1,po� C�rsa /-/rA coin ah Jiaa4d �+f {Ov wce�`u- �6/_ drofo 1h r4Se� �- -- -' -- _ - w per_ _� � he O, / a KG�q abev3F L�'�'- ��� /,J:L, .`. ix //�-- ii' "'rdir3bP e/AA /n /rrlll"'W Zh /t ve/ �^eznt ,fA{a & wa+4iiff -� e;j Kit x119 f© 6e dYy. ✓ ✓ , �• l Mer Jf 63'n 'i O ` � T 'I 1 i � y v �fr•, ,F Ern In *meirntaffi:Uand y.6 ro "f s IGI , liflwl tl V;nll'6s°k Pfd ` {+ 7 , d. aa9...#,� � 4VPGUW ay ° ' • L F e 'wy{' = a AUlS2 sy-i ` : C�• U , V 7 UWC JTS F47U 9 T 1 —4 P6 �e '�. MASt"1 MN:t CUM 4r iZ 44 00 rCUM1 GLM1 , +M 1 � Gum$ 5.1 p is .+ ' •'cJw� , s IA ry�CUVJ1,'CVr1 , r4 J MA'92, %. 1i • i� y =a:•.x Sj. F r 3 k.�y,t .�' d °i�',.• m y4, FL1D•rtk`i{133•a Legend 't a F00fl.1tUP3 rw ,+ + � -� a w � � # � r• ` "[ i i �T'-~5 � '•',e� : � �•+• Errs,rrrrn��lal Intl 4:lassrf'raii�ns i .._ + - � .y��: .,;. � aT�•5 f:'� n° '� r ° �. � �� "�,,,,�r�._ �� � Yf�, ,: _ � • J y .1� , 1 C� 1 ° PL r '+d -_� — .i_� , � CIIP7 �+oe°ure axn 0* r GNW1YRSr�ra`aFC+,�WY41 ais- ` _r 4- .,d G T1 'a t `•� -"ti. y" 14 F...j +.lic+si.. rl �ussm �esYTF �9f` ° r �. , ` ,' .: - . �,r ",•••,• • ^ Rt 4t1 �4t r.v,r� F ; •.�, -;�. p., F. 7• 1 141117 -1 C*t.'WPJ~AI Shlk* 7r r r F �1 i 5 �m P oKa an erw Mom . -,5 dw.�►r'; '' r`x. M A� r,. r prwAndA IF S19A iCE+114' dIaN 5 _ i �i t ' �t}Ib` `�" ' �° '* ,Iii �. .m '7 )•--" t y tl .. ._ —, v: I i i.. �s'�5"rl .Yr i? `�+ r.•r1a -,'� `may , r VcmM VeG LaCaik3na • GPS F" � �. , � •ds ,� AOlr31b+PS?. Exw.•�sNm f, mire sc m I rn t 3 l:6Qf1 (Aff f FIgUre 5 lAlto ...if it has to be developed, only CLUSTERS WERE RECOMMENDED ?? ? ... not 140 packed housing units only - Vernal pools (ephemeral wetlands) are unique, specialized habitats that are frequently overlooked because of their size and appearance - The lack of fish in these ponds is essential to the vitality of frogs, salamanders and invertebrates that would otherwise be prayed upon by the fish - Vernal pools have an important connection to the groundwater system, and are critical to the maintenance of healthy functioning of surface and subsurface water systems - The destruction of these pools decreases the ability of the land to absorb water after heavy rainfall or snowmelt events (flooding, lowering of water table, destruction of fish habitat, reduction of water quality, etc.) - The cost of mitigating these impacts can be a great burden on society. If the Planning Act Sections on Natural Environment, public health & safety of the PPS 1997, 2005, these subs should not be subject to the GP; OP requires protection of natural resources from incompatible development CLOCA: - "wetlands are the `workhorses' of our watersheds; they help protect the quality and supply of our groundwater, groundwater recharge, prevent soil erosion, store floodwater, etc. If you live in a more urban area, your water is treated.... however, not all contaminants can be removed and it can be difficult and expensive to clean up our water. It makes more sense to keep our water and groundwater clean at their sources." A SEPARNAR HOSTED BY; UNIVERSITY (GUELPH S: L-, -1 of -h;,,,, Ecosystem protection in an urbanizing environment innovations In Planning And Design v LONE 21, 1994 * M ARBOROUN UNIRE * NNIYERS1 OF 6OEEPH Thousands of wildlife species residing in this watershed was crushed to pieces by bulldozers and or killed by starvation due to lack of their habitat anywhere else in this watershed. In my last comments in 2007 1 have asked to consider development on more regional scale than just the site specific applications that have no regards to ecosystem and its functions or to biodiversity approach. It seems to me that we still don't understand the relationship between the environment, climate change and economics and we will be paying for this dearly. " Everything is connected to Everything Else" "... a land ethic changes the role of Homo sapiens from conqueror of the land- community to plain member and citizen of the land. (Leopold, Oxford University Press) " our deepest folly is the notion that we are in charge of the place, that we own it and can somehow run it. We are treating the earth as a sort of household pet. It is not so. We are not separate beings. We are a living part of the earth's life, owned and operated by the earth... (Thomas, San Francisco Sierra Club) The environment and the economy must be put on an equal footing, to be weighed and measured as the basis for development decisions. (Colborn, Davidson, Green, etc., Research on Public Policy, Baltimore) The wholeness of nature that encompasses the very structure of every living thing dictates that all forms of life, from frog's eggs to maple trees to humans, are linked in our requirements for life. (McClelland and Steward, Toronto). (Toronto survey, Eggleton: I would be much prouder to have Toronto known as `healhty City' rather than a `world class City') People have been carrying around with them as part of their mental baggage assumption that progress demands degraded surroundings (Hiss- Encountering Countryside) One mature tree can absorb carbon dioxide at a rate of 48 Ibs /year and release enough oxygen back into the atmosphere to support 2 human beings; in its growing season it can remove 60 mg of cadmium, 140 mg of chromium, 820 mg of nickel and 5 200 mg of lead from the environment. 212 ha treed urban park can remove daily 48 Ibs particulates, 9 Ibs nitrogen dioxide, 2 Ibs carbon monoxide, etc. Benefits of treed swamps or woodlands: Architectural Engineering (protect water, save energy, extend the life of paved surfaces, increase traffic safety Aesthetic (social, health ) Climate Control Enhance economic and tourism stability (people linger and shop longer along tree lined streets, houses /offices sell quicker and have longer occupancy rates; workers in offices, etc. are more productive, absenteeism is reduced.... Urban Tree Benefits References 1. Coder, Dr. Kim D., "Identified Benefits of Community .frees and Forests', University of Georgia, October, 1996. 2. USDA Forest Service Pamphiet AT-92-100 I Internationa€ moiety of Arboriculture Tree Carr Bulletin; Benefits of Trees 4. Green Ermron_mental Coalition Website 5. Sierra Ciu4 of Canada, "EraiWon Trends By Country", October 1997 6. Mwak, David J., "Urban Trees and Air QuaRity ", November, 1995 T Martin, Paul, 'The Value of Trees" 8. Nowak, David J., "Dcnefits of Community Trees ", (Brooklyn Trees, USDA Forest Service General TechnicaL Report, in review) 9. Galveston - Houston Association for Smog Prevention (GRASP), "Trees arxf Our Air ", January, 1994. 10. Mckiney, dike. Arguments for Land Conservation; Documentation and information Sources for Land Resources Frotection, Trust for Public Land, Sacramento, CA, December, 1943 11. Michigan State University Extension, Urban Forestfy4*7269501, "Benefits of Urban Trees° 12. Americdn Forests, "Tire Case Far Greener Cities ", Autumn 1994. 11 American Forests, "How Trees Fight Climate Change" 1499. 14. American Forests, "Wiry Plant Trees ", 1949. 15- Prow, Tina_, " f e Power of Trees ", Human Environmental Research Laboratory at University of Uhnois. 16. Natior W Arbor Day FoundatioP pamphlet #909 005 17. American Fomstry Association Tree Facts: Growing Greener Cities, 1942. 18. USDA Forest Service Pamphiet #FS -363} 19. Tree Guidelines for San Joanihn Valley Conrrnunities, March 1999. Published by the USDA forest Services Wester Center for Urban Forest Research and Education. 2p. American Forests Jdagasine, irersiackRe Clean Wat�riiegulat�ans;, Summer —�s _ . _ . 2000. Developers undertake: - erosion monitoring on the tributary and a portion of the main branch of the Farewell Creek — how? - relocation of rare plant species — where? - construction of the proposed amphibian wetland - when, after development? Monitoring? SWM — what kind? r t Ptri4:5l -9. Ewa. a CLIFFORD CURTIS 3337 TOOLEY ROAD FEBRUARY 28, 2011 VISF J &d9 a R41d J / _•- ��. =:mac-- -��I" �,��� f _J / 4 REGIONAL FL 4 - - -�_�, — - - -_- - • ,-_ -_- - „aEI.EU.l33.r8k� 1 f j, � � t � .� � ! ri � s_ y r7n),� / J 3` 30 29 1 I s r � `., f I a� ' `-� • � � ` f +l fr_� •p,�9,�'� y''1 � -J �!� �'• j � � f �1 \ J�,13 c+ !L� � T6� ` �i 1� f l s r f� 31 zu 1 MAR 12.00 l/a 12.06 LAPOINTE -� �.� ��, 33 g34 5 36. 372 � 16.53 REGIONAL FLOG D ° RC_EV.180,fi7 � u f� � �� �!- ! �,� �.- � 1 � R�G�SiERF�, C U RTI S �� �� +I�,� ,,i 590 s� � 611 62 63 64 � J,7 I 1 1 � 1 ellJ 5 �I Erosion Concerns �l 6 a y a t�, x e 1 F Y 'tVV TA Pf m y x 1 Y IA r n rf • . x • yi V ° �- jot a' �'► !R + � JA r �� 'mod � a• 4tl � . � *IN 4F 160 fn_`4 „'M. J _WW 10i Diverted Watershed D REFER TO F I GORE 5 ,M & " FF-S,1 R� PRE 18T-89055 i 18T-900O3 PRE-DEVELOPMENT DRAINAGE AREA PLAN �D.D. Biddle 6 Associates Limited rconsulting engineers \ G, D r 96 KING STREET EAST • 06HAWA�ON LIH le6 AREA IN HECTARES PHONE 9057576.8500 • FAX 99050576-8730 PR X IMPERVIOUS DRAWN M, B. zsoo PRO AT" 86219 /93055 DRAWN BY- M.B.C. NOTE, THIS PLAN IS FOR STORM °ESICRRB M.B.C. °RAMIMCN°. DRAINAGE AREAS ONLY DAATE, R.C.A. F I GURE 2 DECEMBER 2007 MNNOIKINGSBERRY EROSION ASSESSMENT Project No. 93055186219 March 26, 2009 • REVISED MARCH 3, 2010 sA93055erosion,gpw Storm Event (Year) Pea k Flow (k ­ms) Time Exceeding Critical Discharge Exceedance Increase(hr) Discharge Exceedance Increase(min) Routed Dischar a of 0.51cros hr Pre-De vela meet Post- Develo meat Pre- Develo meet Post-Development 25mm Storm 0.71 0.68 0.67 0.75 108 5.00 2 r SCS 1.16 1.11 1.50 1.50 0.00 0.00 5 r SCS 1.92 1.83 2.00 2.16 0.16 10.00 10 r SCS 2.50 2.38 2.92 2.67 0.25 15,00 25 r SCS 3.29 3.17 3.17 4.17 1.00 60.00 50 SCS 3.92 3.81 3.83 4.58 0.75 45.00 100 r SCS 4.57 4.48 433 5.00 Of 40.00 5 r Chicago 1.42 1.36 1.50 1.50 0,00 '0.00 Tyr Chicago 1.87 1.78 1,83 1,75 0.00 0,00 25 r Chic a o 3.43 3.28 2.50 2.92 0.42 25.00 100 r Chica o 4.66 4.61 3,00 3.42 1 0.42 25,00 154 152 , 150 14B , 146 144 , ' W 142 (L 1: ' CURTIS � 14" � ? EXISTING RESIDENCE , . M IL j- > 138 Existing Top of Bank Lu 136 Long-Ton Stable Slope Line 134 StaNa ' 1.5 Gradient GWT , Existing 1 2 1 132 SanalySiltlSily Fire Sand TrtAaryto Farewell Creek 130 SiIryClay7iY 128 4 Silly Sand Till 2 m Toe Erosion Allowance 126 124 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 05 Scale 1:200 Drawing No.3 Cross - Section A -A (Stable Condition) (o!s 17m) 70 75 Soil Engineers Ltd. Re1.1009028 CONCERNS Increased erosion leading to slope failure • Increased foot traffic • Increased liability REQUEST Erosion control at foe of slope - Minimal impact to tree cover Fencing at property boundary - Legal survey of Lapointe properly QUESTIONS?