Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/25/2012P� GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE DATE: June 25, 2012 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 June 11, 2012 5. PUBLIC MEETINGS 4 -1 (a) Application for a Proposed Zoning By -law Amendment and Draft Plan of 5 -1 Subdivision Applicant: 289143 Ontario Ltd. Report: PSD- 031 -12 (b) Application for a Proposed Zoning By -law Amendment and Draft Plan of 5 -3 Subdivision Applicant: 1494339 Ontario Ltd., and Maria J. Williams Report: PSD- 032 -12 (c) Application for a Proposed Zoning By -law Amendment and Official Plan 5 -5 Amendment Applicant: Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority Report: PSD- 033 -12 6. DELEGATIONS (Draft List at Time of Publication — To be Replaced with Final 6 -1 List) (a) Stephen Brickell, Member of the Resident/Community Coalition, Regarding Addendum #1 to Report CSD- 006 -12, Clarington Older Adult Association - Parking Concerns /Strategic Plan CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905 - 623 -3379 G. P. &A. Agenda - 2 - June 25, 2012 (b) Keith Giesbrecht, Event Producer, and Carolyn Smith, Senior Story Producer, MDN Media 2 Inc., Regarding "Million Dollar Neighbourhood - Season 2" and a Request to Use Garnet Rickard Complex Banquet Hall for Filming (c) Gerry Mahoney, on behalf of the South East Clarington Ratepayers Association, Regarding the Proposed Leader Energy Wind Turbines and Port Granby Project (d) Kulpreet Khurana, Regarding the Proposed Leader Energy Wind Turbines and Port Granby Project (e) Bryce Jordan, Sernas Associates, Report PSD- 034 -12, Regarding Proposed Official Plan Amendment, Proposed Neighbourhood Design Plan for Village North Neighbourhood in Newcastle, Applications to Amend the Zoning By -law and for Approval of Draft Plans of Subdivision Applicants: Smooth Run Developments (Metrus Developments Inc.) Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited 7. PRESENTATIONS No Presentations 8. PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT (a) PSD- 031 -12 Proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision and Rezoning to 8 -1 Permit a 239 Unit Residential Development Owner: 289143 Ontario Ltd. (b) PSD- 032 -12 Application for a Draft Plan of Subdivision and Zoning 8 -12 By -law Amendment Applicant: 1494339 Ontario Ltd. and Maria J. Williams (c) PSD- 033 -12 Proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By -law 8 -19 Amendment to Permit the Construction of a Single Detached Dwelling on an Existing Lot of Record in Enniskillen Applicant: Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority (d) PSD- 034 -12 Proposed Official Plan Amendment 8 -28 Proposed Neighbourhood Design Plan for Village North Neighbourhood in Newcastle Applications to Amend the Zoning By -law and for Approval of Draft Plans of Subdivision Applicants: Smooth Run Developments (Metrus Developments Inc.) Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited G. P. &A. Agenda - 3 - June 25, 2012 9. ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT (a) EGD- 020 -12 Monthly Report on Building Permit Activity for May, 2012 9 -1 (b) EGD- 021 -12 Appointment of Inspector 9 -8 (c) EGD- 022 -12 No Parking at West Beach Road Parkette Proposed 9 -11 Amendment to By -Law 91 -58 10. OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT (a) OPD- 007 -12 Cemetery By -Law and Tariff of Rates 10 -1 11. EMERGENCY AND FIRE SERVICES DEPARTMENT (a) ESD- 010 -12 Fire Dispatch Services 11 -1 (b) ESD- 011 -12 Staffing Trucks with Full -time Firefighters 11 -6 (c) ESD- 012 -12 By -law to Regulate Open Air Burning 11 -9 12. COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT See Report under Unfinished Business 13. MUNICIPAL CLERK'S DEPARTMENT (a) CLD- 022 -12 Appointment to Orono Arena and Community Centre 13 -1 Board 14. CORPORATE SERVICES DEPARTMENT (a) COD- 013 -12 Tender CL2012 -8 Supply & Delivery of Two (2) Vacuum 14 -1 Street Sweepers (b) COD - 014 -12 Expression of Interest EOI- 2011 -3, Solar Voltaic Panel 14 -5 ,Installation — OPA MicroFIT Program (c) COD - 016 -12 Tender CL2012 -16, Erosion Control 14 -17 (d) COD - 017 -12 Tender CL2012 -04, Duke Street Reconstruction 14 -27 15. FINANCE DEPARTMENT (a) FND- 016 -12 2011 Audited Financial Statements 15 -1 (b) FND - 017 -12 Municipal Performance Measures Program — 2011 15 -10 G.P. & A. Agenda - 4 - June 25, 2012 (c) FND- 018 -12 Host Community Strategic Funding Policy 15 -35 16. SOLICITOR'S DEPARTMENT No Reports 17. CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE No Reports 18. UNFINISHED BUSINESS (a) CSD- 006 -12 Clarington Older Adult Association - Parking 18 -1 Addendum 1 Concerns /Strategic Plan (b) Nick Kulb, Partner & Executive Producer, Republic Live, Requesting a 18 -41 Temporary Extension to By -laws 91 -53 and 97 -126 for Noise (Correspondence D — 14, Referred from Council Meeting of June 18, 2012) 19. OTHER BUSINESS 20. COMMUNICATIONS (a) Michelle Speelman Viney, Correspondence Relating to Public Meeting to 20 -1 Consider the Proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision and Rezoning to Permit a 239 Unit Residential Development Owner: 289143 Ontario Ltd. 21. CONFIDENTIAL REPORTS No Reports 22. ADJOURNMENT QdLig lke }Yay General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes June 11, 2012 Minutes of a meeting of the General Purpose and Administration Committee held on Monday, June 11, 2012 at 9:30 a.m. in the Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Present Were: Mayor A. Foster arrived at 10:18 a.m. 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 Facilities Manager, G. Acorn until 2:25 p.m. Municipal Solicitor, A. Allison Director of Engineering Services, T. Cannella until 2:25 p.m. Director of Planning Services, D. Crome Director of Operations, F. Horvath until 2:25 p.m. Director of Corporate Services & Human Resources, M. Marano Director of Finance/Treasurer, N. Taylor until 2:25 p.m. Director of Emergency & Fire Services, G. Weir until 2:25 p.m. Municipal Clerk, P. Barrie Committee Coordinator, J. Gallagher until 2:25 p.m. Councillor Woo chaired this portion of the meeting. DISCLOSURES OF PECUNIARY INTEREST There were no disclosures of pecuniary interest stated at this meeting. ANNOUNCEMENTS Councillor Partner attended the following events: • A Community Meeting on June 5, 2012 at the Bowmanville High School to promote Bowmanville as the next "Million Dollar Community" as featured on the Oprah Network. • Tim Horton's Camp Day on Wednesday, June 6, 2102 at Orono and Newcastle. • A Beef BBQ, sponsored by Durham Cattlemen and Durham Region Federation of Agriculture on Friday, June 8, 2012 at Blackstock. -1- 4 -1 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes June 11, 2012 • Doors Open Clarington on Saturday, June 9, 2012 at Solina and Enniskillen. • Newcastle Chamber of Commerce Spring Trade Show on Sunday, June 10, 2012 at the Newcastle Community Hall. Councillor Partner announced the following upcoming events: • A Public Open House to discuss the Growth Management Discussion Paper as part of the Official Plan Review will be held on Wednesday, June 13, 2012 at the Newcastle & District Recreation Complex. • The RCMP Musical Ride will be held on Thursday, June 14, 2012 at the Orono Fairgrounds. • The Annual Newtonville BBQ will be held on June 16, 2012 at the Ina Brown Parkette. • The Kendal Lions Club will be holding a Pancake Breakfast on Sunday, June 17, 2012 at the Kendal Community Hall. Councillor Traill attended the following events: ® A Community Meeting with Bowmanville High School Officials, Durham Regional Police Service and residents of Trudeau Drive to discuss traffic, littering and loitering issues in the Trudeau Drive area, on Wednesday, June 6, 2012 at the Bowmanville High School. ® Durham Pride Gala on Tuesday, June 5, 2012 at Bobby C's. Councillor Traill announced the upcoming Tyrone Spirit Day will be held on Saturday, June 16, 2012 at the Tyrone Community Centre. Councillor Hooper attended the following events: • Bowmanville's Million Dollar Neighbourhood Town Hall Meeting on Tuesday, June 5, 2012 at the Bowmanville High School. • The 4t" Change of the Command of the 172 Clarington Air Cadet Squadron on Tuesday, June 5, 2012 at the Bowmanville High School. • A Community Meeting with Bowmanville High School Officials, Durham Regional Police Service and residents of Trudeau Drive to discuss traffic, littering and loitering issues, on Wednesday, June 6, 2012 at the Bowmanville High School. ® Tim Horton's Camp Day on Wednesday, June 6, 2102 at Newcastle. • The Public Open Houses to discuss the Growth Management Discussion Paper as part of the Official Plan Review held on Tuesday, June 6, 2012 at the Garnet B. Rickard Recreation Complex and on Wednesday, June 7, 2012 at the Courtice Community Complex. • The St. Marys Cement Award Presentation on Thursday, June 7, 2012, for attaining the first North American International Standards Organization (ISO) 50001 certification, which is a framework for industrial facilities seeking to manage their energy use. SM 4_2 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes June 11, 2012 • Bowmanville Rotary Club Ribfest on Saturday, June 9, 2012 and Sunday, June 10, 2012 at the Garnet B. Rickard Recreation Complex. • The Grand Opening of the new business, "You're Home Windows and Doors ", on Friday, June 8, 2012 at 1648 Taunton Road. • Doors Open Clarington on Saturday, June 9, 2012 at Benjamin Lett's Homestead. • Ecumenical Church Service on Sunday, June 10, 2012 at Rotary Park. Councillor Hooper announced the following upcoming events: • The Concerts in the Park Series begins Thursday, June 14, 2012 at Rotary Park. • June 15, 2012 is Elder Abuse Awareness Day and Bethesda House and the Clarington Older Adults will be hosting a BBQ in the Bowmanville Town Square, at the Bowmanville Cenotaph. Councillor Neal attended the following events: • The Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board Public Meeting at Dr. G. J. MacGillivray Public School on Monday, June 4, 2012 regarding a proposal to relocate Grade 7 -8 French Immersion classes to Courtice Secondary School, starting September 2013. • EFWAC meeting where a presentation on composting was provided by Miller Waste on Tuesday, June 5, 2012. • A Community Meeting with Bowmanville High School Officials, Durham Regional Police Service and residents of Trudeau Drive to discuss traffic, littering and loitering issues in the Trudeau Drive area, on Wednesday, June 6, 2012 at the Bowmanville High School. • A Public Open House to discuss the Growth Management Discussion Paper as part of the Official Plan Review on Tuesday, June 6, 2012 at the Garnet B. Rickard Recreation Complex. • The Grand Opening of the new business, "You're Home Windows and Doors ", on Friday, June 8, 2012 at 1648 Taunton Road. • A Beef BBQ at Blackstock, sponsored by Durham Cattlemen and Durham Region Federation of Agriculture on Friday, June 8, 2012. • Bowmanville Rotary Club Ribfest on Saturday, June 9, 2012 and Sunday, June 10, 2012 at the Garnet B. Rickard Recreation Complex. • Moda Salon's 2nd Anniversary BBQ on Sunday, June 10, 2012 with proceeds going to Sick Children's Hospital. Councillor Novak attended the following events: • The Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board Public Meeting at Dr. G. J. MacGillivray Public School on Monday, June 4, 2012 regarding a proposal to relocate Grade 7 -8 French Immersion classes to Courtice Secondary School, starting September 2013. -3- 4 -3 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes June 11, 2012 • EFWAC meeting where a presentation on composting was provided by Miller Waste on Tuesday, June 5, 2012. • The St. Marys Cement Award Presentation on Thursday, June 7, 2012, for attaining the first North American International Standards Organization (ISO) 50001 certification, which is a framework for industrial facilities seeking to manage their energy use. • The Grand Opening of the new business, "You're Home Windows and Doors ", on Friday, June 8, 2012 at 1648 Taunton Road. • Bowmanville Rotary Club Ribfest on Saturday, June 9, 2012 and Sunday, June 10, 2012 at the Garnet B. Rickard Recreation Complex. • The Public Open House to discuss the Growth Management Discussion Paper as part of the Official Plan Review held on Tuesday, June 6, 2012 at the Garnet B. Rickard Recreation Complex. • Doors Open Clarington on Saturday, June 9, 2012 at Film Studio Barn. Councillor Novak announced the following upcoming events: • A Public Information Centre regarding the Highway 401 and Holt Road Interchange will be held on Wednesday, June 20, 2012 at the Baseline Community Centre. • An Open House to present the proposed Draft - Secondary Plan for the Courtice Main Street (Highway 2) area as part of the Municipality's Official Plan Review process will be held on Wednesday, June 20, 2012 at the Courtice Community Complex. • A Public Open House to discuss the Growth Management Discussion Paper as part of the Official Plan Review will be held on Wednesday, June 13, 2012 at the Newcastle & District Recreation Complex. Councillor Woo attended the following events: • Racing Against Drugs (RAD) event at the Garnet B. Rickard Recreation Complex on Friday, June 8, 2012. • The Gutsy Walk on Sunday, June 10, 2012 with Lisa Benedict at the Whitby Rotary Sunrise Lake Park. He explained that the event is to raise awareness and funds for research into Crohn's Disease and Ulcerative Colitis. • Bowmanville Rotary Club Ribfest on Saturday, June 9, 2012 and Sunday, June 10, 2012 at the Garnet B. Rickard Recreation Complex. Councillor Woo announced that the Durham Masonic Lodge will be hosting a Blood Donor Clinic on Tuesday, June 12, 2012 at the Newcastle Community Hall. Councillor Woo noted that Mayor Foster had attended the Grand Masters Banquet for the International Order of Oddfellows organization. , General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes June 11, 2012 MINUTES Resolution #GPA- 350 -12 Moved by Councillor Neal, seconded by Councillor Hooper THAT the minutes of the regular meeting of the General Purpose and Administration Committee held on May 28, 2012, be approved. CARRIED Councillor Novak chaired this portion of the meeting. PUBLIC MEETING (a) Subject: Application to Amend the Zoning By -law 84 -63 and Proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision Applicant: 1825284 Ontario Limited Report: PSD- 030 -12 Anne Taylor Scott, 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. Glenn Genge, Planning Consultant, D.G. Biddle & Associates, was present representing the applicant. He stated that he is pleased that there are no concerns from the public and that the applicant has been working with staff on this application. Councillor Woo chaired this portion of the meeting. DELEGATIONS Ben Commodore, Coordinator, was present regarding an update from the Firehouse Youth Centre. Mr. Commodore informed the Committee that the year has been going well. He highlighted the Battle of the Bands, and work with the Leadership Class with the Clarington Project. Mr. Commodore informed the Committee that there will be a Golf Tournament, in support of the Firehouse Youth Centre, on August 24, 2012 at the Cider House Golf. He stated that the Firehouse Youth Centre has begun partnering with the Durham Regional Police Service, including sending two youths to a youth camp. Mr. Commodore noted that the Firehouse Youth Centre has begun partnering with PFLAG. He informed the Committee of the recent purchase and donations of electronics and entertainment items. Mr. Commodore informed the Committee that he is working with local gyms to bring events to the Youth Centre. He noted that the Summer Youth Coordinator will be starting in June and several programs are planned -5- 4 -5 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes June 11, 2012 for the summer. Mr. Commodore stated that there have been 775 visits to the Firehouse Youth Centre since January 1, 2012. He introduced a staff member from the John Howard Society and a placement student who work with the Firehouse Youth Centre. Mark Clarke was present regarding West Beach Parkette Overnight Parking and Access. Mr. Clarke provided the Committee with background on the issue, including a reminder of the petition which had been submitted in November, 2011. He stated that the neighbours are concerned about the overnight activities including noise, drinking and littering. Mr. Clarke stated that a post had been installed but it has recently been removed. He informed the Committee that there is a delay by the Durham Region Police Services (DRPS) in response to calls. Mr. Clarke stated that he is concerned that the DRPS are not laying charges. He had previously suggested that posts, similar to the East Beach area, be installed on the corner, to follow the contour of the road to allow for a drop off zone with parking in the parking area. Mr. Clarke stated that he would re- submit a petition requesting the posts. He noted that a light was installed which helps to a certain extent, but does not solve the entire problem. Mr. Clarke also noted that a sign has also been installed. He added that there have been a couple of break -ins in the area. Mayor Foster attended the meeting at 10:18 a.m. Resolution #GPA- 351 -12 Moved by Councillor Traill, seconded by Councillor Partner THAT Staff be directed to move the bollards to the "L turn" on the West Beach Road; and THAT an accessible parking space be created in the same area. See following motion Resolution #GPA- 352 -12 Moved by Councillor Neal, seconded by Councillor Partner THAT the issue of West Beach Parkette overnight parking and access be referred to staff for a report, and THAT, in the meantime, a metal or wooden post be installed immediately. MOTION LOST M W General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes June 11, 2012 RECESS Resolution #GPA- 353 -12 Moved by Mayor Foster, seconded by Councillor Hooper THAT the Committee recess for 15 minutes. CARRIED The meeting reconvened at 11:35 a.m. with Mayor Foster in the Chair. DELEGATIONS - Continued Resolution #GPA- 354 -12 Moved by Councillor Novak, seconded by Councillor Woo THAT the delegation of Mark Clarke regarding West Beach Parkette Overnight Parking and Access be received with thanks. CARRIED Rolf Kluem, Inspector, Durham Regional Police Service (DRPS), was present regarding Report CLD- 021 -12, Safe Communities Advisory Committee and Anti - Graffiti By -law. He stated that he has been in discussions regarding enhancing community safety. Inspector Kluem noted that several area municipalities already have Safe Community Advisory Committees. He explained that the Committees consist of stakeholders in the various aspects of community safety. Inspector Kluem noted that he has provided input to Clarington Staff regarding the stakeholders which might be included in the proposed Clarington Safe Communities Advisory Committee. He explained some of the activities which the Committee may undertake, such as safety forums and community clean -ups. Inspector Kluem stated that the members of the proposed Committee are equal partners. He stated. that he believes that real benefits can be realized by the creation of the proposed Committee, given his experience with a similar Committee in Oshawa. PRESENTATIONS There were no presentations. m 4 -7 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes June 11, 2012 DELEGATIONS - Continued Resolution #GPA- 355 -12 Moved by Councillor Woo, seconded by Councillor Traill THAT the delegation of Ben Commodore, Coordinator of Firehouse Youth Centre, regarding an update from the Firehouse Youth Centre, be received with thanks. CARRIED RECESS Resolution #GPA- 356 -12 Moved by Councillor Partner, seconded by Councillor Traill THAT the Committee recess for 1 hour. CARRIED The meeting reconvened at 1:16 p.m. with Councillor Novak in the Chair. PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT PROPOSED DRAFT PLAN OF SUBDIVISION AND ZONING BY -LAW AMENDMENT APPLICATION TO PERMIT A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OWNER: 1825284 ONTARIO LTD. (CITY HOMES) AND HALLOWAY DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED Resolution #GPA- 357 -12 Moved by Councillor Hooper, seconded by Mayor Foster THAT Report PSD- 030 -12 be received; THAT the application for the proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision, submitted by City Homes to permit the development of up to 66 residential units be supported; THAT the Zoning By -law Amendment application submitted by City Homes be approved as contained in Attachment 4 to Report PSD- 030 -12; THAT once all conditions contained in the Official Plan and Zoning By -law with respect to the removal of the (H) Holding Symbol are satisfied, the By -law authorizing the removal of the (H) Holding Symbol be forwarded to Council for approval; General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes June 11, 2012 THAT the Region of Durham Planning Department and Municipal Property Assessment Corporation be forwarded a copy of Report PSD- 030 -12 and Council's decision; and THAT all interested parties listed in Report PSD- 030 -12 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. CARRIED Councillor Traill chaired this portion of the meeting. ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT ON- STREET ACCESSIBLE PARKING FOR PERSONS WITH A DISABILITY - NEWCASTLE Resolution #GPA- 358 -12 Moved by Mayor Foster, seconded by Councillor Hooper THAT Report EGD- 019 -12 be received; THAT Council officially designate an On- Street Accessible Parking Space for Persons with a Disability on King Avenue East Newcastle, in front of the Shoppers Drug Mart; THAT the proposed by -law with a revised Schedule XXIX attached to Report EGD- 019 -12 be approved by Council; and THAT all interested parties listed in Report EGD- 019 -12 be advised of Council's decision. CARRIED Councillor Woo chaired this portion of the meeting. OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT WINTER BUDGET REPORT Resolution #GPA- 359 -12 Moved by Councillor Hooper, seconded by Councillor Novak THAT Report OPD- 006 -12 be received for information. CARRIED Councillor Hooper chaired this portion of the meeting. 11100Z 4 -9 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes June 11, 2012 EMERGENCY AND FIRE SERVICES DEPARTMENT MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT — MAY 2012 Resolution #GPA- 360 -12 Moved by Councillor Novak, seconded by Mayor Foster THAT Report ESD- 009 -12 be received for information. CARRIED COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT There were no reports to be considered under this section of the Agenda. Councillor Partner chaired this portion of the meeting. CLERK'S DEPARTMENT SAFE COMMUNITIES ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND ANTI - GRAFFITI BY -LAW Resolution #GPA - 361 -12 Moved by Councillor Novak, seconded by Councillor Woo THAT Report CLD- 021 -12 be received; THAT the proposed terms of reference for the establishment of a Safe Communities Advisory Committee as set out in Attachment No. 1 to Report CLD 021 -12 be amended to add a Courtice Business Representative to the membership; THAT the amended Terms of Reference be endorsed in principle and presented to the Committee for review and approval; THAT staff be authorized to contact the key stakeholder groups identified in Report CLD- 021 -12, seeking representatives for the Safe Communities Advisory Committee; THAT the proposed Anti - Graffiti By -law attached to Report CLD- 021 -12 be presented to Council; and THAT all interested parties listed in Report CLD - 021 -12 be advised of Council's decision. 4 -10 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes June 11, 2012 Mayor Foster chaired this portion of the meeting. CORPORATE SERVICES DEPARTMENT CL2012 -13, PEBBLESTONE ROAD REHABILITATION, COURTICE Resolution #GPA- 362 -12 Moved by Councillor Neal, seconded by Councillor Novak THAT Report COD - 015 -12 be received; THAT Coco Paving, Bowmanville, Ontario, with a total bid in the amount of $390,758.40 (net of H.S.T. Rebate), being the lowest responsible bidder meeting all terms, conditions and specifications of Tender CL2012 -13 be awarded the contract for Pebblestone Road Rehabilitation, Courtice, as required by the Municipality of Clarington, Engineering Department; THAT the funds required in the amount of $517,000.00 (which includes $390,758.40 for tendering, design, contract administration and contingencies) be drawn from the following Engineering Department Capital Accounts; Pebblestone Road Rehabilitation: 110 -32- 330 - 83355 -7401 (2012) ........................... ............................... $517,000.00 ME THAT the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to execute the necessary agreement. CARRIED FINANCE DEPARTMENT SOUTH COURTICE ARENA DEBENTURE Resolution #GPA- 363 -12 Moved by Councillor Hooper, seconded by Councillor Partner THAT Report FND- 015 -12 be received for information. CARRIED EKE 4 -11 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes June 11, 2012 SOLICITOR'S DEPARTMENT Resolution #GPA- 364 -12 Moved by Councillor Neal, seconded by Councillor Traill THAT the Municipal Solicitor prepare a report regarding the ownership of West Beach properties, including the rules surrounding waterfront access. CARRIED CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER CORPORATE STRATEGIC PLAN 2011 -2014 PROGRESS REPORT Resolution #GPA- 365 -12 Moved by Councillor Hooper, seconded by Councillor Partner THAT Report CAO- 003 -12 and the Progress Report of the Clarington Strategic Plan attached to Report CAO- 003 -12 be received for information. CARRIED LATER IN THE MEETING (See following motion) Resolution #GPA- 366 -12 Moved by Councillor Neal, seconded by Councillor Traill THAT the foregoing Resolution #GPA- 365 -12 be amended by adding the following at the end: "THAT Staff be directed to prepare a report on the feasibility of including positive and negative descriptions related to strategic plan priorities in the "Conformity with Strategic Plan" section of staff reports being presented to Committee and Council." MOTION LOST The foregoing Resolution #GPA- 365 -12 was then put to a vote and carried. -12- 4 -12 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes June 11, 2012 UNFINISHED BUSINESS There were no items to be considered under this section of the Agenda. OTHER BUSINESS MEDIA PARKING PASSES Resolution #GPA- 367 -12 Moved by Councillor Traill, seconded by Councillor Neal THAT the Municipality of Clarington provide parking passes for the members of the media (Metroland Media, Orono Times, Rogers Cable, CHEXTV, Snap Newspaper, CKDO, KX96 and The Rock) to attend Clarington events. CARRIED COMMUNICATIONS There were no items considered under this section of the Agenda. CONFIDENTIAL REPORTS BENEFITS FOR EMPLOYEES WORKING BEYOND AGE 65 AND A LEGAL MATTER CLOSED SESSION Resolution #GPA- 368 -12 Moved by Councillor Novak, seconded by Councillor Neal THAT in accordance with Section 239 (2) of the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended, the meeting be closed for the purpose of discussing the Confidential Report COD - 010 -12 regarding a matter that deals with labour relations or employee negotiations and a matter that deals with advice that is subject to solicitor - client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose. CARRIED -13- 4 -13 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes June 11, 2012 RISE AND REPORT The meeting resumed in open session at 2:58 p.m. with Mayor Foster in the Chair. Mayor Foster advised that two items were discussed in "closed" session in accordance with Section 239(2) of the Municipal Act, 2009 and no resolutions were passed. Resolution #GPA- 369 -12 Moved by Councillor Neal, seconded by Councillor Woo THAT Report COD - 010 -12 be received; THAT Health, Dental and related benefits be continued equally for applicable employees who continue to work to age 70; THAT AD &D (Accidental Death & Dismemberment), and Life Insurance be provided, as available by plan provider, not less than current limits of 50% reduction at age 65, and 50% further at age 70; THAT LTD (Long Term Disability) terminate at age 65, unless otherwise required by prevailing legislation or as may be available by plan provider; and THAT Short Term Disability terminate at age 65, unless required by prevailing legislation. MOTION LOST Resolution #GPA- 370 -12 Moved by Councillor Novak, seconded by Councillor Partner THAT Report COD - 010 -12 be received; THAT benefits be provided to employees who continue to work beyond age 65 as outlined in Report COD - 010 -12. CARRIED -14- 4--14 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes June 11, 2012 ADJOURNMENT Resolution #GPA- 371 -12 Moved by Councillor Partner, seconded by Councillor Woo THAT the meeting adjourn at 3:01 p.m. CARRIED •C -15- MUNICIPAL CLERK 4 -15 PUBLIC MEETING NOTICE OF C0M12891443Ontario td. Leading the Way Al, The Municipality of Clarington has received Complete Applications for a proposed Zoning By -law Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision. APPLICANT: 289143 Ontario Ltd. PROPERTY: Southeast corner of Prestonvale Road and Bloor Street, Courtice. Part of Lot 33, -Concession 1, former Township 'of Darlington (as shown on• reverse). PROPOSAL: Proposed draft plan of subdivision containing a total of 239 residential units, ,including: 69 single detached dwelling units, 11 lots for 22 semi - detached dwelling units, 73 medium density (townhouse) units and 75 high density (apartment) units, open-space, a parkette, roads and related services. FILE NOS.: S-C-201 1 -0001 and ZBA 2012 -0008 FURTHER INFORMATION: http:// www. carington .net/htdocs /planning_eastvale subdivision.htmi A Public Meeting to receive input on the applications will be held on: DATE: Monday, June 25th, 2012 TIME: 9:30 a.m. PLACE: Council Chambers, 2nd Floor, Municipal Administrative Centre, 40 Temperance St., Bowmanville, Ontario, Additional information relating to the applications is available for inspection between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. (during July and August 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m,) at the Planning Services Department, P Floor, 40 Temperance Street, Bowmanville, Ontario L1C 3A6, or by calling Anne Taylor Scott, Planner, at (905) 623 -3379, extension 2414 or by e -mail at ATaylorScott @clarington.net. If you cannot attend the Publid Meeting on these applications you can make a deputation to. Council at their meeting on Tuesday, July 3rd, 2012, commencing at 7:00 p.m. Should you wish to appear before Council, you must register with the Clerks Department by noon on Wednesday, June 27th, 2012 to have your name appear on the Agenda. If -you wish to be notified of the decision in respect of the proposed draft plan of subdivision and /or rezoning you must make a written request to the Municipality of Clarington, Planning Services Department. APPEAL* If a person or public body does not make oral submission's at a public meeting or make written submissions to the Municipality of Clarington, Planning Services Department before the by -law is. passed, and /or before the approval authority gives or refuses to give approval to the draft plan of subdivision, the person or public body: i) is not entitled to appeal the decision of Clarington Council to the Ontario Municipal Board; and ii) may not be added as a party to the hearing of an appeal before the Ontario Municipal Board unless, in the opinion of the Board, there are reasonable grounds to do so. Dated at the Municipality of Clarington this 31st day of May, 2012. lam' David J. Crome, M.C.I.P., R.P.P. Director of Planning Services Municipality, of Clarington 40 Temperance Street Bowmanville, Ontario L1C 3A6 5 -1 cc: LDO I Property Location Map (Courtice) e BLOOR STREET Subject Site I — 58P r i a ' Cp 63 6¢ Q5 BB 60 STREET .'A ' �—]— % :'a•� •. �� ;/O � t�o •�: qo :�.c I d IS O Z ' '�'•i, X43' .an 83 f 1 1 1 sp •r� !a 4� to •25 � I ]C2 •. ZBA 2012 -0008 Z/V ,9J ItJ .5} .,S �, Z f 4 Zoning By -law Amendment ,!= I, iao �` S 3 4 'sas STREET`; A' ', i -C -2012 -0001 O= ee. , � p Draft Plan Of Subdivision 91101 ,,.: 1•.f I.. & 70 L{ 15 7e 1) 18 78 z0 21 ZZ 23 `° 1 N Owner: 289143 Ontario Ltd. I ® PUBLIC MEETING REPORT # PSD- 032 -12 Leading the Way NOTICE OF CON1494339 Ontario Ltd. and Maria J. Williams The Municipality of Clarington has received a Complete Application for a proposed Zoning By -law Amendment and Proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision. APPLICANT: 1494339 Ontario Ltd, and Maria J. Williams PROPERTY: Part Lot 31, Concession 2, Former Township of Darlington 1635 Durham Highway 2 and Block 20.in Plan 40M -1744 (west of southwest corner of Durham Highway 2 and Trulls Road) Courtice (shown on reverse) PROPOSAL: A proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision having two blocks of street townhouses, each block having five units FILE NOS.: S =C 2012 -0002 & ZBA 2012 -0010 A Public Meeting to receive input on the applications will be held on: DATE: Monday, June 25, 2012 TIME: 9:30 a.m. PLACE: Council Chambers, 2nd Floor, Municipal Administrative Centre, 40 Temperance St., Bowmanville, Ontario Additional information relating to the applications is available for inspection between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. (during July and August 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m.) at the Planning Services Department, 3`d Floor, 40 Temperance Street, Bowmanville, Ontario L1 C 3A6, or by calling Bob Russell (905) 623 -3379, extension 2421 or by e -mail at brussell(a-),clarington.net. If you cannot attend the Public Meeting on these applications you can make a deputation to Council at their meeting on Tuesday, July 3, 2012, commencing at 7:00 p.m. Should you wish to appear before Council, you must register with the Clerks Department by noon on Wednesday, June 27, 2012 to have . your name appear on the Agenda. If you wish to be notified of the decision in respect of the proposed plan of subdivision you must make a written request to the Municipality of Clarington, Planning Services Department. APPEAL If a person or public body does not make oral submissions at a public meeting or make written submissions to the Municipality of Clarington, Planning Services Department before the by -law is passed; and /or before the approval authority gives or refuses to give approval to the proposed draft plan of subdivision, the person or public body: i) is not entitled to appeal the decision of Clarington Council to the Ontario Municipal Board; and ii) may not be added as a party to the hearing of an appeal before the Ontario Municipal Board unless, in the opinion of the Board, there are reasonable grounds to do so. Dated at the Municipality of Clarington this 30th day of May 2012. v qi� David J. Crome, M.C.I.P., R.P.P. 40 Temperance Street Director of Planning Services Bowmanville, Ontario Municipality of Clarington L1 C 3A6 cc: LDO 5 -3 Gl I .ja Property Location Map (Gourtice) REGIONAL HW Y2 2 N ACY'T e.a ism` 4 Q e s. w r Subject Site DURHAM HrDHUVA , � 5 \ 0 S RATMLLM DRIVE N J UE K O U 0 ^ � I •sa . h O S a?o -- g 7.�a 5 Crl t5.4Y W U / ZBA 2012 -0010 L? C LLI �i _ r Zoning By- IawAmendment ry i a S- C- 2012 -0002 Draft Plan Of Subdivisions 41 • f tGd N , _a3 Owner: 1494339 Ontario Ltd. & . Maria J. Williams — _ ms ° PUBLIC MEETING ����.�� ®� ®REPORT #PSD - 033 -12 Leading the Way Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority The Municipality of Clarington has received Complete Applications for a proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By -law Amendment. APPLICANT: Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority PROPIERTV: 2160 Regional Road 3,-Enniskillen PROPOSAL: To permit the construction of a single detached dwelling on an existing lot of record by amending the Clarington Official Plan and Zoning By -law 84-63. The proposed 0.6 ha building envelope is ,located on a' portion- of the property currently designated Environmental Protection Area and zoned Environmental Protection (EP). This building envelope is proposed to be rezoned to permit a dwelling: 4.45 ha of the 6.88 ha parcel will be acquired by the Conservation Authority. FILE NOS.: COPA X012 -0005 and ZBA 2012 -0009 A Public Meeting to receive input on the applications will be held on: DATE: Wonday, June 25, 2092 _ riM E: 9:30 a.m. PLACE: - Council Chambers, 2 "d Floor, Municipal Administrative Centre,. 40 Temperance St., Bowmanville, Ontario Additional information relating to the applications is available for inspection between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. (during July and August 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m.) at the Planning Services Department, 3rd Floor, 40 Temperance Street, Bowmanville, Ontario L1C 3A6, or by calling Mitch -Morawetz (905) 623 - _3379, extension 2420 or by e -mail at mmorawetz @clarington.net. . If you cannot attend the Public Meeting on these applications you can make a deputation to Council at their meeting on Tuesday July 3, 2012, commencing at 7:00. p.m. Should you wish to appear before Council, you must register with the Clerks Department by noon on Wednesday, June 27, 2012 to have your name appear on the Agenda. If you wish to be notified of the adoption of the proposed official plan amendment, or of the refusal of a request to amend the official plan you must make a written request to the Municipality of Clarington, Planning Services Department.. . APPEAL If a person or public body does not make oral submissions at a public meeting or make written submissions to the Municipality of Clarington, Planning Services Department before the proposed - official plan amendment is adopted, and /or before the Icy -law is passed, the person or public body. i) is not entitled to appeal the decision of Clarington Council to. the Ontario Municipal Board, and ii) may not be. added as a party'to the hearing of an appeal before the Ontario Municipal Board unless, in the opinion of the Board, there are reasonable grounds to do so. Dated at the Municipality of Clarington this 30th'day'of May, 2012. . David J. Crome; M.C.l.P., R.P.P. 40 Temperance Street Director of Planning Services Bowmanville, Ontario Municipality of Clarington LIC 3A6 D• - 5_51 Property Location Map (Dariington) ZSA 2012-0009 Zoning By-law Amendment COPA 2012-0005 Marington Official Plan Amendment Appftant: Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority Owner: Jay Armond Sweet and Kathryn Teresa Schoon Ln -- • - N Wal fi- (a) Stephen Brickell, Member of the Resident/Community Coalition, Regarding Addendum #1 to Report CSD- 006 -12, Clarington Older Adult Association - Parking Concerns /Strategic Plan (b) Keith Giesbrecht, Event Producer, and Carolyn Smith, Senior Story Producer, MDN Media 2 Inc., Regarding "Million Dollar Neighbourhood - Season 2" and a Request to Use Garnet Rickard Complex Banquet Hall for Filming (c) Gerry Mahoney, on behalf of the South East Clarington Ratepayers Association, Regarding the Proposed Leader Energy Wind Turbines and Port -- Granby Project (d) Kulpreet Khurana, Regarding the Proposed Leader Energy Wind Turbines and Port Granby Project (e) Bryce Jordan, Sernas Associates, Report PSD- 034 -12, Regarding Proposed Official Plan Amendment, Proposed Neighbourhood Design Plan for Village North Neighbourhood in Newcastle, Applications to Amend the Zoning By -law and for Approval of Draft Plans of Subdivision Applicants: Smooth Run Developments (Metrus Developments Inc.) Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited M to, it 11 W - ��Mm 1 :14 uei :4 1 Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: June 25, 2012 Resolution #: By -law #: Report #: PSD- 031 -12 File #: S -C- 2012 -0001 & ZBA 2012 -0008 Subject: PROPOSED DRAFT PLAN OF SUBDIVISION AND REZONING TO PERMIT A 239 UNIT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT APPLICANT: 289143 ONTARIO LIMITED RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: THAT Report PSD- 031 -12 be received; 2. THAT the application for a Draft Plan of Subdivision (S -C- 2012 -0001) and Rezoning (ZBA 2012 -0008) submitted by 289143 Ontario Limited to permit the development of 239' residential units continue to be processed including the preparation of a subsequent recommendation report; and, 3. THAT all interested parties listed in Report PSD- 031 -12 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. Submitted by: ATS /CP /mj /df 19 June 2012 iA�V_ David-,J. Crome, MCIP, RPP Director, Planning Services Reviewed by: '4� lmet,4�6_ Franklin Wu Of Chief Administrative Officer CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T (905)623 -3379 F (905)623 -0830 LIM 1. APPLICATION DETAILS 1.1 Owner /Applicant: 289143 Ontario Limited 1.2 Agent: Tunney Planning Inc. 1.3 Proposal: Proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision To allow the development of 239 residential units, consisting of 69 single detached residential units, 11 lots for 22 semi - detached dwelling units, 73 medium density (townhouse) units and 75 high density (apartment) units, blocks for open space, a parkette, roads, road widening and reserves. Rezoning To rezone the lands from the Agricultural (A) Zone to appropriate zones that permit the uses as presented in the draft plan of subdivision. 1.4 Area: 7.16 ha 1.5 Location: Part of Lot 33 and Part of the road allowance between Lots 32 and 33, Concession 1, former Township of Darlington (southeast corner of Bloor Street and Prestonvale Road, Courtice) (Attachment 1). 2. BACKGROUND 2.1 289143 Ontario Limited recently submitted an application for a proposed draft plan of subdivision and rezoning in order to develop 7.16 ha parcel of land in the Courtice urban area, just north of the South Courtice Arena. A copy of the proposed draft plan of subdivision is included as Attachment 2. 2.2 A preliminary concept plan shows how the medium and high density block can be developed (Attachment 3). The concept plan shows a four (4) storey apartment building containing 75 units, along Prestonvale Road. The remainder of the block can accommodate 73 townhouse units accessed by private lanes. 2.3 There are currently no servicing limitations with respect to the subject lands. 2.4 The applicant has submitted the following studies, which are currently under review, in support of the application: ® Environmental Impact Study ® Sustainability Letter ® Geotechnical Report ® Phase I Environmental Site Assessment ® Parking Plan 0 Functional Servicing Report REPORT NO.: PSD- 031 -12 Stage 1 -2 Archaeological Assessment Noise Assessment 3. LAND CHARACTERISTICS AND SURROUNDING USES 3.1 The subject lands are currently vacant and in agricultural production. 3.2 The surrounding uses are as follows: North - Vacant land within the Courtice Urban Area; existing dwellings South - South Courtice Recreation Facility East - Robinson Creek and valley system West - Existing residential development & vacant lands designated and zoned for residential development 4. PROVINCIAL POLICY 4.1 Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) PAGE 3 Settlement areas shall be the focus of growth. Land use patterns shall be based on densities and a mix of land uses which efficiently use land, resources and infrastructure and other public services. A full range of housing types and densities are to be provided to meet the projected requirements of current and future residents of the regional market area. The PPS encourages a compact built form which supports the development of transportation systems that minimize the length and number of vehicle trips and also supports the development of viable choices and plans for public transit. Compact built form minimizes negative impact to air quality and climate change and promotes energy efficiency. Natural features and areas shall be protected for the long term. Development shall not be permitted in, or adjacent to, significant woodlands and valleylands unless it has been demonstrated that there will be no negative impacts. 4.2 Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (Growth Plan) The Growth Plan requires municipalities to manage growth, and encourages the creation of complete communities that offer a mix of land uses, employment and housing options, high quality open space, and access to stores and services. Natural heritage features that complement, link or enhance natural systems shall be identified and protected. The subject lands are located outside of the built -up area as defined through the Growth Plan. In new development areas, growth is to make efficient use of services and infrastructure and be compact and transit - supportive. Reducing dependence on the MM automobile through the development of mixed use, pedestrian - friendly environments contributes to achieving complete communities. The Growth Plan requires municipalities to achieve a minimum density target that is not less than 50 residents or jobs per hectare in the designated greenfield area. 5. OFFICIAL PLANS 5.1 Durham Regional Official Plan The Durham Regional Official Plan designates the subject lands as Living Area, with an indication of Key Natural Heritage and Hydrologic Features. 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 natural environment, including Key Natural Heritage and Hydrologic Features, shall be given paramount consideration in light of their ecological functions and scientific, educational and health values. Bloor Street is identified as a Type `A' Arterial Road and Prestonvale Road is a Type 'C' Arterial Road. Regional Official Plan Amendment #128 (ROPA 128), also referred to as Growing Durham, has identified Bloor Street as a Regional Corridor within the Courtice urban area limits. This designation was established to promote public transit ridership through well- designed developments that have a mix of uses at higher densities. Development shall be sensitive to urban design considerations and shall be oriented to the corridor, complemented by the consolidation of access points. Regional Corridors shall have higher density mixed use areas that support higher order transit services and pedestrian oriented development. A long term density target of 60 residential units per gross hectare and a floor space index of 2.5 is to be supported. The built form should be a wide variety of building forms, generally mid -rise in height with some higher buildings. ROPA 128 as approved by Regional Council has been appealed and is under consideration by the Ontario Municipal Board. The Regional Corridor designation on the subject lands is not in dispute. 5.2 Clarington Official Plan In the Clarington Official Plan the subject lands are designated as Urban Residential with High and Medium Density Residential and Environmental Protection Area. The lands are within the Bayview Neighbourhood, which has a population allocation of 4500 and a housing unit target of 1625, including 300 medium density units and 125 high density units. . , REPORT NO.: PSD -031 -12 PAGE 5 The Environmental Protection Area designation reflects the location of the watercourse and valleylands along the east side of the property. Significant woodlands are also present on the subject lands. The preparation of an Environmental Impact Study is required. Bloor Street is a Type 'A' Arterial and Prestonvale Road as a Type 'C' Arterial. Arterial roads: • Provide full continuous movements; • Limit private access; • Provide for public transit vehicles and transit stops; • Provide sidewalks on both sides; and • Provide for cycling where possible. 6. ZONING BY -LAW 6.1 Zoning By -law 84 -63 zones the subject lands Agricultural (A) Zone. A rezoning application is required to place the lands in appropriate zones to permit the development as shown on the proposed draft plan of subdivision. 7. PUBLIC NOTICE AND SUBMISSIONS 7.1 Public notice was given by mail to each landowner within 120 metres of the subject property and public meeting signs were installed along each street frontage. 7.2 At the time of the writing of this report, two (2) residents have contacted the Planning Services Department regarding the applications. One resident requested further information on the applications and the other resident had concerns about the proposed high density development causing an increase in traffic volumes and congestion and compromising pedestrian safety. 8. AGENCY COMMENTS 8.1 The Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board (KPRDSB) has reviewed the proposed applications and indicates that the development may generate up to 24 elementary pupils to attend Dr. G.J. MacGillivray Public School and up to 18 secondary pupils to attend Courtice Secondary School. KPRDSB requests sidewalks along the south side of Bloor Street and along the internal Street 'A'. The medium and high density block should be designed with pedestrian connections to both Bloor Street and Prestonvale Road at the site plan approval stage. 8.2 Durham Region Transit and Rogers Communications have no objections to the proposed applications. REPORT NO.: PSD- 031 -12 8.3 Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority (CLOCA) has provided a number of comments relating to the review of the Environmental Impact Study and the Functional Servicing Report. These comments have been forwarded to the applicant and must be addressed prior to approving the applications. CLOCA's comments relate to: • Defining top of bank; • Implementation of the Robinson/Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan (2011); • Confirming breeding bird status; • Protection of the endangered Butternut trees and other rare species; • Appropriateness of buffers and access allowances adjacent to natural features; and • Additional information required regarding stormwater management. 8.4 Comments from Durham Regional Planning Department have not been received at the time of writing this staff report. 9. DEPARTMENTAL COMMENTS 9.1 Clarington Community Services, Emergency & Fire Services and the Clarington Building Division have no concerns or objections with the proposed applications. 9.2 Clarington Operations has no objections but highlights that stormwater management will need to be addressed and a 20 metre roadway width is required for the public street. For the medium and high density block, snow storage areas and amenity space will be required as part of the site plan review process. 9.3 Clarington Engineering Services has provided a number of technical comments in addition to the following: A Traffic Impact Study is required to assess the impact of the traffic generated on the surrounding road network. Stormwater management techniques for the development must be designed in compliance with the Southwest Courtice Subwatershed of Robinson Creek Implementation Report. The dedication of parkland is determined by the requiring 1 hectare of land for every 300 units. The Municipality may also decide to accept a cash -in -lieu payment. The proposed 239 unit development requires the conveyance of 0.8 hectares of parkland. Block 82 in the proposed draft plan of subdivision is 0.2 hectares in size. Therefore, the developer would be responsible for providing for an additional 0.6 hectares which could be additional land dedication, or cash contribution, or a combination of both. The on- street parking plan does not demonstrate that there is sufficient on- street parking in the low density residential area and requires revisions. For the W. PAGE 7 high /medium density block, the provision of on -site parking will be reviewed through the site plan process. • The public road must have a minimum width of 20 metres. 10. DISCUSSION 10.1 The proposed draft plan provides a mix of units that complies with the density and population targets of the Official Plan. The development would be a sequential and logical extension of development that is occurring to the west and would make efficient use of servicing and road infrastructure that exists in the area. 10.2 The development appears to satisfy the objectives of the PPS and Growth Plan. Further discussion is required on how the development on the medium and high density block can meet the corridor policies of ROPA 128 and the urban design policies relating to corridors through OPA 77. The medium and high density block would be subject to site plan control and site details, such as building orientation and layout, architectural details, vehicular and pedestrian connections, and landscaping would be part of the site plan review process. 10.3 The development achieves an overall density of 92 persons per gross ha and satisfies the population and density objectives of the PPS, Growth Plan, and both the Regional and Clarington Official Plans. The proposed lot frontage are more narrow that what is typically found in newer subdivisions. This in part, leads to the potential on- street parking problem noted in Engineering Department's comments. The suitability of the lot sizes will require further discussion, in order to ensure that entrances, driveways, snow storage and on- street parking can be accommodated. 10.4 It is apparent that the EIS requires revisions that may impact the limit of development and affect the design concept. 10.5 All agency, staff and public submissions will be considered through the detailed review of the application. All submitted studies and reports are currently under review and will be summarized in a future report for Committee and Council's consideration. 11. CONCURRENCE — Not Applicable 12. CONCLUSION 12.1 The purpose of this report is to satisfy the Public Meeting requirements under the Planning Act and taking into consideration the outstanding comments, staff respectfully request that this report be received and for staff to continue processing the application including the preparation of a subsequent report. CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN — Not Applicable Staff Contact: Anne Taylor Scott AM Attachments Attachment 1 - Key Map Attachment 2 - Proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision Attachment 3 - Preliminary concept plan for Medium & High Density Block List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Kevin Tunney, Tunney Planning Inc. 289143 Ontario Limited (c /o Michael Freedman) Stacy Howson Michael deBeaupre & Jill Alley- DeBeaupre Janice Jones PAGE 8 4 2 63 6q 8S 65 a➢ 08 68 ro > >2 > O 1 3 O ,Z'J CD O �D C/)v os oE3 cD Property Location Map (Courtice) Subject Site ZBA 2012 -0008 Zoning By -law Amendment S -C- 2012 -0001 Draft Plan Of Subdivision Owner: 289143 Ontario Ltd. N N � BLOOR STREET OPEN SPACE BLOCK 84 (0.67 ha -1.6 ac. HIGH / MEDIUM DENSITY 3 BLOCK 81 c (2.21 ha - 5.5 ac.) m HIGH DENSITY o BLOCK ROBINSON CREEK VALLEY FUTURE PARK 56 3 69 60 O 61 8 >4 �. 6j STREET 'A' O ss S3 >s d O 24 2 I 77 I S S> S 4g �8 4? g6 4S > s 43 2> 42 >8 28 29 41 30 31 32 33 34 1,1116 31 38 39 >9 40 >8 1 3 STREET 'A' 4 S 8 PARKETTE > 8 BLOCK 82 9 10 11 12 13 14 1S 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 (0.20 ha - 0.5 ac.) SOUTH COURTICE V RECREATION FACILITY 2 63 6q 8S 65 a➢ 08 68 ro > >2 > O 1 3 O ,Z'J CD O �D C/)v os oE3 cD Property Location Map (Courtice) Subject Site ZBA 2012 -0008 Zoning By -law Amendment S -C- 2012 -0001 Draft Plan Of Subdivision Owner: 289143 Ontario Ltd. N N � Property Location Map (Courtice) Subject Site ZBA 2012 -0008 Zoning By -law Amendment S -C- 2012 -0001 Draft Plan Of Subdivision Owner: 289143 Ontario Ltd. N N � I ... .......... .... . -14— L -,g L 0 T-- ............ .. . . ... . .... T ..... . ....... ......... i II r r .,WV4 CE 8 34 DIDISFTY Ix aoJ aL= 81 .... . . ... . 'T 4. .4 f I —J i L A/l "Y 72 64 ,6 : f STREET 'A�` t Z4 . ... ... ... a,Y 0 4 aj 6 a 2.,, STREET ------------------ 10 7 5" 9 'D IJ' 14 Is Ts is 79 20 21, ..1 1,2 /77 f j i SOUTH COURTICE COMMUNITY PARK SC��h�,fA�� � / r , PROPOSED DRAFT PLAN OF SUBDIVISION OF PART OF LOT 33 AND PART OF THE ROAD ALLOWANCE BETWEEN LOTS 32 AND 33 CONCESSION 1 TOWNSHIP OF DARUNCTON, Now In The MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF DURHAM RELEVANT_ INFORMATION S U B M I S S 1 0 N S iCTION 51(17) OF IIIE PLANNING ACT -amm —SWInUm n. 10. aAANaa WY1FL 28.143 ONTARIO LTD. V A L E litit I IWG a2a-4 Dp- ---i 0 �u (D -0 0 CD zr 0 c, (D f '_ �.J L ' ^ / / r- --� / FUTURi �---� ` c=/ 0.3. RESME NII I, If TWO.ftd Buffr BLOC 6111-1 op SPACE BL THIGH��I,�M LEN 11:11 (0.67 h. 1.6 cc. ji wa STREET A STREET 'A' S BDJWSION PROPOSED CONCEPT SITE PLAN FOR BLOCK 81 OF PROPOSED DRAFT PLAN MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF DURHAM —^ � BLOCK 81 o o o E3 m� Leading the Way 1,A 4: '*T�wti Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: June 25, 2012 Resolution #: By -law #: Report #: PSD- 032 -12 File #: S -C 2012 -0002 & ZBA 2012 -0010 Subject: APPLICATIONS FOR A DRAFT PLAN OF SUBDIVISION AND ZONING BY -LAW AMENDMENT APPLICANT: 1494339 ONTARIO LTD. AND MARIA J. WILLIAMS RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: THAT Report PSD- 032 -12 be received; 2. THAT the application for a Draft Plan of Subdivision (S -C 2012 -0002) and Zoning By- law Amendment (ZBA 2012 -0010) submitted by D.G. Biddle & Associates, on behalf of 1494339 Ontario Ltd. and Maria J. Williams, for the development of 10 townhouse units continue to be processed including the preparation of a subsequent report; and 3. THAT all interested parties listed in Report PSD- 032 -12 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. Submitted by: /J � Da J rome, MCIP, RPP Director, Planning Services BR /CP /mj /df /av 19 June 2012 `'°,% Reviewed by: 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 -12 REPORT NO.: PSD- 032 -12 PAGE 2 1. APPLICATION DETAILS 1.1 Applicant/Owner: 1494339 Ontario Ltd. (Michael Foley) and Maria J. Williams 1.2 Agent: D.G. Biddle & Associates Limited 1.3 Proposal: To permit two blocks of street townhouses, each block having 5 units, total of 10 units fronting on the east side of McMann Crescent 1.4 Area: Two abutting properties totalling 0.2425 hectares (0.599 acres) 1.5 Location: Part Lot 31, Concession 2, former Township of Darlington, 1635 Durham Highway 2 and Block 20 in Plan 40M -1744 (west of southwest corner of Durham Highway 2 and Trulls Road) Courtice (see Attachment 1) 2. BACKGROUND 2.1 The proposal is for a 10 unit street townhouse development consisting of two blocks of five units each. On May 11, 2012, the applicant submitted applications for Draft Plan of Subdivision and Zoning By -law Amendment. 2.2 The following studies were submitted in support of the proposal: • Functional Servicing Report & Stormwater Management Brief; • Noise Impact Study; • Soil Probe Ltd. Site Investigation; • Energy Conservation & Sustainability Plan; • Site Screening Questionnaire; and • Parking Plan. 3. LAND CHARACTERISTICS AND SURROUNDING USES 3.1 The subject lands are located on McMann Crescent and are also adjacent to the south side of Durham Highway 2. The land is generally flat and currently there is one detached dwelling accessed from Durham Highway 2. The dwelling is proposed to be demolished should the proposed development be approved. 3.2 The surrounding uses are as follows: North - Durham Highway 2 and beyond, detached dwellings South - Detached dwellings East - Convenience Store and detached dwellings West - McMann Crescent and beyond, townhouses and semi - detached dwellings 8 -13 REPORT NO.: PSD- 032 -12 4. PROVINCIAL POLICY 4.1 Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) PAGE 3 The PPS encourages growth within settlement areas on full municipal services. Land use patterns are to promote a mix of housing choices. The subject application is consistent with the PPS. 4.2 Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (Growth Plan) The Growth Plan directs growth to built up areas where the capacity exists to best accommodate expected population growth. Transit supportive densities and a healthy mix of residential uses are promoted. The property is within the built boundary. The Growth Plan principles are supportive of the subject applications. 5. OFFICIAL PLANS 5.1 Durham Regional Official Plan The Durham Regional Official Plan designates the subject lands as "Living Area ". According to Regional Official Plan Amendment 128 the property is also within the Courtice Durham Highway 2 Regional Corridor. The proposed street townhouses meet the Corridors Policy for uses at higher densities that promote public transit ridership. The proposed development conforms to the Durham Regional Official Plan and Regional Official Plan Amendment 128. 5.2 Clarington Official Plan The Clarington Official Plan designates the subject lands as "Urban Residential' within "Special Policy Area F ". The proposed development conforms to policies of the Urban Residential designation and Special Policy Area F. The Special Policy F Area and Courtice Town Centre are a current part of a secondary plan study. The subject lands are within the proposed Courtice Main Street Secondary Plan area in the Medium Density Residential designation and the street townhouses proposed conform. The relatively higher density of the street townhouses supports the Regional Transit Spine on adjacent Durham Highway 2. The street townhouses proposed are sited opposite street townhouses. Following the preconsultation meeting in January 2012, an On- street Parking Plan was submitted to address the policies of the Official Plan which do not permit townhouses opposite townhouses on a street unless adequate on- street parking can be provided. After some revisions, the parking plan was accepted by Clarington Engineering Services in March. 8 -14 6. ZONING BY -LAW 6.1 Within Zoning By -law 84 -63, as amended, the subject lands are zoned "Urban Residential Type One (R1)" and "Holding - Urban Residential ((H)R1) ". The proposed use does not conform and hence, the rezoning application. 7. PUBLIC NOTICE AND SUBMISSIONS 7.1 Public notice has been given by mail to each landowner within 120 metres of the subject lands and two (2) public meeting signs were installed, on the subject lands 21 days prior the Public Meeting; one along the McMann Crescent frontage and the other, on the south side of Durham Highway 2. No inquiries on the subject application were received at the time this report was written. 8. AGENCY COMMENTS 8.1 The application has been circulated and no agencies have commented to date. 9. DEPARTMENTAL COMMENTS 9.1 Engineering Services has commented that prior to approval of the subdivision, the applicants must satisfy Engineering Services regarding noise attenuation and traffic, although it is anticipated the existing road network is sufficient. Drainage for the proposal was accounted for in the original Courtice Mill Subdivision Stormwater Management Plan. The preliminary grading plan meets the intent of the master plan but, minor changes will be requested. 9.2 At this time, the majority of agencies and departments have not provided comments on this application. 10. DISCUSSION 10.1 The proposed plan of subdivision is consistent with the Emily Stowe Neighbourhood Design Plan in terms of both medium density housing and the melding of the development potential of the 1635 Durham Highway 2 property with the abutting vacant block in the registered plan to the west. Neighbourhood Design Plans are detailed and comprehensive and have thematic plans for consideration of land use, phasing, water distribution, sanitary sewer collection, storm drainage, open space and public facilities, roads, sidewalks, trails and transit. The subdivision complies with the design concept. 10.2 The proposed plan of subdivision is within the proposed draft Courtice Main Street Secondary Plan area in the Medium Density Residential designation. The street townhouses proposed conform. am REPORT NO.: PSD- 032 -12 11. CONCURRENCE — Not Applicable 12. CONCLUSION PAGE 5 12.1 The purpose of this report is to give the status of the applications for the public meeting, and identify issues and comments received to date. It is appropriate to have the applications continue being processed by staff. CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN The recommendations contained in this report conform to the general intent of the following priorities of the Strategic Plan: X Promoting economic development Maintaining financial stability Connecting Clarington Promoting green initiatives Investing in infrastructure Showcasing our community Not in conformity with Strategic Plan Staff Contact: Bob Russell Attachments: Attachment 1 - Property Location Map & Proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision Attachment 2 - Parking Plan List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: D.G. Biddle & Associates Limited Durham Regional Planning Department mm 0 x m 0 ;:I_ _U D > �v o =. o3 w0 N � N -� Properly Location Map (Courtice) N REGIONAL � 8WY 2 Q a Subject - f�s�!uy;' s RlnisT �f"4�= ✓E.yr. Site DURHAM HIGH \) > w V Z Z h Y O F T� I Variety Store a ST RATHALLAN DRIVE Z 0 UE U O J� O O m � e O 11111 0 z LtJ '12 7 o Bell Switching C) s I _ Station U) W ZBA 2012 -0010 U ��" - - Q Zoning By -law Amendment r C— NO S -C -2012 -0002 �C i , J Draft Plan Of Subdivisions Y N Owner: 1494339 Ontario Ltd. & Maria J. Williams 0 x m 0 ;:I_ _U D > �v o =. o3 w0 N � N -� cV I( I i 1 1 L Alp LLJ w - 4� c� 1 2, 3. • � 6 7 W I U W U z ® ® y ® BI z MCA d (BUCK 19 I I 7 48 49 50 5152 53 54 '5 U W IJ w ' McMA/V Lu W 6 45 44 43 42 41 40 39 38 7 O U OD TROLLS ROAD ar ar— i Q -a_ KEY�N McMANN CRESCENT EAST LEG ON STREET PARKING REQUIRED - 1 SPACE PER 4 TOWNHOUSE — ..B SPACES I SPACE PER 3 SNGLE/SEMI UNRS m 7 SPACES TOTAL - IS SPACE ON STREET PARKING AVAILABLE - 16 SPACES McMANN CRESCENT WEST LEG ON STREET PARKING REQUIRED I SPACE PER 4 10WN8011E LANDS - 6 SPACES 1 SPACE PER 3 SINGLE /SEMI UNRS . 8 SPACES ON STREET PARKING AVAILABLE = 30 SPACES PARKING PLAN o. o. elaal. o n. oche.. L1m1t.A 5CA`E 1500 111108 OPAWN eY: H.ft. c n0. DESIGN W. %.S,%, CHECKED B : R.CA. P DATE' JNAWff 2012 s 6 O x O U D VJ 6 03 o3 W N � N N 0 1 Ll 4 ;Lei 04 1 11 rd ► Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: June 25, 2012 Resolution #: By -law #: Report #: PSD- 033 -12 File #: COPA 2012 -0005 AND ZBA 2012 -0009 Subject: PROPOSED OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND ZONING BY -LAW AMENDMENT TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE DETACHED DWELLING ON AN EXISTING LOT OF RECORD IN ENNISKILLEN RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report PSD- 033 -12 be received; 2. THAT the application submitted by the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority continue to be processed including the preparation of a further recommendation report; and 3. THAT all interested parties listed in Report PSD- 033 -12 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. Submitted by: Reviewed by: Davi . Crome, MCIP, RPP Director of Planning Services MM /CP /df /mj /av 19 June 2012 Lx d- __ - z nklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905 - 623 -3379 '. REPORT • 1 • r- 1. APPLICATION DETAILS 1.1 Applicant: Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority ( CLOCA) 1.2 Owner: Jay Sweet and Kathryn Schoon 1.3 Proposal: To amend the Clarington Official Plan and Zoning By -law 84 -63 to permit the construction of a single detached dwelling on an existing lot of record in Enniskillen 1.4 Area: 6.9 ha 1.5 Location: 2160 Regional Road 3, Enniskillen 2. BACKGROUND 2.1 On April 27, 2012, CLOCA submitted applications on behalf of Jay Sweet and Kathryn Schoon proposing to amend the Clarington Official Plan and Zoning By -law 84 -63 to permit the construction of a single detached dwelling on an existing lot of record in Enniskillen. The portion of the property where the dwelling is proposed to be located is designated Environmental Protection Area in the Official Plan and zoned Environmental Protection (EP). The construction of a single residential dwelling is not permitted. 2.2 The property owners approached CLOCA about selling a portion of the subject property that is abutting lands that CLOCA already owns in the Enniskillen Valley. The owners wish to sell 4.45 hectares of land to CLOCA, so long as they can get a building permit to construct a dwelling on the remaining 2.42 hectares. (see Attachment 1) CLOCA has agreed to purchase the lands being offered and is representing the property owners as the applicant for the subject applications, seeking to amend the Clarington Official Plan and Zoning By -law 84 -63 to permit the construction of a dwelling on the proposed retained lands. 2.3 A Scoped Hydrogeological Assessment has been completed by CLOCA and was submitted with the application. This study is required by the policies of the Clarington Official Plan for development applications proposed within identified Natural Heritage Features. The scope of the study and findings are detailed later in this report. A Planning Justification Report was also submitted with the applications. 3. LAND CHARACTERISTICS AND SURROUNDING USES 3.1 The subject property is vacant land, used previously as pasture. A lane used to access three residential properties to the west passes over the subject property. This same lane is used to access the subject property. During a site visit, staff observed 8-20 REPORT NO.: PSD- 033 -12 PAGE 3 some cars being stored on the property. The applicant has indicated that the cars will be removed. 3.2 The subject property is located in the Enniskillen Valley amongst 590 ha of land owned by CLOCK An unopened road allowance runs up the west side of the property however CLOCA owns the lands to the west of the road allowance and the lands north and east of the subject property. 3.3 The surrounding uses are as follows: North - Enniskillen Valleylands owned by CLOCA South - Rural residential properties East - Enniskillen Valley Lands owned by CLOCA West - Unopened road allowance and Enniskillen Valley Lands owned by CLOCA 4. PROVINCIAL POLICY 4.1 Provincial Policy Statement The 2005 Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) states that land must be carefully managed to promote efficient land use and development patterns which support strong, liveable and healthy communities, protect the environment and facilitate economic growth. The PPS directs residential development to settlement areas. Development may occur within significant valleyland, such as the Enniskillen Valley, if it can be demonstrated that the proposed development will not negatively impact the feature or its function. A Hydrogeological Study has been completed to support this proposal and it has been determined that there would be no negative impact on the significant valleylands if a dwelling were constructed on a portion of the property. This property is an existing lot of record within the hamlet of Enniskillen and the proposal will not result in the creation of a new lot, since the proposed severed lands will meld with CLOCA's adjacent lands. The proposal is consistent with the PPS. 4.2 Greenbelt Plan The subject property is located in the Protected Countryside and partially within the Hamlet of Enniskillen in the - Greenbelt Plan Area. The proposed area to be re- designated and rezoned is located within the hamlet boundary. Hamlets are governed by municipal official plans and are not subject to the policies of the Greenbelt Plan. All of the subject lands that are within the Protected Countryside and a portion of the lands within the hamlet are to be sold to CLOCA following approval of the proposed amendments to permit a single detached dwelling. The subject applications are consistent with the policies of the Greenbelt Plan. [MMI 5. OFFICIAL PLANS 5.1 Durham Regional Official Plan The Durham Regional Official Plan designates the subject property Hamlet and Major Open Space. The proposed building envelope is located within the Hamlet portion of the property. Single detached dwellings are to be the predominant land use in hamlets, according to the Official Plan. The proposal to rezone a portion of the subject property to permit the construction of a single detached dwelling conforms with the Durham Regional Official Plan. 5.2 Clarington Official Plan The Clarington Official Plan designates the property Hamlet Residential and Environmental Protection Area. The proposed building envelope is located on a portion of the property within the Environmental Protection Area designation. A Clarington Official Plan Amendment is required in order to allow the construction of a single detached dwelling in the proposed location on the property. The intent of this application is not to re- designate the subject lands but rather insert an exception policy to permit a dwelling within the proposed building envelope. The property is entirely within the Significant Valleylands component of the Natural Heritage System in the Clarington Official Plan. Therefore, an appropriate study is required in order to determine the suitability of the proposal for the subject property and the potential impact on the identified feature. A Scoped Hydrogeological Assessment has been completed in support of the applications. 6. ZONING BY -LAW 6.1 Zoning By -law 84 -63 zones the subject lands Agricultural (A), Residential Hamlet Exception (RH -3) and Environmental Protection (EP). A dwelling is permitted in either the "A" zone or the "RH -3" zone but not in the "EP" zone. The proposed building envelope is located on a portion of the property zoned EP and therefore a Zoning By- law Amendment is required. A Zoning By -law Amendment must conform to the Official Plan and since the proposed building envelope is located on lands designated Environmental Protection Area, the Zoning By -law cannot be amended without also amending the Official Plan. 7. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND STUDIES 7.1 A Scoped Hydrogeological Assessment has been completed and submitted in support of the applications. This study has identified that the proposed building envelope is located in the vicinity of areas of significant groundwater discharge that support important hydrologic functions. The Scoped Hydrogeological Assessment was completed to ensure that the proposed development will not impact groundwater resources and ecosystem functions. This study provides a description of site conditions including surficial and subsurface soil conditions, groundwater flow conditions and vulnerability, recharge and discharge. An assessment of potential impacts associated with the development has also been completed. The study found LOOWA that no impact to the shallow or deeper aquifer systems is expected to result from the proposed development. The area slated for the construction of the house is underlain by a till unit that has limited recharge properties and the private water supply well is finished in the deeper less vulnerable aquifer system. No impacts to surface water features in the area are anticipated. PRIM 8.1 Public notice was given by mail to each landowner within 120 metres of the subject properties and a public meeting notice was installed on the site. As of the writing of this report, no comments or concerns from neighbouring land owners have been received. One nearby resident called seeking clarification on the application but stated no concerns. 9. AGENCY COMMENTS 9.1 The Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority have commented that,they have no objection to the approval of these applications. The Region of Durham Health Department have commented that they have no objection to the approval of these applications. They note that the proposed forthcoming severance must conform with the Region's Drilled Wells and Lot Sizing Policies. The Region of Durham Planning Department and Works Department have not commented at the time of writing this report. 10.1 Engineering Services have advised they have no objection in principal to the application, but wish to review a grading plan for the proposed lot prior to issuance of a building permit. 10.2 The Emergency Services have no objection to the application, but recommend the driveway be constructed to carry the weight of a fire truck. 11. DISCUSSION 11.1 The owner of the subject lands wishes to construct a dwelling within the proposed building envelope. At the same time, CLOCA wishes to purchase the lands being offered to them to add to the Enniskillen Conservation Area, reducing the length of edge lands around their holdings. If successful, the approval of this application will benefit the current land owner, CLOCA and the residents of Clarington who will benefit from CLOCA's endeavours to acquire lands in the Enniskillen Valley. CLOCA's goal is 8 -23 REPORT NO.: PSD-033-12 .y to protect these significant valleylands that are the headwaters of the Bowmanville Creek. 11.2 The subject lands were designated Environmental Protection Area as a result of the steep slopes associated with the Enniskillen Valley. There are no woodlands or other natural heritage features in the proposed building envelope. The proposal has identified a small area of land in the valley that could be made suitable for a residence. It still requires a steep and long driveway up the hill between the existing residences. The access to Regional Road 3 would continue to be shared with other residences. 11.3 The subject proposal does not result in an additional lot since the lands to be severed would be melded with CLOCA's land holdings. 11.4 Staff will continue to review the application and work towards bringing forth a recommendation report once all agency comments have been received. Staff will also continue to work with the applicant to address any and all, concerns which may come forward from the public or agencies circulated to. 12. CONCURRENCE — Not Applicable 13. CONCLUSION 13.1 The purpose of this report is to satisfy the requirements of the Public Meeting under the Planning Act. It is respectfully recommended that this report be referred back to Staff for further processing and the preparation of a subsequent report. CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN The recommendations contained in this report conform to the general intent of the following priorities of the Strategic Plan: X Promoting economic development Maintaining financial stability Connecting Clarington Promoting green initiatives Investing in infrastructure Showcasing our community Not in conformity with Strategic Plan Staff Contact: Mitch Morawetz, Planner I Attachments: Attachment 1 - Key Map Attachment 2 - Subject Property and CLOCA Lands 8-24 REPORT NO.: PSD- 033 -12 List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Central Lake Ontario Conservation Jay Sweet PAGE 7 8 -25 Property Location Map (Darlington) N Subject ct Site t w Approximate location Z :Builciing;Enyelope - `. of house O TT O Driveway.- Well LU Z W 0- O Z ZBA 2012-0009 Zoning By -law Amendment COPA 2012 -0005 Clarington Official Plan Amendment Applicant: Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority ® Proposed Retained Land Proposed Severed Land Owner: Jay Armond Sweet and Land Owned By CLOCA REGIONAL ROAD 3 Kathryn Teresa Schoon I X CD 0 �D �v O z. o� CIO0 w� N LM R v c� • Leading the Way Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: June 25, 2012 Resolution #: By -law #: Report #: PSD- 034 -12 File #'s: COPA 2005 -008, PLN 31.5.10, S -C 2005 -0003, S -C 2005 -0004; ZBA 2005 -042 and ZBA 2005 -043 Subject: PROPOSED OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROPOSED NEIGHBOURHOOD DESIGN PLAN -FOR VILLAGE NORTH NEIGHBOURHOOD IN NEWCASTLE APPLICATIONS TO AMEND THE ZONING BY -LAW AND FOR APPROVAL OF DRAFT PLANS OF SUBDIVISION APPLICANTS: SMOOTH RUN DEVELOPMENTS (METRUS DEVELOPMENTS INC.) BROOKFIELD HOMES (ONTARIO) LIMITED RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: THAT Report PSD- 034 -12 be received; 2. THAT Addendums 1, 2 and 3 to Report PSD- 067 -09 be lifted from the table and received; 3. THAT the North Newcastle Neighbourhood Design Plan be received; 4. THAT the Mayor and Clerk be authorized by By -law, on behalf of the Municipality to execute a Memorandum of Understanding regarding the phasing of parkland referred to in Section 12.4.5 of this report between Smooth Run Developments and Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited and the Municipality of Clarington which contains terms and conditions to protect the Municipality's interests satisfactory to the Directors of Planning Services and Engineering Services; 5. THAT subject to the execution of a Memorandum of Understanding referenced above, Council request the Ontario Municipal Board to: a) approve application COPA 2005 -008, submitted by Smooth Run Developments and Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited,; as Amendment No. 86 to the Clarington Official Plan as contained in Attachment 7 to PSD- 034 -12; b) approve Draft Plan of Subdivision S -C- 2005 -003 submitted by Smooth Run Developments to permit the development of 656 residential units, subject to the conditions contained in Attachment 8 to Report PSD- 034 -12; c) approve Draft Plan of Subdivision S -C- 2005 -004 submitted by Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited to permit the development of 270 residential units, subject to the conditions contained in Attachment 9 to PSD- 034 -12; d) enact zoning by -law amendment ZBA 2005 -042 submitted by Smooth Run Developments to implement the proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision as contained in Attachment 10 to Report PSD- 034 -12; and e) enact zoning by -law amendment ZBA 2005 -043 submitted by Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited to implement the proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision as contained in Attachment 11 to Report PSD- 034 -12; 6. THAT a By -law to remove the Holding (H) symbol be forwarded to Council at such time that the applicants have entered into a subdivision agreement; 7. THAT the Durham Region Planning Department and Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) be forwarded a copy of this report and a copy of Council's decision; and 8. THAT all interested parties listed in Report PSD- 034 -12 and any delegation be advised of Council's decision. Submitted by: Z204---, Reviewed by: avid . Crome, M.C.I.P., R.P.P. Director of Planning Services�� CS /CP /df /sn /ah /df 18 June 2012 8 -29 Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T (905)623 -3379 F (905)623 -0830 REPORT NO.: PSD -034 -12 1. 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 APPLICATION DETAILS Owners: Smooth Run Developments (Metrus Developments Inc.) Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited Agent: Sernas Associates Proposed Clarington Official Plan Amendment: PAGE 3 Amend Table 9 -2 by increasing the housing target for North Village Neighbourhood to reflect the following: i) 1050 low density units to 1000 units; ii) 250 medium density units to 400 units; iii) total from 1350 units to 1450 units; and iv) amending all corresponding totals. Amend Map A -4 — "Land Use Newcastle Village Urban Area" by: i) revising the collector road pattern; ii) enlarging the boundaries for Special Policy Area G; iii) deleting one public elementary school symbol; iv) relocating one public elementary school symbol; v) relocating one separate school symbol; vi) relocating one neighbourhood park symbol; vii) relocating one medium density symbol; viii) adding two medium density symbols; and ix) adding an Environmental Protection Area. ® Amend Map B4 — "Transportation — Newcastle Village Urban Area" by revising the collector road pattern. ® Amend Map H3 - "Neighbourhood Planning Unit — Newcastle Village Urban Area" by changing the population of the North Village Neighbourhood from 3900 to 4150 (see Attachment 7). Plans of Subdivision: Smooth Run Developments (S -C- 2005 - 0003): 656 unit residential Plan of Subdivision consisting of 326 single detached dwellings, 76 semi detached dwellings, 76 linked dwelling units, 84 townhouse units, and a medium density townhouse block, 1 elementary school, 1 park block, a parkette, a daylighted tributary, two (2) stormwater management ponds, an open space block, a block for a water reservoir and a Future Development Block (Attachment 4). Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited (S -C- 2005 -0004) 270 unit residential Plan of Subdivision, consisting of 139 single detached dwellings units, 62 linked dwellings, 69 townhouse units, a parkette, a walkway, a servicing block and a Future Development Block (Attachment 5). W PAGE 4 1.5 Zoning By -law Amendments: Change the current zoning on both properties from "Agricultural (A -1) Zone" and "Environmental Protection (EP) Zone" to appropriate zones to permit the proposed developments. 1.6 Site Area 2. LOCATION Smooth Run Developments Brookfield Homes TOTAL 73.84 hectares 34.86 hectares 108.70 hectares 2.1 The subject properties are located north of the Canadian Pacific Railway (St. Lawrence and Hudson Railway), east of North Street and Regional Road 17 and Highway 35/115, south of Concession Road 3 and west of Arthur Street, being Part Lots 27 & 28, Concession 2, and Former Township of Clarke (see Attachment 1). 3. BACKGROUND 3.1 On August 24, 2005 Staff received an application to amend the Clarington Official Plan submitted jointly by Smooth Run Developments (Metrus Developments Inc.) and Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited. An application for a Neighbourhood Design Plan was also submitted jointly by both parties. 3.2 Smooth Run Developments (Smooth Run) and Brookfield Homes (Brookfield) have each submitted separate applications for proposed draft plans of subdivision as well as zoning by -law amendments for their respective lands. A statutory Public Meeting was held on January 9, 2006. The applications were referred back to staff for further processing, the completion of the Neighbourhood Design Plan process and a Financial Impact Analysis. The Financial Impact Analysis was undertaken by Hemson Consulting for the Municipality of Clarington and included a review of these two applications as well as four other major development proposals in other areas of the Municipality. 3.3 On May 28, 2008, both Smooth Run and Brookfield submitted revised proposed draft plans of subdivision and corresponding rezoning applications for only the lands in the south west corner of the combined overall site, where the applicants believed that servicing would be available for only 250 units, referred to as Phase 1. 3.4 On July 28, 2008, a revised Official Plan Amendment was received, as well as two revised proposed draft plans of subdivision and rezoning applications based on the entire site. The total number of residential units was 1567. 3.5 On August 7, 2008 the Municipality received a Notice of Appeal submitted by the solicitor for Smooth Run and Brookfield, regarding the Official Plan Amendment, proposed Draft Plans of Subdivision and applications for Zoning By -law amendment. The appeals were filed under Sections 22 (7)', 51(34) and 34(11) of the Planning Act, for failure of Council to make a decision in respect of these development applications. The 8 -31 REPORT NO.: PSD- 034 -12 PAGE 5 appeals were detailed in Report PSD- 092 -08, considered by Committee on September 8, 2008. 3.6 A second Statutory Public Meeting, based on the,July 28, 2008 submissions was held on September 22, 2008. The applications were referred back to staff for further processing, the completion of the Neighbourh000d Design Plan (NDP) process and resolution of issues. 3.7 On December 10, 2008, a Prehearing Conference before the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) was held. At that time, the Municipality and applicant's solicitor agreed to continue to work on resolving the various issues, regarding financial, phasing-and environmental concerns. A second pre- hearing conference was held on March 26, 2009 at which time a third pre- hearing conference was set for July 9, 2009 to establish the issues for the actual OMB hearing. A date for the OMB hearing was also set for October 5, 2009 for 21 days. The transportation issues involving the realignment of Regional Road 17 were resolved through mediation held March 6, 2009 involving the Region of Durham, Ministry of Transportation and the appellants. The details of the mediated resolution are contained in Section 12.1 of this report. 3.8 On May 6, 2009, a fourth submission was received. The total number of units for both subdivisions was 1030 units. As a result of unsuccessful negotiations regarding the restoration and naturalization of a buried tributary on the Smooth Run property, staff prepared Report PSD- 067 -09 for Committee's consideration at their meeting of June 22, 2009. The report, contained in Attachment 2, recommended the Municipality take the position that the NDP and related development applications incorporate a restored (daylighting) naturalized channel for the north tributary of the Foster Creek. At the General Purpose and Administration meeting, the motion to approve the recommendations in the report was lost and a new motion was brought forward recommending that both the north and south tributaries be daylighted. The motion was passed. At the subsequent Council meeting of June 29, 2009, Council tabled PSD- 067 -09 to September 14, 2009 (Addendum 1). The motion to support daylighting of both tributaries was never adopted by Council. As such, only the daylighting of the northerly tributary was advanced by Staff, consistent with the recommendations of the Foster Creek Subwatershed Study. Addendum 1 to Report PSD- 067 -09 was tabled until October 26, 2009; it was further tabled to January 2010 (Addendum 2) and then again on April 2010 and July 2010 (Addendum 3) (Report PSD- 067 -09 and the various Addendums on Attachment 2). At the December 20, 2010 meeting Council passed a resolution that PSD- 067 -09 be tabled until such time as the Director of Planning Services deemed it suitable to report back on the Official Plan Amendment, Draft Plans of Subdivision and their related rezoning and the NDP. The recommendations in PSD- 067 -09 are being recommended for approval within the context of this report. 8 -32 '' ' • � 1 PAGE 6 Committee's resolution to daylight both tributaries will be discussed in Section 12.2 of this report. 3.9 During this time, Metrus requested staff to focus efforts in resolving the issues with their Draft Plan of Subdivision in the Brookhill Neighbourhood, which was also subject to an appeal to the OMB. All issues were resolved in the fall of 2011 and the first phase was registered in December 2011. 3.10 In the fall of 2009, the applicant presented staff with a concept that proposed to relocate and daylight a portion of the northern tributary. This concept was formalized in a revised plan which was submitted in May 2010 as the fifth submission. In addition to a daylighted channel, an Open Space Block was introduced which resulted from the relocation of the west stormwater management pond. 3.11 On April 2, 2011, the sixth submissions to each proposal were submitted. It included a reservoir site requested by the Region of Durham, lots for traditional semi - detached units and reoriented lots. The sixth submissions are the basis for the approval of the NDP and Official Plan Amendment, Proposed Draft Plans, Conditions of Draft Approval and Zoning By -law amendments. The breakdown of dwelling by unit type is noted below: Sixth Submission (March 2011) Dwelling Type Brookfield Smooth Run 9.8 m link 62 76 19.6 m semi - 76 11.6 m single 95 170 13.1 m single 44 88 15 m single - 36 18 m single - 32 6.6 m street townhouse 34 - 7.6 m street townhouse 35 84 Medium density block - 94 TOTAL units per draft plan 270 656 TOTAL UNITS 926 3.12 Supporting Documentation 3.12.1 The applicants provided various studies with the first submission of the proposed draft Plans of Subdivision. These studies have subsequently been revised to reflect subsequent submissions. The following documents will be summarized in Section 8 of this report. 8--33 REPORT NO.: PSD- 034 -12 PAGE 7 ® Phase 1 — Environmental Site Assessment for Brookfield Homes(Ontario) Limited, dated August 2004; • Phase 1 — Environmental Site Assessment for Smooth Run Developments, dated August 2004; ® Noise Impact Study for Smooth Run Developments, latest revision dated April 2010; ® Noise Impact Study for Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited latest revision dated April 2010; ® Functional Servicing Study for Smooth Run Developments and Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited, latest revision dated April 2011; and ® Transportation Study for Smooth .Run Developments and Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited, dated May 2008. 4. SITE CHARACTERISTICS AND SURROUNDING LAND USES 4.1 The lands within the North Village Neighbourhood slope from north to south and are cultivated with soybean and corn crops. Two tributaries flow from the lands east of Arthur Street towards the railway tracks both overland and by means of tile drains. In 2009, the lands were regraded in the vicinity of the piped tributary by the farmer who rents the lands. The lands owned by Smooth Run Developments are currently vacant. The lands owned by Brookfield Homes support existing barns. A 4.0 hectare parcel, supporting a single detached dwelling and accessory buildings front onto Regional Road 17. A 0.39 hectare parcel supporting a single detached dwelling and accessory buildings is located on Arthur Street. The Region of Durham owns a 0.58 hectare parcel for a reservoir. 4.2 Surrounding Land Uses: North - Rural residential, a cemetery, agricultural crop and livestock barns once used for a hog operation. South - CP Railway and beyond that, established residential neighbourhood in the Village of Newcastle East - Rural residential, trailer park and agricultural crops West - Rural residential, a church, commercial uses and Highway 35/115 5. PROVINCIAL POLICY 5.1 Provincial Policy Statement 5.1.1 The applications were reviewed in the context of the 2005 Provincial Policy Statement. New development shall occur adjacent to built up areas and shall have compact form, a mix of uses and densities that allow for the efficient use of land, infrastructure and public services. 8 -34 • ' • 1 i Planning authorities are required to provide for a range of housing types and densities with a ten year supply of lands which are designated and a three year supply of zoned and serviced lands within draft approved and registered plans. New housing is to be directed to locations where infrastructure and public services are or will be available. A full range of housing types and densities shall be provided to meet projected requirements of current and future residents of the regional market area. Public Spaces, Parks and Open Space policies, states that healthy active communities should be promoted by planning public streets and spaces that are safe and facilitate pedestrian and non - motorized movement. A full range of publicly accessible built and natural setting for recreation including facilities, parks, open space and trails should also be considered. Infrastructure and Public Service Facilities, states that infrastructure and public services facilities shall be provided in a coordinated efficient and cost effective manner. Planning for these shall be integrated with planning for growth so that they are available to meet current and projected needs. The use of existing infrastructure and public service facilities should be optimized where feasible before considering developing new infrastructure and public service facilities. Natural Heritage policies states that natural features and area shall be protected for the long term. The diversity and connectivity of natural features and the long- term ecological function and biodiversity of natural heritage systems should be maintained, restored or where possible improved, recognizing linkages between and among natural heritage features and areas, surface water features and ground water features. 5.1.2 The applications are generally consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement as they are proposing a mix of low and medium density housing types. A greater variety of housing types could be provided to meet the future needs of residents. The subject lands are within the Urban Area boundary of Newcastle Village and adjacent to existing built up areas and will make use of existing infrastructure and public service facilities. The proposals provide for recreation through the parks and open space. Natural heritage features will be restored and linkages through the open space and park blocks will be provided. 5.2 Provincial Growth Plan 5.2.1 The Provincial Growth Plan encourages municipalities to manage growth by directing population growth to settlement areas. Growth is to be accommodated by building compact, transit - supportive communities in designated greenfield areas and by reducing dependence on the automobile through the development of mixed use, pedestrian - friendly environments. Growth shall also be directed to areas that offer municipal water and wastewater systems. Municipalities should establish an urban open space system within built up areas which may include communal courtyards and public parks. +- REPORT NO.: PSD- 034 -12 PAG E 9 5.2.2 The North Village Neighbourhood is in a Greenfield Area as defined by the Provincial Growth Plan. Designated Greenfield Areas of each upper and single tier municipality will be planned to achieve a minimum density of 50 residents and jobs per hectare. This provision is not intended to be applied to each individual draft plan. The two proposed draft plans achieve approximately 41 persons per gross ha. The proposed Official Plan Amendments do increase the density in this neighbourhood from that currently contained in the Official Plan and bring both proposals closer to the 50 persons per ha. In addition, there will be future employment in the neighbourhood with the development of the elementary school and home occupation uses. 6. OFFICIAL PLAN POLICIES 6.1 Durham Regional Official Plan 6.1.1 The subject lands are designated as "Living Area" in the Durham Regional Official Plan. Lands within this designation shall be used predominantly for housing purposes. 6.1.2 Development applications in designated Living Areas shall achieve the following: • A compact urban form; • The use of good urban design principles; • A mix of appropriate uses; • Linkages for pedestrians and cyclists which link communities internally and externally and to public transit; • A grid pattern of arterial and collector roads where necessary to support transit supportive road pattern; • A Greenland system that compliments and enhances the Urban System; and • The balance between energy efficiency and cost. The application conforms to the Durham Region Official Plan policies. 6.2 Clarinaton Official Plan 6.2.1 The Clarington Official Plan designates the subject lands as "Urban Residential' and "Future Urban Residential" subject to the policies of "Special Policy Area G ". The use of lands within the "Urban Residential" designation shall be predominately for housing. Two (2) public elementary schools, one (1) separate elementary and one (1) separate secondary school, two (2) medium density areas and two (2) neighbourhood parks are also designated over the neighbourhood. 6.2.2 The lands north of the northerly collector road (Streets "A" and "C" on Attachments 4 & 5) are designated within the "Special Policy Area G ". This area is potentially affected by the hog operation located immediately north of the urban boundary and the surrounding planning area. The area of influence as defined in the Minimum Distance Separation Formula is designated "Future Urban Residential Area ". Until such time as the hog operation or similar agricultural operation ceases including removal of the barns, the area of influence shall remain designated "Future Urban Residential'. There are also AM A lands designated "Urban Residential" in "Special Policy Area G ". As a condition of development, a warning clause must be included in all purchase and sale agreements indicating potential impacts from agricultural operations including noise and odour. These lands may also be affected by the hog operation. One public elementary school symbol, one separate secondary school symbol and a Neighbourhood Park symbol are also identified within "Special Policy Area G." 6.2.3 Regional Road 17 is designated as a Type 'B' Arterial. Type `B' Arterials are designed to move significant volumes of traffic from one part of the Municipality to another. Arthur Street and Concession Road 3 are Type 'C' Arterials which are designed to move lower volumes of traffic over shorter distances. In addition, two east -west collector roads are identified as well as a north -south collector within the neighbourhood itself. 6.2.4 The lands within the North Village Neighbourhood have a population allocation of 3900 and a housing target of 1350, being 1050 low density units, 250 medium density units and 50 units for intensification. The amendment proposes an increase in the population to 4150 and the housing target to 1450 units. 6.2.5 The Clarington Official Plan requires the preparation of Neighbourhood Design Plan (NDP) prior to the consideration and approval of a plan of subdivision. An NDP was prepared in consultation with the Municipality and other agencies. It does not require the approval of Council but does require approval from the Directors of Planning Services and Engineering Services. 6.2.6 The Clarington Official Plan may require that a Financial Impact Analysis be undertaken for major development proposals. Where such an analysis demonstrates that the development will have adverse effect on the Municipality's finances, then the development will be considered premature and contrary to the intent of the Official Plan. A Financial Impact Analysis was prepared in February 2008. Council adopted the recommendations therein. This will be discussed further in Section 12.4 of this report. 6.2.7 Prior to municipal approval of any draft plan of subdivision, the Municipality is to prepare a subwatershed plan in consultation with the Ministry of Natural Resources, the Conservation Authority and other agencies. The Foster Creek Subwatershed study was completed in 2001 and received by Council. 628 Council Approved Amendment No. 77 The proposed Official Plan Amendment, draft plans and rezoning applications have been reviewed in the context of Amendment No. 77, approved by Council, in March 2012. The proposed development complies with the new Urban Design Policies contained in Amendment No. 77. The neighbourhood is edged with arterial roads which provide for easy traffic movement including transit. Internally a grid of short streets allow convenient circulation for walking, cycling and connection to transit routes. The daylighting of the tributary gives consideration to the natural features and terrain. REPORT NO.: PSD- 034 -12 PAGE 11 The conditions of draft approval require the Owners to provide a Community Theme Plan which will detail street lights, fencing, entrance features and landscaping to provide an attractive streetscape. An Environmental Sustainability Plan is also being required in the conditions of draft approval. This plan will detail how the Owners /builders will promote energy efficiency and water conservation, enhanced indoor air quality, use of non -toxic and recycled building products, landscaping and tree planting programs and low energy appliances. 7. ZONING BY -LAW 7.1 The majority of both properties are zoned "Agricultural Exception (A- 1) ".in Zoning By- law 84 -63, as amended. A small portion zoned "Environmental Protection (EP) Zone" is located on the south -east quadrant of the Smooth Run draft plan. Zoning by -law amendments are required in order to implement both proposed plans of subdivision. 8. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND STUDIES 8.1 Phase 1 - Environmental Site Assessment The Site Screening Questionnaire prepared by Brookfield indicated that an orchard was situated on the site and as such, a Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) is required. Soil sampling was conducted to determine the presence of arsenic and free cyanide on the site. The soil sampling and analysis determined that lands are within the acceptable levels according to the Ministry of Environment's guidelines. A Phase 1 ESA was submitted by Smooth Run. The site has been used historically for agricultural purposes. The neighbouring properties consist mainly of farm fields and houses. No issues of environmental concerns were identified with regard to the historical or present use of the subject site or surrounding land. No further environmental investigations were recommended. 8.2 Noise Impact Studies Sernas Associates prepared individual Noise Impact Studies for Smooth Run and Brookfield in August 2005 and revised reports were submitted in 2008 and 2011. The studies address noise generated from vehicular traffic on Concession Road 3 to the north, Arthur Street to the east, Regional Road 17 and Highway 35/115 to the west, and train traffic from the railway to the south. The reports recommend noise abatement measures to meet the noise levels acceptable to the Region of Durham, Municipality of Clarington, CP Railway and the Ministry of Environment. Noise fencing 1.8 metres high will be required along locations of Arthur Street and Concession Road 3. Noise fencing and berms totaling 2.2 metres to 2.8 metres high are required along Regional Road 17, where these lots will also be influenced by noise from Highway 35/115. Where residential units are located adjacent to the railway, a 2.2 metre high noise barrier is proposed comprising noise fence and earthen berm. The reports recommend that A. . detailed noise impact studies be submitted to identify noise mitigation measures and warning clauses to be included in the subdivision agreements once the final grading plans and the building plans are available. 8.3 Functional Servicinq Study Sernas Associates prepared a Functional Servicing Study for both sites. The report was revised in July 2008 and April 2011. Approximately 109 hectares outside of the urban Area and east of Arthur Street drain through the North Village Neighbourhood through two existing culverts under Arthur Street. The minor system flows from the neighbourhood will discharge to the two proposed stormwater management ponds located the immediately north of the railway. Major system flows (overland flow) from the neighbourhood will be conveyed to the stormwater management ponds via the public road allowances, with the exception of a small area at the north end of the plan which drains onto Concession Road 3. A flow inlet structure will be required on Regional Road 17 to intercept and direct the overland flow into the west stormwater management pond. The two stormwater management facilities are designed to meet water quality and quantity targets outlined in the Foster Creek Subwatershed Planning Study (March 2001). The northerly extension of the sanitary sewer on Regional Road 17 will provide a sanitary sewer services for the neighbourhood. Watermain supply to the neighbourhood will require expansion of the existing Zone 1 reservoir and the installation of the permanent Zone 2 pumping station. A section of feedermain will be required on Arthur Street to supply pressure and flow to the internal water distribution system to meet the ultimate build out. 8.4 Transportation Study Sernas Transtech prepared a Transportation Study for both sites. The report was submitted in September 2007 and was revised in May 2008 and was prepared on the basis of the development of the entire neighbourhood, as such a revised Transportation Study was not required for the submissions of 2011. In May 2008, the report stated that the development traffic can be satisfactorily accommodated on the road network with the following road improvements: Add a centre two -way left turn lane on North Street (Regional Road 17) along the frontage of the development to accommodate existing and future left turning traffic and should be implemented for each phase as the development progresses from south to north. 8 -39 REPORT NO.: PSD- 034 -12 PAGE 13 Before the completion of 260 units, remove the stop sign from the eastbound and westbound approaches at the intersection of North Street and Concession Road 3 which is currently under all —way stop control. When the development reaches 600 units, improvements are required at the intersection of Concession Road 3 /North Street and Highway 35/115, including additional lanes on exit ramps of Highway 35/115 and North Street. When the development reaches the final 300 units, realign North Street by shifting it 300 metes to the east along Concession Road 3. This alignment will require that: Concession Road 3 be widened to four lanes between existing North Street and the realigned North Street; and A cul -de -sac on North Street just south of the McDonalds be constructed to provide access to the McDonalds and the church to the south. The geometrics at the intersection of Concession Road 3 /North Street will require revisions. • Reconfigure the intersection of Concession Road 3 and Highway 35/115 (southbound ramps on the west side) to accommodate southbound traffic patterns when the development reaches full build out. • Urbanize the frontage of the development on North Street, Arthur Street and Concession Road 3, including curb and gutter, sidewalks and illumination as the development progresses. • Prior to the development reaching 600 units, add gates to the level crossing of Arthur Street and CP Railway. • Arthur Street requires no widening based upon future traffic volumes. • Concession Road 3, east of the recommended realignment of North Street requires no widening based on future volumes. 9. PUBLIC MEETING AND SUBMISSIONS 9.1 The first Public Meeting was held in January 2006 and a second Public Meeting was held on September 22, 2008 for the revised application received in August 2008. In addition, a Public Information Centre for the Neighbourhood Design Plan was held on September 11, 2008. 9.2 Concerns and comments from area residents from both public meetings and the information centre are summarized below. • The development is not in keeping with the historic character of Newcastle Village; • There are too many homes; • The form of development is too dense; • The number and size of parks should be increased; • The development will have an impact on wells in the area; 8 -40 • The development will impact on existing water and sewer services in Newcastle Village; • The development will increase traffic volumes on major roads in Newcastle Village; • What improvements will be made to Regional Road 17 and Arthur Street to accommodate the increase in traffic; • An overpass or safety arms at the level crossing of Arthur Street is required; • When will sidewalks be installed on Regional Road 17 and Arthur Street to accommodate pedestrians' movements to the Village core; • What accommodations will be made to mitigate the effects of construction traffic on the existing area residents; • There are no provisions for a full time fire department, police department, churches and adequate playing fields for children and adults; • Diminishing agricultural lands; and • Daylighting of the two buried tributaries is being ignored. 9.3 In addition to those shared concerns noted above, the owners of 220 Arthur Street are concerned that the development will adversely affect the setting of their historic home and that development will impact the stream traversing a portion of their property. The owners have requested that the lots sizes in the vicinity of their home be increased as well as an evergreen tree buffer planted around their property. In addition, the stream should remain in the same location and in the physical condition as it is currently on their property. 9.4 Residents on Concession Road 3 and a business on Regional Road 17 ,expressed concerns with the realignment of Regional Road 17 as it effects their driveway locations. This issue and all concerns from area residents will be discussed in Section 12.5 of this report. 10. AGENCY COMMENTS 10.1 This sixth submission of the revised Neighbourhood Design Plan development applications for the Official Plan Amendment, draft Plans of Subdivision and rezonings were circulated to various agencies for comment. 10.2 Enbridge Gas, Bell Canada and Rogers Cable Communications Inc. have offered no objection. 10.3 The Region of Durham 10.3.1 The Region of Durham has provided comments on the revised Official Plan Amendment with respect to the Provincial Policy Statement, the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, and their Provincial Plan Review Responsibilities, 10.3.2 The subject lands are designated "Living Area" in the Durham Regional Official Plan. Lands within this designation shall be for housing purposes incorporating the widest possible variety of housing types, sizes and tenures. The Region has no objection to 8 -41 REPORT NO.: PSD -034 -12 PAGE 15 the proposed amendment. The Region does suggest that the Municipality consider re- designating Concession Road 3 as a Type 'B' Arterial between any realigned Regional Road 17 and Highway 35/115. This would maintain a continuous Type `B' Arterial Road connection to Highway 35/115, as provided by Regional Road 17 on its existing alignment and would protect the Right -of -Way width appropriate for the improvements that may be required as part of the Regional Road 17 realignment. The alignment of Regional Road 17 south of Concession Road 3 is to be determined through a Class Environmental Assessment (EA) study. 10.3.3 In their letter of June 2009, the Region states that the subject draft plans are located within the future Zone 2 Pressure District of the Newcastle Water Supply System. Servicing this area will require the construction of a reservoir, feedermains, a pumping station and expansion of the Newcastle Water Supply Plant (WSP). The existing WSP is sufficient to service approximately 11,000 persons. The current serviced population is approximately 9,000 persons. The remaining draft approved developments will utilize the remaining plant capacity during the next 5 -10 years. The Region of Durham has identified an expansion of the Newcastle WSP in the Capital Budget and Forecast with design in 2013 -2014 and expansion to take place in 2015 subject to budget approvals. 10.3.4 The Zone 2 infrastructure has been identified in the Development Charges By -Law Background study. Where applicable, feedermains are being included for installation as part of Subdivision servicing. The remainder of the required infrastructure shall be installed through the Region's Capital Works program. These remaining works are forecasted between 2011 to 2020. 10.3.5 The Wilmot Water Pollution Control Plant (WPCP) has a sufficient capacity to service approximately 10,000 persons. The current serviced population is approximately 8,400 persons. The remaining draft approved developments will utilize the majority of the plant capacity during the next 5 -10 years. The Region of Durham has identified an expansion of the Wilmot WPCP in the Capital Budget and Forecast. The proposed development area contributes to the Foster Creek Trunk Sanitary Sewer System. Sanitary servicing of these lands will also require the construction of a 675 mm trunk sanitary sewer along the Foster Creek alignment, from Hwy 401 to the WPCP. The construction of this work is forecasted between 2014 to 2015. 10.3.6 The development will also require the extension of a trunk sewer (600mm — 750mm) on North Street from Wilmot Street to the north side of the CPR. These works have not been identified in the Region of Durham Capital Works program since growth projections could be achieved within other lands south of the CPR within the Zone 1 Water Pressure District. 10.3.7 Development should not be considered within the Future Development Block of the Brookfield plan until a Class EA study has been completed to determine the future alignment of Regional Road 17. The realignment will require a minimum right -of -way (ROW) width of 30 m. All other aspects of the road cross - section, intersection/ entrance locations, lane configurations, etc. will be determined through the Class EA study and subsequent detailed design. -The realignment is to be constructed by the developer prior to, or in conjunction, with the Future Development Block. Ownership of 8 -42 • the realigned portion of Regional Road 17 is to be transferred to the Region following completion of the road realignment. 10.3.8 The Region will require the developers to construct left and right turn auxiliary lanes for the Regional Road 17 /Street `A' intersection and to urbanize the east side of Regional Road 17 over the entire frontage of the subdivisions. These improvements are to be designed to accommodate the future extension of the auxiliary lanes and urbanization to the north on Regional Road 17. 10.3.9 All of the Regional road improvements are to be designed and constructed to Regional standards at 100% developer cost. 10.3.10 Traffic impacts are to be monitored at completion of each stage of the development in order to confirm the scope and timing of road network improvements required to accommodate the next and subsequent stages. 10.3.11 The storm sewer system for the development is to be designed to accept the road drainage from Regional Road 17, through the full extent of the North Village Neighbourhood Plan. The Region will enter into a cost - sharing agreement with the developer to pay for the over - sizing of the storm sewer system required to accommodate the Regional Road 17 drainage. 10.3.12 The Region is concerned about the proposed high school location on Regional Road 17 at Concession Road 3 due to the operational and safety problems associated with vehicular and pedestrian access from a major arterial road. 10.3.13 Durham Transit provides service on Regional Road 17. Concession Road 3 and Arthur Street will be designated for future transit routes. One north -south and one east -west collector' road should be designated for future transit stops 10.4 Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority 10.4.1 The Functional Servicing Report prepared by Sernas Associates, was reviewed. The stormwater management scheme presented in the report has demonstrated that the site can be serviced in terms of both quality and quantity treatment, as required by current MOE guidelines. 10.4.2 GRCA reviewed the revised draft plan which shows the daylighted triburary. GRCA requires the channel to be restored and naturalized. The GRCA provided a number of conditions of draft approval, among them a condition requiring the developer to. undertake an inventory of the two downstream tributaries from the railway to the main channel of the Foster Creek. The inventory shall describe current channel morphology and culvert conditions including a photographic record of redevelopment conditions. GRCA provided conditions of draft approval for both sites. REPORT NO.: PSD- 034 -12 PAGE 17 10.4.3 The Municipality did receive a preliminary design of the naturalized daylighted channel. It has been reviewed by the GRCA and deemed satisfactory. 10.5 Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board 10.5.1 The Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board, has advised that these applications would generate approximately 368 elementary students to Newcastle Public School and a further 49 secondary students to Clarke High School. 10.5.2 The proposed location of the Public Elementary School (Block 428) in the Smooth Run Draft Plan is acceptable. The Board provided conditions of draft approval which require the subdivider to enter into an option agreement with the Board prior to the registration of a subdivision agreement with the Municipality for second phase of development. Prior to the execution of the option agreement the subdivider must provide a stormwater management report, soils study, a Record of Site Condition and grading and servicing plans. The subdivider must also grade the site, add topsoil and sod as well as install a 1.8 metre high chain link fence on the perimeter of Block 428 where it abuts proposed residential lands. 10.6 Peterborough Victoria Northumberland and Clarington Catholic District School Board 10.6.1 The Peterborough Victoria Northumberland and Clarington Catholic District School Board has advised that the secondary school site located on the Brookfield Homes lands is no longer required by the Board. The anticipated secondary enrolment for this development will be approximately 30 -60 students which can be accommodated within the current capacity at St. Stephen's Secondary School in Bowmanville. 10.7 Canadian Pacific Railway 10.7.1 The Canadian Pacific Railway (St. Lawrence and Hudson Railway) provided comments on the first submission applications. CPR has standard comments related to residential development adjacent to their property, as such comments on subsequent submissions did not change. CPR advises that the proposed developments abut the principle main line. The Railway is not in favour of residential developments adjacent to their right -of- way, as the land use is not compatible with railway operations. However, a standard list of conditions of approval were provided which includes, appropriate noise attenuation and adding warning clauses in the purchase and sale agreements regarding noise and vibrations and fencing adjacent to the railway property. 10.8 The Ministry of Transportation 10.8.1 The Ministry of Transportation (MTO) reviewed the applications in accordance with the requirements for controlled access highway policies and criteria and the Public Transportation and Highway Improvement Act (PTHIA). The Ministry has no objection in principle to the proposed Official Plan Amendment, proposed Draft Plans and rezoning Application, and provided standard comments with respect to permits for building /structures and signs within the prescribed distance of the permit control area. 8 -44 REPORT NO.: PSD- 034 -12 •, Y 10.8.2 MTO acknowledges that Draft Plan S -C- 2005 -003 Smooth Run Developments, falls outside of the MTO Permit control area and portions of Draft Plan S -C- 2005 -004, Brookfield Homes are within MTO's permit control area. Both Draft Plans of Subdivision make up the North Village Neighbourhood, and therefore were required to submit traffic and drainage reports to consider the impacts on Highway 35/115 of the entire North Village development. 10.8.3 MTO has raised concerns with the intersection of Highway 35/115 and Concession Road 3. MTO is of the opinion that the existing infrastructure can accommodate the increase in traffic generated from the first phase of development, approximately 260 units, without the need for substantial improvements. However, approval of Phase 1 or Stage 1 does not constitute approval of the entire site /neighbourhood plan. Future phases would require a more detailed investigation /analysis. The applicants have provided transportation studies to MTO which propose alternative options to mitigate any traffic concerns, in the future. 10.8.4 The introduction of increased traffic would more than likely require the signalization of both ramp terminals of King Avenue (Durham Highway 2) and Highway 35/115 by 2016. This may require the widening of the King Avenue overpass to accommodate left turn lane and storage for the westbound to southbound movement. 10.8.5 MTO advises the Municipality and the owner that the cost for all improvements including design, construction, utility relocation and property acquisition to the Highway 35/115 and Concession Road 3 interchange, made necessary by this development will be assumed entirely by the owner, at no cost to MTO. 10.8.6 As a condition of Draft Approval the owners shall submit to the Ministry of Transportation for their review and approval, a Traffic Impact Study to assess the impacts of the development on the Highway 35/115. The owner shall submit to the Ministry of Transportation for their review and approval, a Stormwater Management Report indicating the intended treatment of the calculated runoff. Finally, the owners shall enter into a legal agreement with the Ministry of Transportation, whereby the owners agrees to assume financial responsibility for all highway improvements to the Highway 35/115 and Concession Road 3 interchange, as a direct result of this development. 11. DEPARTMENTAL COMMENTS 11.1 Emergency and Fire Services The Clarington Emergency & Fire Services had concerns with an increase in call volumes as a result of this subdivision. In May 2012, the location for a new Fire Station was approved by Council. It is expected that construction will commence in the fall 2012 and will be operational in 2014. :_, REPORT NO.: PSD- 034 -12 11.2 Engineering Services PAGE 19 11.2.1 The Clarington Engineering Services provided comments for both draft plans. The following provides a summary of the comments. Appropriate conditions have been added to the conditions of draft approval for both draft plans. 11.2.2 The existing municipal roadways situated in this portion of the Newcastle Urban Area have not yet been constructed to an urban standard and related infrastructure such as storm sewers and stormwater drainage systems do not exist and are not contemplated in the foreseeable future. Full build out of the subject lands cannot occur until improvements to municipal infrastructure such as the urbanization of existing roads, the installation of pedestrian sidewalks, streetlights and storm drainage systems has taken place. The phasing scheme and the timing for actual development within any part of the subject lands will be dependent upon the completion of necessary and related municipal infrastructure improvements. The number of residential units that will be permitted will be made solely at the discretion of the Director of Engineering Services. 11.2.3 Monitoring of potential traffic infiltration both into and through the Foster Creek North Subdivision via Grady Drive will be required. External road improvements, and traffic control measures or other municipal infrastructure improvements may be necessary depending on the amount of infiltration that actually occurs. Subsequent to the initial phase of development within the subject neighbourhood, a further Traffic Study will be required to determine the timing for upgrades and improvements to the intersection of Arthur Street and the Canadian Pacific Railway. The potential improvements shall include but not be limited to crossing barriers or a grade separation. 11.2.4 No phase of this development can proceed until such time as the Municipality has approved the expenditure of funds for the provision of the reconstruction of Arthur Street from the CPR tracks to Concession Road 3 and Concession Road 3 from Arthur St. to Hwy. 35/115 to an urban standard including storm sewers, water, sanitary, full urban road section, street trees, parks, sidewalks and street illumination as well as any other external works. Alternatively, other financial arrangements can be made at the sole discretion of and to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services and Director of Finance in order to provide for individual phases of this development to proceed. 11.2.5 Development of the park within this development is not identified in the Municipality's 10 year capital works forecast. As a result should the Owner wish to develop in advance of Council approving the expenditure of funds for this park, the Owner shall be responsible for the cost (100 %) of constructing the Park on Block 428 (S-C-2005- 003). Park construction shall commence at the issuance of the 151St building permit within Phase 1 and shall be completed prior to the issuance of the 200th building permit or one year anniversary of the issuance of the 151 st building permit, whichever occurs first. 8 -46 11.2.6 The Stormwater Implementation Management Report must demonstrate that the blocks are adequately sized and location of the stormwater management facility. The report shall demonstrate that the lands ultimately designed for a stormwater management pond shall be designed as an amenity to the community with sufficiently flat side slopes (5:1 or flatter) so that fencing is not required. 12. DISCUSSION 12.1 Proposed Official Plan Amendment 12.1.1 North Portion of the Neighbourhood The proposed Official. Plan Amendment shows an enlarged area for "Special Policy Area G ". This is as a result of the mediated solution by the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) for the realignment of Regional Road 17. The realignment of Regional Road 17 is required as a result of concerns raised by the Ministry of Transportation regarding the proximity of the Highway 35/115 off ramp to the intersection of Regional Road 17 and Concession Road 3. MTO is concerned that traffic will back up on the exit ramp as vehicles wait to move through the stop condition at the intersection of Concession Road 3 and Regional Road 17. There are also concerns with turning movements into commercial sites on Highway 35/115. The lands associated with realignment, approximately 19 hectares, have been set aside so that an Environmental Assessment (EA) can determine the exact alignment. These lands have been identified as a "Future Development Block" in the Brookfield Draft Plan and have resulted in a "Future Development Block" in the Smooth Run Draft Plan as there are shared land uses between the two draft plans. The actual new alignment of Regional Road 17 will be determined through the EA and therefore is not shown on the Official Plan Amendment schedules. This position is supported by the Region. 12.1.2 Collector Road Alignments The proposed Official Plan Amendment shows changes to the Collector Road pattern on Maps A4 and B4. The alignment of the north -south collector is slightly realigned by providing a curve to relax the grid -iron road pattern. The remaining east -west collector road is shifted south. Staff have no objection to the realignment of the north -south collector only to the intersection of the most northerly east -west collector situated in Draft Plans. The land uses and street patterns north of this collector, shown as Future Development Blocks in both draft plans, are undetermined at this time. 8-47 REPORT NO.: PSD- 034 -12 12.1.3 Location of Schools and Parks PAGE 21 The proposed Official Plan Amendment deletes one public elementary school, and relocates one public elementary school and one separate elementary school. The one public elementary school, located in the north portion of the neighbourhood has been deleted at the request of the public school board. The second public elementary school has been relocated more central to the North Village Neighbourhood, north of the most southerly east west collector adjacent to the park. The Catholic School Board has requested that the one separate elementary school site remain within Special Policy Area G. The Catholic School Board has also indicated that the secondary school site is not required. The proposed Official Plan Amendment does not remove the school block site at this time, since the land uses and population allocation cannot be determined until the EA has been completed, fixing the alignment for Regional Road 17. 12.1.4 Population and Housing Targets The proposed Official Plan Amendment changes to the population target for North Village Newcastle Neighbourhood from 3900 to 4150, and increases the housing units from 1350 to 1450. The number of low density units decreases from 1050 to 1000, while the medium density units increase from 250 to 400. Staff support the increase in population for the North Village Neighbourhood. The density for this portion of the neighbourhood is approximately 28 units per residential net hectare. 12.2 Restored Tributaries and Natural Corridors Over the years, the property has been tile drained with some of the flow contained within a pipe. The subject lands are located within the Foster Creek Subwatershed. The Foster Creek Subwatershed Planning Study was prepared in March 2001 by the consulting firms of Gartner Lee Limited and Greenland International Consulting Inc. (now AECOM). The study identified resource management objectives for aquatic and terrestrial habitat, surface and groundwater functions, soil and land resources and wildlife corridors and linkages. The report recommends, among other things, that a portion of a buried tributary north of the railway in the vicinity of Arthur Street be uncovered and a 100 metre wide corridor be established to connect to the Wilmot Creek and the Foster Creek valleys. The establishment or restoration of native trees and ground cover in the corridor will facilitate wildlife movement. The subwatershed study and its recommendations, including restoring (daylighting) the northern watercourse, were received by Council in June 2001. After many discussions with the owners, GRCA and municipal staff, agreement on a "modified" restored channel, adjacent to the stormwater management plan was achieved. ,. REPORT i ' 1 1 PAGE 22 The restored channel and the stormwater management features together form an adequate east -west corridor. The restored channel will contribute to creating connectivity within the watershed, as well as conveyance of nutrients and habitat for invertebrates. It will be planted with native species that over time will produce a tree canopy which will maintain cool water temperatures. The modified daylighted channel meets the objectives of the subwatershed study. 12.3 Neighbourhood Desi n Plan 12.3.1 A Neighbourhood Design Plan (NDP) was prepared by the applicant's consultant, Sernas Associates and shows proposed land uses for the North Village Neighbourhood, save and except the northerly one third of the neighbourhood, where land has been set aside for the re- alignment of Regional Road 17 (see Attachment 3). The NDP is a development master plan showing the land uses and servicing for the neighbourhood. The NDP includes road alignments, sidewalks, and trails, lotting patterns, school and park locations, open space system, a phasing plan, the daylighted channel and the stormwater management facilities. 12.3.2 The park and elementary school are centrally located in this portion of the neighbourhood and are the focus of the neighbourhood. They are accessible on three sides by two local roads and one collector road. Short blocks make this community convenient for pedestrian movements throughout the neighbourhood. Sidewalks are provided along Regional Road 17 and will provide pedestrian connections to the downtown. Trails are identified within the open space block and adjacent to the stormwater management ponds. Bike lanes are also provided along the north -south collector street to connect to the trails in the open space areas to the south. The portion neighbourhood does not have a commercial site. However, the Official Plan does allow for convenience commercial establishments through approval of rezoning application. Home occupations, in keeping with the zoning by -law, are also permitted. 12.4 Draft Plans of Subdivision 12.4.1 Phasing of Development The servicing and road infrastructure required to support development in this neighbourhood is identified in the Municipality's Development Charges Background Study for sometime between 2015 and 2031. A Financial Impact Analysis was prepared in accordance with the policies of the Official Plan to ascertain impacts on Municipality finances related to advancing this development and others, prior to 2015. The results of the Financial Impact Analysis concluded that the Municipality's current policies and practices are appropriate. The report recommended that development proceed by phases and that each phase of registration of a draft approved plan of subdivision would require a separate subdivision agreement so as to ensure that growth could be linked to the capital budget process. RM REPORT NO.: PSD- 034 -12 PAGE 23 At the present time, development of the North Village Neighbourhood does not align with the Municipality's infrastructure financing and timing assumptions as contained in the Development Charges Background Study which anticipated development not to occur until 2015 or beyond. Works that are required to be completed to support the growth associated with the development include the following: i) Installation of street lighting and sidewalks on Regional Road 17; ii) Reconstruction of Arthur Street and Concession Road 3; iii) Improvements of the Arthur Street level railway crossing; iv) Development of the neighbourhood parks; and v) A new fire station. Through negotiations, Brookfield and Smooth Run have agreed to construct some of the infrastructure works to address the impact of allowing phase one containing approximately 250 units to proceed at this time. Brookfield and Smooth Run have agreed to financially be responsible for the installation of the street lighting and sidewalks on Regional Road 17 and construction of the neighbourhood park, with the exception of the water -play equipment. Water and hydro will be provided to the site. The Municipality would install the water -play equipment at a future date as development charges funding permits. The timing of the reconstruction of Concession Road 3 will be reviewed through the processing of the applications of the Future Development Blocks. Development adjacent to, and road connections to Arthur Street will be in the later phases, being Phase 5, 6, 7 and 8 (see Attachment 6). Reconstruction of Arthur Street and improvements to the level crossing will occur as development proceeds in the later phases and as warranted through the various updated traffic studies required by the Engineering Services Department. In May 2012, the location for the Fire Station was approved, with construction to commence in the fall 2012 and to be operational in 2014. The Fire Station is no longer an issue with regard to the prematurity of development of the subject proposals. 12.4.2 Lapsing of Draft Approval Given that there are servicing constraints beyond approximately 250 units, staff are recommending that the conditions of draft approval have an expiry of six (6) years to be fully registered, not the typical three (3) years required where development is considered infill to the urban areas and servicing is readily available. 12.4.3 Housing Mix and Typologies The Clarington Official Plan requires a variety of housing densities and housing forms for each neighbourhood to achieve a desirable housing mix. Medium Density blocks are encouraged to locate near arterial and collector roads to support transit routes, as prescribed in the Official Plan and the Provincial Growth Plan. M The two draft plans of subdivisions, submitted in April 2011, total 926 residential units. The low density units total approximately 73 %, singles, semi - detached and linked units and the balance, 27 %, is made up of street townhouse units and block townhouse units. The draft plans provide a variety of lot sizes from 18 m frontage singles down to 9.6 m frontage units for the linked units. It would have been preferable to have a greater variety of residential units with, for example, seniors' apartments or a retirement residence. A similar density could have been achieved with some higher density blocks allowing for larger lots for ground - related units. Although specifically not identified on the draft plans of subdivision, the Zoning By -law provides for a dual zone in some areas which' would allow for the lots as proposed in the draft plans, or alternatively limited apartments an a senior retirement residence. If in the future the developer chooses to utilize this zoning, it would move the proposal closer to the Regional overall average of 50 residents and jobs /hectare. 12.4.4 Region of Durham - Water Reservoir The Region of Durham has identified the need for a water reservoir in the general location of Arthur Street and Concession Road 3. Approximately 2.70 hectares immediately north of the existing reservoir has been set aside in the Smooth Run Draft Plan to accommodate this facility should the preferred location, on the east side of Arthur Street, not be acquired by the Region of Durham. Should the Region not require the reservoir, the use of these lands will be reviewed in the context of the land uses in the Future Development Block. 12.4.5 Parkland The Official Plan establishes a standard of 0.8 hectares per 1000 residents for the development of Neighbourhood Parks. The Planning Act requires a developer to provide 5% of the land proposed for development or one (1) hectare per 300 dwelling units, whichever is greater for parkland purposes. The locations and sizes of the parks were examined in the context of the neighbourhood design plan rather than on an individual draft plan basis. Within the two proposed plans of subdivision a 2.02 ha neighbourhood park and two parkettes are proposed for a total of 2.76 ha of parkland Based on 0.8 ha per 1000 people 2.14 ha of parkland are required to achieve the Official Plan policies. However, 5 percent of the phase I lands would require 3.4 ha of parkland. The developer could compensate the difference by a payment of cash in lieu of parkland, however a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) has been negotiated with the developers, whereby the shortfall in Phase I will be provided with parkland in the Future Development Blocks, or cash payment made at that time. 8 -51 REPORT NO.: PSD- 034 -12 12.5 Concerns From Area Residents 9-ITC] 01111111014i 12.5.1 The concerns from area residents have been categorized to simplify the discussion. The development is not in keeping with historic character of Newcastle Village. There are too many homes. The form of development is too dense. The development contains smaller frontage lots but very limited medium density and no high density units. The lot sizes for single detached units are larger then what has been approved in Courtice and Bowmanville. The design vision for this community is based on a grid pattern of streets, with a centralized school and park block. The developers advise that the house designs are similar to those approved in Brookhill neighbourhood, which are simple in form and inspired by small Ontario towns. The number and size of the parks should be increased. This issue was addressed in Section 12.4.5. In addition to the required parkland dedication, the developer is required to provide an area dedicated for the daylighted channel, open space block and two stormwater management ponds. These will all provide for passive recreational opportunities for the area residents. The development will have an impact on wells in the area. Municipal piped water is available to half way between the CPR line and Concession Road 3 on Regional Road 17. The Region of Durham collects funds through Development Charges to extend water should well interference be reported and substantiated. Through conditions of approval the developer will be responsible for connecting the home to the municipal water in the event there is impact on existing wells. The development will impact existing water and sewer services in Newcastle Village, The Region of Durham provides the forecast for improving the water pollution control plant and water supply plant. Plant expansions and trunk services will be extended as Development Charges funding permits but regardless, service to existing residents will not be affected. The development will increase traffic volumes on major roads in Newcastle Village. A traffic study was completed which recommends certain road improvements but indicates a good level of service at all intersections in the area including the North Street/King Avenue and North Street/Grady Drive intersections. In the area of Highway 115/35 and Regional Road 17 recommendations have been made for intersection improvement as future phases develop. These improvements will be subject to the approval of the Ministry of Transportation and Region of Durham. 8 -52 What improvements will be made to Regional Road 17 and Arthur Street to accommodate the increase in traffic? Regional Road 17 is under the Region's jurisdiction and will be the subject of review through the Environmental Assessment. The reconstruction of Arthur Street is included in the Municipality's Development Charges (DC) Background Study. Reconstruction of Arthur Street to an urban standard will occur as future phases connect to Arthur Street. An overpass or safety arms at the level crossing of Arthur Street are required. Improvements to the level crossing on Arthur Street are included in the Municipality's DC Background Study. Improvements will be constructed when future phases of the development connect to Arthur Street. When will sidewalks be installed on Regional Road 17 and Arthur Street to accommodate pedestrian movements to the Village core? Sidewalks connecting the subject development to the downtown are required during the first phase of the development on Regional Road 17. Sidewalks on Arthur Street will occur during future phases as the development connects to Arthur Street and when the street is reconstructed. What accommodations will be made to mitigate the effects of construction traffic on the existing area residents? Municipal Staff monitors the construction of roads and houses as the development proceeds. Should there be issues with respect to construction traffic, dust or muddy roads, the Engineering Services Department will work with the developer to rectify the problems. There are no provisions for a full time fire department, police department, churches and adequate playing fields for children and adults; A new fire station has been accommodated for in the Capital Budget and a new location on Highway 2 west of Rudell Road has been approved and should be operational by late 2013 to early 2014. Police protection services are under the jurisdiction of the Region of Durham. The Region's Planning Department provides comments with respect to the regional services. Police protection in Newcastle Village was not raised as an issue in the Region's comments on the draft plans. Locations for churches are not identified in the Clarington Official Plan, or Neighbourhood Design Plans unless they are pre - existing. There are a number of existing places of worship in Newcastle Village. Some sites for future places of worship are outside of these two draft plans. 8 -53 REPORT NO.: PSD- 034 -12 PAGE 27 As noted above, the proposed developments will provide for both a Neighbourhood Park and parkettes as well as open space blocks for different forms of recreational activity. Diminishing agricultural land. Although the subject properties are currently being cultivated, the lands have been identified in the Clarington Official Plan for urban residential development since 1996. Daylighting of the two buried tributaries is being ignored. The Foster Creek Subwatershed Study recommended that only the northerly buried tributary be daylighted and restored as a naturalized channel. This was discussed in Section 12.2. 12.5.2 The owners of 220 Arthur Street are concerned with the form of development and the impact this development will have on the setting of their historic home. In addition, the owners are concerned that the development will impact a stream traversing a portion of their property. Staff met with the homeowner to review the current submission prior to finalizing this report. The homeowner is still opposed to the development. His concerns are as follows: • The development is too dense; • The 18 metre lot sizes (closest to his home) are too small; • The 1.2 metre interior side yard setbacks for the 18 metre lots are not enough and the homes will look like row housing; • Coniferous trees should be planted all around his property, not just on the north property boundary; and • The unburied tributary on his property is of great concern and his riparian rights are to be maintained. The resident also had questions regarding site grading, timing for improvement to Arthur Street including the level crossing, sewer and water supply and timing of development. 12.5.3 The resident has raised concerns with development of the site since the first public meeting in 2006. At that time, staff advised him that these lands have been designated for Urban Residential development in the Official Plan since 1996. The overall density of the development meets with objectives of the Clarington Official Plan and Regional Official Plan. Staff have worked with the developer to address many of the concerns. The Draft Plan has been revised by the relocation of the daylighted channel which provides a greater buffer between development and his north property boundary by 40 metres. The lot sizes for the closest portion of the development have been increased to 18 8 -54 19014 2 1: Lei . e metres. In the Zoning By -law, the rear yard setback is 8.5 metres, rather than 7.5 metres and the interior side yard setback is 1.2 metres, standard for most new development in Newcastle Village. The Conditions of Draft Approval for Smooth Run require a double row of coniferous trees, 2.0 metres in height to be planted on the homeowner's north property boundary. The lands to the west and south are designated for a stormwater management pond and will be owned by the Municipality. A coniferous tree buffer can be considered as part of the landscaping plan for the SWM ponds. The unburied tributary on the homeowner's property will remain untouched. It will enter and exit the property where it does today. However, through the review of the detail design, staff may require the north headwall to be replaced and a new headwall be installed where the tributary outlets to the south. The headwalls will be built on municipal property. Regardless, riparian rights should not be affected. 12.6 Tax Status The Finance. Department advises that the taxes for both the subject properties have been paid in full. 13. CONCURRENCE This report has been reviewed by the Solicitor, the Director of Engineering Services and the Director of Finance. 14. CONCLUSIONS 14.1 The applications have been reviewed in consideration of the comments received from area residents, the circulated agencies, the Regional and Clarington Official Plan and Zoning By -law. The Owners have agreed to the Conditions 'of Draft Approval. In consideration of the comments contained in this report and subject to the execution of the Memorandum of Understanding, Staff respectfully recommend that Council request the Ontario Municipal Board to approve Amendment No. 86 to the Clarington Official Plan, approve the proposed draft plans of subdivision subject to the Conditions of Draft Approval as contained in this report on Attachments 8 & 9 and approve the Zoning By -law amendments. iill .�. r o , CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN PAGE 29 The recommendations contained in this report conform to the general intent of the following priorities of the Strategic Plan: X Promoting economic development Maintaining financial stability Connecting Clarington X Promoting green initiatives X Investing in infrastructure Showcasing our community Not in conformity with Strategic Plan Staff Contact: Cynthia Strike Attachments: Attachment 1 Attachment 2 Attachment 3 Attachment 4 Attachment 5 Attachment 6 Attachment 7 Attachment 8 Attachment 9 Attachment 10 Attachment 11 Attachment 12 Attachment 13 — Key Map — Report PSD- 067 -09 with Addendums 1, 2 and 3 — Neighbourhood Design Plan — Proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision — Smooth Run — Proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision — Brookfield Homes — Phasing Plan — Proposed Official Plan Amendment — Conditions of Draft Approval — Smooth Run — Conditions of Draft Approval — Brookfield Homes — Zoning By -law Amendment — Smooth Run — Zoning by -law Amendment — Brookfield Homes — By -law Approving Proposed Official Plan Amendment — By -law Authorizing Execution of Memorandum of Understanding List of interested parties to be notified of Council's decision: May be obtained through the Clerk's Department mom THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK. 8 -57 Leading the Way Attachment 2 To Report PSD- 034 -12 Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: Monday, June 22, 2009 (�jCj`- ��%�'TT CJ ) Report #: PSD- 067 -09 File #'s: COPA 2005 -008, By -law #: PLN 31.5.10, ZBA 2005 -042, ZBA 2005 -043, S -C 2005 -0003 and S -C 2005 -0004 Subject: STATUS REPORT: APPEAL TO THE ONTARIO MUNICIPAL BOARD BY SMOOTH RUN DEVELOPMENTS INC. (METRUS DEVELOPMENTS INC.) BROOKFIELD HOMES (ONTARIO) LIMITED ON APPLICATIONS IN THE VILLAGE NORTH NEIGHBOURHOOD IN NEWCASTLE RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report PSD - 067 -09. be received; 2. THAT the Municipality advise Smooth Run Developments Inc. and Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited that it is the Municipality's position that the North Village Neighbourhood Design Plan and the related official plan amendment and development applications must incorporate a restored and naturalized northerly tributary of the Foster Creek within the Newcastle Village North Neighbourhood; and 3. THAT all interested parties listed in this report and any delegation be advised of Council's decision. Submitted by: Ite: Reviewed by: Davi . Crome, MCIP, RPP Franklin Wu, Direr or of Planning Services Chief Administrative Officer CS /CP /DJC /df 18 June 2009 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T (905)623 -3379 F (905)623 -0830 8 -59 REPORT NO.; PSD- 067 -09 PAGE 2 1.0 APPLICATION DETAILS -1.1 Owners: Smooth Run Developments Inc. (Metrus Developments Inc.) Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited 1.2 Agent: Sernas Associates 1.3 Proposed Clarington Official Plan Amendment (May 2009): Amend Map E3 to increase the population of the North Village Neighbourhood from 3,900 to 5,100 and related changes to the population table. ® Amend Table '9 -2 by increasing the housing target for North Village Neighbourhood to reflect the following: i) 1,050 low density units to 1,275 units ii) 250 medium density units to 420 units iii) total from 1,350 units to 1,750 units; and iv) amending all corresponding totals. ® By amending Section 16.9 — Special Policy Area G North Newcastle Village to, among other things, reflect the proposal to redesignate the lands currently designated Future Urban Residential Area for urban residential uses. ® Amend Map A -4 — "Land Use Newcastle Village Urban Area" by: i) re- aligning Regional Road 17 (Type `B' Arterial); ii), revising the collector road pattern; iii) deleting a public elementary school symbol; iv) relocating two elementary school symbols; v) relocating two neighbourhood park symbols; vi) relocating two medium density symbols and adding three more medium density symbols; and vii) deleting the "Future Urban Residential" designation within Special Policy Area G. ® Amend Map B4 - "Transportation — Newcastle Village Urban Area" by realigning Regional Road 17 (Type 'B' Arterial) and revising the collector road pattern. 1.4 Draft Plans of Subdivision (May 2009): ® Smooth Run Developments: 737unit residential Plan of Subdivision consisting of 304 single detached dwellings, 323 semi /link dwellings, 110 townhouse units, and part blocks for residential units, one (1) elementary school, (1) park block, a parkette, two (2) stormwater management facilities and a Future Development Block. 11 REPORT NO.: PSD- 067 -09 Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited: consisting of 120 single detached townhouse units, and part blocks fo r Development Block. 1.5 " Zoning By -law Amendments: PAGE 3 293 unit residential Plan of Subdivision, dwelling units, 93 semi /link dwellings, 80 residential units, a parkette, and a Future Change the current zoning on .both properties from "Agricultural (A -1) Zone" to an appropriate zone to permit the proposed developments. 1.6. Site Area: Smooth Run Developments 73.84 hectares Brookfield Homes 34.86 hectares TOTAL 108.70 hectares (269 acres) 1.7 The subject properties are located north of the Canadian Pacific Railway (St. Lawrence, and Hudson Railway), east of North Street (Regional Road 17) and Highway 35/115, south of Concession Road 3 and west of Arthur Street, being Part Lots 27 & 28, Concession 2, former Township of Clarke. 2.0 BACKGROUND 2.1 On August 24, 2005 Staff received an application to amend the Clarington Official Plan submitted from Smooth Run Developments Inc. (Smooth Run), a company of Metrus Developments Inc: and Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited (Brookfield). A Neighbourhood Design Plan was also submitted by both parties. 2.2 Smooth Run and Brookfield have each submitted separate applications for draft plans of subdivision as well as rezonings. A statutory Public Meeting was held on January 91h 2006. The applications were referred back to staff for further processing, the completion of the Neighbourhood Design Plan process and a Financial Impact Analysis, The Financial Impact Study was undertaken by Hemson Consulting for the Municipality of Clarington and included a review of these applications as well as various major development proposals in other areas of the Municipality. The conclusions and recommendations of the Financial Impact Analysis were presented at the General Purpose and Administration Committee Meeting of February 25, 2008, through Report FD- 007 -08. 2.3 On May 28, 2008, both Smooth Run and Brookfield submitted revised draft plans of subdivision and corresponding rezoning applications for only the lands in the south -west corner of the combined overall site, where the applicants believed that servicing would be available for approximately 250 units, referred to as Phase 1. 2.4 On July 28, 2008, a revised Official Plan Amendment was received, as well as a third revision to the two draft plans of subdivision and rezoning applications based on the entire site. The total number of residential units was 1,567. REPORT NO.: PSI]- 067 -09 PAGE 4 2.5 On August 7, 2008 the 'Municipality received a Notice of Appeal submitted by the solicitor for Smooth Run and Brookfield, regarding the Official Plan Amendment, proposed Draft Plans of Subdivision and applications for Zoning By -law amendment. The appeals were filed under Sections 22 (7), 51(34) and 34(11) of the Planning Act, for the Municipality's failure to make a decision in respect of these development applications. The appeals were the subject of Report PSD- 092 -08, considered by Committee on September 8, 2008. 2.6 . A second statutory Public Meeting, based on the July 28, 2008 submissions was held on September 22, 2008. The applications were referred back to staff for further processing and the completion of the Neighbourhood Design Plan process and resolution of issues. 2.7 On December 10, 2008, a Prehearing Conference before the Ontario Municipal Board was held. At that time, the Municipality and applicant's solicitor agreed to continue to work on resolving the various issues, regarding financial impacts, phasing and environmental concerns. A second pre - hearing conference was held on March 26tH 2009 at which time a third pre- hearing conference was set for July 9th , 2009 to establish the issues for the actual OMB hearing. A date for the OMB hearing was also set for October 5th, 2.009 for-21 days. The re- alignment of Regional Road 17 involved the Region, the Ministry of Transportation and the developers. It was resolved through mediation held March 6tt', 2009. 2.8 On May 6th, 2009 the proponents made a fourth submission of the plans of subdivision. This submission is currently in circulation for comments from review agencies (Attachment 2). 2.9 Since the appeal, there have been on -going "without prejudice" discussions with the proponent to resolve the large number of issues related to this proposal. Given the size of the proposed development, comprising virtually an entire neighbourhood, and given the anticipated time to build -but, there have been numerous issues under discussion with the applicant, involving the long term needs of various government agencies and the Municipality. This development was also highlighted in the Study of the Financial Impact of New Developments ' in Clarington. While it appears that a number of issues might be resolved by agreement, there is an issue of central importance to the developers and the Planning Services Department which remains at an impasse. The purpose of this report is to refer to Council for consideration. 3.0 RESTORATION OF THE FOSTER CREEK TRIBUTARY 3.1 The subject lands are located within the Foster Creek Subwatershed. The Foster Creek Subwatershed Planning Study was finalized in March 2001 by the consulting firms of Gartner Lee Limited (now AECOM) and Greenland International Consulting Inc. The study identified resource management objectives for aquatic and terrestrial habitat, surface and groundwater functions, soil and land resources and wildlife corridors and am REPORT NO.: PSD- 067 -09 PAGE 5 linkages. The report identified the northerly tributary as a wetland and identified a significant wetland /forest feature (Site 14) east of Arthur Street. It recommended, among other things, that: a portion of a "buried" tributary/wetland north of the railway in the vicinity of Arthur Street be uncovered and restored; and a 100 metre wide corridor be established to connect the Graham Creek and the Foster Creek valleys. The establishment or restoration of native trees and ground cover in the corridor will facilitate wildlife movement and connections between significant environmental features (Attachment 3). The subwatershed study and its recommendations were received by Council in June 2001. 3.2 The two tributaries in the North Village neighbourhood have been severely affected by tile drainage and farm practices over the years. In the view of the Municipality's consultant, the tiling of the northerly tributary has been somewhat ineffective and a meadow marsh community has developed in the depression which includes the buried watercourse. The watercourse conveys water overland as well as through the tiles. The alternatives that are under discussion to date are as follows: • The Developer's Proposal: The construction of a new bypass pipes within the road system of the subdivision to convey the water from outside the Plan of Subdivision (east of Arthur Street) to bypass the stormwater ponds and discharge immediately north of the railway tracks into the existing culverts and tributaries; or ® The Staff Proposal: To restore the northerly existing tributary appropriately designed as a functioning naturalized corridor. 3.3 This matter has been the subject of some discussion since the applications were submitted. The developers have provided opinions from two environmental consultants. Stantec Consulting Ltd. and LGL Limited examined the ecological benefits of daylighting a piped tributary in the subwatershed of Foster Creek, and the benefits of a naturalized corridor adjacent to the CRP railway connecting the Foster Creek and Graham Creek (See Attachments 4, 5 and 6). The proponents are proposing two large stormwater management ponds at the south end of the neighbourhood and in their view, the ponds would provide an east -west wildlife corridor. Our consultant's view is that this existing configuration does not fulfill the function of a terrestrial wildlife corridor. The developer's consultants have advised that there does not appear to be sufficient local population of animal and bird species to warrant a 100 metre wildlife corridor. The stormwater management feature is an adequate facility to provide east -west conveyance of wildlife. In addition, this feature would create a road safety issue. With respect to the daylighting of the tributary their consultants concluded it may result in M. REPORT NO.: PSD- 067 -09 PAGE 6 deleterious impacts on the watercourse including temperature increase and sediment load. In their opinion there is no apparent fisheries benefit. Their estimated cost of daylighting the tributary is estimated to approach $1 million dollars. 3.4 Given the proponents continuing objection to the restoration of the tributary or to provide an alternate proposal to meet the objectives of the Subwatershed Study and with a Municipal Board hearing imminent, staff requested the original authors of the Foster Creek Subwatershed Report to review the opinions provided by the applicant's consultants (See Attachment 7), Gartner Lee, now part of AECOM, continues to support the overriding vision in the original report "to maintain and enhance the health and quality of the Foster Creek Subwatershed and its ecosystem." Natural heritage features in the Foster Creek Subwatershed area are in short supply. The valleys of the Wilmot and Graham Creeks are more robust and offer higher potential for natural heritage functions than Foster Creek due to intense agricultural practices. Overland connections between watersheds could enhance natural heritage functions. In this instance the east —west railway corridors serve as an anchor for a corridor. With the appropriate wildlife underpasses and fencing, road kill and road safety issues can be mitigated. With respect to daylighting and restoration of the partially buried tributary, AECOM re- confirmed that daylighting the tributary would contribute to creating connectivity within the watershed, as well as conveyance of nutrients and provides habitat for benthic invertebrates. AECOM advises that daylighting would be no more costly than the engineering and construction required to collect the water and deliver it downstream, through a third pipe. The daylighted tributary can be planted with native species to produce a tree canopy which. will maintain water temperature levels. 3.5 Planning Staff and GRCA staff have repeatedly requested the developers to amend the proposed Official Plans, Neighbourhood Plans and Draft Plan to include the daylighting and restoration of the tributary and the wildlife corridor. This has not occurred. 3.6 In response to the most recent submission of the subdivision plans, GRCA staff noted that "the lot layout presented in the most recent draft plan continues to ignore the recommendations of the Foster Creek Subwatershed Planning Study. The plan fails to incorporate either of the opportunities presented in the report, one being the restoration of a buried tributary and the other a wildlife corridor along the southern boundary of the property. GRCA staff have been involved in numerous meetings and reviewed several pieces of correspondence from the applicant's consultants regarding the merits of both of these recommend atiohs". GRCA staff remains "of the opinion that a properly restored and naturalized stream channel is the preferred alternative to the current proposal, a piped watercourse, in addition, they are of the opinion that provided wildlife fatality due to increased traffic volumes can be mitigated, a wildlife corridor would serve to enhance the function of a connected .natural heritage system ". RM REPORT NO.: PSD- 067 -09 4.0 APPLICABLE PLANNING POLICIES PAGE 7 4.1 Provincial., Regional and Clarington planning policies support the concept of planning for the diversity and connectivity of natural features so that the long terms ecological functions and biodiversity of natural heritage systems is maintained, restored or improved. From a policy perspective, "islands" of sensitive features are no longer sufficient, but connectivity is critical. 4.2 Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) Section 2.1 Natural Heritage, states that natural features and areas shall be protected for the long term. The diversity and connectivity of natural features and the long -term ecological function and biodiversity of natural heritage systems should be maintained, restored or where possible improved, recognizing linkages between and among natural heritage features and areas, surface water features and ground water features. Natural heritage systems is defined as: "a system made up of natural heritage features and areas, linked by natural corridors which are necessary to maintain biological and geological diversity, natural functions, viable populations of indigenous species and ecosystems. These systems can include lands that have been restored and areas with the potential to be restored to a natural state." . Surface Water feature is defined as :: "refers to water - related features on the earth's surface including headwaters, rivers stream channels, inland lakes, seepage areas, recharge /discharge areas, springs, wetlands, and as riparian lands that can be defined by their soil moisture, soil type, vegetation or topographic characteristics ". Wetlands are defined as: "means lands that are seasonally or permanently covered by shallow water, as well as lands where the water table is close to, or at the surface. In either case, the presence of abundant water has caused the formation of hydric soils and has favoured the dominance of either hydrophytic plants or water tolerant plants. The four types of wetlands are swamps, marshes, bogs and fens ". Section 2.2 Water, requires planning authorities to protect, improve and restore the quality and quantity of water by using the watershed as the ecologically meaningful scale for planning. Other related policies are: Section 1.5, Public Spaces, Parks and Open Space policies, states that healthy active communities should be promoted by planning public streets and spaces that are safe and facilitate pedestrian and non - motorized movement. A full range of publicly accessible built and natural setting for recreation including facilities, parks, open space and trails should also be considered. REPORT NO.: PSD- 067 -09 PAGE 8 Section 1.8, Energy and Air Quality, states that planning authorities shall support energy efficiency and improved air quality through various means in the planning and development process. 4.3 Provincial Growth Plan The Provincial Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe is to be read in conjunction with the PPS. Section 4.2.1 of the Growth Plan states that Planning Authorities are encouraged to identify natural heritage features and areas that complement, link or enhance natural systems 4.4 Durham Region Official Plan 4.4.1 A goal of the Regional Official Plan is to preserve, conserve, and enhance the Region's natural environment for its valuable ecological functions. The development of a connected and functional natural system comprised of the Greenlands System (identified in the Regional Official Plan) and additional linkages and corridors as identified in area municipal official plan is encouraged. 4.4.2 The Environmental policies of the Durham Region Official Plan, under the 'Woodlands' section state: The Region will in cooperation with. the area municipalities, conservation authorities and other agencies having jurisdiction, participate in managing the woodlands in the Region by establishing an overall woodland cover target of a minimum 30% of Durham's total land area. 4.4.3 In addition the 'Water Resources' policies- state that during the process of assessing development, streams and adjoining lands are to be retained in, or rehabilitated to, a natural state, for the protection of fish and wildlife habitat and to minimize alterations to natural drainage systems and sediments entering a watercourse. 4.5 Clarington Official Plan 4.5.1 A goal of the Plan is to enhance, natural heritage systems and ecological integrity. An objective is to enhance ecological processes, biodiversity and connections within the natural heritage system. 4.5.2 The Plan states that in order to ensure corridor functions are maintained, and where possible improved or restored, every application for development or site alteration shall indentify planning, design, and construction practices that ensure no buildings or other site alternation impede the movements of plants and animals among natural heritage features, hydrologically sensitive features and adjacent lands. 4.5.3 The Plan notes that there are a number of natural heritage features which cannot be shown on the official plan schedules due to either inadequate information or the nature of the feature. The Plan notes that these features are also important to the integrity of the natural heritage system. Furthermore, the municipality is to prepare a subwatershed IM-6 a M. REPORT NO.: PSD- 067 -09 PAGE 9 plan prior to the development of any plan of subdivision, with part of the purpose being to identify the natural features and systems to be preserved, enhanced or restored. The Foster Creek Subwatershed study was completed in 2001 and the recommendations were received by Council in principle. 5.0 IMPLICATIONS OF THE RESTORED .TRIBUTARY AND /OR WILDLIFE CORRIDOR TO THE SUBDIVISION DESIGN 5.1 The Village North Neighbourhood area has been affected by aggressive farm practices and, outside of the tributary, has only farm hedgerows. As a whole, this makes the lands extremely efficient to develop but lacking in any natural character for its residents. AECOM noted that the Foster Creek Watershed, as a whole, even taking into account of all restoration opportunities could achieve 4% forest cover. Even in the last few weeks, the site has been disturbed with a .portion of the tributary area being regraded and planted with a cover crop. The restoration of this tributary provides an opportunity for improving the forest cover in the watershed and natural open space area for residents of the neighbourhood. 5.2 The subdivision design to date has involved the planning for two large stormwater ponds. at the south end of the development and the future construction of two by -pass pipes to convey water from outside of the neighbourhood around or under the stormwater ponds to be discharged southerly near the railway. The development proposal requires. extensive regrading, in part as the proponent wants to minimize costs by attempting to maintain a cut and fill balance on the site. Thus the substantial quantity of soil excavated for the stormwater ponds is to be moved to other parts of the site. In addition, lands requiring regarding to accommodate the proposed servicing scheme and deal with some steep grades. Retaining and restoring of the northerly tributary will require re- engineering of the project as currently proposed, potentially including the relocation of the stormwater ponds. 5.3 The restoration of the tributary would require a corridor approximately 30 m wide. This would yield a loss of approximately 1.6 ha from the site. This is equivalent to approximately 35 -40 units, assuming the densities currently proposed for the site. 5.4 If the wildlife corridor was to be incorporated along the railway, both our consultant and GRCA indicated that it could be less than 100 m as originally proposed. The impact of the corridor would be the relocation of the ponds northerly and the loss of more than 50 lots. 6.0 CONCLUSION 6.1 The restoration of the northerly tributary is the preferred option, if only one is to be implemented. It provides a number of environmental benefits including: 8--67 REPORT NO.: PSD- 067 -09 PAGE '10 ® Enhanced ecosystem function including the creation of wildlife habitat and habitat for benthic invertebrates and the contribution of nutrients for downstream fish habitat, a reduction in flashy floods, removal of waterborne pollutants, and array of ecosystem services associated with- riparian and forest vegetation; ® Increased forest cover in the Foster Creek watershed; ® Enhanced connectivity with the significant swamp forest, thicket and meadow marsh referred to as Site 14 to the east of Arthur Street; and ® Open space opportunity for residents of the neighbourhood. 6.2 The costs of engineering and constructing the by -pass pipe solution have not been provided and the costs of the restoration of the existing watercourse would appear to be exaggerated. Utilizing Stantec's cost estimate but applied to a more accurate length following the existing watercourse, the estimated cost is $800,000 but could be much less since with limited flows there is no need for intensive design and engineering. The cost of 'the by -pass pipe also requires engineering the solution, constructing the pipe and. excavating the the drain. Our consultants indicate that many of the costs overlap with and may not be much cheaper than daylighting through natural channel design. The major concern relates to the loss of some residential units. 6.3 Our consultant has noted that there is always more than one solution to improve ecosystem integrity. Alternative means of achieving the goals of the Official Plan and the Subwatershed Plan could be explored through further discussion following Council's decision on the matter. 6.4 Since this matter is before the Ontario Municipal Board, Committee may want to discuss some legal aspects related to the appeal and the Municipality's position. The Solicitor - will be present and a legal update can be considered in closed session. Attachments; Attachment 1 - Neighbourhood Design Plan Attachment 2 — Fourth Submission of Draft Plan of Subdivisions Attachment 3 — Extract of Subwatershed Study Attachment 4 — Stantec Consulting Ltd. — Opinion Letter Attachment 5 — LGL Limited — Opinion Letter, February 15, 2008 Attachment 6 — LGL Limited — Opinion Letter, June 13, 2008 Attachment 7 — AECOM — Peer Review Letter REPORT NO.: PSD- 067 -09 List of interested parties to be notified of Council's decision; Bryce Jordan, Sernas Associates Smooth Run Developments Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited Hugh Allin Steve Wilson Cory Geddes Robert Macdonald Robert Fassen Helen Jones Rev. Robert Brouwer Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority Robert Craunstown. Jerry Reffosco Joanne Raymond Steve Holliday Doug Rombough PAGE 11 111 ����HOMER ME c �'� i����� o n F i �F, tttt �k��F OA � rn '• F s i °:SR �Z p g � e�., Iz '� LF� �L1 ��� Y � � 3 �o e � � � � �Z 5 6 c t i i E f c k�X��n G4 .sc Tip g^•BY Y r S qc € 9 D o - ::c. i .. r =a Z un i cn m —1 O X (D O � D cc) j 00 I J Attachment 2 To Report PSD-067-09 W N Z �O O M IA �i i� Ttl€x � i11�B 1111 u �T zr e� "Rx E?9 n 3L°i ; 3' c ae � � x AN ��g 97q a£ I a ia_ �C 3�=�Zi� � � ��CAi6,g6§ dd �n�q��'Hc� �af��� iq I� � I➢fx�� '� �� m y� 1 I y { C ;!;;s; kk 55 55 - _ ( ( y W N Stantec Consulting Ltd, 361 Southgate Drive Guelph ON N1G 3M5 Tel; (519) 836 -6050 Fax; (519) 836 -2493 stantec.com ,F Stan October 11, 2006 File No. 160960242 Carlos Salizar, Planner Municipality of Clarington 40 Temperance Street Bowmanville Ontario ' Dear Mr. Saliza'r: Attachment 4 To Report PSD- 067 -09 Reference: North• Village Neighborhood Plan Part of Lot 27 and 28, Concession 2 Village of Newcastle, Municipality of Clarington At the request of Smooth Run Developments and Brookfield Homes we have completed a review of the recommendations of the Foster Creek Subwatershed Planning Study (Gartner Lee Limited and Greenlands International Consulting Inc. March 2001) as they apply to the North Village eighborhood Plan (the Subject Lands). This review was discussed at meetings earlier this year with Town Planning staff and members of the Ganaraska'Region Conservation Authority. Located north of the Village of Newcastle, the Subject Lands are bordered by the CPR railroad tracks to the south, Arthur Street to the east, Concession 3 to the north and Regional Road 17 to the west, and are owned by Smooth Run Developments and Brookfield Homes (the proponents)., The Foster Creek Subwatershed Planning Study recommends that a substantial portion of-the southern Subject Lands be set aside as part of a Greenlands System, to allow for the re- opening or °daylighting" of a buried tributary to Foster Creek, the naturalization of agricultural land and the creation of an ecological corridor between Foster %reek and Graham Creek wastersheds, The recommendation is not detailed but it appears from Figures that that the intent would be to open the tributary through the entire North Village Neighborhood from the CPR tracks to Arthur Street (see pages 99 -100 and Figures 11 and 13 in the subwatershed planning studyj. 8 -74 Stantec October 11, 2006 Page 2 of 7 Reference: North Village Neighborhood As was discussed at the meeting with Town and GRCA staff earlier this year, the proponents had some questions about this recommendation to "reopen" the northern tributary across the Subject Lands to connect the CPR railroad tracks with Site 14 west of Arthur Street. Specifically the questions with regard to this recommendation include: 1. What are the specific ecological watershed functions to be performed by the recommended measures? 2. 'What are the relative costs and benefits associated with the recommendation? 3. Is there an alternative approach that could provide substantially the same benefits at lower cost? The information below represents our answers to these questions. 1. Ecological watershed functions potentially addressed by re- opening the Northerly Tributary. The subwatershed planning study apparently does not provide substantial ecological data from the eastern tributaries of Foster Creek that cross under the CPR tracks and through the existing village of Newcastle. Figure 10 In the subwatershed planning study indicates that flow and surface water sampling stations were established (SW6, SW9 ands SW10); along with Fisheries Habitat (1­19) and Benthic Invertebrate (136) stations. However, the version of the plan made available to me does not contain data for the water quality (Table 9), Benthic stations'(Table 10 and Appendix C -3 ), or fish habitat (Table 11). Natural vegetation on the North Village Neighborhood lands is limited. Figure 11 in the subwatershed planning study indicates that Site 15, made up of Polygon 62, is a meadow marsh dominated by reed canary grass. Field work by Stantec Consulting Ltd. conducted in 2006 indicates that this location is a grassed water -way constructed through a farm field, and that is occupied by a range of common grasses. There are wetter areas near the culverts and where grading has created small depressions, but the majority of the site is anthropogenic and does not represent a wetland community. The continuation of the grassed waterway upstream of Arthur Street (polygon 63) is similar to the grassed waterway on the North Village Neighborhood lands, and appears to be more appropriately characterized in the subwatershed planning study as cultural meadow. Site 14, which is east of Arthur Street is listed in the subwatershed planning study as a significant site (page 57) and "a connection between the CPR railroad across to site 14" (page 58) is recognized as a possibility, although it is noted "existing farm buildings that will be affected and therefore will be difficult to achieve." Under the wildlife habitat discussion (pages 63 to 66) core habitats are identified at the mouth and headwaters of Foster Creek and it is concluded that the focus should be on maintenance and enhancement of these features with a second priority being maintaining the corridor of the main branch of Foster's Creek that links these two features. 8 -75 Stantec October 11, 2006 Page 3 of 7 Reference: North Village Neighborhood Site 14 is identified as being linked to the forest areas in Graham Creek and playing an important role in bird habitat functions in that watershed. The stated benefit of linking this area to the railroad corridor is to provide a "circular route" for wildlife movement, although, which wildlife species and how this route would enhance their habitat; are not specified. There is no mention in the subwatershed study of aquatic habitat benefits or stream hydrology benefits that might arise from re- opening or "daylighting ".of the stream, This is despite the fact that the vast _ . majority of creek daylighting projects undertaken are founded primiarily on stream hydrology - - - - and aquatic habitat benefits. Based o-n the limited information summarized above the ecological benefits of the recommendation to reopen the northern -most of the two eastern tributaries would appear to be limited to a third level wildlife habitat function vaguely described as a "circular route" or "multiple opportunities for wildlife movement ". Given that daylighting streams can be an extremely expensive undertaking this seems like insufficient justification of the recommendation. To further investigate the potential benefits of re- opening the stream, aquatic habitat data was collected by Stantec Consulting Ltd. in July of 2006, for the area downstream of the North Village Neighborhood The following is a summary of those 2006 observations. Eastern Tributary of Foster Creek The area upstream of Arthur Street and the proposed new channel site is currently under agricultural production (Photo A), over moderately hilly topography. The area downstream of Arthur Street proposed for daylighting is currently an agricultural grassed waterway with no defined channel due to the presence of a pipe that directs flow to the main stream channel further down the watershed. Photo A -- Agriculture upstream of Arthur Street Examination of the stream channel where it daylights approximately 10 metres northeast of the rall way tracks on the southern edge of the property revealed a small defined channel approximately 15 cm wide, with a depth of 5 cm or less (Photo B). The water temperature was measured at 15 degrees, many degrees below ambient air temperature, reflecting the long residence time in the pipe under grassed waterway as well as possible groundwater contributions. am Stantec October 11, 2006 Page 4 of 7 `Reference: North Village Neighborhood Photo B — Grassed water way outlet Photo C- Downstream of CPR tracks Note diffuse channel, refuse and potential barriers to fish movement. 8 -77 On the south side of the CPR railroad tracks, the stream is a defined, diffuse channel with a narrow, but dense riparian buffer consisting of grasses, shrubs, large trees and wetland plants (Photo C). Instream vegetation consists of dense patches of watercress, grasses and algae. Substrate consists of approximately equal - measures of cobble and gravel with some sand, From this point downstream through the Village of Newcastle towards its it's confluence with the main branch of Foster Creek, the stream has a similar character: a narrow but dense riparian buffer, and evidence of significant human impact, including often abundant in- stream litter and debris, sections .where open -top corrugated steel pipes (CSP) function as the channel bottom, and concrete retaining wall structures. (Photos C and D). et Note Corrugated steel pipe serving as stream bottom (lower left of photo) Stantec October 11, 2006 Page 5 of 7 Reference: North Village Neighborhood Overall, the tributary downstream of the area proposed for daylighting provides low quality fisheries habitat due to the number of alterations, as well as the diffuse, shallow channel features. Creating an open channel upstream of this reach will not add significant value to the existing habitat, as fish passage is limited under regular low flow conditions. To the extent that the re- opening may result in some water quality changes compared to the piped flow, such as temperature increase and sediment load, the quality of habitat. downstream could even degrade slightly. In summary, the watershed ecological functions that the proposed re- opening of the tributary and the naturalization of agricultural lands could enhance include: • Wildlife movement between the Foster and Graham Creek corridors for unspecified wildlife species.. • An increase in the amount of marginal fish habitat in the watershed. • An increase in the total amount of natural vegetation cover. 2. The relative costs and benefits associated with the recommendation , Published experience in Canada and the United States (see for example Daylighting: New Life for buried streams. Richard Pinkham, Rocky Mountain Institute, 2000) indicates that the cost of daylighting streams can range from less than $100 per foot to upwards of $1000 per foot, not including lands costs. Lower cost efforts tend to be characterized by volunteer labour, in kind contributions and simple stream systems with minimal grading required. From the Functional Servicing Plan for the North Village Neighbourhood plan it appears that approximately 600 m of stream could be subject to daylighting. Assuming that this is a reasonably simple system and applying a cost of $1600 per metre (roughly $500 per foot) the total cost could easily approach $1,000,000, excluding the cost of the land. Based on Figure 13 in the subwatershed planning study more than 10 hectares of otherwise developable land would be lost on the North Village site alone, and a similar amount of land would be lost for future development east of Arthur Street. Reduction in developable area adds to per unit costs for infrastructure and drives i ip the cost of servicing and maintaining Clarington's urban fabric affecting tax rates, house prices etc. Taking into account these types of indirect costs the total dollar cost of the proposed daylighting will be several millions of dollars spread out across landowners, the residents and the Municipality. Costs of this magnitude can be justified if the resulting environmental benefits are similarly large and significant. The challenge is that often environmental benefits do not have a clear dollar value associated with them, and it can often be difficult to balance the costs and benefits. However a qualitative assessment of the relative value of the environmental benefits is often possible. In the review above the following potential benefits were identified: • Enhanced wildlife movement between the Foster and Graham Creek corridors for unspecified wildlife species. • An increase in the amount of marginal fish habitat in the watershed. • An increase in the total amount of natural vegetation cover. AM Stantec October 11, 2006 Page 6 of 7 Reference; North Village Neighborhood These potential benefits, while important at a local scale, will not result in not major impacts on the ecology of the subwatershed. On a relative basis it seems clear that the limited benefits do not justify the high costs. This is particularly true if similar, or even greater, watershed scale benefits could be achieved at lower costs. This is the issue addressed below. 3. Alternative approaches to achieve similar benefits at lower cost. Enhance wildlife movement between the Foster- and Graham Creek corridors- - — As noted on page 61, the majority of birds wildlife listed in the subwatershed study are adapted to "field, forest edge and urban fringe habitats" The same could be said, of the mammal species encountered as the full range from short - tailed shrew to deer are known to frequent urban, semi -urban and agricultural landscapes. These species'will readily move through semi - naturalized low maintenance vegetation found along linear features such as railroad tracks and through low maintenance areas of stormwater management ponds, parks, and open spaces. The south end of the proposed North Village Neighborhood includes all these uses backing on to the CPR railroad tracks. With some minor modifications a minimum 30 m strip of these low intensity low maintenance uses could be incorporated into the plan. This would provide an adequate mid - watershed movement corridor between Foster and Graham Creeks. Given that the corridor must cross Regional Road 17 and Arthur Street, it Is, and will remain, a compromised corridor. To make.a portion of the corridor 100 to 400 metres wide would not compensate for the constraints posed by the road crossings, and would not add substantially to the function of the area. Increase the amount of marginal fish habitat in the watershed. Overall, the tributary downstream of the area proposed for daylighting is moderately low quality habitat. Creating an open channel upstream of this reach will not add significant value to fish habitat in Foster Creek, and will only increase the amount of low to moderate quality. habitat. A better approach would be to substantially improve the quality of existing habitat in the main branch of Foster Creek. Several examples of projects that would greatly exceed the benefit of the proposed day - lighting at much lower cost can be drawn from the subwatershed study discussion (see page numbers from subwatershed study below for details): • Increase buffering and riparian plantings in agricultural areas (page 46); • Removal of debris and barriers throughout the main branch; • Increased habitat diversity in upper reaches (page 49); Carp exclusion in the lower reaches of foster Creek (page 49). Additional examples of lower cost higher benefit fish habitat enhancement could be developed in conjuction with the Conservation Authority Staff and other interested parties. One ecological function not addressed by the proposal to daylight the eastern tributary is the fact that the pipe underlying the grassed water way contributes relatively cool baseflow to Foster Creek just upstream of the CPR tracks. This function should be preserved in the servicing of the proposed development. AM Stantec October 11, 2006 Page 7 of 7 Reference: North Village Neighborhood A bypass pipe should be included in the servicing concept to take the relatively cool and clean external flows from upstream of Arthur Street and bypass the stormwater management facilities associated with the proposed development, discharging downstream of the SWM outlets. This will prevent the external flows from being warmed in proposed Pond E. Increase the total amount of natural vegetation cover. Approximately 10 ha of development land would be -set aside for naturalization under the — — approach recommended in the subwatershed study., This area would be in the middle of the watershed isolated by Regional Roads railroads lines and adjacent urban development. A much greater ecological benefit could be realized if the natural core areas at the confluence with Wilmot Creek and in the headwaters were enhanced. Approximately one hectare of relatively natural habitat, in the form of a 30 metre wide corridor along the CPR tracks would provide the urban corridor required for the species encountered in the area between Foster and Graham Creeks, and the time effort and plant material that would have gone into the other nine hectares of corridor could be better invested in enhancing the core natural areas and improving riparian habitat along the main branch of Foster Creek. In summary, we have concluded that the costs of the proposed daylighting of the eastern tributary far outweigh the ecological benefits of the proposal. Much greater ecological benefits could be realized from enhancement of the core natural areas and fish habitat improvement works on the main branch of Foster Creek. A simple bypass of external water flows around North Village Neighborhood and provision of a 30 metre wide semi - natural corridor along the CPR tracks is the optimum balance point between costs and benefits. Sincerely, STANTEC CONSULT NG LTD. David Chariton, M.Sc., P.Ag. Senior Principal, Environmental Management Tel :.(519) 836 -6050 Fax: (519) 836 -2493 dchariton @stantec.com 21 1 S _-, L LIMITED environmental research associates 22 (Fisher Street, PO Box 280 Tel: 905J°833M n_r 2^i iaA: 1905-833J-12155 Email: kingeity@lgl.com URL: www.lgl.com February 15, 2008 Carlos Salazar, Planner The Municipality Of Clarington 40 Temperance Street Bowmanville, Ontario Reference: North Village Neighbourhood Plan Part of Lot 27 and 28, Concession 2 Village of Newcastle, Municipality'of. Clarington Attachment 5 To Report PSD- 0,67 -09 LGL Limited (LGL) was retained by Smooth Run Developments and Brookfield Homes in July 2007 to provide advice respecting selected recommendations of the Foster Creek Subwatershed Planning Study, as they pertain to the (Newcastle) North Village Neighbourhood Plan area. Specifically, LGL was asked to provide opinion on: 1. the necessity for a wildlife conveyance corridor of 100 metres is width to be developed abutting the CPR R.O.W.; and 2. the advisability of "daylighting" a buried (farm - tiled) tributary. Corollary to the daylighting issue is the matter of the study - recommended step to develop a wildlife conveyance feature centred on the re- developed watercourse, which would connect the previously noted 100 metre wide (enhanced rail R.O.W,) corridor with the watercourse; crossing at Arthur Street. In preparation of this letter, we visited the subject lands and adjacent areas (July - December, 2007) conferred with municipal and Conservation Authority staff (site meeting of December •14, 2007),.and reviewed the Subwatershed Study, relevant file correspondence, and planning figures as prepared by MBTW and Sernas Associates.. In addition, LGL has reviewed literature sources that address the aforementioned wildlife issues. Of particular relevance are the Foster Creek Subwatershed Planning Study (Planning Study), and a letter dated October 11, 2006 from Stantec to the Municipality of Clarington, Attention Carlos Salazar, Planning (attached). The formerprovides a vision for a greenway framework comprising cultural, naturalizing and remnarit natural features, enhancements to such features, and new connecting corridors, This Planning Study also recommends exposing farm -tiled groundwaterfidws; Municipality of Clarington Page '1 LGL Limited North Village Neighbourhood Plan February2008 . . and in the case of the subject lands, creating a vegetated watercourse corridor between the enhanced CPR R.O.W. and Arthur Street, The Stantec letter of October 11, 2006 discusses the Planning Study in the context of landowner concerns, relating to the daylighting issue of the buried tributary (noted above) and the enhancement of the Rail R.O.W. corridor, and discusses the costs and benefits of the planning recommendation and recommends alternative approaches to those offered in the Planning Study. The two principal issues addressed by LGL are discussed as follows: the necessity-for a 100-metre wide naturalization at the interface of the CPR - - - - - - - R.O.W. and the North Village Neighbourhood Plan Area, principally to enhance the conveyance of animals between the Foster and Graham Creek watersheds,. The Planning Study basis for the development of the greenway framework in general, and the above -noted enhancement in particular, is grounded in the science of landscape ecology and is built upon the premise that enhancing and connecting islands and corridors of green always provides a net benefit to plants and animals. Page 64 of the Planning Study identifies four terms used in the scientific discussion of connectivity and wildlife habitat, The introduction of these terms implies that any size criteria that are at variance with those will not qualify as a productive /sustainable feature. Additionally, it presumes that urban /ex- urban animals cannot and do not successfully enlist the services of anthropogenic features to travel between vegetated units within and /or adjacent to the built environment. Based on our knowledge of the literature and on our professional experience, it is fair to say that neither premise is accurate. Although the Planning Study provides a list of wildlife species encountered within the study area, there Is no detailed body of data. This is not unusual for this level of study; however, given the sweeping nature of the greenlands recommendations it would have been helpful. Of particular use would have been data respecting animal numbers in the areas proposed for enhancement. In the absence of this information, LGL undertook such focused studies to confirm the character of wildlife usage within � and adjacent to the rail R.O.W. and also in the main branch corridors of Graham and Foster Creek watersheds. The results of this work confirmed the presence of a wide'variety of species (3 amphibians, 49 birds, 24 mammals, 4 reptiles), albeit in moderate to low numbers, with less diversity and lower numbers within the railway lands (2 amphibians, 31 birds, 15 mammals, 2 reptiles). The above numbers exclude migrant birds. The majority of these species are urban tolerant and would be habituated to human presence, Urban subsidized species (gray squirrel, house mouse, Norway rat, raccoon and striped skunk) were prominent in numbers as were predatorial species such as deer mouse, coyote, red fox, American crow, blue jay, and common grackle (gray squirrel, raccoon and striped skunk also fit the second category). Virtually all of these species may be expected to persist through the development period and remain (or increase) in post development years. All of the above noted animals currently appear to be navigating Municipality of Clarington North Village Nelghbourhood Plan Page 2 LGL Limited February 2008 MOM effortlessly within and between the watersheds utilizing cultural pathways, including the rail R.O.W. Although the provision of new green space outside of and paralleling the R.O.W. would benefit tHis situation, there is no apparent biological requirement for this change to maintain the current condition and there does not appear to be a significant. enough local population to warrant the size of a greenspace dedication as proposed in the Planning Study. Additionally, unless any green enhancement of lands abutting the rail R.O.W. is fenced to exclude humans and companion animals, the disturbance factor will result in wildlife selecting the railway lands over the designed greenspace due to the familiarity and isolation of the former. The principal benefit of new greenspace. would be to buffer the 'rail corridor-for wildlife and to.pr_ovide_ additional conveyance opportunities between watersheds for selected nocturnal moving. species. A significant downside to attracting increased numbers of animals to transit between watersheds, regardless of the width of any future greenway, is the crossings they will have to make of Regional Road 17 and Arthur Street, both of which will carry significantly more traffic at build -out. Enticing greater numbers of relatively slow moving ground -based animals into traffic corridors 1s not sound urban wildlife management and can result in significant road safety issues for drivers. A setback width of 20 — 25 metres for the stormwater management feature (i.e. the "permanent pool') from the CPR property boundary is adeq uate*to *facilitate easYwest conveyance of wildlife, and will suitably buffer wildlife pathway functions within the railway lands. Wherever possible, the area between the rail lands and the ponds (including the "park block ") should be planted in coniferous species (white spruce, red and white cedar and white pine) with occasional tall deciduous tree accents (burr and red oak). The interface zones of the greenway feature with Regional Road 17 and Arthur Street (15 — 20 metres) should be vegetated only in herbaceous cover; these areas should be cut at least twice yearly generally to increase visibility of roadside wildlife and to ensure animals crossing these roads do not break from cover in a manner which creates a road safety issue. The greenway unit should not include trails or other features that encourage residents to consider this area a recreational zone; signage in this regard may be necessary. The greenway corridor should not be separated from the stormwater management.area by fencing. 2. The advisability of "daylighting" a buried (farm - tiled) tributary. The Planning Study recommends " daylighting" a buried tributary on principle to recover riparian habitat and in'the process provide a new wildlife movement corridor connecting northeast across Arthur Street to lands that currently are farmed or idle (plantation) and are not within the urban boundary. Municiriality.of Clarington North Village Neighbourhood Plan M.-ON Page 3 LGL Limited February 2008 The issue of exposing the underground flow or maintaining it in an underground pipe for delivery to the creek channel at the rail R.O.W. is discussed by Stantec; who recommend the later. We agree with Stantec on this matter. Specifically, it is Stantec's opinion that the daylighting of the tributary may result in deleterious impacts on the watercourse, including temperature increase and sediment load.. Additionally, Stantec note that the Planning Study does not mention that aquatic habitat benefits or stream hydrology benefits will arise from the daylighting exercise, in spite of the fact that the majority of watercourse daylighting works are grounded principally on precisely these foundations. Notwithstanding these comments, we appreciate that delivery of groundwater in a buried fashion, however cool it -m'ay be, will -not have a profound impact on the downs #roam - - - - - thermal regime of Foster Creek. However, we, too, are of the opinion that taking the course of action proposed in the Planning Study provides no apparent fisheries benefits and could be detrimental in the long run to down - gradient conditions (foreign substances washed into the watercourse and general warming of groundwater). Secondly, and as recommended by Stantec, we agree that the piped groundwater should not be processed through the stormwater management system. In the event a third pipe option is exercised to collect groundwater within the development envelope, it is acceptable to combine the two sources. Lastly, it is our opinion that the Planning Study recommendation to design a tributary -based greenway between the enhanced rail R.O.W. and Arthur Street, across what is now a farm field, is something to be viewed as an example of urban wildlife mismanagement. Implementation of this plan undoubtedly will result in traffic wildlife fatalities and significant road safety issues as Arthur Street is upgraded with development. Secondly, encouraging wildlife to loop northeast onto third party lands in the hope that they will all turn southeast and return to the connecting rail corridor, in our opinion, is wishful thinking. In addition, it will increase wildlife numbers, including those species which come in conflict with humans, on lands to the east of Arthur Street, where they may not be appreciated by landowners. The above comments comprise the results of LGL's review of background natural heritage documents, the development proposal, discussions with Town staff, and site - specific investigations. These findings confirm that the Resource Management Objectives of the sub - watershed study generally will be met through development as proposed. Sincerely, ;'l- A/ J. Robert Nisbet Senior Biologist Munfclpallty of Clarington North Village Neighbourhood Plan Page 4 LCL Limited February Zoo . ., Attachment 6 To Report PSD- 067 -09 v 233 Huycke Street Cobourg, Ontario CANADA K9A 5K8 environmental research associates C 905-372 -3261 ®: 905 - 372 -3281 ri: rnisbet @lgl.com ®: www.lgl.com Head Office: 22 Fisher St., P.O. Box 280, King City, Ontario CANADA 1.7B 1A6 C:905-833-1244 ® :905. 833 -1255 d: kingcity@Igl,com ®: www.igl,com June 13, 2008 Sernas Associates 110 Scotia Court, Unit 41 - - - - Whitby,- Ontario - L1 N 8Y7 Attention: Mr. Bryce Jordan Re: North Village Neighbourhood Plan, Part of Lot •27 and 28, Concession 2 Village of Newcastle, Municipality of clarington Policy Implications of the Foster Creek Sub - Watershed Planning Study Ganaraska Conservation Comment Letter Dated April' 1, 2008 Sent from Greg Wells (GRCA) to Lisa Backus (Clarington) Dear Bryce, At your direction, we have reviewed the above noted GRCA letter and herein offer our thoughts respecting the Conservation Authority's recommendations to the Municipality. Our comments are derived through consultation with LGL ecologists and fisheries biologists who have experience in similar land use conversion exercises, and from a review of the research conducted by Stantec (letter of October 11, 2006 to the Municipality). LGL refers to the Stantec letter in our correspondence of February 15, 2008.• The following comments are offered in order of page and paragraph position from the GRCA letter. 1. Page one, Paragraph one: the first sentence refers to implementation of the measures and recommendations of the Foster Creek Subwatershed Planning Study (Study) as a pre - requisite for development. Whereas this may be the intent of the Authority -and the Municipality, in practice, implementation of all such measures and recommendations appears fragmentary and discretionary if the application in hand is an accurate example. We draw attention to the matter of day - lighting "buried tributaries." The Study notes that "eastern -tributaries have been buried north .of the CPR tracks" (Section 6.7.1, bullet (a)) and recommends in Section 6.7.2 (bullet (a)) to "bring the buried tributaries aboveground" as an impact mitigation measure." Three such "tributaries" are found within the subject lands, yet only a portion of one of the three sub - terranian channels is requested by the Authority to be day - lighted. Using this example alone it is clear that implementation of the Study measures and recommendations in regard for development is approached neither in a compulsory nor a comprehensive fashion by the Authority and /or the Municipality; instead, flexibility apparently is exercised by one or both .bodies. It is this flexibility . and discretionary decision - making that Stantec and LGL understood was in place when we made . our respective recommendations to the landowners, 2. Page one, Paragraph One: the last sentence references restoration of a "buried tributary." The reference might better be worded a buried farm drainage channel for the following reason. We have no historical information regarding the pre - tiling ofthe surface drainage. period respecting the precise location or configuration of any original channel; although we agree, that current Established in 1971 ONTARIO - BRITISH COLUMBIA • NEWFOUNDLAND - ALASKA - TEXAS • WASHINGTON STATE RM Page 2 topographic conditions suggest it would be in this general area, at least from sometime in the late 19`h Century, and probably previous to forest clearing and settlement. It is likely that in the initial years after clearing (with the establishment of the roadway) that run -off flowed south along the east side of the roadway, or overtop of it during flood conditions: In our opinion, the current location almost certainly is an artifact .of farming practices, not nature; any day-lig htin 9, would comprise restoration of a cultural feature or potentially, the creation of a new surface drainage channel. This opinion is offered, in part, on the basis of our knowledge of 19rh Century farming practices as are documented through the social science discipline of historical geography. 3. Page one, Paragraph two: This wording suggests that in the Authority's mind, the proposed Stormwater Management facility (and park), albeit reduced in width from the Study - -- - recommendation, - comprise an-enhancement of the eXisting rail R.O.W, corridor; and that they concede the Study recommendations (Including the 100 metre width) need not be implemented, further reinforcing the point made above. Additionally, they agree that development of a wildlife corridor, as recommended• through the Study, will result in an increased occurrence of wildlife fatality, 4. Page one, Paragraph three, sentenbe one: Mr. Well's notes no GRCA, intent to link wildlife movement off-site by day - lighting the farm drainage channel, their purpose being to restore riparian habitat. LGL does not attach any such intent, but rather provides opinion of what will happen by default if the corridor is created. Secondly, whereas it may not be the intent of 'the GRCA, it was clearly the intent of the Sub - watershed Study authors. Notwithstanding Mr. Well's comments, it is relevant to note that the day - lighting exercise proposed in the Study extends north only to the point where it can conveniently turn due east to link with an off-sit e woodland. If wildlife connectivity wasn't the intent of the Study, and riparian habitat was, then why didn't the Study suggest continuing the day- lighting through the entire length of the drainage channel, to the point of the culvert crossing at Artliur Street, where the corridor walkway also could link with the sidewalk? 5. Page one, Paragraph three: The third sentence of this paragraph acknowledges that a buried water source will provide better "temperature regimes" than day - lighted conditions, although the latter situation would be "acceptable" due to the cooling effects of riparian plantings, This issue was discussed at the site meeting in December when LGL noted that even with extensive plantings it would take decades before surface water conditions receive significant relief from solar impacts. Mr. Wells and a former GRCA fisheries biologist were present at this meeting and neither of these individuals (nor municipal staff) disagreed with LGL's observation. 6. Page one, Paragraph three, Sentence four: LGL's opinion remains at variance with that of the Authority on this issue. On the basis of fisheries benefits alone, we do not believe the matter can be quantified to the extent that a winning opinion is identified. Both approaches have their benefits and these benefits will be somewhat neutralized as up- gradient flows join the creek course south of the CPR corridor.' However, it is clear to LGL that sedimentation is an issue for the construction period and the 'Immediate post build -out years if the channel is day - lighted; the same is not the case if flows are conveyed underground. Secondly, we agree that, over time, a naturalized channel design can create benthic invertebrate production and provision of allochthonous material; however, the quality and quantity of such production is dependent upon anthropogenlc area use variables, which largely are uncontrollable. These include higher water temperature regimes in the early years, and on -going impacts from adolescents and companion animals, which may be expected to frequent the watercourse banks and channel resulting in contaminant loading of the watercourse. On balance, we believe that in this case, there is no clear fisheries benefit to day- North Village Neighbourhood Plan, Part of Lot 27 and 28, Concession 2 Village of Newcastle, Municlpalityof Clarington LGL Limited POUCY implications of the Foster Creek Sub - Watershed Planning Study June 93, 2008 TA4573 Page 3 lighting versus maintenance of the status quo, albeit in a different channel location. Conversely, on the issue of the proposed greenway connection between the daylighted tributary corridor and Arthur Street, LGL sees no such fisheries, aquatic habitat improvement or terrestrial wildlife benefits. 7. Same paragraph, Pages one and two, Sentence five: This issue has been commented on above, and we agree that cooling advantages of an underground delivery would be somewhat compromised when blended with the flows emanating from stormwater management features. However, such adverse affects can and should be minimized through pond design, which ensures an appropriate stratification of the water column, and releases flours which are as cool as possible, therein, this measure is encouraged through the Sub - watershed Study (Page 89, Section 6.6.3(g), :reducing the thermal_ impacts of pond waters- on buried-flows-when -they are- blended- south- of the- - - - - -- - rail corridor. 8. Same paragraph (three), Page two, Sentences six and seven: The issue of "sediment loading" and "foreign substance" introduction is noted above. In addition, we recognize that (non - riparian) "surface flows will be captured and treated by stormwater management facilities prior to re- introduction to the (Foster Creek) system;" however, in open creek blocks through the construction period and beyond,.the day - lighted reach will experience higher than average sediment loading than in a piped state, and will receive foreign substances (from above noted and other anthropogenic sources) irrespective of the "filtration capability of a naturalized vegetative buffer." It is LGL's experience that even with the best of mitigative measures, these issues will prevail with the creation of a surface channel, but to a much lesser extent with a piped conveyance feature. 9. Page two, First full paragraph: Notwithstanding the above comments, and consistent with a focus on "aquatic habitat improvements" as noted in the GRCA letter, consideration should be given to any practical development of a day - lighted portion of this "tributary" where it transits public lands and /or the stormwater management block. We trust,these comments are of use to you in your on -going discussions with the Authority and the Town. Please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned for clarification of points addressed in this correspondence. Sincerely, Robert Nisbet Senior Wildlife Biologist LGL Limited c• Carlos Salazar, Municipality of Clarington Cynthia Strike, Municipality of Clarington Lisa Backus, Municipality of Clarington Greg Wells, GRCA Mark Peacock, GRCA Bruce Fischer, Metrus Tom Albani, Metrus Peter Schut, Brookfield Roslyn Houser, Goodmans North Village Neighbourhood Plan, Part of Lot 27 and 28, Concession 2 Village of Newcastle, Munlcipality of Clarington LGL Limited Pollcy IrnPlicaflons of the Foster Creek Sub - Watershed Planning Study June 13, 2008 TA4573 A. AECOM 300 — 300 Town Centre Boulevard, Markham, ON, Canada WR 5Z6 T905.477,8400 F905,477.1456 vm maeconl.com June 19, 2009 Mr-Dennis Hefferon South Tower, Royal Bank Plaza 200 Bay Street Suite 2600, P.O. Box 185 Toronto, ON MW 2J4 Dear Mr. Hefferon: Attachment 7 To Report PSD- 067 -09 AECOM Project Number: 111885 prepared at the request of counsel Re: North Newcastle Neighbourhood — Response to Peer Review of Foster Creek Subwatershed Study Recommendations AECOM has been requested by the Municipality of Clarington to assist with development issues within the Foster Creek Subwatershed, Specifically, we were asked to review comments provided by Stantec Consulting Ltd. and LGL Limited directed *at two recommendations of the Foster Creek Subwatershed Planning Study (2001) as follows,: a) Bring the buried tributaries above ground (page 92); b) Corridors at least 100 m in width (total) approximately centred on the main creek valley, plus one of the buried tributaries and, c) Corridors of at least 100 m in width adjacent to the CPR and CNR rail lines, east of Foster Creek, to provide landscape connectivity among the natural areas associated with the Graham Creek Subwatershed (page 97), AECOM was to provide our opinion with respect to the Stantec and LGL comments. In addition, AECOM was asked to comment on the estimated cost involved in daylighting the tributary, and whether downstream enhancements are reasonable compensation for not undertaking the daylighting. In order to prepare this opinion, the following documents were reviewed: Gartner Lee Limited and Greeniands International Consulting Inc., 2001. Foster Creek Subwatershed Planing Study. Prepared for the Municipality of Clarington. Stantec Consulting Ltd., October 11, 2006, Letter addressed to Carlos Salizar, Planner, Municipality of Clarington at the request of Smooth Run Developments and Brookfield Homes, (111885 IJune18- 09_fosler creek pearleVleW,doc) Mow Page 2 Mr. Dennis Hefferen June 19, 2009 prepared at the request of counsel LGL Limited, February 15, 2008. Letter addressed to Carlos Salizar, Planner, Municipality of . Clarington at the request of Smooth Run Developments and Brookfield Homes, Peacock, Mark, 2008. Email addressed to Councillor C. Trim regarding North Village Neighbourhood Telephone conversation. MBTW — Watchorn Group and Sernas, 2008. Neighbourhood Plan, North Village Neighbourhood. A site visit was undertaken on June 15, 2009. Note that no rationale for servicing, stormwater management or other documents that indicate how the Plan intends to manage the unique groundwater conditions on this site, nor maintain flow to the two un -named tributaries was provided as part of the scope of this review. Comments are therefore confined to the content of the two letters and the maintenance of the natural heritage functions on the site without specific reference to the servicing of the Neighbourhood Plan. 1. 'Owerview of the Recommendations (200 1) The Foster Creek Subwatershed Planning Study'(FCSPS), completed in 2001, benefited from advice from the Steering Committee and Public Information Centres and includes final editing from the Municipality of Clarington and Ganaraska and Region Conservation Authority. The Vision agreed upon was: "to maintain and enhance the health and quality of.the Foster Creek Subwatershed and its ecosystem." These recommendations for the Greeniands System were confirmed as reflecting the achievement of that vision. When the FCSPS is read in its entirety, the point is made that natural heritage is in very short supply in this subwatershed. The valleys of the Wilmot and Graham Creeks are more robust and offer higher potential for natural heritage functions (also known as ecosystem services) than the Foster Creek valley which has been subjected to intense agricultural activities, The comments in this letter are focused on two tributaries to the Foster Creek that arise in the north- eastern corner of the watershed, pass through the Town of Newcastle and merge with the main channel just north of Durham Road 2 (formerly Highway 2). These headwater streams collect groundwater that- has infiltrated into the sand veneer in this portion of the watershed. The northern tributary has been modified through agricultural practices but passes into a restored wetland and plantation east of Arthur Street, providing connectivity via hedgerows to Nine -mile swamp, and to Site 14 (discussed below), and to the Graham Creek via weak linkages along hedgerows and the CPR. From Arthur Street to just north of the CPRall, a tile drain conveys most of the flow, There Is clear (111885 IJuneiO -09 foster creek_peer revlew.doo) 1 - e Af COM Page 3 - prepared at the request of counsel Mr. Dennis Hefteren June 19, 2009 evidence of surface water flow early in the season, and the invert was mapped as a wetland in the FCSPS. In early June 2009, much of the invert was ploughed and planted with wheat (in contrast to the corn in the upland area planted earlier in the season).. A vertical drain is clearly evident in the invert part way down the swale. The overland flows merge with the tiled flow within a small wooded ravine just north of the railroad. The tributary then passes into the Town of Newcastle where the ravine has been incorporated into the residential fabric as a complement to the landscaping and a wildlife refuge._ _. The southern tributary arises In Site 14, is tiled to a wetland (a swamp thicket) adjacent to Arthur Street, then similarly, disappears Into tile drainage, to emerge south of the CPR. The presence of watercress (Nasturtium officlnale) in both of the tributaries provides evidence of groundwater baseflows, The tributary was flowing at a rate of 1 Usec on June 15, at Arthur Street. The central issue surrounding these tributaries concerns how best to manage these features within the context of the development proposal in a manner that reflects the Vision of the FCSPS. 1.1 Site `14 Based on the natural heritage inventory undertaken in 1999, Site 14, the forest and wetland complex located just east of Arthur Street was notable as it provided habitat for Sharp- shinned Hawk and Black- and -White Warbler. These species are somewhat area sensitive, meaning that their success in breeding and rearing young is proportional to the size of the area in which they breed. Their occurrence was interpreted to be an indication that the. proximity of Graham Creek to the east and the remnants of Nine -mile Swamp to the north were sufficient influence to attract these species. These species were not recorded elsewhere in the Subwatershed. Site 14 on its own, without the influence of these larger native forests, would be unlikely to attract area sensitive species, In addition, Site 14 supports a colony of Early Coralroot (Corallorhiza trifida), a small, native orchid rarely recorded from Durham Region. The marsh dominated by Variegated Horsetail (Equlseturh variegatum) is also an unusual feature restricted to sandy sites with high water tables. Other rare species are often associated with this type of marsh. It is an important recharge /discharge feature that contributes flow to the southern tributary that flows through the Town of Newcastle. On this basis, Site 14 was considered to be a significant feature that should be built into a connected Greenlands System, consistent with the Vision above, in order to maintain and enhance its unique contribution to the subwatershed. Il 2 Wildlife Corridors Principles of Landscape Ecology maintain that connectivity among patches of habitat greatly enhance natural heritage function. It is a case of a connected whole being more than a sum of its parts. The literature suggests that wider corridors provide a greater diversity of functions, and that when (111885 IJune19- o9_Wer creel_peer avlamdoo) AECOM AMD . Dennis f He Mr eren prepared at the request of counsel Mr. De June 19, 2009 corridors achieve a minimum width of 100 metres, that these functions include the provision of breeding habitat for a wider array of wildlife, and greater potential for plant diversity. There is no precise threshold that defines exactly where. this enhancement of function occurs, and it is related to the amount of natural area, proximity of natural areas to one another, and landforms, On this landscape that is lacking tableland forest outside of the valieylands, it is necessary to restore wide corridors in order to achieve the enhancement reflected in the Vision. Environment Canada (2004) speculates that "in urban environments it might be supposed that wider corridors would be required to provide the same level of function In the face of urban effects, assuming that target attributes might persist at all In an urban matrix ". In this case, the agricultural landscape that presents a low barrier to wildlife movement is being replaced by a residential matrix on a landscape framed by higher quality natural features in the Wilmot, Foster and Graham Creek valleys. This is a'good example of a location in which wider corridors are justified. In order to provide sufficient resources for plants and animals making use of the corridor, additional width will reduce edge effects and contribute to breeding and productive potential. Hence the recommendation for 100 metres for all corridors, with emphasis on the creation of an east -west connection between watersheds. In principle, overland connections between watersheds enhance natural heritage function In the same way that trail systems and good road patterns enhance human settlements. It Is recognized that the land is a finite resource and therefore natural heritage function is coupled with other suitable infrastructure where possible to achieve multiple objectives. The east -west railroads within the Foster Creek Subwatershed are obvious anchors for east -west wildlife corridors, however they fail to connect to Site 14, 1.3 Un -named Tributaries As described above, the two un -named tributaries arise on the till plain as the sand cap thins to the south. Both of them have been tiled between Arthur Street and the CPR (i.e., excavated followed by installation of a perforated pipe and backfilling) in order to allow farmers to cross from one part of the field to the other unimpeded. However,, the tiling of the more northerly tributary has been less ineffective and a meadow marsh community has developed in the depression left over the buried watercourse, This ephemeral watercourse conveys water overland as well as through the tiles in the spring, but dries out in late spring or early summer when it conveys surface water flow alone. Both tributaries connect across the railroad to downstream valley systems that have been incorporated into the, Newcastle Village fabric, The contribution to the downstream watercourses must be maintained, therefore a discussion in the subwatershed study considered opening both watercourses within the development block and create a pathway of connectivity to the agricultural lands east of Arthur, and ultimately toward Site 14 and Graham Creek valley, In addition to a functional wildlife corridor, habitat that contributes to downstream Canadian fisheries waters would be enhanced in that it would contribute flow as well as conveyance of nutrients and provide habitat for benthic invertebrates. A desktop calculation of potential baseflow from the catchment west of Arthur Street based on broad assumptions, estimates an average annual ('111885_IJune1409 fosle� week_ "et_ ovlew.doo) H i AECOM Page prepared at the request of counsel Mr, Dennis Hefferen June 19, 2009 baseflowl of about 0.5 Usec (plus /minus 0.2 Usec) that is likely to range from 2 Usec in the spring to zero in summer. These flows would be somewhat enhanced by storm runoff and accumulated flows from east of Arthur Street. There are many benefits of the open watercourse over the piped condition including attenuation of water quantity in storm events and reduction in flashy flows, removal of water- borne pollutants, creation of wildlife habitat, habitat for benthic invertebrates and contribution of nutrients to downstream fish habitat, aesthetics, and an array of ecosystem services associated with the riparian plantings designed to maintain cool water temperatures (I.e_., reductio_n of heat sink effect, carbon storage and carbon sequestration.) In order to minimize the loss of development potential while realizing the benefits to natural heritage, only one tributary was recommended for daylighting in association with creating a pathway of connectivity toward Site 14 in spite of the potential to make a case for opening both of the watercourses. Daylighting the watercourse was expected to be no less expensive than the engineering required to collect the water and deliver it to the two watercourses, with the enhanced benefit of creating the wildlife connection, attenuating storm flows and enhancing downstream aquatic habitat, 1.4 Creating the Corridor The Greenlands System needs to be anchored to the valleylands of the Foster Creek, but in order to respond to the Vision, opportunities to enhance the natural heritage system must be identified. Given the: ® Significance of Site 14 and need to connect this feature to the Greenlands System; Opportunity to create an inter- watershed connector parallel to the railroad; Needto maintain water supply to the downstream tributaries; and, Direction to enhance the natural heritage function; the opportunity to connect these features was identified, described in Section 7.1 and illustrated on Figure 13 of the FCSPS (Attachment 1). In order to achieve these objectives, it is anticipated that the corridor be forested in order to provide the ecosystem services in terms of air quality, water quantity control and psychological benefits for the residents. This approach supports the goal of the Official plan "to'create an integrated and continuous system of natural areas" (Section 14.1) and supports the principle of Ecosystem Integrity (Section 3.2). I's Planhliig for Sa. staiiiable Comri- tunities These recommendations were made eight years ago. In the interval many municipalities have undertaken Integrated Community Sustainability Plans or Environmental Management Plans that establish goals for Environmental, Social /Cultural and Economic Sustainability, The ecosystem services 1. Based on a contributing area of about 22 ha and a post development Infiltration of 110 mm /annum, and allowing for 25% leakage to depth (111005_IJune1309_fosler_creeK peer eviewdoc) I ' ECOM • M Page 6 prepared at the request of counsel Mr. Dennis Hefferen June 19, 2009 that contribute to social and economic sustainability are important and quantifiable, A study undertaken by the Town of Oakville Identified an annual environmental benefit of the urban forest to be $2.1 million with a canopy cover of 29 %. Various municipalities are seeking to substantially increase canopy cover to benefit from air quality improvements, carbon sequestration, carbon storage, heat island effect mitigation, psychological improvement for residents among many other positive effects for residents. Brantford is undertaking an increase in canopy cover to 40 %. The City of Vaughan is targeting 40% justified by the threshold for air quality improvement, water quality improvement and benefits to wildlife habitat. The FCSPS reported that natural cover, including old fields and wetlands, is close to' 20% within Foster Creek. Of that, 9% is forest cover. Brantford estimates the contribution of its street trees to be around 5% therefore if the urban forest both existing and projected is included, 14% forest cover may be obtainable within the Foster Creek Subwatershed post development. Forest cover in York Region and Durham Region (excluding the urban forest) hovers around the 20% mark, more than twice that in the Foster Creek Subwatershed. Even if all of the restoration opportunities identified in the FCSPS on Figure 13 were implemented, the total would still fall below 20 %. As a result the community will fail to benefit from the many valuable ecosystem services provided by the forest alone. The recommendation to daylight the tributary north of the railroad and restore the watercourse and a wildlife corridor will help to remedy the shortage in ecosystem services needed by the residents to maintain a healthy community. 1.6 st, ml-riary The recommendation of a wildlife corridor that links the three watersheds (Wilmot, Foster, and Graham), enhances connectivity to Site 14 and maintains and enhances the ecosystem function of the northern un -named tributary is justified in the context of the Vision for the FCSPS and the goals and principles of the Municipality of Clarington Official Plan. This review confirms that there is sufficient merit in terms of enhanced ecosystem function to justify the consequences to the developable envelope in the North Newcastle Neighbourhood. Further, in the context of designing sustainable communities, the existing forest canopy is less than half of that in York and Durham, and as a consequence, Clarington is not benefiting from the substantial economic and social, as well as environmental outcomes of a more robust natural heritage network, including the urban forest. Restoration efforts should in fact exceed those recommended in the FCSPS in order to achieve thresholds for effective performance of ecosystem services. 2. Co' rn m eints of the east Reviewers Smooth Run Developments and Brookfield Homes retained two consultants to provide opinions with respect to the recommendations provided above. (111aa5 IJune1M im ter creel -peer revlem.doc) HIM AECQM Page 7 prepared at the request of counsel Mr. Dennis Hefferen June 19, 2009 2.1 Star'itec Consultir'19 Ltd.,. 2006. Letter addressed to Carlos alizar, Planrier, i flunicipality of Clarington at the request of Smooth Ravi Developments and Brookfield Homes, The comments provided by Stantec are discussed in the sections identified by the authors as follows. 2.1.1 F:colroclical Watershed Functions In general the Stantec description of Subwatershed" Is study generally accurate although it exaggerates the extent of the daylighting specifically recommended in the FCSPS. We disagree that the vegetation in Polygon 62 is not a wetland. At the time that it was assessed for the FCSPS, there were hydric soils present and the vegetation consisted of more than 50% wetland species- and by definition that means it is a wetland and whether it Is anthropogenic Is not relevant. The-Stantec observations of creeks is likely accurate and technically sound and seems to support the importance of this feature in contributing to downstream fish habitat. The buried tributary is currently providing this function not identified in the 2001 report. Stantec further comments that daylighting the tributary north of the CPR railroad "will not add significant value to the existing habitat" based solely on fish passage and further suggests that the quality of downstream habitat could degrade due to an increase in water temperature and sediment load. However, a properly designed natural channel in a post - development scenario should not suffer from an unusual sediment load, and creeks require a certain bedload to remain healthy and viable. The temperature issue can be easily rectified through dense riparian plantings. On June 15, 2009, watercress, an indicator of cold groundwater discharge, was abundant in full sun at the exposed tile drains at Arthur Street and also occurred throughout the Village. In addition, the benefits of daylighting and restoring a natural channel connected to a floodplain include reduced potential for flash flows and runoff velocities that contribute to erosion along the tributary (Brooke 2007). Further, air, vegetation, and soil more likely to absorb water -borne pollutants in an open channel as opposed to conveyance in a sewer pipe (City of Redwood 2006). Stantec correctly identifies the ecological benefits of daylighting and associated naturalization of creek side as; d Wildlife movement between the Foster and Graham Creek corridors for unspecified Wildlife species. 4 An increase in the amount of marginal fish habitat in the watershed. Q An increase in the total amount of natural vegetation cover. We note that the connectivity to Wilmot Creek and to Site 14 should be included in this list. Further, the exponential response of wildlife in terms of potential breeding habitat to the increase in natural cover at this scale has not been identified. No conclusion is provided on the intrinsic importance of these functions nor their value in an ecosystem services context. (111885 ljune19 -09 lostef tteek_ peer evlawdoo) AECOM • m Page 8 Mr. Dennis Hefferen June 19, 2009 2.1.2 Costs and Bonefits prepared at the request of counsel The Stantec discussion proceeds to make the case that daylighting the tributary is expensive while failing to place this conclusion into context. We agree with this assessment in that restoration of ecosystem function is often expensive, but needs to be evaluated In terms of the net gain to environmental, social and economic parameters of community planning. Evidence is provided by - Stantec from. one American source that seems to suggest that the total cost of restoring the natural watercourse "could easily approach $1,000,000." However, no estimate of the cost of the engineering required to excavate the existing tile drains (it cannot remain in situ), and replace the watercourse with some type of groundwater collection system (foundation drain collector or "third pipe" system) that will maintain flow to the two tributaries south of the railroad, A proposal for an additional by -pass pipe to take water from upstream of Arthur Street around the stormwater management facilities, discharging downstream is mentioned which may or may not be a separate system with additional costs. We are. unaware if there is a report available that' details how the development will achieve these engineering requirements, but this will be an expensive undertaking with many costs that overlap with, and may exceed, that of daylighting, It is our experience that when faced with an option to bio- engineer a solution (e.g., natural channel design), as opposed to hard engineering (pipes that will require future maintenance), the costs of bioengineering are comparatively low. In•addition, the proposed piping project (including routing water from Arthur Street around the SWMP) will have a greater length (following roadways and not topography) and both projects will be undertaken in sloppy soils with a high water table, There will be a greater cost to construct in these saturated soils with corresponding dewatering issues. A solution that requires less excavation with less interference with groundwater conditions'reduces costs, Based on advice from clients who have undertaken natural channel design, estimates for restoration of the northern connector to Arthur Street (Figure 13) range between $1,400 to $2,000 a metre which compares well with Stantec's estimate of $1,600, By our calculation, the total costs translate approximately to $700k to $1,000k based on our experience, or $800k according to Stantec. These estimates are for sophisticated natural channel designs that handle considerable flow. In the case of this project, the flows are low, therefore intensive design and engineering will not be required. This is more of a grading and planting project and therefore the costs are highly unlikely to escalate to seven figures. With respect to the costs associated with the design and construction of a piped alterative, we are unable to develop an accurate estimate without first obtaining additional information regarding the proposed minor and major drainage systems that would convey the external flows to the downstream reaches of the Foster Creek tributary (i.e,, south of the CPR tracks). We believe that a detailed estimate that reflects these costs of a piped alterative should be provided by the developer prior to rejecting the recommendation to daylight the tributary based simply on the notion that it would be prohibitively costly, Stantec also estimates that 10 ha within the North Village site would be lost which appears to be the total of all of the corridor, daylighting and the interior restoration potential shown in green. This figure (11188UJune10 -09 foster creek peer ey1m.doc) A • AECOM Page 9 prepared at the request of counsel Mr. Dennis Hefferen June 19, 2009 is high as the interior polygon is not part of the recommended Greenlands System, but rather constitutes a restoration opportunity, in extrapolating the costs of the restoration, .no mention is made of the potential to charge more for houses that back on to greenspace, or for houses in neighbourhoods well serviced by natural areas. Natural England's Accessible Natural Greenspace Standard (2008) recommends that each home,. at a minimum, should be within 300 m of an accessible natural green space of at least two hectares (ha). In addition, each home should also have access to: d At least one accessible 20 ha site within two km; m At least one accessible 100 ha site within five km; m At least one accessible 500 ha site within 10 km; Natural England also recommends that at least two ha of accessible natural green space be provided for every 1000 population.; and in doing so the value of the properties are enhanced and the communities benefit from the ecosystem services provided by the natural areas. Stantec acknowledges that these services are difficult to calculate; nevertheless they-are real and should not be dismissed. Stantec goes on to conclude that the "potential benefits... will not result in not [sic) major Impacts on the ecology of the subwatershed" without evaluating what those impacts might be. 2.1,3 Alternative Approaches We do not fully agree that the costs are as high as suggested and that the benefits are as low as stated by Stantec. However, there, are many options in ecosystem design to achieve the desired outcome, in this case, the desired outcomes include: - The east -west wildlife corridor from Wilmot Creek to Graham Creek, - Connectivity with Site 14, - Maintenance of-ecosystem function for the buried tributaries and - A contribution to the increase in forest cover within the Foster Creek Subwatershed to recover lost ecosystem services. Stantec proposes other alternative approaches to ecological enhancements: 1. Alternate proposal to wildlife corridor between Foster and Graham Creek corridors. 2. Increase amount of marginal fish habitat in the watershed. 3. Increase the total amount of natural vegetation cover (by replacing most of 10 ha naturalized areas that would be in North Village Neighbourhood Plan (under FCSPS) 'with 10 ha elsewhere). It is not clear whether these .are proposed to be undertaken in concert, or whether they are mutually exclusive. (IiM IJunal "k(wter creek_peer revlevi.dw) AECOM Page 10 at the request Mr, Dennis Hefferen _ prepared q t of Counsel June 19, 2009 In an effort to evaluate these proposals we have prepared a matrix that provides comment on their ability to satisfy the desired outcomes (Table 1); Table 1 Analysis of Alternative Proposals (Stantec) �E •' ; . °� ! - { 4 a o Im �,4r , •�,. .n !ei �r 6 0 ji o FF�Ah9 y�` f fi �f �!X 7_ - �f <'L o J 0 0 {� < �'i,.J� _ �r. x.C..t.�•�. z: Iri! t.li �'� : t'. The east -west wildlife_ Reduce to.30 m;-barriers to - - Not applicable - - 1 -ha of relatively natural habitat- corridor from Wilmot movement remain. Creek to Graham Needs to be extended to Wilmot Creek Creek however this Is outside of the Village Neighbourhood, Connectivity with Site No connectivity Not applicable No 14. Maintenance of No' Water contribution expected to Not applicable ecosystem function be maintained; thermal regime for the buried cool tributaries Increase in forest Marginal Marginal? Enhance core natural areas and cover riparian habitat along main branch by 9 he but trees are not sit ulated. Additional Comment The resulting narrow corridor All of these actions appear to Suggested isolation is will concentrate wildlife closer to be stewardship Initiatives and exaggerated as wildlife the rail corridor with expected occur on other owners underpasses and fencing can wildlife fatalities and rail noise properties. Carp exclusion is improve permeability, Interference however no very expensive and not Riparian habitat along the main documentation of the recommended. branch may be achieved through significance of this effect is other planning Initiatives. Strategic available. Need to confirm that addition of 9 ha to core areas will railroad does not require a contribute important benefits but larger berm, ownership is an issue. A review of the table suggests that if all of these initiatives were undertaken, that a minimum of wildlife movement would be preserved across the watersheds, water would continue to flow in the tributaries, and natural cover might be increased with the cooperation of non - participating landowners. The disadvantage is that connectivity would not be enhanced for Site 14, the potential to increase breeding habitat for area sensitive forest birds will be lost, the benefits of the rehabilitation of a natural watercourse will not be realized and recovery of threshold ecosystem services for the residents will not be addressed. Most of the stewardship actions suggested occur outside of the North Village Neighbourhood which will require creative implementation plans to ensure that they occur and the timing of the projects relative to the schedule for development could be an issue. A recurring theme that implies that the wildlife community is urban tolerant and therefore does not require management is. erroneous. The wildlife community is not all urban tolerant (e.g., Black -and- white Warbler) and it is for these more sensitive species that ecosystem design has more to offer. Typical planning for natural heritage systems has done little to take into account the management of urban tolerant wildlife communities, To say that they are urban tolerant is to say that. they forage in the garbage cans and feast at feeders. More thought needs to go in to what constitutes sufficient natural area for healthy wildlife populations that are self limiting, and that can support the predators required to create sustainable natural communities, 0 11885 I.Junel" foster mre k_PQe olavf..ducj /- EC'OM Page 11 Mr, Dennis Hefferen June 19, 2009 prepared at the request of counsel 2.2 I-GL Limited, 2008. Letter addr6ssed to Carlos Salizar, Planner, Municipality of Ciaringtei'i at the request of Smooth Run Developments and Brookfield i"iomes. The LGL letter references the Stantec letter then proceeds to provide additional discussion,on the same themes. 2.2.1 Animal Conveyance LGL is incorrect in stating that defining concepts of landscape ecology that include corridors, core habitat, connectors and linkages 'implies that any size criteria that are at variance with those will not qualify as a productive /sustainable feature" and that "urban /exurban animals cannot and do not successfully. enlist the services of anthropogenic features" . The reason for defining these terms is to enlighten the reader with respect to how they are used in this report, The science of landscape ecology is relatively young, and terms are defined differently by different authors. We totally agree that neither of these premises are accurate, and they are not at all Intended by this report. It is ironic that LGL goes on to criticize the FCSPS for lack of detailed data, then goes on to provide ambiguous data with no species, no dates (although it appears that data were all collected outside of breeding dates according to the statement that the area was visited July to December 2007 and without acceptable protocols). The fact that a wide variety of species were recorded is not at variance with the FCSPS. The author. again evaluates these species in the context of what they are able to tolerate, rather than what constitutes appropriate habitat, and how these animals can be expected to be managed into the future on a landscape with so little cover, where even with the urban forest, the cover is less than a third of recommended thresholds, It is not clear how the numbers of species recorded from portions of the watershed that are not specified, assists in the recommendation for the need for a corridor. The Subwatershed study had sufficient information for this and included ecosystem function well beyond simple lists of species, The suggestion that the wildlife corridor area should be separate from human /pet used areas is appropriate, but that both could be present (wildlife south, people north) in overall 60 to 100 m wide area. We also agree that road crossings are an issue however underpasses and wildlife funnel fencing as mentioned earlier would in large part address this issue. Although LGL recommends meadows adjacent to roads they are not needed if underpasses and wildlife fencing are implemented. We disagree with LGL in recommending the planting of mainly conifers, especially as White Spruce and Red Cedar are not often found naturally in the region. The rationale is not provided. A mix of native species, shrubs and trees native to area is preferred. 2.2.2 Daylighting Buried Tributary LGL incorrectly suggests that Stantec implies there might only be negative impacts to watercourse (temperature increase and sediment load), but neglects to mention that Stantec more strongly mentions the potential benefits. It is true that the subwatershed study does not clearly mention (111886 (�une1399_foster cree:<, peer revlew.doo) AECOM NOM Page 12 prepared at the request of counsel Mr. Dennis Hefferen June 19, 2009 aquatic benefits of daylighting. It may well be that most daylighting projects are founded on Improvements to aquatic habitat, but this one is focused on many other ecosystem functions, of which aquatic habitat is only one. AECOM does not understand why LGL considers that increasing the contribution of nutrients to downstream fish habitat, improving water chemistry, maintaining the thermal regime through maintenance of groundwater infiltration, riparian plantings and attenuation of storm flows "provides no apparent fisheries benefits and could be detrimental in the long run to down - gradient conditions ". LGL notes that there is potential for "foreign substances [to be] washed into-the. watercourse. and-general warming of groundwater_b_oth of which can be mitigated. AECOM._ does not agree that benefits are limited to fish habitat, nor that daylighting the tributary will have a deleterious effect on downstream conditions. The issue of piped groundwater is dealt with in Section 2.1.2 above. The plan to create corridors and wildlife linkages is not based on any one attribute. Providing a relatively wide corridor that can be shared with residents is a good way to keep the wildlife off of the streets, although we recognize that crossings are inevitable. For that reason, during the development process consultants for the development industry can be expected to make reasonable recommendations to mitigate for road kill and road safety Issues in the form of state -of -the -art wildlife underpasses and fencing. A considerable body of science is devoted to increasing the permeability of the landscape for wildlife of all descriptions. The Greenlands System was recommended based on an ecosystem approach that considered the need for many species of wildlife, as well as the maintenance of other ecosystem services. It is not wildlife mismanagement. 2.2.3 North Village Neighbourhood: Neighbourhood Plan (2008) The development plan proposes to locate two stormwater management blocks north of the railroad .alignment. LGL suggests that there will be a setback from the CPR lands of 20 to 25 m but does not provide a rationale for the functionality of this minimal setback, This suggestion is not reflected in the May 2009 drawing, which shows the constructed ponds immediately adjacent to the property line with no provision for a terrestrial wildlife corridor. In this configuration, the ponds will provide little to no cover for wildlife passage, fails to increase natural cover the subwatershed through the creation of a wide wildlife corridor and there is no indication of how water will be delivered to the two downstream catchments. The current plan does not satisfy the objectives or recommendations of the FCSPS. It appears that LGL did not .have the current stormwater plan on which to base comments and therefore they are not'relevant, (111M_IJune19-09 foster mek_pur .vlew,do ) AECOM Page 13 Mr. Dennis Hefferen June 19, 2009 prepared at the request of counsel After a careful review by a team of senior and intermediate biologists, engineers and senior hydrogeologist, AECOM confirms that the recommendations contained within the FCSPS with respect to landscape connectivity and a preferred treatment of daylighting the buried tributary are justified in - - - - - - - - tfie context of the Vision for the Foster Creek Subwatershed. - -- - - - -- - However, there is always more than one solution to improve ecosystem function and Stantec offered some suggestions that are worth considering. At issue is the fact that the key outcomes have not been achieved by their recommended alternative enhancements. The Consultant for the development community should reconsider appropriate methods to achieve the following outcomes: Create an enhanced east -west wildlife corridor from Wilmot Creek to Graham Creek to facilitate wildlife and human movement, e Enhance connectivity with Site 14, Enhance ecosystem function for both buried tributaries and the downstream corridors; and, Increase forest cover within the Foster Creek Subwatershed to recover lost ecosystem services based on a defensible rationale. Note that the reforestation of all of the restoration opportunities identified in Figure 13 constitutes only 4% of the watershed. The restoration and maintenance of wide corridors will not only contribute to the forest cover, they will enhance habitat for area sensitive species, increase connectivity with Site 14, and increase the thermal regulation for the buried tributaries. If these outcomes can be achieved in another way the consultants should be encouraged to submit an alternative. design for consideration of the Conservation Authority and the Municipality. Most of the alternatives offered occur outside of the North Village Neighbourhood lands . and will require commitments from the Municipality, non - participating landowners and the developer of the North Village Neighbourhood who would contribute funds to buying lands near the core natural areas as compensation for not following Greenlands System.. These are significant commitments when compared to finding a solution within the North Village Neighbourhood lands, where the restoration of ecosystem services would benefit that emerging community and complement the existing Town of Newcastle. Regarding the costs for daylighting the tributary, AECOM and Stantec are more or less in agreement that $1600 a metre is reasonable. This significance of this cost cannot be evaluated out of the context of servicing and maintaining ecosystem function across the block. There is no comparison of the cost to engineer the solution, which is expected to exceed that of the naturalization. (111885_uune130U_ ieure6L peer_revlew.doc) AECOM- • 11H Page 14 Mc Dennis Hefferen prepared at the request of counsel June 19, 2009 In conclusion, it is our hope that we have responded to your concerns to the best of our ability with the documentation - available to us at this time. Please call me to discuss further. Thank you for asking us to provide this service to the Municipality. Sincerely, AECOM Canada Ltd. Dale Leadbeater, B.Sc., B.Ed. Senior Biologist dale. lead beater @aecom.com References Brooke R. Smith, 2007, Assessing the Feasibility of Creek Daylighting in San Franciso, Part 1: A synthesis of Lessons Learned from Existing Urban Daylighting Projects City of Redwood, California, General Plan — Conservation Element Environment Canada, 2004, How Much Habitat is Enough? A Framework for Guiding Habitat Rehabilitation in Great Lakes Areas of Concern (Second Edition) (1918B5_IJune79 -O9 losler creek peer revlewdoo) AECOM, Attachment 1 Figure 13, The Greenlands System (Foster Creek Subwatershed Planning Study, 2001) 011885 IIJune1909 fwlet creek peer teVlew.do ) 8 -102 (t the Way Addendum to PSD- 067 -09 Unfinished Business PLANNING SERVICE Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: Monday, September 14, 2009 Report #: Addendum 1 toy File #'s: COPA 2005 -008, By -law #: PSD- 067 -09 PLN 31.5.10, ZBA 2005 -042, ZBA 2005 -043, S -C 2005 -0003 and $-C 2005 -0004 Subject: STATUS REPORT: APPEAL TO THE ONTARIO MUNICIPAL BOARD BY SMOOTH RUN: DEVELOPMENTS INC. (METRUS DEVELOPMENTS INC.) BROOKFIELD*HOMES (ONTARIO) LIMITED ON APPLICATIONS IN THE VILLAGE NORTH NEIGHBOURHOOD IN NEWCASTLE RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Addendum 1 tol report PSD - 067 -09 be received; 2. THAT report PSD - 067 -09 be tabled until the October 19th meeting of the General Purpose and Administration Committee; and 3. THAT all interested :parties listed in this report and any delegation be advised of Council's decision. Submitted by: avi . Crome, MCIP, RPP Director of Plonning Services Reviewed b Y :�`'�`'`"'"�"'� Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer DJC 10 September 2009 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T (905)623 -3379 F (905)623 -0830 1 REPORT NO.: Addendum to PSD- 067 -09 PAGE 2 1. At the meeting held on June 29, 2009, Council tabled report PSD- 067 -09 to September 14, 2009. The report recommended that the Municipality take the position that the Neighbourhood Design Plan and the related development applications must incorporate "a restored, naturalized northerly tributary of the Foster Creek within the Newcastle Village North Neighbourhood ". 2. Staff of the Municipality and the Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority subsequently met with the Smooth Run Developments Inc. and Brookfield Homes Limited to clarify the possibilities for day - lighting and incorporating a naturalized and restored tributary into the subdivision plan. It is my understanding that the developer's engineers are reviewing this matter. 3. At the same meeting, we were advised that the priority for the Metrus Developments (Smooth Run) was the completion and approval of their Brookhill plan of subdivision in Bowmanville. Subsequently, the focus of the efforts on behalf of Metrus Developments has been on resolving the outstanding issues related to the Bowmanville subdivision application, including the external services and the joint development arrangements with other developers in the neighbourhood. As a result no further meetings have been held with respect to the Village North project. 4. The Ontario Municipal Board held a pre - hearing conference on the Village North applications on August 4, 2009. The Board has set a timetable for the appeals of the Village North development proposals as follows: • Pre - Hearing Conference on October 30,2009 • Hearing commencing February 5, 2010 5. In recognition of the efforts to prioritize the Bowmanville development applications, it is recommended that report PSD- 067 -09 be further tabled until to the October 19th meeting of the General Purpose and Administration Committee. This recommendation is supported by the developers. List of interested parties to be notified of Council's decision: Bryce Jordan, Sernas Associates Smooth Run Developments Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited Hugh Allin Steve Wilson Cory Geddes Robert Macdonald Robert Fassen Helen Jones Rev. Robert Brouwer Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority Robert Craunstown. Jerry Reffosco Joanne Raymond Steve Holliday Doug Rombough 8 -104 e Leading the way Meeting: COUNCIL Date: Monday, January 11, 2010 Addendum 2 to PSD- 067 -09 Unfinished Business PLANNING SERVICES (?,110 1 1�76_ri . e- of (0 -ICS T Report #: - Addendum 2 to- File #'s: COPA 2005 -008, By -law #: PSD - 067 -09 PLN 31.5.10, ZBA 2005 -042, ZBA 2005 -043, S -C 2005 -0003 and S -C 2005 -0004 Subject: STATUS REPORT: APPEAL TO THE ONTARIO MUNICIPAL BOARD BY' SMOOTH RUN. DEVELOPMENTS INC. (METRUS DEVELOPMENTS INC.) BROOKFIELD HOMES (ONTARIO) LIMITED ON APPLICATIONS IN THE VILLAGE NORTH NEIGHBOURHOOD IN NEWCASTLE RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended to Council the following: 1. THAT Addendum 2 to report PSD- 067 -09 be received; 2. THAT Report PSD -067 -09 be tabled until�the April 12, 2010 meeting of Council; and 3. THAT all interested parties listed in this report and any, delegation be advised of Council's decision. Submitted by: Reviewed by i David Crome, MCIP, RPP Franklin Wu, Director of Planning Services Chief Administrative Officer CP /df 6 January 2010 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T (905)623 -3379 F (905 )623 -0830 8 °105 ADDENUM 2 TO REPORT NO.: PSD- 067 -09 PAG E 2 At the meeting held on June 29, 2009, Council tabled report PSD - 067 -09 to September 14, 2009. The report recommended that the Municipality take the position that the Neighbourhood Design Plan and the related development applications must incorporate if a restored, naturalized northerly tributary of the Foster Creek within the Newcastle Village North Neighbourhood ". An Addendum report was presented to Committee on September 14 and tabled to October 26 and subsequently further tabled until to the first Council meeting of 2010. 2. In the fall of 2009 the applicant's presented staff a concept that proposed to relocate and daylight a portion of the northern tributary. The concept would continue to pipe the tributary from the point it crosses Arthur Street southerly along the west boundary of Arthur Street to the vicinity of the southern tributary. From this point the northern tributary would be daylighted in an east — west direction to the mid -point of the property where it then runs south to the railway. 3. This concept has not been formalized and an official revision has not been submitted at this time. However, discussions with Metrus Developments confirmed that their priority remains obtaining Final Approval and registration of their subdivision application in the Brookhill Neighbourhood of Bowmanville. They would like municipal staff to focus efforts on this matter prior to dealing with Village North applications. The plan of subdivision in the Brookhill Neighbourhood was presented to the Ontario. Municipal Board on December 2, 2009 at a settlement hearing and draft approved subject to conditions. 4. The Ontario Municipal Board has presently schedule hearing dates for appeals to the North Newcastle Village applications as follows: • Progress report Pre - hearing April 16, 2010 • Hearing May 10 -14, 2010 6. It is recommended that report PSD - 067 -09 be further tabled until to the Council meeting of April 12, 2010. Staff Contact: Carlo Pellarin List of interested parties to be notified of Council's decision: Doug and Bridgette Rombough Rev. Robert Brouwer Steve Holliday Hugh Allin Anthony Jones Helen Hudolin Heather Dowing Patricia Simiele Robert MacDonald Cory Geddes Jerry Reffosco Joanne Raymond Mark Veneziano Rob Franssen Jason Gibson Steve Wilson Smooth Run Developments Inc. Brookfield Homes Ontario Limited Roslyn Houser Bryce Jordan Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority 1. Leading the Way Addendum 3 to PSD- 067 -09 Unfinished Business PLANNING SERVICE Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: July 5, 2010 Resolution #: d 04 ­4/2$-10 By -law #: N/A Report #: Addendum 3 to File #'s: COPA 2005 -008 PSD - 067 -09 PLN 31.5.10, ZBA 2005 -042, ZBA 2005 -043, S -C 2005 -0003 and S -C 2005 -0004 Subject: STATUS REPORT: APPEAL TO THE ONTARIO MUNICIPAL BOARD BY SMOOTH RUN DEVELOPMENTS INC. (METRUS DEVELOPMENTS INC.) AND BROOKFIELD HOMES (ONTARIO) LIMITED ON APPLICATIONS IN THE VILLAGE NORTH NEIGHBOURHOOD IN NEWCASTLE RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Addendum 3 to Report PSD - 067 -09 be received; 2. THAT Addendum 3 to Report PSD - 067 -09 be tabled until the first full meeting of Council, following the municipal election, to allow staff to continue to work with the applicants to finalize the outstanding issues once the required supporting documentation is received, including preparation of a recommendation on the Official Plan Amendment, Draft Plans of Subdivision and Zoning By -law Amendments; and 3. THAT all interested parties listed in the Addendum 3 to Report to PSD - 067 -09 and any delegation be advised of Council's decision. Submitted b0AXing Reviewed by Cj La m , FCSLA, RPP Franklin Wu, Director of Planning Services Chief Administrative Officer C P /df 29 June 2010 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 EMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T (905)623 -3379 F (905)623 -0830 8 -107 ADDENDUM 3 TO: REPORT PSD- 067 -09 PAG E 2 1.0 BACKGROUND 1.1 At a meeting held on June 29, 2009, Council tabled report PSD- 067 -09 to September 14, 2009. The report recommended that the Municipality take the position that the Neighbourhood Design Plan for the North Newcastle Village neighbourhood and the related development applications must incorporate "a restored, naturalized northerly tributary of the Foster Creek within the Newcastle Village North Neighbourhood ". An Addendum report was presented to Committee on September 14 and tabled to October 26. In October, it was further tabled to the first Council meeting of 2010. In January the Report was tabled to April 12, 2010. In April, Council tabled the report to July 12, 2010. At that time the solicitors for both parties had a conference call with the OMB and re- scheduled a pre- hearing conference for Friday September 17, 2010. 1.2 In the fall of 2009 the applicants presented staff with a concept that proposed to relocate and daylight a portion of the northern tributary. The.concept would continue to .pipe the tributary from the point it crosses Arthur Street, southerly along the west boundary of Arthur Street to the vicinity of the southern tributary. From this point, the northern tributary would be daylighted in an east -west open channel to the mid -point of the property where it then runs south, still in an open channel, to the railway outletting at existing culverts under the CPR. 1.3 This concept was formalized in a revised plan which was received on Friday May 28, 2010 and circulated to various agencies on Tuesday June 1. 1.4 Discussions with staff from Metrus, Smooth Run Developments, confirmed that their priority remains obtaining Final approval and registration of their subdivision application in the Brookhill Neighbourhood of Bowmanville, and both Metrus and the Municipality's staff have been working to this end. 2.0 APPLICATION DETAILS 2.1 This latest submission represents the fifth subdivision submission since applications were originally filed. The following charts summarize the May 2009 and the revised May 2010 submissions for Smooth Run Developments (S -C- 2005 -003) and Brookfield Homes (S -C -2005 -004). .p,R}.�" s ... 1���. f'.3l ' �. ^iJ1.�S 9 00,7�.7�,'i!!!�S��Y `2�-- .� a L~'��,•ii ��o�2`` LAND AREA ha SC2006 =003 SG2005 -004 S- +02005- 00..3. >'S =C. =2005 -004> Residential including Part Lots 25.51 10.58 20.62 10.55 School 2.35 N/A 2.4 N/A Park and walkway 3.0 0.56 3.95 0.58 Stormwater Management 7.37 N/A 6.41 N/A Open Space N/A N/A 2.55 N/A Possible Reservoir 2.69 N/A 2.17 N/A Future Development 20.04 18.98 22.85 18.98 Roads, Road Widenings and Reserves 1219 4.74 12.91 4.75 TOTAL 1 73.86 34.86 73.86 34.68 1. ADDENDUM 3 TO: REPORT PSD- 067 -09 PAGE 3 2.2 As can be seen the unit mix has changed with the revised submissions as has the land area distribution with the introduction of the new Open Space Block which has resulted from the relocation of the west stormwater management pond. The applicant has not submitted a revised Neighbourhood Design Plan (NDP) consistent with the revised proposed draft plans of subdivision. Based on the policies of the Official Plan a NDP is required for the North Newcastle Neighbourhood prior to approval of applications for draft plan approval. 3.0 AGENCY COMMENTS 3.1 At this time comments remain outstanding from a number of the circulated agencies including; the Region of Durham Works and Planning Departments, and St. Lawrence and Hudson Railway. 3.2 Engineering Services staff has completed their initial review of the revised proposal and advised that the following studies or information are required to review the revised submission: • a revised Transportation Study must be submitted which reflects the current neighbourhood plan; • a revised Functional Servicing Plan is required; • a revised on- street parking plan is required; and • a Stormwater Management Implementation Report providing for the sequential construction of the stormwater management works necessary for the watershed and addressing the impacts of developing this plan of subdivision in the absence of the balance of the watershed. 3.3 Similar to Engineering Service, GRCA staff advised that the following documents are required to complete the review of the revised proposals: 1' RESIDENTIAL UNITS incl ud'm 9 a ots ::. n , a BI d ock S� _ metres' of Eton e ta - 9.8 Link Lots 216 62 136 74 11.6 Single 139 56 186 72 12.8 Single 125 N/A N/ N/A 13.1 Single N/A 46 82 48 13.4 Single 36 14 N/A N/A 15.0 Single 4 4 '50 4 18.0 Single N/A N/A 28 N/A 9.8 Cap-End Semi - detached 107 31 N/A N A Street Townhouse Units 110 80 214 76 TOTAL 1 737 293 696 274 2.2 As can be seen the unit mix has changed with the revised submissions as has the land area distribution with the introduction of the new Open Space Block which has resulted from the relocation of the west stormwater management pond. The applicant has not submitted a revised Neighbourhood Design Plan (NDP) consistent with the revised proposed draft plans of subdivision. Based on the policies of the Official Plan a NDP is required for the North Newcastle Neighbourhood prior to approval of applications for draft plan approval. 3.0 AGENCY COMMENTS 3.1 At this time comments remain outstanding from a number of the circulated agencies including; the Region of Durham Works and Planning Departments, and St. Lawrence and Hudson Railway. 3.2 Engineering Services staff has completed their initial review of the revised proposal and advised that the following studies or information are required to review the revised submission: • a revised Transportation Study must be submitted which reflects the current neighbourhood plan; • a revised Functional Servicing Plan is required; • a revised on- street parking plan is required; and • a Stormwater Management Implementation Report providing for the sequential construction of the stormwater management works necessary for the watershed and addressing the impacts of developing this plan of subdivision in the absence of the balance of the watershed. 3.3 Similar to Engineering Service, GRCA staff advised that the following documents are required to complete the review of the revised proposals: 1' ADDENDUM 3 TO: REPORT PSD- 067 -09 PAGE 4 a geomorphic assessment and restoration design illustrating that the block is appropriately sized to accommodate a channel designed to natural channel specifications; and a revised Functional Servicing Report. 4.0 STAFF COMMENTS 4.1 Earlier this year when the pre- hearing was re- scheduled for September 17, 2010, it was envisioned that revised submissions and supporting documentation would be forthcoming shortly. As a result of soil issues resulting from an investigation completed earlier this year, a re- design of the stormwater management pond location was necessary. This delayed the revised submission to the end of May. 4.2 One of staff's key concerns outlined in PSD- 067 -09 related to daylighting the northerly tributary on the Smooth Run lands as recommended in the Foster Creek Subwatershed Study. The watercourse is currently piped /tile drained from where it enters the property on the west side of Arthur Street to just north of the CPR line. The revised application contains a proposed daylighting channel as described in Section 1.2 of the report. Clarington Planning and Engineering staff together with staff from the GRCA generally concur that the proposed channel identified as Block 436, satisfies the intent of the daylighting requirement for the northerly tributary as contained in the original recommendation of report PSD - 067 -09. However, the supporting documentation and details on the design of the channel and the width of the block has not been presented for review by Clarington or GRCA staff. 4.3 The revised plans have significantly changed the unit mix for the development. The impacts of the proposed revisions to the unit mix and design have not been thoroughly reviewed and discussed in detail with the applicants. In consideration of the additional information required, the number of issues currently outstanding, staff commitments over the next three months including the preparation for and attendance at a 3 week OMB hearing on a different matter in September and Council's meeting schedule, preparing a recommendation report to approve the various applications prior to the September 17 pre- hearing is not feasible. 5.0 CONCLUSION 5.1 It is recommended that staff continue to work with the applicants to finalize the outstanding issues once the required supporting documentation is received, including preparation of a recommendation on the official plan amendment, draft plans of subdivision and zoning by -law amendments, and that PSD- 067 -09 be tabled until the first full meeting of Council, following the municipal election, to allow this to happen. Staff Contact: Carlo Pellarin Me] ADDENDUM 3 TO: REPORT PSD- 067 -09 List of interested parties to be notified of'Council's decision: Smooth Run Developments Inc. Brookfield Homes Ontario Limited Roslyn Houser, Goodmans Bryce Jordan, Sernas Associates Doug and Bridgette Rombough Rev. Robert Brouwer Steve Holliday Hugh Allin Anthony Jones Helen Judolin Heather Dowing Patricia Simiele Robert MacDonald Cory Geddes Jerry Reffosco Joanne Raymond Mark Veneziano Rob Franssen Jason Gibson Steve Wilson Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority 8 -111 PAGE 5 r r , I 1 I I I I UNIT YIELD IL - — — — — — — — — — — Attachment 3 To Report PSD- 034 -12 jl Low Density Total I I I I I I iESSlb?` 4R0A 93-- L--------------- --- -LJ- - -L Existing units 2 ------ - - - - -- -- 1 +Single Detached 18.0. 32 7 l ,II i FUTURE �J -1 isns��se .• seses� �OWN.I O � s o ®8sE ®� �eeeee�es ■eases �nesseses oe�s�d P!P o..t. -.u,�. fit, 3M] fns otno- irvlt- naaiwv- YN -,IOV. I 1.6m 51NGLE DETACHED x� 19.6m 6EM1- DETACHED 0 �I I 9.Bm SINGLE DETACHED NNNEOJ 7.6m CAP ENDTOWNHOUSES 6A. REVERSE TOWNHOUSES MEDIUM DENSITY 0 40wh FUST1NG RESIDENCE 1 PUBLIC SPACES I PUBLIC ELEMENTARY . •�I• o I i SCHOOL © PARRS SWMAIANAGEMEMFAOUTY I�OPEN SPACE ,TRIO I ROAD NETWORK TYPEWARTERIAL I FUTURE REALIGNMENT - -- � TYPE'C'ARTERIAL I � PROPOSED COLtERORf o PROPOSED LOCAL ROADS NOISEEENCE EM PEDESTRIAN NETWORK l ...... PROPOSED BIKE LANE I I PROPOSED SIDEWALKS I ••� °` PROPOSED TRAITS PEDESTRIAN NODES I jRESERVOIR FI POTENTIAL RESERVOIR - f1. r ■RR.■ NEIGHBOURHOODBO.DARN r_ —JI I r � I I �`�''••~��'�.� ® .......R III rTTr'� 1 I TAT i \ ij1 111��1 I III' 11 Approved for the purposes of making an appllcallon for a Dlan of g Ad.sim under Section 51 of the PlannFg AcF. } Single Detached 15.0m m� 36 NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN North Village O Single Detached 13.1. ue /A4 152 .VNF. 3012 v.wr N Single Detached 11.6m 295 X Se.i - DeL 19.6. 76 X Single Det. 9.8. (linked) 146 Subtotal 739 Medium Density I 0 7.6m Cap End TH's 147 ' I 6.6m Reverse TH's 34 Med Dens efocks ®60uph 97 I Subtotal 278 I I Total Units 1017 POTENTIAL RESERVOIR I I I I SUBfECT TO EA I I II �I LEGEND RESIDENTIAL I 99 18.Om SINGLEDDACHED 9 1s.Om SINGLE DErACHO A w I o 13.1m SINGLE DETACHED � s o ®8sE ®� �eeeee�es ■eases �nesseses oe�s�d P!P o..t. -.u,�. fit, 3M] fns otno- irvlt- naaiwv- YN -,IOV. I 1.6m 51NGLE DETACHED x� 19.6m 6EM1- DETACHED 0 �I I 9.Bm SINGLE DETACHED NNNEOJ 7.6m CAP ENDTOWNHOUSES 6A. REVERSE TOWNHOUSES MEDIUM DENSITY 0 40wh FUST1NG RESIDENCE 1 PUBLIC SPACES I PUBLIC ELEMENTARY . •�I• o I i SCHOOL © PARRS SWMAIANAGEMEMFAOUTY I�OPEN SPACE ,TRIO I ROAD NETWORK TYPEWARTERIAL I FUTURE REALIGNMENT - -- � TYPE'C'ARTERIAL I � PROPOSED COLtERORf o PROPOSED LOCAL ROADS NOISEEENCE EM PEDESTRIAN NETWORK l ...... PROPOSED BIKE LANE I I PROPOSED SIDEWALKS I ••� °` PROPOSED TRAITS PEDESTRIAN NODES I jRESERVOIR FI POTENTIAL RESERVOIR - f1. r ■RR.■ NEIGHBOURHOODBO.DARN r_ —JI I r � I I �`�''••~��'�.� ® .......R III rTTr'� 1 I TAT i \ ij1 111��1 I III' 11 Approved for the purposes of making an appllcallon for a Dlan of g Ad.sim under Section 51 of the PlannFg AcF. N rsn..aa s.,rv. m� v •6i SEANASAS� NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN North Village Neighbourhood ue /A4 09319 .VNF. 3012 v.wr PLATE 13 8 -112 I I � I 3I =1 1 I I I VACANT' I 1J I-6131 Attachment 4 To Report PSD- 034 -12 I � ! I REt..., ...... ........ mow. I C-2005-003 PART CON - - - - - - - J- C 9 ESONLOZ zz a za ! - - L--- - - - - -- - - - - - - - -= MUNICIPALITY OF -- - - - -- t� -- — CLARINGTON (GEOGRAPHIC TOWNSHIP OF CLARKS. (i FORMERLY MUAGE OF NEWCASTLE) FMGWAL MUNICPA(TY OF DURHAM FUTURE DEVELOPMENT BLOCK426 (21.10 h9 - 52.1 ae.) FUTURE DEVELOPMENT BL (ruse'n. . _) IiESAWfl/i9Y 9fN9tt BL9IX {]] (i]I he - i7 xJ - YF91YY OEH9tt 9L9IXO {.3 9W,n rrrrrrrrrar 6■6■ �esessesse eeeee�ee�eP � . �eeeeee� e�e�sees� o flufflN MINIMUM lion Em sm RR RR 9 A I PAbET,E/9A1WJ1 (14.. 19i9 ' B.Po h M1. 9 - oc) 4E9YK1(i/A _ 1 SW YA4AC9IFNT FAWtt �� EbSMG f — 1 \ (161 M6s .c) pFFdn — FT--T--- -- _ _, c.9�ttvc ac nA4' �� ®� `�•< I'III��I �_i r���•� I I�i I+ �- Y - -- 9omuEawo ua I SMOOTH RUN O ® gom , �� o• �paM� a ua /* eau ,P1a.. YmAa,]�.l000mx< ua w ttT'9tt -m �� I tj" YY !� - P - po o flufflN MINIMUM lion Em sm RR RR 9 A I PAbET,E/9A1WJ1 (14.. 19i9 ' B.Po h M1. 9 - oc) 4E9YK1(i/A _ 1 SW YA4AC9IFNT FAWtt �� EbSMG f — 1 \ (161 M6s .c) pFFdn — FT--T--- -- _ _, c.9�ttvc ac nA4' �� ®� `�•< I'III��I �_i r���•� I I�i I+ �- Y - -- 9omuEawo ua I SMOOTH RUN O I5 I I �� o• �paM� a ua /* eau ,P1a.. YmAa,]�.l000mx< ua w ttT'9tt -m �� I tj" YY !� - P - I 9.an mmrA xanvls mmlu,c w�sY���� -ao�u �aVuu�lm lowtNAN ASKSMCIATB 1wss.wrt T9A466M! ua0 y r�. rmrsrr ,wtJ,aR uxm ORTH VILLAGE- SMOOTHRUN ®m.., aaa Ao m X12 DP -6 II 1 I( I 111.5111 II V FVWRE DEVELOPMENT I BLOCK 196 IBM Attachment 5 To Report PSD-034-12 MiSION TO DRAFT PLAN S-C-2005-004 PART OF LOTS 25 CONCESSION 2 U MUNICIPALITY OF EK� CLARINGTON ?K.!PWC To NWAUTY OF DURHAM FUTURE DEVELOPMENT BLOCK426 (2MG n. - 52.1 —) 57 .1 A lull MIIII ull 0"' 057S IMEM loo 111011 MA 1 "oll, 6, I N ------ WINE mono 911111 51 T-W! NORTH VILLAGE -BROOKFIELD T0' oaTia 8-114 irAl . . . . . . . .... T-W! NORTH VILLAGE -BROOKFIELD T0' oaTia 8-114 8 -115 Attachment 6 To Report PSD- 034 -12 ■ 1111IIMII_ . IIIINNIIII 11111111111 IIIII�IIN `�11 NI11 INII INII IIIIILi__1_�t \IIIIIIIIIIIII p 1 If == = == HNIIII1111 NIIII- '!!111 a as mm Illll�l�lf�ll IIIIIii11N I1tl,a1 It�q f NNNNIiI /IIIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIN � aNa11111111: '��� =���� IIIIIIIN,J a IaNN111111; 11111111111 IIIIIINNN �� , �= ; %���� %= %�,11111NNgN11 �IIIIIIIIIIII \; UNa11It� .Illli i %�� - "ice- ♦ ��: NIii� =s �al� �� �I111111111111�I�I��: Approved for "",% rpo s f moktrig on ppllcoUon for a n of wbdlvsion under Sectem151 afr the PlannFig Act. a uer..rq s..w. SFANAS AS`Oy1AlE5 PHASING PLAN North Village Neighbourhood n. ses ~ 04119~ /AY, 1012 wear PLATE 12 Attachment 7 To Report PSD- 034 -12 AMENDMENT NO. 86 TO THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON OFFICIAL PLAN PURPOSE: To implement the recommendations of the Foster Creek Subwatershed Study and to permit development in accordance with the North Village Neighbourhood Design Plan. BASIS: This amendment is based on Foster Creek Subwatershed Study, August 2001 prepared by Gartner Lee Limited and Greenland International Consulting Inc. and the North Village Neighbourhood Design Plan, 2011 prepared by the Sernas Group Inc., and applications for Official Plan Amendment, two Draft Plans of Subdivision and rezonings submitted by Smooth Run Developments Inc. and Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited. ACTUAL AMENDMENT: The Clarington Official Plan is hereby amended as follows: 91. Amend Table 9 -2 "Housing Targets by Neighbourhood" by revising the targets for Neighbourhood N5 North Village and amending all corresponding totals as follows: l±a 3 0 Table 9 -2 Housing Targets by Neighbourhoods Urban Area Neighbourhoods Housing Units Low Medium High Intensification Total N5 North Village 1000 400 0 50 1450 TOTAL 5110 1225 1 300 350 6985 By Amending Map A4 — Land Use Newcastle Village Urban Area as shown on Exhibit "A" to this amendment. By Amending Map B4 — Transportation Newcastle Village Urban Area as shown on Exhibit "B" to this amendment. By Amending Map H3- Neighbourhood Planning Units — Newcastle Village Urban Area as shown on Exhibit "C" to this amendment. IMPLEMENTATION:The provisions set forth in the Clarington Official Plan, amended, regarding the implementation of the Plan, shall apply in regard to this amendment. INTERPRETATION: The provisions set forth in the Clarington Official Plan, amended, regarding the interpretation of the Plan, shall apply in regard to this amendment." 8 -116 Exhibit "A ", Amendment No. 86 To the Municipality of Clarington Official Plan, Map A4, Land Use, Newcastle Village Urban Area CONCESSION ROAD 3 )AFE!SPECI Change From "Public Elementary School" To "Separate Elementary School" A ■ AREA ■ ■ Expand "Special Policy Area G" N ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Add "Medium Density Residential" Revise Collector symbols Road locations M M Delete "Separate Elementary School" symbol Relocate "Medium Density Residential" symbol Relocate "Public Elementary School" and "Neighbourhood Park" symbols W W F- I— Add new Environmental U) Protection Area NP SPECIAL POLICY AREA E SPECIAL Q POLICY i O AREA E KING AVENUE M 8 -117 Exhibit "B ", Amendment No. 86 To The Municipality of Clarington Official Plan, Map 134, Transportation, Newcastle Village Urban Area v - - TYPE A ARTERIAL ® TYPE B ARTERIAL O ---------- TYPE C ARTERIAL MAP 134 COLLECTOR ROAD TRANSPORTATION - - - - - - - REGIONAL TRANSIT SPINE NEWCASTLE VILLAGE URBAN AREA EXISTING FUTURE OFFICIAL PLAN E "� MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 4_ =_� FREEWAY INTERCHANGE JANUARY 1, 2010 0 200 400 600 800 m My -� REFER TO SECTION 19 200 m O GRADE SEPARATION THIS CONSOI.If11T10N IS PR(]VIf)FT] F(1R f.(1NVFNIFN(:F my Exhibit "C ", Amendment No. 86 To the Municipality of Clarington Official Plan, Map H3, Neighbourhood Planning Units, Newcastle Village Urban Area ro 0 230 460 920 1,380 1,840 Metres 8 -119 MAP H3 NEIGHBOURHOOD PLANNING UNITS NEWCASTLE VILLAGE URBAN AREA OFFICIAL PLAN MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON JANUARY 1, 2010 REFER TO SECTIONS SAND 9 1H�'a CONSOIJOATION IS PROJIDEO FOR fANVS MDA OM1LY AND REPRESEMS ftEOVESTED MODIFICATIONS ANDAPPROJ Attachment 8 To Report PSD- 034 -12 CONDITIONS OF DRAFT APPROVAL S -C- 2005 -003 (Smooth Run Developments) PLAN IDENTIFICATION The Owner shall have the final plan prepared on the basis of approved draft plan of subdivision S -C- 2005 -003 prepared by Sernas Associates identified as Project Number 04012, original submission dated August 2005, and as revised in March 2011, and further red lined, which illustrates a total 656 residential units consisting of 76 link detached units, 76 semi detached units, 326 single detached lots, 84 street townhouse units, a medium density block containing a maximum of 94 units, blocks for 2 stormwater management ponds, a block for a public elementary school, a block, for a park, a block containing a daylighted water channel, a block for open space, a block for a water reservoir, a block for a walkway, a future development blocks, road widenings, and 0.3 metre reserves. The red -line revisions are: 1. 3.00 metre road widening on Concession Road 3 from Block 426; 2. 3.00 metre road widening on Arthur Street from Block 426; 3. Appropriate widening to accommodate Arthur Street grade separation; 4. 14.0m x 14.0m sight triangle at Concession Road 3 and Arthur Street; 5. The daylighted water channel and abutting parkette are identified as two separate blocks, the daylighted channel being Block 430 and the parkette being Block 430 A; 6. Rename Block 427, from "Walkway" to "Servicing Block "; and 7. Delete reference to "Street S" as it is a continuation of "Street B ". FINAL PLAN REQUIREMENTS 2. The Owner shall dedicate to the Municipality of Clarington: a) the road allowances included in this draft plan as public highways on the final plan; b) a 3.00 metre road widening (Block 444 and 445), across the entire frontage of the draft plan abutting Concession Road 3; C) a 3.00 metre road widening across the entire frontage of the draft plan abutting Concession Road 3; d) a 14.0 metre x14.0 metre sight triangle at the intersection of Arthur Street and Concession Road 3; e) a 14.0 metre x 7.0 metre sight triangle at intersections where a local or collector street connects with an arterial road; f) Block 427 for the purposes of an overland flow channel; Conditions of Draft Approval FINAL (S -C- 2005 -003 - Smooth Run): May 11, 2012 - Page 1 1 g) Block 430 and Block 430 A (as redlined) for the purposes of a day - lighted water channel and a parkette; h) Block 431 to for Open Space purposes. 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 terminate any dead ends 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. 5. All land dedications, easements, sight triangles and reserves as required by the Municipality for this development must be granted to the Municipality free and clear, of all encumbrances and in a form satisfactory to the Municipality's Solicitor. 6. The Owner shall convey to the Region of Durham: a) a sufficient road widening to provide for a minimum of 18 metres measured from the original centerline of Regional Road 17, across the entire frontage of the draft plan abutting Regional Road No. 17. b) a 7.0 metre x 14.0 metre sight triangles at the northeast and southeast corners of Regional Road 17 and Street "A "; and C) 0.3 metre reserve across the frontage of the site along Regional Road 17 where it abuts Lot 1 and Blocks 416, 431 and 432. 7. All land dedications, easements, sight triangles and reserves as required by the Region of Durham for this development must be granted to the Region free and clear of all encumbrances and in a form satisfactory to the Region's Solicitor. 8. The Owner shall grant to the Region of Durham, any easements require to provide Regional services for this development and these easements shall be in locations and of such widths as determined by the Region. REQUIREMENTS TO BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT 9. Prior to the execution of the Subdivision Agreement, the Owner shall execute and cause to be registered on the title to the lands to which it applies a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Municipality of Clarington and such other persons as the Municipality of Clarington Director of Planning Services and Director of Engineering Services deems necessary. The MOU shall detail parkland requirements for the development of the North Newcastle Neighbourhood. It shall specifically address the responsibility of Smooth Run Developments and Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited with respect to parkland dedication of their total land ownership within the Neighbourhood. Parkland contribution shall be provided on the basis of 1 hectare per 300 hectares or 5% of the land area as specified in the Planning Act. Conditions of Draft Approval FINAL (S -C- 2005 -003 - Smooth Run): May 29, 2012 Page 2 8 -121 10. The Owner must submit a revised Functional Servicing Report. This, report, reflecting the draft approved plan, will be subject to the approval of the Director of Engineering Services and the Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority. The report shall confirm the following: • that no storm sewers will be flatter that a 0.5% grade; that external drainage from the east side of Arthur Street can be accommodated in a storm sewer system that is situated within the road allowance on Arthur Street; and • how the channel to be constructed within Block 430, will convey water from where it currently enters the site, on Arthur Street to its current outlet at the property line of the Canadian Pacific Railway. The report must also detail how water will be conveyed through the property located at 220 Arthur Street (18 -17- 030 - 130 - 1100). 11. The Owner shall submit a Transportation Study which reflects the approved neighbourhood plan. The study shall include monitoring of potential traffic infiltration both into and through the Foster Creek North Neighbourhood as development of the subject neighbourhood proceeds. The report shall be updated and submitted for approval by the Director of Engineering Services prior to registration of each phase of development, after registration of Phase 1, in this draft plan. Each report shall identify recommendations for external road improvements, external traffic control measures and the need for other municipal infrastructure improvements that may be required as a result of the amount of infiltration that actually occurs. Furthermore, the number of units available for development within the overall neighbourhood may be restricted depending upon the amount of infiltration that actually occurs. Any decision regarding the number of units that will be made available for development within the overall neighbourhood at any phase of development will be determined solely at the discretion of the Director of Engineering Services. 12. The Owner agrees that prior to the registration of the second phase of development, to submit a further Traffic Study to determine the timing for upgrades and improvements to the intersection of Arthur Street and the Canadian Pacific Railway. The improvements shall include but not be limited to crossing barriers or a grade separation. 13. The Owner shall prepare an Internal Traffic Impact Study to assess the traffic movements within the Plan of Subdivision and identify areas where traffic calming may be required. The study shall recommend the appropriate measures .to be used, such as textured asphalt, bump outs or landscaping measures. This study shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services Conditions of Draft Approval FINAL (S -C- 2005 -003 - Smooth Run): May 29, 2012 Page 3 8 -122 and Director of Planning Services, The Owner shall be 100% responsible for any improvements required as a result of the recommendations in the study. 14. The Owner shall, if necessary, apply to the Municipality of Clarington and obtain area municipal approval of the zoning for the land uses shown on the approved draft plan in accordance with the provisions of the Planning Act. 15. 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. The Plan shall include: a planting plan for Blocks 430, 430 A and 431; 2.0 metre walking trail through Blocks 430, 430 A, 431 and 432; a double row of coniferous trees, consisting of White Pine and White Spruce and no less than 2 metres in height within Block 430 immediately north of the property located at 220 Arthur Street. 16. ' The Owner shall be responsible for planting the double row of coniferous trees within Block 430 immediately north of the property located at 220 Arthur Street. Such planting shall be required simultaneously with the creation of the daylighted channel and to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services and Director of Planning Services. 17. The Owner shall implement a rear yard planting program for all lots in accordance with the guidelines to be established or terms approved by the Municipality or by the Director of Panning Services. 18. 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 Director of Engineering Services. 19. The Owner shall prepare an Environmental Sustainability Plan for approval by the Director of Planning Services and the Director of Engineering Services. The Plan shall identify the measures that the Owner will take to conserve energy, and water in excess of the standards of the Ontario Building Code, reduce waste and increase recycling of construction materials and utilize non - toxic, environmentally sustainable materials and finishes. 20. The Owner shall prepare a Community Theme Plan, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning Services and the Director of Engineering Services. This plan shall be consistent with the draft approved plan prepared by the Owner of the Plan of Subdivision S -C- 2005 -004. The Plan shall include design concepts for community theming include gateway treatments, landscape treatments, lighting Conditions of Draft Approval FINAL (S -C- 2005 -003 - Smooth Run): May 29, 2012 Page 4 8 -123 fixtures, fencing details and related design issues for the overall design, location and configuration of trails and open space buffers. REQUIREMENTS TO BE INCLUDED IN SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT 21. That the Owner shall enter into a Subdivision Agreement with the Municipality of Clarington and agree to abide by all terms and conditions of the Municipality's standard subdivision agreement. 22. The Owner shall submit plans showing the proposed phasing to the Region of Durham and the - Municipality of Clarington for review and approval if the subdivision is to be developed by more than one registration. 23. The future phasing will be restricted by the number of external accesses that are available. Full development of this draft plan will require all external accesses to be constructed. The specific lots available for building permit in any single phases of the development will be determined at the engineering stage and shall be at the sole discretion of the Director of Engineering Services. 24. The existing municipal roadways situated in this portion of the Newcastle Urban Area have not yet been constructed to an urban standard and related infrastructure such as storm sewers and storm water drainage systems do not exist. Full build out of the subject lands cannot occur until improvements to municipal infrastructure such as the urbanization of existing roads, the installation of pedestrian sidewalks, the installation of streetlights and the installation of storm drainage systems has taken place. The phasing scheme and the timing for actual development within any part of the subject portion of the Newcastle Urban Area will be dependent upon the completion of necessary and related municipal infrastructure improvements. The subdivision shall be developed in phases by more than one registration. The Owner shall submit plans showing the proposed phasing to the Directors of Engineering Services and Planning Services for approval. The number of residential units that will be permitted for development at any given time will be made solely at the discretion of the Directors of Engineering Services. 25. The Owner acknowledges that portions of this draft plan of subdivision are premature relative to the Municipality's capital budget and Development Charges By -law. Development cannot proceed until such time as the Council of the Municipality of Clarington, acting reasonably, has approved the expenditure of funds for the provision of the certain works for this draft plan or external works or services in its capital budget and which have been included in the Municipality's Development Charges By -law and deemed necessary by the Director of Engineering Services, and Director of Finance, to service this development. These include but are not limited to: i) Installation of sidewalks to serve as a direct connection to the existing municipal sidewalk network within the Newcastle Urban Area; Conditions of Draft Approval FINAL (S -C- 2005 -003 - Smooth Run): May 29, 2012 Page 5 8 -124 ii) installation of streetlights within the North Street road allowance; iii) park development; iv) reconstruction of Arthur Street and Concession Road 3; and iv) improvements to the level crossing at Arthur Street. 26. Should the Owner wish to proceed in advance of the approval by the Council of the Municipality of Clarington acting reasonably, for the expenditure of funds for any of the works required by the Director of Engineering Services identified in Condition No. 25, to facilitate development, the Owner shall pay 100% of the cost of all required works, to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services and Director of Finance. 27. The Owner shall convey Blocks 429 and Block 430 A to the Municipality of Clarington for park or other public recreational purposes. The Owner further agrees that the dedication of parkland dedication for the subject application will be considered together with the parkland dedication requirement for the application of Draft Plan of Subdivision S -C- 2005 -004. The Owners of the two draft plan agree that the parkland dedication is less than 1 hectare per 300 units or 5% of the total land area as provided for in the Planning Act. The dedication of additional parkland or cash payment in lieu of parkland shall be in accordance with the provisions of the Memorandum of Understanding. 28. The Owner shall be responsible for grading and seeding Block 430 A in accordance with the local service definition in the Development Charges By -law and to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services. 29. The park, Block 429, must be developed as part of Phase 1. Should the Owner wish to develop Phase I in advance of Council approval for the expenditure of funds for development of the park, the Owner shall be 100% responsible to construct the park (Block 429) in its entirety. The Owner shall retain a qualified Landscape Architect to undertake the preparation of a detailed park concept plan, followed by the preparation of park construction drawings and specifications all to be approved by the Director of Engineering Services. The park construction drawings shall clearly indicate all park grading, equipment and facilities. Park facilities to be included in Block 429 shall include, but not be limited to: • traditional playground with equipment suitable for junior and senior age Children; • hard surface play court (i.e. basketball, ball hockey); . • shade structure; • park furniture such as benches, picnic tables, waste containers, bike racks as appropriate; Conditions of Draft Approval FINAL (S -C- 2005 -003 - Smooth Run): May 29, 2012 Page 6 8 -125 • paved walkways connecting various park features to surrounding street; • walkway lighting; • tree and shrub planting as appropriate; • park sign; • one unit sports field; and • park entirely sodded /seeded to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services. 30. The Owner 'agrees to commence construction of the park Block 429 at the issuance of the 151St building permit of Phase I of the development either singularly or in combination with plan of subdivision S -C- 2005 -004. The Owner further agrees to complete the park construction in accordance with the approved construction drawings and specifications prior to the issuance of the 200th building permit of Phase I of the plan either singularly or in combination with plan of subdivision S -C- 2005 -004. 31. The Owner acknowledges that full build out of this development cannot occur until such time that the Council of the Municipality of Clarington has approved expenditure of funds for the reconstruction of Arthur Street from the Canadian Pacific Railway to Concession Road 3 and Concession Road 3 from Arthur Street to Regional Road 17, to an urban standard including storm sewers, water service sanitary sewers, full urban section, street trees, parks, sidewalks and street illumination as well as any other external works or services which have been included in the Municipality's Development Charges By -law and have been deemed necessary by the Director of Engineering Services to service this development. Alternatively other financial arrangements can be made at the discretion of and to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services and the Director of Finance in order for individual phases of this development to proceed. 32. The Owner must provide the Engineering Services Department with a Stormwater Management Implementation Report which provides for the sequential construction of the stormwater management works necessary for the entire watershed and addresses the impacts of developing this plan of subdivision in the absence of the balance of the watershed. The required Report must demonstrate that the blocks designated for stormwater management facilities proposed for this development address the needs of the entire tributary watershed area and have been adequately sized. This Report shall be subject to the approval of the Director of Engineering Services and the Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority. 33. Building Permits for Lots 18 to 26 and 37 to 58 will not be issued until such time as engineering drawings and specifications for the stormwater management ponds and the daylighted water channel have been submitted and demonstrate that these proposed lots are not required for the ponds and daylighted channel Conditions of Draft Approval FINAL (S -C- 2005 -003 - Smooth Run): May 29, 2012 Page 7 8 -126 respectively. The release of these lots shall be at the discretion of the Director of Engineering Services and the Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority. 34. The Owner must provide the Engineering Services Department with a Master Grading Plan satisfactory to the Director of Engineering Services. The required Plan shall be submitted at the engineering review stage of the development process. 35. The Owner shall cause the north side of Street "C" to be fully serviced with water, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, hydro, telephone and cable television for any future development that may front onto Street "B" and "D" and any streets or future streets which may intersect Street "C ", must be stubbed for water, sanitary sewer and storm sewer. 36. Suitable temporary turning circles must be located on streets with a temporary "dead end" configuration. The installation of any temporary turning circles will be subject to the approval of the Director of Engineering Services. Any Lots or blocks situated adjacent to temporary turning circles will remain frozen until such time that the street is extended and constructed to a finished urban roadway including Regional services, asphalt paving, curb and gutter, sodded boulevard, sidewalk, street trees and street lighting, for the entire frontage width abutting any "frozen" lot or block. Any final decision regarding the requirement for a temporary turning circle or the suitability of a temporary turning circle configuration will be made solely at the discretion of the Director of Engineering Services during the engineering review stage of the development process. 37. Sufficient road pavement widths to accommodate turning lanes must be provided at any locations where local roads meet arterial roads. Any final decision regarding road pavement widths will be determined solely at the discretion of the Director of Engineering Services at the engineering review stage. 38. The applicant will be responsible to provide a revised On- Street Parking Plan satisfactory to the Director of Engineering Services. The required Plan must also illustrate the driveway location for each residential unit and demonstrate that a suitable driveway access can be provided to all units. 39. The engineering drawings for this development must be signed, sealed and dated by a Professional Engineer. 40. All works and services must be designed and constructed in accordance with the Municipality of Clarington Design Criteria and Standard Drawings, provision of the Municipality Development Charges By -law and all applicable legislation and to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services. 41. Prior to development of adjacent lands some of the lands identified as "Part Lots" and "Part Blocks" on the draft plan may be difficult to access. Prior to registration of the relevant/affected portion of this draft plan containing the Part Lots and Conditions of Draft Approval FINAL (S -C- 2005 -003 - Smooth Run): May 29, 2012 8 -127 Page 8 Part Blocks, the owner will be required to demonstrate that a suitable access can be provided to all "Part Lots" or "Part Blocks ". 42. Should development of S -C 2005 -004, not proceed simultaneously with development of this draft plan a suitable access must be provided to Blocks 416 and 417. The applicant must demonstrate how these blocks can be accessed and maintained. 43. The Owner shall grant such easements as may be required for utilities, drainage and servicing purposes to the appropriate authorities. 44. All works shall be constructed in accordance with the Municipality of Clarington standards. 45. The Owner shall install fencing adjacent to all park, water courses, stormwater management and open space blocks and on the rear and side lot lines of Lots 18 to 36 and 37 to 58 in accordance with Municipality of Clarington standards. 46. The Owner shall cause all utilities, including, hydro, telephone, Cable television within the streets of this development to be . installed underground for both primary and secondary services. 47. 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. 48. The Owner agrees that where the well or private water supply of any person is interfered with as a result of the subdivision, the Owner shall at his expense, either connect the affected party to municipal water supply system or provide a new well or private water system so that water supplied to the affected party shall be of quality and quantity at least equal to the quality and quantity of water enjoyed by the affected party prior to the interference. 49. The Owner shall provide the Municipality, unconditional and irrevocable, Letters of Credit acceptable to the Municipality's Director of Finance, with respect to Performance Guarantee, Maintenance Guarantee, Occupancy Deposit and other guarantees or deposit as may be required by the Municipality. 50. The Owner shall pay to the Municipality, the development charge in accordance to the Development Charge By -law as amended from time to time, as well as payment of a portion of front end charges pursuant to the Development Charges Act if any are required to be paid by the Owner. Conditions of Draft Approval FINAL (S -C- 2005 -003 - Smooth Run): May 29, 2012 Page 9 51. The Owner shall be required to make a new application for the proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision, Future Development Block 426. 52. 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. 53. The Owners shall be 100% responsible for the cost of preparing 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: 54. The Owner agrees that no residential units shall be offered for sale to the public on said plan until such time as the architectural control guidelines and the exterior architectural design of each building has been approved by the Control Architect and the Director of Planning Services. 55. Dwellings on Lots 25 and 26, abutting (Block 427), shall have upgraded and enhanced elevations. 56. Prior to final approval, the proponent shall engage a qualified professional to carry out, to the satisfaction of the Ministry of Culture, an archeological 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 Culture confirming that all archeological resource concerns have been met including licensing and resource conservation requirements. 57. The Owner shall agree in the Municipality of Clarington Subdivision Agreement to implement the recommendation of the report entitled "Environmental Noise Assessment" prepared by YCA Engineering Limited, dated April 2011, which specify recommended noise control measures. The measures shall be included in the Municipality of Clarington Subdivision Agreement and must also 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. 58. 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 Conditions of Draft Approval FINAL (S -C- 2005 -003 - Smooth Run): May 29, 2012 Page 10 8-129 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. 59. The Owner is required to reserve Block 425 to the Regional Municipality of Durham for a water reservoir. Should the Regional Municipality of Durham not require the Block for a reservoir, then those lands will be incorporated into new Draft Plan of Subdivision required for the Future Development Block 426. 60. 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. 61. 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. 62. Prior to final approval and to any grading taking place on ' the site, a detailed stormwater management report in accordance with current MOE criteria and the Functional Servicing report prepared by Sernas Associates, (last revised April 2011) shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the GRCA, and the Director of Engineering Services. 63. Prior to the commencement of any on -site works the Owner shall prepare a report satisfactory to the Director of Engineering Services and the GRCA detailing the means whereby erosion and siltation will be minimized and contained on the site both during and subsequent to the construction period. 64. The Owner shall submit a detailed design report for the tributary to be restored and re- naturalized. The report shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the Municipality and the GRCA, in accordance with the Geomorphic Solutions memorandum of June 8, 2011, and shall include but not be limited to fluvial geomorphic design of the channel complete with minimum vegetation requirements to ensure structural stability of the works. 65. The Owner shall retain a qualified soils engineer to investigate the potential for groundwater interference with the functionality of the east pond, and the pond shall be redesigned if necessary. 66. The Owner shall provide a detailed hydrogeological investigation, as per the recommendation of the 2010 hydrogeological study, incorporating additional boreholes being drilled in the west stormwater management pond block. Conditions of Draft Approval FINAL (S -C- 2005 -003 - Smooth Run): May 29, 2012 Page 11 8 -130 Depending on the findings of this investigation, changes to the pond design may be required. 67. That prior to any on site grading, an inventory of the downstream tributaries from the railway to the main branch of the Foster Creek shall be carried out. This survey shall describe. current channel morphology and culvert conditions including a photographic record of pre - development conditions. Additionally, that the Owner re- conduct the inventory at a point in time deemed to be acceptable by the Municipality, documenting any changes in channel or culvert conditions. This report is to be reviewed and found to be acceptable to the Municipality of Clarington and the Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority. 68. The Owner shall agree in the subdivision agreement to carry out or cause to be carried out all of the measures and recommendations contained within the reports approved under Conditions, 62, 63 and 64. 69. The Owner agrees in the subdivision agreement to maintain all erosion and siltation control devices in good repair during the construction period in a manner satisfactory to the Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority. 70. Prior to any on -site works requiring permission under Ontario Regulation 168/06 (i.e watercourse alteration /interference) the Owner shall obtain GRCA permit(s). 71. The Owner shall be 100% responsible for the construction of the new daylighted channel, in keeping with the recommendations of the Geomorphic Solutions memorandum of June 8, 2011, and the approved Landscaping Plan. 72. 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 clause advising all potential purchasers that while an elementary school site has been 'reserved within the approved draft plan of subdivision for the Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board 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 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 site. 73. The Subdivider shall enter into an option agreement with the Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board for Block 428 in draft plan of Subdivision S -C 2005- 003, prior to the registration of a subdivision agreement with the Municipality of Clarington for the second phase of development. 74. Prior to the execution of an option agreement with the Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board, the Subdivider for draft plan of subdivision S -C 2005 -003 Conditions of Draft Approval FINAL (8-C- 2005 -003 - Smooth Run): May 29, 2012 Page 12 8 -131 shall provide the following to the satisfaction of the Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board: a) A copy of a stormwater management report indicating that all storm water quality and quantity facilities for the proposed school block will be accommodated outside of the proposed school block. b) A copy of a geotechnical soils study indicating that the soils in Block 428 are suitable for the construction of an elementary school. c) A copy of Record of Site Condition filed with the Ministry of Environment that applies to the proposed elementary school site indicating that soils in Block 428 are suitable for the construction of an elementary school. d) The proposed grading and servicing plans for the proposed elementary school site, Block 428. 75. 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 the draft plan of subdivision. 76. The Owner shall install along all residential lot lines that are common with the proposed school block a 1.8 metre high galvanized chain link fence that is situated 150 mm within the school block site. The 1.8 metre high galvanized chain link fence may be a lower height only if required to comply with the Municipality's zoning by -law. The chain link fence shall be installed by the Owner simultaneously with the topsoil and sodding of the abutting residential lots having. the common lot line with the proposed elementary school Block 428. 77. The Subdivider shall install a sidewalk within the road allowance for any roads that are adjacent to Block 428. 78. The Owner agrees to construct a berm, or combination berm and noise attenuation fence, having extensions or returns at the ends, to be erected on lands within the Plan of Subdivision and parallel to the railway right -of -way with construction according to the following: a) minimum total height 5.5 metres above top -of -rail; b) berm minimum height 2.5 metres and side slopes not steeper than 2.5 to 1; and c) fence or wall, to be constructed without openings and of a durable material weighting not less than 20 kg. per square metre (4 Ib /sq.ft) of surface area. No part of the berm /noise barrier is to be constructed on railway property. Conditions of Draft Approval FINAL (S -C- 2005 -003 - Smooth Run): May 29, 2012 Page 13 8 -132 79. The Owner shall insert a clause in all Offers of Purchase and Sale or Lease, and be registered on title or included in the lease for each dwelling affected by any noise and vibration attenuation measures, advising that any berm, fencing, or vibration isolation features implemented are not be tampered with or altered, and further that the owner shall have the sole responsibility for and shall maintain these features. 80. Dwellings must be constructed such that the interior noise levels meet the criteria of the appropriate Ministry. A noise study should be carried out by a professional noise consultant to determine what impact, if any, railway noise would have on residents of proposed subdivisions and to recommend mitigation measures, if required. The Railway may consider other measures recommended by the study. 81. Setback of dwellings from the railway right -of -way to be a minimum of 30 metres. While no dwelling should be closer to the right -of -way than the specified setback, an unoccupied building, such as a garage, may be built closer. The 2.5 metre high earth berm or depression adjacent to the right -of -way must be provided in all instances. 82. Ground vibration transmission to be estimated through site tests. If in excess of the acceptable levels, all dwellings within 75 metres of the nearest railway track should be protected. The measures employed may be: a) Support the building on rubber pads between the foundation and the occupied structure so that the maximum vertical natural frequency of the structure on the pads is 12 H2; b) Insulate the building from the vibration originating at the railway tracks by an intervening discontinuity or by installing adequate insulation outside the building, protected from the compaction that would reduce its effectiveness so that vibration in the building became unacceptable; or C) Other suitable measures that will retain their effectiveness over time. 83. The Owner shall insert a clause in all Offers of Purchase and Sale or Lease and in the title deed or -lease of each dwelling within 300m of the railway right -of -way, warning prospective purchasers or tenants of the existence of the Railway's operating right -of -way; the possibility of alterations including the possibility that the Railway may expand its operations, which expansion may affect the living environment of the residents notwithstanding the inclusion of noise and vibration attenuating measures in the design of the subdivision and individual units, and that the Railway will not be responsible for complaints or claims arising from the use of its facilities and /or operations. . Conditions of Draft Approval FINAL (S -C- 2005 -003 -Smooth Run): May 29, 2012 Page 14 8 -133 84. The Owner shall obtain concurrence from the Railway should any proposed alterations to the existing drainage pattern affecting railway property, and be substantiated by a drainage report to be reviewed by the Railway. 85. The Owner shall construct and maintain a 1.83 metre high chain link security fence along the common property line of the Railway and the development by the Owner at his expense, and the Owner is made aware of the necessity of including a covenant running with the lands, in all deeds, obliging the purchasers of the land to maintain the fence in a satisfactory condition at their expense. 86. The Owner shall obtain approvals from the Railway should any proposed utilities under or over railway property to serve the development prior to their installation and be covered by the Railway's standard agreement. 87. The Owner is to co- ordinate the preparation of an overall utility distribution plan that allows for the safe installation of all utilities including the separation between utilities. Streets are to be constructed in accordance with composite utility plans previously submitted and approved by all utilities. 88. 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 utility company. 89. All utilities will be installed within the proposed road allowances in the event that that is not possible easements will be provided at no cost to the utility provider. 90. 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 and other local services. 91. The Owner shall be responsible to advise all purchasers and tenants in Offers of Purchase and Sale warning clauses recommended in the approved Noise Report, as required by the Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board, Canadian Pacific Railway, and as follows: "Purchasers and tenants are notified that there are existing farm operations nearby and they will not object, complain or seek legal action against nuisances such as noise, odour, dust or illumination. Purchasers, and tenants are notified noise caused by the adjacent railway, be heard on a regular basis. Train enforced by Transport Canada." that despite measures to attenuate whistling from oncoming trains may whistling protocol is regulated and Conditions of Draft Approval FINAL (S -C- 2005 -003 - Smooth Run): May 29, 2012 Page 15 8 -134 92. 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: i) Regional Municipality of Durham, how Conditions 3, 6, 7, 8, 22, 57, 58, 59, 60 and 61 have been satisfied; ii) Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority, how Conditions 10, 32, 33, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70 and 71 have been satisfied; iii) Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board how Conditions 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77 and 91 have been satisfied; iv) Ministry of Culture, how Condition 56 has been satisfied; and v) Canadian Pacific Railway, how Conditions 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86 and 91 have been satisfied. NOTES TO DRAFT APPROVAL 1. If final approval is not given to this plan within six 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. 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: i) Ganarska Region Conservation Authority, 2216 County Road 28, PO Box 328 Port Hope, Ontario L1A 3W4 ii) Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board, 1994 Fisher Drive, PO Box 719 Peterborough Ontario K9J 7A1 iii) Regional Municipality of Durham, 605 Rossland Road East, 4th Floor Whitby Ontario LIN 6A3 Conditions of Draft Approval FINAL (S -C- 2005 -003 - Smooth Run): May 29, 2012 Page 16 8 -135 iii) Regional Municipality of Durham, 605 Rossland Road East, 4th Floor Whitby Ontario LIN 6A3 iv) The Ministry of Culture, Culture Programs Unit, 400 University Avenue, 4th Floor Toronto, Ontario M7A 2R9. v) Canadian Railway, 1290 Central Parkway West Suite 800, Mississauga Ontario L5C 4R3 Conditions of Draft Approval FINAL (S -C- 2005 -003 - Smooth Run): May 29, 2012 Page 17 8 -136 Attachment 9 To Report PSD- 034 -12 CONDITIONS OF DRAFT APPROVAL S -C -2005 -004 (Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited) PLAN IDENTIFICATION 1. The Owner shall have the final plan prepared on the basis of approved draft plan of subdivision, S -C- 2005 -004 by Sernas Associates identified as Project Number 04320, original submission dated August 2005, and as revised in March 2011 and further redlined, which illustrates a total 270 residential units consisting of 62 link detached units, 139 single detached lots, 69 street townhouse units, various blocks for residential uses, a parkette, a walkway , a future development block, road widenings, and 0.3 metre reserves. As redlined revisions are: 1. a 3.00 metre road widening on Concession Road 3; and 2. Rename Block 193 from "Walkway" to "Servicing Block ". FINAL PLAN REQUIREMENTS 2. The Owner shall dedicate to the Municipality of Clarington: a) the road allowances included in this draft plan as public highways on the final plan; b) a 3.00 metre road widening, as red -lined along the entire frontage of the. draft plan abutting Concession Road 3; and c) 'a 14.0 metre X 7.0 metre sight triangles at intersections where a local or collector street connects to an arterial road. 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 terminate any dead ends 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. 5. All land dedications, easements, sight triangles and reserves as required by the Municipality for this development must be granted to the Municipality free and clear of all encumbrances and in a form satisfactory to the Municipality's Solicitor. 6. The Owner shall convey to the Region of Durham: Conditions of Draft Approval FINAL (S -C- 2005 -004 — Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited) - Page 1 8 -137 Conditions of Approval S -C- 2005 -004 (Brookfield): May 11, 2012 a) a sufficient road widening to provide for a minimum of 18 metres measured from the original centerline of Regional Road 17, across the frontage of the draft plan abutting Regional Road No. 17, save and except along the Future Development Block (Block 196) ; and b) a 0.3 metre reserve across the frontage of the site along Regional Road 17, within the draft plan, save and except the Future Development Block (Block 196). 7. All land dedications, easements, sight triangles and reserves as required by the Region of Durham for this development must be granted to the Region free and clear of all encumbrances and in a form satisfactory to the Region's Solicitor. 8. The Owner grant the Region of Durham, any easements required to provide Regional services for this development and these easements shall be in locations and of such widths as determined by the Region. REQUIREMENTS TO BE SATISFIED PRIOR TQ SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT 9. Prior to the execution of the Subdivision Agreement, the Owner shall execute and cause to be registered on the title to the lands to which it applies a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Municipality of Clarington and such other persons as the Municipality of Clarington Director of Planning Services and Director of Engineering Services deems necessary. The MOU shall detail parkland requirements for the development of the North Newcastle Neighbourhood. It shall specifically address the responsibility of Smooth Run Developments and Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited with respect to parkland dedication of their total land ownership within the Neighbourhood. Parkland contribution shall be provided on the basis of 1 hectare per 300 hectares or 5% of the land area as specified in the Planning Act. 10. The Owner must submit a revised Functional Servicing Report. This report, reflecting the draft approved plan, will be subject to the approval of the Director of Engineering Services and the Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority. The report shall confirm the following: • that no storm sewers will be flatter that a 0.5% grade; and • proposed walkway (Block 194) is required for over land flow. 11. The Owner shall submit a Transportation Study which reflects the approved neighbourhood plan. The study shall include monitoring of potential traffic infiltration both into and through the Foster Creek North Neighbourhood as development of the subject neighbourhood proceeds. The report shall be updated and submitted for approval by the Director of Engineering Services prior to registration of each subsequent phase of development, after registration of Phase I, in this draft plan. Each report shall identify recommendations for external road improvements, external traffic control measures and the need for Conditions of Draft Approval FINAL (S -C- 2005 -004 — Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited) - Page 2 Conditions of Approval S -C- 2005 -004 (Brookfield): May 11, 2012 other municipal infrastructure improvements that may be required as a result of the amount of infiltration that actually occurs. Furthermore, the number of units available for development within the overall neighbourhood may be restricted depending upon the amount of infiltration that actually occurs. Any decision regarding the number of units that will be made available for development'within the overall neighbourhood at any phase of development will be determined solely at the discretion of the Director of Engineering Services. 12. The Owner shall prepare an Internal Traffic Impact Study to assess the traffic movements within the Plan of Subdivision and identify areas where traffic calming may be required. The study shall recommend the appropriate measures to be used, such as textured asphalt, bump outs or landscaping measures. This study shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services and Director of Planning Services. The Owner shall be 100% responsible for any improvements required as a result of the recommendations in this study. 13. The Owner shall, if necessary, apply to the Municipality of Clarington and obtain area municipal approval of the zoning for the land uses shown on the approved draft plan in accordance with the provisions of the Planning Act. 14. 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 Community Theme Plan and design criteria of the Municipality as amended from time to time. 15. The Owner shall implement a rear yard planting program for all lots in accordance with the guidelines to be established or terms approved by the Municipality or as specified by the Director of Planning Services. 16. 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 Director of Engineering Services. 17. The Owner shall prepare an Environmental Sustainability Plan for approval by the Director of Planning Services and the Director of Engineering Services. The Plan shall identify the measures that the Owner will take to conserve energy, and water in excess of the standards of the Ontario Building Code, reduce waste and increase recycling of construction materials and utilize non - toxic, environmentally sustainable materials and finishes. 18. The Owner shall prepare a Community Theme Plan, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning Services and the Director of Engineering Services. This plan shall be consistent with the draft approved plan prepared by the Owner of the Plan of Subdivision S- C- 2005 -003. The Plan shall include design concepts Conditions of Draft Approval FINAL (S -C- 2005 -004 — Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited) - Page 3 Conditions of Approval S -C- 2005 -004 (Brookfield): May 11, 2012 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. REQUIREMENTS TO BE INCLUDED IN SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT 19. That the Owner shall enter into a Subdivision Agreement with the Municipality of Clarington and agree to abide by all terms and conditions of the Municipality's standard subdivision agreement. 20. The Owner shall submit plans showing the proposed phasing to the Region of Durham and Municipality of Clarington for review and approval if the subdivision is to be developed in more than one registration. 21. No phase of this development can proceed until adjacent lands in S -C -2005 -003 are developed which provide Municipal services and road connections to this development. The future phasing will be restricted by the number of external accesses that are available. Full development of this draft plan will require all external accesses to be constructed. The specific lots available for building permit in any single phases of the development will be determined at the engineering stage and shall be at the sole discretion of the Director of Engineering Services. 22. The existing municipal roadways situated in this portion of the Newcastle Urban Area have not yet been constructed to an urban standard and related infrastructure such as storm sewers and storm water drainage systems do not exist. Full build out of the subject lands cannot occur until improvements to municipal infrastructure such as the urbanization of existing roads, the installation of pedestrian sidewalks, the installation of streetlights and the installation of storm drainage systems has taken place. The phasing scheme and the timing for actual development within any part of the subject portion of the Newcastle Urban Area will be dependent upon the completion of necessary and related municipal infrastructure improvements. The subdivision shall be developed in phases by more than one registration. The Owner shall submit plans showing the proposed phasing to the Directors of Engineering Services and Planning Services for approval. The number of residential units that will be permitted for development at any given time will be made solely at the. discretion of the Directors of Engineering Services. 23. The Owner acknowledges that portions of this draft plan of subdivision are premature relative to the Municipality's capital budget and the Development Charges By -law. Development cannot proceed until such time as the Council of the Municipality of Clarington, acting reasonably, has approved the expenditure of funds for the provision of the certain works for this draft plan or external works or services in its capital budget and which have been included in the Municipality's Development Charges By -law and deemed necessary by the Conditions of Draft Approval FINAL (S -C- 2005 -004 — Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited) - Page 4 W, Conditions of Approval S -C- 2005 -004 (Brookfield): May 11, 2012 Director of Engineering Services, and Director of Finance, to service this development. These include but are not limited to: i) Installation of a sidewalk to serve as a direct connection to the existing municipal sidewalk network within the Newcastle Urban Area; ii) installation of streetlights along the frontage of North Street road allowance; iii) reconstruction of Concession Road 3; and iv) park development. 24. Should the Owner wish to proceed in advance of the approval by the Council of the Municipality of Clarington, acting reasonably, for the. expenditures for any of the works required by the Director of Engineering Services, identified in Conditions No. 23 to facilitate development, the Owner shall pay 100% of the cost of all required works, to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services and Director of Finance. 25. The Owner shall convey Block 195 to the Municipality of Clarington for park or other public recreational purposes. The 'Owner further agrees that the dedication of parkland for the subject application will be considered together with the parkland dedication requirement for the application for Draft Plan of Subdivision S -C- 2005 -003 being Block 429. 26. The Owners of the two draft plans agree that the parkland dedication is less than 1 hectare per 300 units or 5% of the total land area as provided for in the Planning Act. The dedication of additional parkland or cash payment in lieu of parkland shall be in accordance with the provisions of the Memorandum of Understanding. 27. The Owner agrees to commence construction of the park Block 429 in S -C- 2005 -003 prior to the issuance of the 151St building permit of Phase 1 of the development either singularly or in combination with plan of subdivision S -C 2005 -003 and further agrees to complete the park construction in accordance with the approved construction drawings and specifications prior to the issuance of the 200th building permit of Phase 1 of the development either singularly or in combination with the plan of subdivision S -C 2005 -003, 28. Should the Owner wish to proceed with Phase 1 singularly, the Owner is 100% responsible to construct the park (Block 429 in S -C 2005 -003) in its entirety. The Owner shall retain a qualified Landscape Architect to undertake the preparation of a detailed park concept plan, followed by the preparation of park construction drawings and specifications all to be approved by the Director of Engineering Services. The park construction drawings shall clearly indicate all park grading, equipment and facilities. Park facilities, to be included in Block 429 shall include, but not be limited to: ® traditional playground with equipment suitable for junior and senior age children; Conditions of Draft Approval FINAL (S -C- 2005 -004 — Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited) - Page 5 !. Conditions of Approval S -C- 2005 -004 (Brookfield): May 11, 2012 • hard surface play court (i.e. basketball, ball hockey); • shade structure; • park furniture such as benches, picnic tables, waste containers, bike racks, as appropriate; • paved walkways connecting various park features to surrounding streets; • walkway lighting; • tree and shrub planting as appropriate; • park sign; • one unlit sports field; and • park entirely sodded /seeded to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services. 29. For the purpose of Block 195 parkland development, the local service as defined in the Development Charges By -law as amended from time to time, includes the requirement for the Owner to undertake the preparation of a detailed park concept plan including proposed grading to demonstrate that the proposed park size, configuration and topography will allow for the construction of park facilities to the satisfaction of the Municipality. In addition, the Owner is required to provide the park site graded in accordance with the park concept plan including storm water servicing. The park site must be fenced and seeded with a minimum cover of 200mm of topsoil. 30. The Owner acknowledges that the Stormwater Management facilities for these lands are located in draft plan S -C- 2005 -003. The Owner must provide the Engineering Department with a Stormwater Management Implementation Report which provides for the sequential construction of the Stormwater Management works necessary for the entire watershed and addresses the impacts of developing this plan of subdivision in the absence of the balance of the watershed. The required Report must demonstrate that the blocks designated for Stormwater Management facilities proposed for this development address the needs of the entire tributary watershed area and have been adequately sized. This Report shall be subject to the approval of the Director of Engineering Services and the Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority. 31. The Owner must provide the Engineering Services Department with a Master Grading Plan satisfactory to the Director of Engineering Services. The required Plan is shall be submitted at the engineering review stage of the development process. 32. The Owner shall cause the south side of Street "F" to fully serviced with water, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, hydro, telephone and cable television for all part lots and for the future southerly extension of Street "H 33. The owner shall cause Street "A" to be fully serviced with water, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, hydro, telephone and cable television to the northerly limit in a manner appropriate to accommodate future development to the north. Conditions of Draft Approval FINAL (S -C- 2005 -004 — Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited) - Page 6 8 -142 Conditions of Approval S- C- 2005 -004 (Brookfield): May 11, 2012 34. Suitable temporary turning circles must be located on streets with a temporary "dead end" configuration. The installation of any temporary turning circles will be subject to the approval of the Director of Engineering Services. Any lots or blocks situated adjacent to temporary turning circles will remain frozen until such time that the street is extended and constructed to a finished urban roadway including Regional services, asphalt paving, curb and gutter, sodded boulevard, sidewalk, street trees and street lighting, for the entire frontage width abutting any "frozen" lot or block. Any final decision regarding the requirement for a temporary turning circle or the suitability of a temporary turning circle configuration will be made solely at the discretion of the Director of Engineering Services during the engineering review stage of the development process. 35. Sufficient road pavement widths to accommodate turning lanes must be provided at any locations where local roads meet arterial roads. Any final decision regarding road pavement widths will be determined solely at the discretion of the Director of Engineering Services at the development review process. 36. The applicant will be responsible to provide a revised On- Street Parking Plan satisfactory to the Director of Engineering Services. The required Plan must also illustrate the driveway location for each residential unit and demonstrate that a suitable driveway access can be provided to all units. 37. The engineering drawings for this development must be signed, sealed and dated by a Professional Engineer. 38. All works and services must be designed and constructed in accordance with the Municipality of Clarington Design Criteria and Standard Drawings, provision of the Municipality Development Charges By -law and all applicable legislation and to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services, 39. Prior to development of adjacent lands some of the lands identified as "Part Lots" and "Part Blocks" on the draft plan will be difficult to access. Prior to registration of the relevant /effected portion of this draft plan containing Part Lots and /or Part Blocks, the Owner will be required to demonstrate that a suitable access can be provided to all "Part Lots" or "Part Blocks ". 40. All lots which do not have frontage on a completed section of roadway will be placed on hold with no building permits issued until such time as these roads have been constructed. Alternatively, a temporary turning circle can be provided with suitable easements for snow storage. Lots situated at the end of these roads will remain frozen until such time as the roads are extended and constructed to a finished urban profile including Regional services, asphalt paving, curbs and gutter, sodded boulevard and sidewalk. Release of building Conditions of Draft Approval FINAL (S -C- 2005 -004 — Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited) - Page 7 8 -143 Conditions of Approval S -C- 2005 -004 (Brookfield): May 11, 2012 permits for designated `frozen lots" will be determined by the Director of Engineering Services. 41. Block 194 is identified as 9.0 metre easement and walkway. The Owner shall be 100% responsible for the cost of constructing the walkway to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services. Furthermore, a building permit for Lot 115 will not be available until the walkway is constructed in accordance with drawings approved by the Director of Engineering Services. 42. The Owner acknowledges and agrees that the dwelling on Lot 115 abutting Block 194 shall have upgraded and enhanced side and rear elevations. Furthermore, The Owner acknowledges and agrees to install decorative fencing along the lots abutting Block 194. 43. The Owner shall grant such easements as may be required for utilities, drainage and servicing purposes to the appropriate authorities. 44. All works shall be constructed in accordance with the Municipality of Clarington standards. 45. The Owner shall cause all utilities, including, hydro, telephone, Cable TV, etc. to be buried underground for both primary and secondary services. 46. Prior to the issuance of building permits, access routes to the subdivision must be provided to meet Subsection 3.2.5.2(6) of the Ontario Building Code and, that all watermains and hydrants are fully serviced and the Owner agrees that during construction, fire access routes be maintained according to Subsection 2.5.1.2 of the Ontario Fire Code, storage of combustible waste be maintained as per Subsection 2.4.1.1 and open burning as per Subsection 2.6.3.4 of the Ontario Fire Code. 47. The Owner shall retain a qualified Engineer to prepare and submit a Hydrogeology Report to the Director of Engineering Services to demonstrate that the proposed development will not adversely impact the existing wells in the surrounding areas. 48. The Owner agrees that where the well or private water supply of any person is interfered with as a result of the subdivision, the Owner shall at his expense, either connect the affected party to municipal water supply system or provide a new well or private water system so that water supplied to the affected party shall be of quality and quantity at least equal to the quality and quantity of water enjoyed by the affected party prior to the interference. 49. The Owner shall be required to make an application for a new Draft Plan of Subdivision for Block 196, Future Development Block. Conditions of Draft Approval FINAL (S -C- 2005 -004 — Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited) - Page 8 8 -144 Conditions. of Approval S -C -2005 -004 (Brookfield): May 11, 2012 50, The Owner shall be required to make an application for Site plan Approval for development of Block 171 to 176, Medium Density Block. 51. The Owners shall be 100% responsible for the cost of preparing 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. 52. The Owner agrees that no residential units shall be offered for sale to the public on said plan until such time as the architectural control guidelines and the exterior architectural design of each building has been approved by the Control Architect and the Director of Planning Services. 53. The Owner shall provide the Municipality, unconditional and irrevocable, Letters of Credit acceptable to the Municipality's Director of Finance, with respect to Performance Guarantee, Maintenance Guarantee, Occupancy Deposit and other guarantees or deposit as may be required by the Municipality. 54. The Owner shall pay to the Municipality, the development charge in accordance to the Development Charges By -law as amended from time to time, as well as payment of a portion of front end charges pursuant to the Development Charges Act if any are required to be paid by the Owner. 55. Prior to final approval, the proponent shall engage a qualified professional to carry out to the satisfaction of the Ministry of Culture, an archaeological assessment of the entire 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 Culture confirming that all archaeological resource concerns have been met including licensing and resource conservation requirements. 56. The Owner shall agree in the Municipality of Clarington Subdivision Agreement to implement the recommendation of the report entitled "Environmental Noise Assessment" prepared by YCA Engineering Limited, dated April 2011, which specify recommended noise control measures. The measures shall be included in the Municipality of Clarington Subdivision Agreement and must also 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. 57. All Subdivision Agreements for the subject draft plan between the Municipality of Clarington and the Subdivider shall contain a requirement that all Purchase and Sale Agreements for all phases of the approved draft plan contain a clause advising all potential purchasers that while an elementary school site has been Conditions of Draft Approval FINAL (S -C- 2005 -004 — Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited) - Page 9 8 -145 Conditions of Approval S -C- 2005 -004 (Brookfield): May 11, 2012 reserved within the adjacent approved draft plan of subdivision for the Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board that it may not be constructed and used as an Elementary School site. All potential purchasers are further advised 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 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 site. 58. Prior to final approval and to any grading taking place on the site, a detailed Stormwater Management Report in accordance with current MOE criteria and the Functional Servicing report prepared by Sernas Associates, (last revised April 2011) be prepared to the satisfaction of the Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority and the Director of Engineering Services. 59. Prior to the commencement of any on -site works, the Owner shall prepare a report satisfactory to the Director of Engineering Services and the Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority detailing the means whereby erosion and siltation will be minimized and contained on the site both during and subsequent to the construction period. 60. Should the Owner proceed in advance of Draft Plan of Subdivision S -C 2005 -003, the Owner shall: i) retain a qualified soils engineer to investigate the potential for groundwater interference with the functionality of the east pond. The pond shall be redesign if necessary and; ii) provide a detailed hydrogeological investigation as per the recommendations of the 2010 hydrogeological study, incorporating additional boreholes being drilled in the west stormwater management pond block (Block 432 in Draft Plan of Subdivision S -C 2005 -003). Depending on the findings of this investigation, changes to the pond design may be required. 61. The Owner shall agree in the subdivision agreement to carry out or cause to be carried out all of the measures and recommendations contained within the reports approved under Conditions 58 and 59. 62. The Owner agrees in the subdivision agreement to maintain all erosion and siltation control devices in good repair during the construction period in a manner satisfactory to the Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority. Conditions of Draft Approval FINAL (S -C- 2005 -004 — Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited) - Page 10 Conditions of Approval S -C -2005 -004 (Brookfield): May 11, 2012 63. The Owner shall obtain all necessary Authority permits. 64. Prior to final approval, the Owner shall submit to the Ministry of Transportation for their review and approval, a Traffic Impact Study to assess the impacts of the development on the Highway 35/115. 65. Prior to final approval, the Owner shall submit to the Ministry of Transportation for their review and approval, a Stormwater Management Report indicating the intended treatment of the calculated runoff. 66. Prior to final approval, the Owner shall enter into a legal agreement with the Ministry of Transportation, whereby the Owner agrees to assume financial responsibility for all highway improvements to the Highway 35/115 Concession Road 3 interchange, as a direct result of this development. 67. The Owner shall insert a clause in all Offers of Purchase and Sale or Lease, and be registered on title or included in the lease for each dwelling affected by any noise and vibration attenuation measures, advising that any berm, fencing, or vibration isolation features implemented are not be tampered with or altered, and further that the Owner shall have the sole responsibility for and shall maintain these features. 68. The Owner agrees to construct dwellings such that the interior noise levels meet the criteria of the appropriate Ministry. A noise study should be carried out by a professional noise consultant to determine what impact, if any, railway noise would have on residents of proposed subdivisions and to recommend mitigation measures, if required. The Railway may consider other measures recommended by the study. 69. The Owner shall insert a clause in all Offers of Purchase and Sale or Lease and in the title deed or lease of each dwelling within 300m of the railway right -of- way, warning prospective purchasers or tenants of the existence of the Railway's operating right -of -way; the possibility of alterations including the possibility that the Railway may expand its operations, which expansion may affect the living environment of the residents notwithstanding the inclusion of noise and vibration attenuating measures in the design of the subdivision and individual units, and that the Railway will not be responsible for complaints or claims arising from the use of its facilities and /or operations. 70. 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 Conditions of Draft Approval FINAL (S -C- 2005 -004 — Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited) - Page 11 8 -147 Conditions of Approval S -C- 2005 -004 (Brookfield): May 11, 2012 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. 71. 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. 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 shall agree that no development is to be approved within Block 196 (Future Development) until a Class Environmental Assessment study has been completed to determine the future alignment of Regional Road 17. 74. The Owner is to co- ordinate the preparation of an overall utility distribution plan that allows for the safe installation of all utilities including the separation between utilities. Streets are to be constructed in accordance with composite utility plans previously submitted and approved by all utilities. 75. 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 utility company. 76. All utilities shall be installed within the proposed road allowances in the event that that is not possible easements will be provided at no cost to the utility provider. 77. 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 and other local services. 78. The Owner shall cause to advise all purchasers and tenants in Offers of Purchase and Sale warning clauses recommended in the approved Noise Report, as required by the Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board, Canadian Pacific Railway, and as follows: "Purchasers and tenants are notified that there are existing farm operations nearby and they will not object, complain or seek legal action against nuisances such as noise, odour, dust or illumination. Conditions of Draft Approval FINAL (S -C- 2005 -004 — Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited) - Page 12 Conditions of Approval S -C- 2005 -004 (Brookfield): May 11, 2012 Purchasers and tenants are notified that despite measures to attenuate noise caused by the adjacent railway, whistling from oncoming trains may be heard on a regular basis. Train whistling protocol is regulated by Transport Canada." 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: i) Regional Municipality of Durham, how Conditions 3, 6, 7, 8, 20, 56, 70, 71, 72 and 73 have been satisfied; ii) Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority, how Conditions 10, 30, , 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, and 63 have been satisfied; iii) Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board how Conditions 57 and 78 have been satisfied; iv) Ministry of Culture, how Condition 55 has been satisfied; v) Canadian Pacific Railway, how Conditions 67, 68, 69 and 78 have been satisfied; and vi) Ministry of Transportation, how Conditions 64, 65 and 66 have been satisfied. NOTES TO DRAFT APPROVAL 1. If final approval is not given to this plan within six 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. 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: Conditions of Draft Approval FINAL (S -C- 2005 -004 — Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited) - Page 13 Conditions of Approval S -C- 2005 -004 (Brookfield): May 11, 2012 i) Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority, 2216 County Road 28, P.O. Box 328, Port Hope Ontario L1A 3W4 ii) Ministry of Transportation, Corridor management Section, 7th Floor Building D, 1201 Wilson Avenue, Downsview Ontario M3M 1J8 iii) Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board, 1994 Fisher Drive P.O. Box 719, Peterborough Ontario K9J 7M3 iv) The Ministry of Culture, Culture Programs Unit 400 University Avenue, 4th Floor Toronto, Ontario M7A 2R9 V) Canadian Pacific Railway, 1290 Central Parkway West Suite 800, Mississauga Ontario L5C 4R3 vi) . Regional Municipality of Durham, 605 Rossland Road East, 4th Floor Whitby Ontario LIN 6A3 Conditions of Draft Approval FINAL (S -C- 2005 -004 — Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited) - Page 14 8 -150 Attachment 10 To Report PSD- 034 -12 THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BY -LAW NO. 2012- being a By -law to amend By -law 84 -63, the Comprehensive Zoning By -law for the former Corporation of the 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 former of Town of Newcastle for ZBA 2005 -042; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Council of the Corporation of Clarington enacts as follows: By -law 84 -63, as amended, is hereby further amended, as follows: 1.• Section 12.4 "SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS — URBAN RESIDENTIAL TYPE (R1) ZONE" is hereby amended by adding new Special Exceptions as follows: "SECTION 12.4.86 URBAN RESIDENTIAL EXCEPTION (R1 -86) ZONE Notwithstanding Sections 3.1 j. i) and iv); 3.16 i. iv); 3.22; 12.1; 12.2 a); b); c); d) i), ii), iii), 0; h); i), those lands zoned R1 -86 on the Schedules to this By -law shall only be used for single detached, linked dwellings, subject to the following zone regulations: a.. For the purpose of this Section, the terms: Dwelling, Linked shall mean a building separated vertically into two separate dwelling units, which are horizontally connected at the footing, each of which has an independent entrance directly from the outside of the building and each of which is located on a separate lot. b. Lot Area (minimum) I) single detached dwellings with minimum of 11.6 metre frontage 345 square metres ii) single detached dwellings with minimum of 13.1 metre frontage 410 square metres iii) linked dwellings 585 square metres c. Lot Frontage Interior (minimum) i) single detached dwelling 11.6 metres ii) single detached dwelling 13.1 metres iii) linked dwellings 19.6 metres d.. Lot Frontage Exterior (minimum) I) single detached dwelling 14.5 metres ii) linked dwellings 22.5 metres e. Yard Requirements for single detached dwellings (minimum) i) Front or exterior 6.0 metres to the garage; 4.0 metres to dwelling; 2 metres to the unenclosed porch; ii) Interior side yard 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. Affim g. Yard Requirements for linked dwelling (minimum) i) Front or exterior side yard 6.0 metres to the garage; . 4.0 metres-to dwelling; 2 metres to the unenclosed porch; ii) Interior side yard 1.2 metres without private garage or carport 3.0 metres h. Special Yard Regulation . i) Notwithstanding the interior side yard requirements above, a linked dwelling connected by the footing shall have a horizontal distance between the. interior walls of the two (2.) dwelling units above finished grade between 1.2 metres and 1.5 metres. ii) Bay windows with foundations may project into any required yard to a distance of not more *than 0.75 metres with the bay window having a maximum width of 2.4 metres, but in.no instance shall the interior side yard be reduced below 0.6 metres. iii) Steps may project into the required front or exterior side yard, but in no instance shall the front or exterior side yard be reduced below 1.0 metre. iv) Visibility Triangle (minimum) 6.5 metres i. Lot Coverage (maximum) i) 1 Storey a) Dwelling 50 percent b) Total of all buildings and structures 55 percent ii) All other residential dwellings - a) Dwelling 45 percent b) Total of all buildings and structures 50 percent iii) Notwithstanding the above lot coverage provision, a covered and unenclosed porch /balcony having no habitable floor space above it, shall be permitted subject to the following: a) in the case of an interior lot, an unenclosed porch /balcony up to a maximum area of 12.0 square metres shall be permitted provided it is located in the front yard of the lot and shall not be calculated as lot coverage. b) In the case of an exterior lot, an unenclosed porch /balcony up to a maximum area of 20.0 square metres shall be permitted provided it is located in the front and /or exterior side yard of the lot and shall not be calculated as lot coverage j. Height of floor deck of unenclosed porch above finished grade (maximum) 1.0 metre k. Height (maximum) i) 1 storey 8.5 metres ii) all other residential units 10.5 metres I. Garage Requirements all garage doors shall not be located any closer to the street line than the dwellings front wall or exterior wall or covered porch projection. 8 -152 2. Section 14.6 "SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS —URBAN RESIDENTIAL TYPE (R3) ZONE" is hereby amended by adding thereto new Special Exceptions as follows: "SECTION 14.6.37 URBAN RESIDENTIAL EXCEPTION (R3 -44) ZONE Notwithstanding Sections 3.1 j. i), iv); 3.16 i. iv); 3.22; 14.1; 14.2; 14.3 a.; b.; c. i), ii) and iii); e.; and h. those lands zoned R3-44 on the Schedules to this By -law shall only be used for street townhouse dwellings subject to the following: a. Lot Area (minimum) , b. Lot Frontage 1nterior (minimum) c. Lot Frontage Exterior (minimum) d. Yard Requirements (minimum) i) front yard or exterior side Yard ii) interior side yard (minimum) iii) rear yard (minimum) e. Special Yard Regulation 210 square metres 7.6 metres 11.6 metres 6.0 metres to the garage; 4.0 metres to dwelling; 2.0 metres to the unenclosed porch; 1.2 metres; nil where building has a common wall with any building on an adjacent lot located in an R3 -44 zone 7.5 metres i) bay windows with foundations may project into any required yard to a . distance of not more than 0.75 metres with the bay window having a maximum width of 2.4 metres, but in no instance shall the interior side yard be reduced below 0.6 metres. ii) steps may project into the required front or exterior side yard, but in no instance shall the front or exterior side yard be reduced below 1.0 metre. f. Visibility Triangle (minimum) 6.5 metres g. Lot Coverage (maximum) i) townhouse dwelling 45 percent ii) Notwithstanding the above lot coverage provision, a covered and unenclosed porch /balcony having no habitable floor space above it, shall be permitted subject to the following: a) in the case of an interior lot, an unenclosed porch /balcony up to a maximum area of 10.0 metres shall be permitted provided it is located in the front yard of the lot and shall not be calculated as lot coverage. b) In the case of an exterior lot, an unenclosed porch /balcony up to a maximum area of 15.0 metres shall be permitted provided it is located in the front and /or exterior side yard of the lot and shall not be calculated as lot coverage. h. Height of floor deck of unenclosed porch above finished grade (maximum) 1.0 metre i, Garage Requirements all garage doors shall not be located any closer to the street line than the dwellings front wall or exterior wall or covered porch projection. 3 -153 3. Section 15.4 "SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS — URBAN RESIDENTIAL TYPE FOUR (R4) ZONE" is hereby amended by adding a new "Urban Residential Exception (R4 -32) Zone" as follows: 15.4.31 URBAN RESIDENTIAL EXCEPTION (R4 -32) ZONE Notwithstanding Sections 15.1 a. and15.2. those lands zoned "R4 -32" on the Schedules to this By -law may be used for an apartment building, a nursing home, retirement home; or linked townhouse dwelling units subject to the following zone provisions: Definitions: Retirement Home shall mean any premises maintained and operated for retired persons or couples where each private living unit has a separate private bathroom and separate entrance from a common hall but where common facilities for the preparation and consumption of food are provided, along with common lounge, and recreation rooms and may include ancillary uses for the residents such as a beauty salon, barber shop or tuck shop. b. Density (maximum) 60 units per ha c. Regulations for apartment building, a nursing home, or retirement home: i. Yard Requirements (minimum) carport and 3.0 metres to a dwelling i) Front Yard 7.5 metres ii) Exterior Side Yard 7.5 metres iii) Interior Side Yard 7.5 metres iv) , Rear Yard 7.5 metres ii. Dwelling Unit Area (minimum) 40 percent i) Bachelor Dwelling Unit 40 square metres 10 metres ii) One Bedroom Dwelling Unit 55 square metres iii) Two Bedroom Dwelling Unit 70 square metres iv) Dwelling Unit Containing Three or more Bedrooms 80 square metres plus 7 square metres for each bedroom in excess of three iii. Lot Coverage (maximum) 40 percent iv. Landscaped Open Space (minimum) 35 percent V. Building Height (maximum) 12 metres d. Regulations for linked townhouse dwelling units: i. Yard Requirements (minimum) i) Front Yard 6.0 metres to private garage or carport and 3.0 metres to a dwelling ii) Interior Side Yard 4.5 metres iii) Exterior Side Yard 6.0 metres iv) Rear Yard 7.5 metres ii. Lot Coverage (maximum) 40 percent iii. Landscaped Open Space (minimum) 40 percent iv. Building Height (maximum) 10 metres 4. Section 26 "INTERPRETATION' is hereby amended by adding the following new Section 26.5 as follows and renumbering existing Sections 26.5 to 26.6 inclusive: "26.5 COMPOUND ZONES Notwithstanding any other zone provision of this By -law, where two or more zone symbols are shown on a map to this by -law divided by an oblique line `Y", the total of the lands within that block may be used for any use permitted in either one of the zones included in the compound zone symbol subject to the regulations applicable to said zone." 5. Schedule 5 to By -law 84 -63 as amended is hereby further amended by changing the zone designation from: Agricultural Exception (A -1) to Environmental Protection (EP) Agricultural Exception (A -1) to Urban Residential Type One (R1) Zone 8 -154 Agricultural Exception (A -1) to Urban Residential Exception (R1 -42) Zone Agricultural Exception (A -1) to Holding -Urban Residential Exception ((H)R1 -70) Zone Agricultural Exception (A -1) to Holding -Urban Residential Exception ((H)R1 -71) Zone. Agricultural Exception (A -1) to Holding -Urban Residential Exception ((H)R1 -74) Zone Agricultural Exception (A -1) to Holding -Urban Residential Exception ((H)R1 -75) Zone Agricultural Exception (A -1) to Holding -Urban Residential Exception ((H)R1 -86) Zone Agricultural Exception (A -1) to Holding -Urban Residential Exception ((H)R3 -44) Zone Agricultural Exception (A -1) to Holding -Urban Residential Exception ((H) R3) Zone. Schedule W attached hereto shall form part of this By -law. This By law shall come into effect on the date of the passing hereof subject to the provisions of Sections 34 and 36 of the Planning Act BY LAW passed in open session this day of 2012 Adrian Foster, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk 8 -155 This is Schedule-"A" to L By-law 2012- passed I this day of ® Zoning Change From "Al "To "R1" ® Zoning Change From "Al "To "R1 -42" Zoning Change From "Al "To "(H) R1 -70" Zoning Change From "Al "To "(H) R1 -71" Zoning Change From "Al "To "(H) R1 -74" Zoning Change From "A1 "To "(H) R1 -75" Zoning Change From "A1" To "(H) R1 -86" Zoning Change From "A1" To "(H) R1- 86/(H)R4 -32" ® Zoning Change From "A1" To "(H) R3" ® Zoning Change From "Al "To "(H) R3 -44" ® Zoning Change From "Al "To "(H) R3- 44/(H)R4 -32" Zoning Change From "A1" To TP" =� Zoning To Remain " EP" 44 °4 Zoning To Remain "A1" Adrian Foster, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk canau paci fc Rail way 'BA 2006 -042 NEWCASTLE I S -C 2006 -003 SCHEDULES a. a) P U) a� Q Attachment 11 To Report PSD -034 -12 THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BY -LAW NO. 2012- being a By -law to amend By -law 84 -63, the Comprehensive Zoning By -law for the former Corporation of the 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 former of Town of Newcastle for, ZBA 2005 -043; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Council of the Corporation of Clarington enacts as follows: By -law 84 -63, as amended, is hereby further amended, as follows: Section 12.4 "SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS — URBAN RESIDENTIAL TYPE (R1) ZONE" is hereby amended by adding new Special Exceptions as follows: "SECTION 12.4.86 URBAN RESIDENTIAL EXCEPTION (R1 -86) ZONE Notwithstanding Sections 3.1 j. i) and iv); 3.16 i. iv); 3.22; 12.1; 12.2 a); b); c); d) i), ii), iii), 0; h); i), those lands zoned R1 -86 on the Schedules to this By -law shall only be used for single detached, linked dwellings, subject to the following zone regulations: a. For the purpose of this Section, the terms: Dwelling, Linked shall mean a building separated vertically into two separate dwelling units, which are horizontally connected at the footing, each of which has an independent entrance directly from the outside of the building and each of which is located on a separate lot. b. Lot Area (minimum) i) single detached dwellings with minimum of 11.6 metre frontage 345 square metres ii) single detached dwellings with minimum of 13.1 metre frontage 410 square metres iii) linked dwellings 585 square metres c. Lot Frontage Interior (minimum) i) single detached dwelling 11.6 metres ii) single detached dwelling 13.1 metres iii) linked dwellings 19.6 metres d. Lot Frontage Exterior (minimum) i) single detached dwelling 14.5 metres ii) linked dwellings - 22.5 metres e. Yard_ Requirements for single detached dwellings (minimum) i) Front or exterior 6.0 metres to the garage; 4.0 metres to dwelling; 2 metres to the unenclosed porch; ii) Interior side yard 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. 8 -157 g. Yard Requirements for linked dwelling (minimum) i) Front or exterior side yard 6.0 metres to the garage; 4.0 metres to dwelling; 2 metres to the unenclosed porch; ii) Interior side yard 1.2.metres without private garage or carport 3.0 metres h. Special Yard Regulation i) Notwithstanding the interior side yard requirements above, a linked dwelling connected by the footing shall have a horizontal distance between the interior walls of the two (2) dwelling units above finished grade between 1.2 metres and 1.5 metres. ii) Bay windows with foundations may project into any required yard to a distance of not more than 0.75 metres with the bay window having a maximum width of 2.4 metres, but in no instance shall the interior side yard be reduced below 0.6 metres. iii) Steps may project into the required front or exterior side yard, but in no instance shall the front or exterior side yard be reduced below 1.0 metre. iv) Visibility Triangle (minimum) 6.5 metres L Lot Coverage (maximum) i) 1 Storey a) Dwelling 50 percent b) Total of all buildings and structures 55 percent ii) All other residential dwellings a) Dwelling 45 percent b) Total of all buildings and structures 50 percent iii) Notwithstanding the above lot coverage provision, a covered and unenclosed porch /balcony having no habitable floor space above it, shall be permitted subject to the following: a) in the case of an interior lot, an unenclosed porch /balcony up to a maximum area of 12.0 square metres shall be permitted provided it is located in the front yard of the lot and shall not be calculated as lot coverage. b) In the case of an exterior lot, an unenclosed porch /balcony up to a maximum area of 20.0 square metres shall be permitted provided it is located in the front and /or exterior side yard of the lot and shall not be calculated as lot coverage j. Height of floor deck of unenclosed porch above finished grade (maximum) 1.0 metre k. Height (maximum) i) 1 storey 8.5 metres ii) all other residential units 10.5 metres I. Garage Requirements all garage doors shall not be located any closer to the street line than the dwellings front wall or exterior wall or covered porch projection. Section 14.6 "SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS —URBAN RESIDENTIAL TYPE (R3) ZONE" is hereby amended by adding thereto new Special Exceptions as follows: "SECTION 14.6.44 URBAN RESIDENTIAL EXCEPTION (R3 -44) ZONE Notwithstanding Sections 3.1 j, i), iv); 3.16 i. iv); 3.22; 14.1; 14.2; 14.3 a.; b.; c. i), ii) and iii); e.; nd h. those lands zoned R3 -44 -on the Schedules to this By -law shall only be used for street townhouse dwellings subject to the following: a. Lot Area (minimum) b. Lot Frontage Interior (minimum) c. Lot Frontage Exterior (minimum) d. Yard Requirements (minimum) i) front yard or exterior side Yard ii) interior side yard (minimum) iii) rear yard (minimum) e. Special Yard Regulation 210 square metres 7.6 metres 11.6 metres 6.0 metres to the garage; 4.0 metres to dwelling; 2.0 metres to the unenclosed porch; 1.2 metres; nil where building has a common wall with any building on an adjacent lot located in an R3 -44 zone 7.5 metres I) bay windows with foundations may project into any required yard to a distance of not more than 0.75 metres with the bay window having a maximum width of 2.4 metres, but in no instance shall the interior side yard be. reduced below 0.6 metres. ii) steps may project into the required front or exterior side yard, but in no instance shall the front or exterior side yard be reduced below 1.0 metre. f. Visibility Triangle (minimum) 6.5 metres g. Lot Coverage (maximum) i). townhouse dwelling 45 percent iii) Notwithstanding the above lot coverage provision, a covered and unenclosed porch /balcony having no habitable floor space above it, shall be permitted subject to the following: a) in the case of an interior lot, an unenclosed porch /balcony up to a maximum area of 10.0 metres shall be permitted provided it is located in the front yard of the lot and shall not be calculated as lot coverage. b) In the case of an exterior lot, an unenclosed porch /balcony up to a maximum area of 15.0 metres shall be permitted provided it is located in the front and /or exterior side yard of the lot and shall not be calculated as lot coverage. h. Height of floor deck of unenclosed porch above finished grade (maximum) 1.0 metre I. Garage Requirements all garage doors shall not be located - any closer to the street line than the dwellings front wall or exterior wall or covered porch projection, 8 -159 0 4. Section 14.6 "SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS —URBAN RESIDENTIAL TYPE (R3) ZONE" is hereby amended, by adding thereto new Special Exceptions as follows: "SECTION 14.6.46 URBAN RESIDENTIAL EXCEPTION (R3 -46) ZONE Notwithstanding Sections 2, 3.1 a., b. and f., 14.1 and 14.2, those lands zoned R3- 17 on the Schedules to this By -law shall only be used for a street townhouse dwelling in accordance with the following definitions and regulations: a. Definitions Arterial Road: Shall mean an improved public street with a right -of -way width of 26 metres or greater. Local Road: Shall mean an improved public street with a right -of -way width of 20 metres or less. - FRONT LOT LINE For the purposes of this Special Exception, front lot line shall mean the line dividing the lot from the arterial road. In the case of a lot having frontage on two arterial roads, the shorter lot line abutting the arterial road shall be deemed the front lot line. REAR LOT LINE The lot line dividing the lot from a local road shall be deemed the rear lot line. In the case of a lot having frontage on two local roads, the shorter lot line abutting the local road shall be deemed the rear lot line. b. Regulations i) Lot Area (minimum) ii) Lot Frontage (minimum) a) Interior Lot b) Exterior Lot iii) Yard Requirements (minimum) a) Front Yard b) Interior Side Yard c) Exterior Side Yard d) Rear Yard iv) Building Height (maximum) 200 square metres 6.0 metres 10.5 metres 4.0 metres to dwelling; 2.0 metres to the unenclosed porch; 1.5 metres, nil where the building has a common wall with any dwelling on an adjacent lot located in the R3-46 Zone; 4.5 metres for a dwelling with a detached garage 18.0 metres; for a dwelling with an attached garage 12.0 metres 10.5 metres Special Building Regulations i) Notwithstanding 3.1 a., no accessory structures are permitted in the R3 -46 Zone except detached private garage subject to the special regulations contained herein. ii) Notwithstanding 3.1 b. and f., a detached private garage shall have a minimum 6.0 metre setback to the rear lot line and must have a minimum separation from the main dwelling of 5.0 metres. The side yard setback shall be a minimum of 0.6 metres, nil where the detached private garage has a •common wall with another private garage on an adjacent lot located in the R3 -17 Zone, Schedule 5 to By -law 84 63 as amended is hereby further amended by changing the zone designation from: Agricultural Exception (A -1) to Urban Residential Type One (R1) Zone Agricultural Exception (A -1) to Holding -Urban Residential Exception ((H)R1 -86) Zone; .1 Agricultural Exception (A -1) to Holding -Urban Residential Exception ((H)R3 -44) Zone; and Agricultural Exception (A- 1)'to`Holding -Urban Residential Exception ((H)R3 -46) Zone. 5. Schedule 'A' attached hereto shall form part of this By -law. 6. This By law shall come into effect on the date of the passing hereof subject to the provisions of Sections 34. and 36 of the Planning Act BY LAW passed in open session this day of 2012 Adrian Foster, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk 8 -162 This is'chedule "A" to By-law 2012- , Passed this day of , 201 A.D. N I E SITE _ g _ a Concession Road 3 s � � � PPQ QQPPPp PQ P Pp QPQ P .� .a.b�� c PQ4p4P pQ QpP pp pp a ` s � P44PP4 QQP4QAP4pp4 A4Q pQ4 . A4P4pA 4QppQP QpA4p P4 PPp Pp4p A44Q4 Pp4 Q4pppP4PQC Q4 P4 P4 44P P4 PQD 44 P4 A 4QQ ppQ 'P 4p4 p4 pp4pPP4 p4 PQ44PA4P PpP4Qp P4PPP4PQ4QQ4 4p Q4 4p4Q pPpPPp4 4PP 4QPll p9p, 4p4 QP4 pop PQPpAQQ QP . p4pp 4p PPppQAP444 p �p4 �� pPp4 p4p44ppQA4 44 QQP Opp PPQp4QPp AQ A4 pP . 4 4 P P 4 A 4 P � ® Zoning Change From "Al t ' �� TO R1" 4 ppA44p Q44P44APP4 Q44 Q44 4 ' QQ4 pA4AQP4pp PP PQPpP QpA4 �S: ' Zoning Change From "Al " it TO (H) R1 -86 tt QA 4 pP444 QA4 Q4 P Pp QQP QPQP P4 QP4 P4 44P P4 444 Ppp Pp P Zoning Change From "A1" To "(H) R3-46" P4 Pp Q4 Pp Qp P4 PP Pp P P A4 4QP PpQQAQ4A PpPp4PQP ® Zoning Change From "Al" To "(H) R3-44" PpPP4 Q44pA QP pp4AQ4 Pp QP 4 QQ44 Zoning To Remain "Al " pP4 P44 P 44P4 QP 4 P4Qp p4pQ P P Q P 44Q QQ44 pPpPp •r Al K P — g • 54wt D t;Aa •S w � sase< v sww F � •.ty' .� .t: is :�. i+:• ' o ' LL • SOeel F N sues c a •t• •`• `•' - Streat F Adrian Foster, Mayor ZBA 2005 -043 S -C- 2005 -004 Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk NEWCASTLE SCHEDULE 5 8 -162 Attachment 12 To Report PSD- 034 -12 THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BY -LAW NO. 2012- being a By -law to adopt Amendment No. 86 to the Clarington Official Plan WHEREAS Section 17 (22) of the Planning Act, R.S.O., 1990 as amended, authorize the Municipality of Clarington to pass By -laws for the adoption or repeal of Official Plans and Amendments thereto; AND WHEREAS the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington deems it advisable to amend the Clarington Official Plan to include recommendations contained in the Foster Creek Subwatershed Plan and the North Newcastle Neighbourhood Design Plan; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington enacts as follows: 1. That Amendment No. 86 to the Clarington Official .Plan, being the attached explanatory Text and exhibits is hereby adopted. 2. This By -law shall come into force and take effect on the date of the final passing thereof. BY -LAW passed in open session this day of , 2012. Adrian Foster, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk 8 -163 Attachment 13 To Report PSD- 034 -12 THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BY -LAW NO. 2012- being a By -law to authorize the execution of the Memorandum of Understanding between Smooth Run Developments and Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited and the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington WHEREAS Council on 'July 3, 2012, recommended approval of Official Plan Amendment No. 86 to the Clarington Official Plan; AND WHEREAS at their meeting held on July 3, 2012, Council of the Municipality of Clarington approved Draft Approved Plans of Subdivision S -C- 2005 -003, and S- C -2005- 004 and Zoning By -law Amendments ZBA 2005 -042 and ZBA 2005 -043 as they apply to certain lands owned by Smooth Run Developments and Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited, respectively; 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 seal, the Memorandum of Understanding between Smooth Run Developments and Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited and the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington. BY -LAW passed in open session this day of , 2012. Adrian Foster, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk 8 -164 (t REPORT ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT Meeting GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: June 25, 2012 Resolution #: By -law #: Report EGD- 020 -12 File #: Subject MONTHLY REPORT ON BUILDING PERMIT ACTIVITY FOR MAY, 2012. RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report EGD- 020 -12 be received for information. Submitted by: Reviewed bye/ �-J A. 9. Cannella, C.E.T. Franklin Wu Director of Engineering Services' Chief Administrative Officer ASC /bb CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T (905)623 -3379 F (905)623 -1824 9 -1 1.1 With respect to the Building Permit Activity for the month of MAY 2012, Staff wish to highlight the following statistics for the information of Committee and Council. T 2012 2011 BUILDING CATEGORY NUMBER OF PERMITS VALUE OF CONSTRUCTION NUMBER OF PERMITS VALUE OF CONSTRUCTION % CHANGE OF VALUE 2012 -2011 Residential 76 $15,650,197 90 $20,436,048 -23.4% Industrial 2 $762,500 0 $0 N/A Government 0 $0 3 $81,000 N/A Commercial 6 $519,600 5 $2,921,750 - 82.2% Institutional 0 $0 0 $0 N/A Agricultural 1 $42,000 2 $42,000 0.0% Demolition 4 $0 4 $0 N/A TOTAL 89 $16,974,297 104 $23,480,798 - 27.7 % 9 -2 2012 2011 BUILDING CATEGORY NUMBER OF PERMITS VALUE OF CONSTRUCTION NUMBER OF PERMITS VALUE OF CONSTRUCTION % CHANGE OF VALUE 2012 -2011 Residential 315 $71,683,189 343 $75,150,616 -4.6% Industrial 5 $5,078,360 3 $545,000 831.8% Government 2 $25,442 4 $201,000 - 87.3% Commercial 17 $3,476,500 20 $3,900,110 - 10.9% Institutional 3 $3,411,625 4 $2,302,000 48.2% Agricultural 8 $431,978 7 $329,416 31.1% Demolition TOTAL 36 386 $0 $84,107,094 14 395 $0 $82,428,142 N/A 2.0% 9 -2 REPORT NO.: EGD- 020 -12 PAGE 3 1.2 With respect to building permit activities (over $250,000) and large residential building permit activities, the details are provided as follows: Owner / Applicant ' Construction Type Location Value 1377019 ONTARIO INC (ABE'S Shop 2532 Concession Road 3, Bowmanville $345,1000 AUTO) ONTARIO POWER GENERATIONS Water Meter Building/Water 2151 South Service Road, Bowmanville $750,000 Service 9 -3 REPORT NO.: EGD- 020 -12 PACE 4 The following is a comparison of the types of dwelling units issued for the month of "MAY" and "YEAR TO DATE ". Dwelling Unit Type "MAY" 2012 0 1 Townhouse 0% Apartment 2 o/ Semi - Detached 4% w Single Detached 44 Sem i-Detached 2 Townhouse 0 0 Apartment 1 44 Single Detached 94% Dwelling Unit Type "YEAR TO DATE 2012" 2 19 Apartment Townhouse 1% 11% 10 Semi- ` Detached ,{ 6% i 140 Single Detached 82% L Single Detached 140 Semi- Detached 10 Townhouse19 :; Apartment2 The following is a historical comparison of the building permits issued for the month of "MAY" and "YEAR TO DATE" for a three year period. Historical Data for Month of "MAY" $40,00 - — $35,00 4 111 $30,00 4 111 $25,00 111 $20,00 d 111 • • $15,00 111 111 • $10,00 •• • • $5,00 Historical Data "YEAR TO DATE" ', 11 111 111 $90,000,0 $80,000,000 $70,00 111 ■ ;■■ ■� r� '. • 1 111 111 A ■■ ■■ . '. 1 111 111 ■ ■■ � /111 111 ■ ■■ ■■ • '. $30,000,000 ■ ■■ ■■ '� / 111 111 ■ ■•'I .■ . '. 1 111 111 ■ ■■, 9 -4 -� �.,.��a • • • 111 • • •• • •• • • ', 11 111 111 $90,000,0 $80,000,000 $70,00 111 ■ ;■■ ■� r� '. • 1 111 111 A ■■ ■■ . '. 1 111 111 ■ ■■ � /111 111 ■ ■■ ■■ • '. $30,000,000 ■ ■■ ■■ '� / 111 111 ■ ■•'I .■ . '. 1 111 111 ■ ■■, 9 -4 REPORT NO.: EGD- 020 -12 PAGE 5 PERMIT REVENUES 2012 2011 May Year to Date May Year to Date PERMIT FEES $ 127,005 $ 603,127 $ 173,734 1 $ 523,693 9 -5 2012 2011 May Year to Date May Year to Date Building Inspections 821 3,119 531 2,056 Plumbing & Heating Inspections 833 3,580 618 2,299 Pool Enclosure Inspections 12 14 5 5 TOTAL 1 1,666 6,713 1 1,154 4,360 9 -5 2012 2011 May Year to Date May Year to Date Single Detached 44 184 51 167 Semi - Detached 2 12 10 50 Townhouse 0 19 8 42 Apartments 1 3 0 2 TOTAL 47 218 69 261 9 -5 YEAR: AREA Bowmanville (toend of May) 127 2011 360 2010 282 2009 98 2008 340 2007 451 2006 609 2005 307 2004 587 2003 468 2002 345 Courtice 67 312 236 113 134 82 126 241 173 180 133 Newcastle 15 165 37 24 60 77 84 202 191 123 131 Wilmot Creek 0 5 8 9 30 16 15 15 25 29 38 Orono 1 1 1 0 2 1 1 1 2 0 1 Darlington 0 5 8 6 10 6 7 14 15 13 17 Clarke . 2 8 6 11 5 11 12 13 10 16 15 Burketon 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 Enfield 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Enniskillen 2 0 3 2 0 0 1 1 1 0 2 Hampton 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 Haydon 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Kendal 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 Ej 3 Kirby 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Leskard 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Maple Grove 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Mitchell Corners 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 Newtonville 2 3 7 5 7 2 2 4 5 3 3 Solina 2 1 1 5 0 6 3 3 3 3 1 Tyrone- 0 1 1 0 5 0 0 0 0 3 9 TOTALS 218 863 593 274 593 655 861 802 1,015 843 701 REPORT NO.: EGD- 020 -12 2. CONCURRENCE - Not Applicable CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN - Not Applicable Staff Contact: Rick Pigeon, Chief Building Official PAGE 7 9 -7 Date: June 25, 2012 Resolution #: By -law #: Report#: EGD- 021 -12 File #: Subiect: APPOINTMENT OF INSPECTOR RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report EGD- 021 -12 be received; 2. THAT Bradley Muma be appointed as Building Inspector for the Municipality of Clarington effective as soon as, possible and that his name be added to Schedule 'A', Table 'B' of By -law 2011 -036; and 3. THAT the appropriate by -law be forwarded to Council. Submitted by: ASC /RP /jo /dv Reviewed by: A. . Cannella, C.E.T. Director of Engineering Services anklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer CORPORATION OF'THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905 - 623 -3379 1.0 REVIEW AND COMMENT 1.1 Bradley Muma is currently employed as a Building Inspector with the Engineering Services Department in the Municipality of Clarington. Bradley is a graduate of the 3 year Civil Engineering Technology program at Loyalist College. His work experience includes residential construction and contractor sales and estimating for residential and commercial construction. Bradley has completed the Ministry of Municipal Affairs & Housing building code General Legal course and is due to write the exam on June 29th. Bradley is enrolled in the Internship Program through the Ministry of Housing and the OBOA for House and HVAC — House. Bradley will be writing the House exam in early August. The Building Code requires that the inspector pass the Ministry of Municipal Affairs & Housing exams or is registered in the Internship program through the Ministry of Housing and the OBOA before the inspector can be appointed in the building by -law. KRUEEK001 Ll -► Lei Not applicable NFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN — Not Applicable Staff Contact: Rick Pigeon, Chief Building Official Attachments: Attachment 1 - Proposed by -law amendment List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision. Not applicable THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BY -LAW NO. 2012 -XXX Being a By -law to amend By -law 2011 -036, a by -law respecting the appointment of a Chief Building Official, Building Inspectors, Plumbing Inspectors and Fire Safety Inspectors. WHEREAS, the Council of the Municipality of Clarington has approved the recommendations contained in Report EGD - 021 -12. NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington hereby enacts as follows: 1. Schedule `A', Table 'B' to By -law 2011 -036 is hereby amended by adding the following there to: Column 1 `Inspector" Column 2 "Bradley Muma" Column 3 "Building Inspector" Column 4 "42038" This By -law shall come into effect on the date of passing hereof. BY -LAW passed in open session this xx day of xx, 2012. rian Foster, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk ATTACHMENT NO.:1 REPORT NO.: EGD- 021 -12 m Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: June 25, 2012 Resolution #: By -law #: Report#: EGD- 022 -12 File #: Subject: NO PARKING AT WEST BEACH ROAD PARKETTE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO BY -LAW 91 -58 RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report EDG- 022 -12 be received; and 2. THAT the General Parking and Stopping Regulation section of Traffic By -law 91- 58 be amended to prohibit parking "From Dusk to Dawn" adjacent to the West Beach Road Parkette. Submitted by: ASC /LJB /dv UI Reviewed by: A. S. Cannella, C.E.T. Director of Engineering Services Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905 - 623 -3379 9 -11 REPORT NO.: EGD- 022 -12 PAGE 2 1.0 BACKGROUND 1.1 The Municipality owns the West Beach Rd. Parkette located on the waterfront at the south end of West Beach Rd. in Bowmanville (see Attachment 1). There is signage in the park which states "This park is open during daylight hours only ", and refers to the applicable by -laws. Municipal by -law enforcement staff have included this area in their night time patrol to ensure compliance with that posting, and the area is regularly patrolled by Durham Region Police Services. 1.2 To further discourage night time activities in the parkette, staff recommend that the Municipality's Traffic By -law be amended to include the parking area associated with the parkette in the No Parking schedule of the by -law to prohibit parking "from dusk to dawn ". Appropriate signage will be placed. 2.0 CONCURRENCE Not applicable 3.0 CONCLUSION 3.1 The parkette in the West Beach Rd. Area is currently open for daytime enjoyment by the general public; however, the Municipality does not intend to allow any night time activity in the parkette and associated parking lot. Staff recommend that the current restriction on night time use be augmented with a prohibition on parking at night in that area. 3.2 Staff respectfully recommend that the attached by -law amendment be approved by Council. CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN The recommendations contained in this report conform to the general intent of the following priorities of the Strategic Plan: _ Promoting economic development Maintaining financial stability Connecting Clarington _ Promoting green initiatives _ Investing in infrastructure X Showcasing our community Not in conformity with Strategic Plan Staff Contact: Leslie J. Benson, P. Eng., Manager Transportation and Design 9 -12 REPORT NO.: EGD- 022 -12 Attachments: Attachment 1 - Location Plan PAGE 3 Attachment 2 — By -law 2012 -xxx to amend By -Law 91 -58 being a by -law to Regulate Traffic on Highways, Municipal and Private Property in the Municipality in the Municipality of Clarington List of Interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Not applicable 9 -13 A,T I ATCHMENT 2 REPORT EDG- 022 -12 THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BY -LAW 2012 -XXX being a By -law to amend By -law 91 -58, as amended, being a By -law to Regulate Traffic on Highways, Municipal and Private Property in the Municipality of Clarington WHEREAS the Council of the, Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington deems it desirable to amend By -law 91 -58; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington enacts as follows: 1. Schedule II "NO PARKING" of By -law 91 -58 is amended by adding: Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4 Prohibited Highway Side Between Times or Days West Beach Rd. South across the width of Dusk to Dawn the unopen road allowance between Lots 10 and 11, Broken Front Concession abutting West Beach Rd. 2.' This By -law shall come into force and take effect on the date approved by Council and when signs to the effect are erected. BY -LAW passed in open session this 3`d day of July, 2012. Adrian Forster, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk 9 -15 Date: June 25, 2012 Resolution #: By -law #: Report#: OPD- 007 -12 File #: Subject: CEMETERY BY -LAW AND TARIFF OF RATES RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: THAT Report OPD- 007 -12 be received; 2. THAT the Cemetery By -law as outlined on the proposed by -law (Attachment No. 1) be approved; 3. THAT the rates and fees as outlined on Schedule "A" of the by -law (Attachment No. 2) be approved; and 4. THAT Council authorize an agreement authorizing locally licenced funeral establishments to act as non - exclusive sales representatives to sell interment rights or cemetery services on behalf of the Municipality (Attachment 3). Submitted by: Reviewed by: Fre o ath, nklin Wu, Dire of Operations Chief Administrative Officer BG /bg (� CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905 - 623 -3379 10 -1 1.1 On February 9, 2011 the Funeral, Burial and Cremation Services Act ( FBCSA) was proclaimed in force and will take effect on July 1 2012. The Act was part of a comprehensive review of consumer protection legislation undertaken by the Ontario government and combines the Cemeteries Act and the Funeral Directors and Establishment Act. This means that all previously Council approved By- Laws and Tariffs of Rates are no longer in effect as of July 1, 2012. Council, under the requirements of the Cemeteries Act 1990, approved the cemetery Tariff of Rates for 2011 -2014 in Report OPD- 005 -11. The FBCSA provides for the repeal of the Cemeteries Act and the Funeral Directors and Establishments Act that, until July 1, 2012, governed the bereavement sector in Ontario. The Lieutenant Governor in Council has also proclaimed Ontario Regulation 30/11 under the Act. This regulation will place requirements related to the bereavement sector such as the establishment of care and maintenance funds, record keeping and trust accounts. 2.0 MAJOR CHANGES UNDER THE FBCSA 2.1 The following are the major changes under the legislation: 1) Co- ownership and co- location of all bereavement businesses: This means that an individual may operate any or all bereavement businesses, including cemeteries, crematoriums, funeral establishments and transfer services (whether on or off cemetery lands). 2) Crematoriums can be established on or off cemetery lands: previously, a crematorium could only be established on cemetery lands. 3) Resale of unused interment rights: The Act allows interment rights holders to resell unused interment rights up to the cemeteries current price list amount with two options. Option 1: Resale on the open market; or Option 2: The cemetery operator restricts the resale of interment rights on the open market in their by -laws. . 2.2 The Act provides important protection for consumers: 1) Consumers must be provided with prescribed information such as a price list for services, and supplies in printed or electronic format, information on relevant business relationships and a consumer information guide to help 10 -2 consumers know their responsibilities and obligations when making funeral, burial and cremation service arrangements. 2) Operators under the Act must provide consumers with a copy of the consumer information guide prior to the consumer entering into a contract with the operator. 3) The Act requires operators to provide written information in accessible formats, such as large print or audio at no extra cost. 4) The Act gives consumers up to 30 days to change their minds and get a full refund. IAfter the 30 days, a cancellation fee of 10 percent of the cost of the contract, up to a maximum of $350, may apply. 5) The FBCSA requires that the Cemetery Operator enter into an agreement with a licensed funeral home to act as a non - exclusive sales representative to sell interment rights or cemetery services. 3.0 HOW CHANGES EFFECT THE MUNICIPALITY 3.1 The previous Act did not allow for co- ownership or co- location of businesses in the bereavement sector. This now allows funeral homes, crematoriums and cemeteries to be owned together. 3.2 Previously crematoriums had to be located on cemetery lands, now this requirement has been lifted and crematoriums can apply for rezoning to operate anywhere within the Municipality. 3.3 Currently unused interment rights can be sold back to the Municipality for the price of the original sale. The Act requires that interment rights can now be resold up to current prices. Cemetery Operators such as the Municipality have several options. Through their by -Laws they can opt for rights holders to be allowed to sell their rights on the open market up to current market value or the municipality can restrict those sales and only allow the Municipality to buy back the unused interment rights. Staff have recommended in the proposed by -Law to allow rights holders to resell their rights on the open market, with the condition that the Municipality has first right to repurchase the rights. This will allow the Municipality to repurchase unused interment rights if the funds are available and resell them at a later date. 3.4 The Municipality must provide consumers with a current copy of our Cemetery By -Law and a copy of our current Tariff of Rates in printed or electronic form, accessible in large print or audio, at no extra cost prior to signing a contract for interment rights. Consumers must also be allowed a 30 day "cooling off" period to return those rights for a full refund. 10 -3 3.5 The Municipality of Clarington's current practice is to allow local licensed funeral homes to accept fees on behalf of their clients for the Municipality. The Act requires that licensed funeral homes must enter into a more formal agreement to act as non - exclusive sales representatives and be licensed as such to act on the Municipality's behalf. Staff recommends that the Municipality enter into agreements with the local licensed funeral homes to continue this practice (Attachment No. 3). 4.0 CEMETERY BY -LAW AND TARIFF OF RATES 4.1 The Ontario Association of Cemetery and Funeral Professionals have developed a standard Cemetery By -Law that has been pre approved by the Cemeteries Regulation Unit of the Ministry of Consumer Services to meet the requirements of the Act. Staff has made minor amendments to the Standard By -Law that apply to all Municipal operated Cemeteries (Attachment No. 1). 4.2 The Council approved Tariff of Rates for 2012, 2013 and 2014 will become null and void as of July 1, 2012, and therefore Council must again approve the Tariff of Rates for 2012. Staff have recommended that the previously Council approved Tariff of Rates for 2012 continue for the balance of 2012 as indicated in "Schedule "A" (Attachment No. 2). 4.3 Staff will report back to Council prior to January 1, 2013 to recommend any further changes to the By -Law and review and recommend increases to the 2013 Tariff of Rates. 5.0 CONCURRENCE This report has been reviewed by the Municipal Clerk who concur(s) with the recommendations. 6.0 CONCLUSION The Funeral, Burial and Cremation Services Act is the legislation that regulates the bereavement sector as of July1st 2012. Staff have reviewed the parameters as set out in the Act and Regulations, and understand the Municipalities responsibilities and requirements for compliance CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN — Not Applicable Staff Contact: Bob Genosko, Supervisor, Operations Department 10 -4 61 Z4 ED0111141, ' 9 11 Attachments: Attachment No. 1 - Proposed By -law Attachment No. 2 - Schedule "A" Tariff of Rates Attachment No. 3 - Authorized Representative Agreement List of interested parties: None 10 -5 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 REPORT NO. OPD- 007 -12 THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BY -LAW NO. 2012- Being a by -law to provide for the maintenance, management, regulation and control of the cemeteries in the Municipality of Clarington. WHEREAS The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington owns and operates municipal cemeteries known as Bowmanville Cemetery, located at 1330 Haines Street; Bond Head Cemetery, located at 44 Queen Victoria Street; and St. George's Cemetery, located at 2 Browview Road; AND WHEREAS the Funeral, Burial and Cremation Services Act, 2002, S.O. 2002.c.33 regulates the operations of cemeteries in Ontario; AND WHEREAS the Council of The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington deems it desirable to enact a By -law to regulate the operation of municipal cemeteries; NOW THEREFORE the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington hereby enacts as follows: The provisions of this By -law shall be applicable to Bowmanville Cemetery, Bond Head Cemetery, and St. George's Cemetery unless otherwise noted. 1.0 DEFINITIONS "Act" means the Funeral, Burial and Cremation Services Act, 2002 (FBCSA), S. 0. 2002 c.33; "Ashes" means the cremated remains of a deceased human body; "Baby Land" means a part of a cemetery designated for infants with a grave no bigger than 24" x 36" (61 cm X 91.5 cm); "Burial" means the opening and closing of an inground lot or plot for the disposition of human remains or cremated human remains; "By- laws" means the rules and regulations under which the Cemetery operates. "Care and Maintenance Fund" means the % of the purchase price of interment rights and set amounts for marker and monument installation that are invested and the interest from which is used to provide maintenance security and to preserve the cemetery grounds; "Casket" means the container /coffin in which human remains are interred; "Cemetery" means those areas inside the Bowmanville Cemetery, St. George's Cemetery and Bond Head Cemetery set aside for the interment of human remains or ashes; "Cemetery Operator" means the Municipality of Clarington; "Columbarium" means a structure (a niche wall) designed for the purpose of interring and preserving of cremated remains in sealed compartments (niches); "Contract" means the signed contract between the purchaser of Interment Rights and the Cemetery Operator; "Corner Posts" means any stone or other land markers set flush with the surface of the ground and used to indicate the location of a lot or plot; "Corporation" means the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington; "Council" means the Council of the Municipality of Clarington; i . "Director" means the Director of Operations of the Municipality of Clarington or his /her designate; "Disinterment" means the digging /removal and re- interment of a casket, vault or urn; "Grave" (Also known as Lot) means any inground burial space intended for the interment of a child, adult or cremated human remains; "Holiday" means a Statutory or Declared Holiday as well as any day designated in a collective agreement approved by the Municipality of Clarington; "Human remains" means the remains of a deceased human body; "Interment" means the digging and preparation of the grave, placing of the casket, vault or urn, filling the grave, leveling the ground; and re- establishing the grass; "Interment Right" means the right to require or direct the interment of human remains or cremated human remains in a grave, lot, or niche and direct the associated memorialization; "Interment Rights Certificate" means the document issued by the Cemetery Operator to the purchaser once the interment rights have been paid in full, identifying ownership of the interment rights; "Interment Rights Holder" means any person designated to hold the rights to inter human remains in a specified lot; "Lot" (also known as Grave) means a single Grave space; "Marker" means any permanent memorial structure that is set flush and level with the ground, and used to mark the location of a burial lot; "Ministry" means the Cemeteries Regulation Unit, Ministry of Consumer Services; "Monument" means any permanent memorial projecting above the ground installed to mark the location of a burial or lot; "Municipal Clerk" means the Clerk of the Municipality of Clarington or his /her designate; "Niche" means an individual compartment in a columbarium for the interment of cremated human remains; "Plot" means a parcel of land, sold as a single unit, containing multiple lots; "Register" means an up to date record (within five days of interment) of the name and address of each Interment Rights Holder and the location of the lot. The name and address of the original Interment Rights Holder, any date of transfer, and to whom the rights were transferred to. The name of each person interred, the location within the Cemetery, and the date of interment. Particulars regarding disinterments including the name of the person disinterred, date of disinterment, who authorized the disinterment, where the remains were re- interred, or the person who took possession of the remains; "Third Party Purchaser" means any person who purchased Interment Rights from a source other than the Cemetery Operator, in accordance with the provisions of this by- law; "Treasurer" means the Director of Finance/Treasure of the Municipality of Clarington or his /her designate; "Urn" means the container for cremated human remains; "Vault" means a manufactured fiberglass or concrete shell that the casket is placed into prior to an Interment. 10 -7 3 2.0 GENERAL 2.1 HOURS OF OPERATION Visitation Hours: 8:00 a.m. to Sundown Office Hours: 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. (July and August) Interment Hours: 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Note, the Office for the Cemeteries is the Municipal Clerk's Office, 40 Temperance Street, Bowmanville. 2.1.1 No person shall enter or remain in a Cemetery between sundown and 8:00 a.m. without the permission of the Cemetery Operator. 2.1.2 Subsection 2.1.1 shall not apply to a police constable and employees of the Municipality of Clarington in the performance of their duties. 2.2 CONDUCT The Cemetery Operator reserves full control over the Cemetery operations and management of land within the Cemetery grounds. No person may damage, destroy, remove or deface any property within the Cemetery. All visitors shall conduct themselves in a quiet manner that shall not disturb any service being held. 2.3 LIABILITY The Cemetery Operator shall not be held liable for any loss or damage, without limitation (including damage by the elements, Acts of God, or vandals)to any lot, plot, columbarium niche, monument, marker, or other article that has been placed in relation to an Interment, save and except for direct loss or damage caused by gross negligence of the Cemetery Operator. 2.4 PUBLIC REGISTER The Public Register shall be available to the public through the Municipal Clerk's Office during regular office hours. 2.5 PETS OR OTHER ANIMALS Pets or other lower animals, including cremated animal remains, are not allowed to be buried on Cemetery grounds. 2.6 INTERMENTS ON A STATUTORY HOLIDAY No Interment shall be made on a Statutory Holiday except in the case of a written order of the Medical Officer of the Department of Health or the Cemetery Operator. 2.7 INTERMENTS ON A SATURDAY OR SUNDAY No Interment shall be made on a Saturday or Sunday without payment of an extra charge as set forth in Schedule"A", save and except in the case of a written order of a Medical Officer of Health and in such case the extra charge shall not apply. 2.8 MEMORIAL SERVICES Before any memorial service is held in the Cemetery, the Cemetery Operator shall be given at least 10 days notice in writing, together with a satisfactory undertaking that the cost of repairing any damage which may be occasioned, will be paid. 3.0 CEMETERY SERVICES SUPPLIED BY THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 3.1 . Cemetery services available from the Municipality of Clarington shall not be allowed to be supplied by any person. "Cemetery Services" shall include: a) cutting grass and general care of lots; b) planting trees, shrubs and grass; c) setting grave markers, memorials; d) construction of foundation for monuments and markers; e) opening and closing of graves; and f) disinterment or removal of human hemains. 3.2 Minor scraping of the monument base of an upright monument due to grass /lawn maintenance is considered to be normal wear. Disinterment or Removals 3.3 Unless otherwise directed by the Medical Officer of the Department of Health, no human remains may be disinterred from the Grave without written consent of the Interment Rights Holder. 3.4 No disinterment or removal of any casketed human remains shall be allowed except under the supervision and direction of the Medical Officer of the Department of Health and in the presence of the Cemetery Operator, and upon due observance of all other requirements of the Act and regulations. 3.5 A certificate from the local Medical Officer of Health is not required for the removal of cremated remains. Oversized Vaults 3.6 Where Vault has a width of more than 2'6" (0.762 metres), or a length of more than T6" (2.286 metres), the Cemetery Operator shall not be obliged to permit the interment unless there is sufficient space to accommodate it; and the Cemetery Operator or his /her designate shall not be obliged to permit the erection of any Monument where there is insufficient room left for the foundation. Right to Re- Survey 3.7 The Cemetery Operator has the right at any time to re- survey, enlarge, diminish, re -plot, change or remove plantings, grade, close pathways or roads, alter in shape or size, or otherwise change all or any part of the Cemetery, subject to approval of the appropriate authorities. 4.0 SALE AND TRANSFER OF INTERMENT RIGHTS 4.1 Subject to availability of Lots, Interment Rights may be purchased from the Municipality at the rates set out in Schedule A. The rates for Interment Rights include the, portion specified by the Act for deposit to the Cemetery's Care and Maintenance Fund. 4.2 Payments for Interment Rights shall be made payable to the Municipality of Clarington, through the Municipal Clerk's Department. 4.3 Upon payment in full, the Municipality shall provide each purchaser of Interment Rights with: a) a copy of the Contract; b) a copy of the Cemetery By -law; and c) a Certificate of Interment Rights. 10 -9 5. 4.4 Purchasers of lots. acquire only the right and privilege for the interment of human remains and the placing of markers, subject to this By -law. 4.5 To ensure accuracy of the Register, no transfer of any Interment Right or any interest therein shall be binding upon the Municipality, unless application for the 'Transfer has been submitted, including necessary supporting documentation, and the original Certificate of Interment Rights returned, as required under Subsection 4.9 a). Upon receipt of such application and payment of the prescribed fee, the Transfer shall be made and a new Certificate of Interment Rights issued. Third Party Purchases /Re -Sales 4.6 Subject to the provisions of this By -law and the Act, and provided that no part of the Interment Rights have been exercised, an Interment Rights Holder may sell their Interment Rights to a Third Party Purchaser. 4.7 An Interment Rights Holder intending to sell their Interment Rights to a Third Party Purchaser must first allow the Municipality to repurchase the Rights at a price to be negotiated between the Municipality and the Interment Rights Holder. Only in the event that the parties cannot agree to a repurchase price or the Municipality, in its sole discretion has decided not to repurchase the Rights, may the Interment Rights Holder then sell the Rights to a Third Party Purchaser. 4.8 No person shall purchase Interment Rights for the sole or primary purpose of reselling the Rights with a view to making a financial gain. The Interment Rights may not be sold to Third Party Purchasers for more than the price set out in the then current Tariff of Rates (Schedule A) as the case may be. 4.9 An Interment Rights Holder intending to sell their Interment Rights to a Third Party Purchaser shall provide the Municipality with the following documentation so that the Municipality can confirm the ownership of the Rights and provide the Third Party Purchaser with the required documentation: a) an Interment Rights certificate endorsed by the current Rights holder; b) if the resale involved Interment Rights, a written statement of the number of Lots that have been used in a Plot and the number of Lots that remain available; and c) any other documents in the Interment Rights Holder's possession relating to the Rights. 4.10 To complete the sale of the Interment Rights to a Third Party Purchaser the Municipality may also require: a) a statement signed by the Interment Rights Holder(s) selling the Interment Rights acknowledging the sale of the Rights to the Third Party Purchaser; b) confirmation that the person selling the Interment Rights is the person registered on the Cemetery records and that they have the right to re -sell the Interment Rights; c) a record setting out the date of the transfer of the Interment Rights to the Third Party Purchaser; and d) a statement of any money owing to the Municipality in respect of the Interment Rights. 4.11 The Third Party Purchaser will be provided with the following documents by the Municipality: a) a new Certificate of Interment Rights; b) a copy of this By -law; c) a copy of the current Tariff of Rates (Schedule A); d) If the resale involves Interment Rights, a written statement of the number of Lots that have been used in a Plot and the number of Lots that remain available; and e) any other documentation in the Interment Rights Holder's possession 10 -10 relating to the Rights. 4.12 Upon completion of the procedures detailed in Subsections 4.9, 4.10 and 4.11, and at the approval of the Municipal Clerk, the Third Party Purchaser shall be considered the current Interment Rights Holder and the resale or Transfer of the Interment Rights shall be considered completed. Transfer by Will or Bequest 4.13 In cases of Transfer by will or bequest, the Municipal Clerk shall have the right, in his or her sole discretion, to require the production of a notarized copy of the will or other evidence sufficient to prove ownership. Cancellation of Interment Rights within 30 Day Cooling -Off Period 4.14 In accordance with the Act, and Interment Rights Holder may cancel the Interment Rights within thirty (30) days of signing the Contract by providing written notice of the cancellation to the Municipality. The Municipality will refund all monies paid by the purchaser within thirty (30) days from the date of the request for cancellation. 4.15 No refund will be made for any Lot if any portion of the Interment Rights have been exercised. 5.0 CARE AND MAINTENANCE FUND CONTRIBUTIONS 5.1 As required by sections 166 and 168 of Regulation 30/11, a percentage of the purchase price of all Interment Rights, a prescribed amount of $25.00, and a prescribed amount for monuments and markers, is contributed into the Care and Maintenance Fund.. 5.2 Income from this fund is used to provide only general care and maintenance of the Cemetery. 5.3 Contributions to the Care and Maintenance Fund are not refundable except when Interment Rights are cancelled within the 30 day cooling off period, as per Subsections 4.14 and 4.15. 6.0 ERRORS 6.1 In the event that an error on the part of the Municipality is discovered with an Interment Right prior to the use of the lot/niche for Interment, and that lot is no longer available, the Municipality shall: a) promptly notify the Interment Rights Holder of the error; b) amend the affected Contract and Certificate of Interment Rights of that lot/niche, or other Interment Right made prior to the enactment of this By -law, so as to provide a lot/niche of equal or greater value and similar location acceptable to the Interment Rights Holder; or C) cancel the Interment Rights and refund the full amount paid as evidenced in the Municipality's records. 6.2 The Interment Rights Holder shall notify the Municipality of their preference within 30 days of the notification of the error; otherwise the Municipality shall be entitled to make the decision. 7.0 INTERMENTS 7.1 Interment Rights Holders must provide written authorization prior to an Interment. Should the Interment Rights Holder be deceased, authorization must be provided in writing by the person authorized to act on behalf of the Interment Rights Holder (i.e. Personal Representative, Estate Trustee, Executor, succession Rights holder, or next.of kin). 7.2 A burial permit issued by the Registrar General, or equivalent document showing 10 -11 that the death has been registered with the Province, must be provided to the Cemetery Operator prior to an Interment taking place. 7.3 A Certificate of Cremation must be submitted to the Cemetery Operator prior to the Interment of cremated remains. 7.4 The Cemetery shall be given 24 business hours of notice for each Interment. 7.5 Payment for Interment must be made to the Cemetery Operator, payable to the Municipality of Clarington through the Municipal Clerk's Office, before an interment can take place. 7.6 The opening and closing of Graves or Niches may only be conducted by Municipal staff or those designated to do work on behalf of the Cemetery Operator. Scattering 7.7 No person shall scatter cremated remains on any Grave. More than Two in One Lot 7.8 Due- to the instability of the soil, the top of any interment container shall be 36" (91.5 cm) below ground surface for safety reasons. Regardless of the manner in which the Grave is prepared only one fully Human Remains is to be interred in any single Lot. 7.9 For those purchasing Lots or Plots prior to the enactment of this By -law, double interments will be honoured, but no more than two interments shall be allowed in one Lot. Both Interments in one Lot must each have Caskets. .7.10 Cremated remains shall be allowed to be interred with fully Human Remains. The limit shall be three (3) cremated remains with one (1) fully Human Remains in any single Lot. For those purchased Lots prior to the enactment of By -law 2005 -067 requesting a double interment in one Lot, the limit shall be two (2) cremated remains with two (2) full Human Remains in any single Lot. 8.0 MEMORIALIZATION . 8.1 No memorial or other structure shall be erected or permitted on a Lot until all setup and foundation fees have been paid in full. 8.2 No Monument, footstone, Marker or memorial of any description shall be placed, moved, altered, or removed without permission of the Cemetery Operator. 8.3 Every Monument shall be made of bronze, granite, marble or other durable stone used for that purpose with no vertical joint and no ornament of stone, metal or other material attached thereto. 8.4 All Monuments shall be mounted only on a stone or concrete base or footing and the base or footing shall be constructed by the Cemetery Operator and set flush with the level of the adjoining ground. 8.5 All foundations for Monuments and Markers shall be built by, or contracted to be built for, the Cemetery Operator at the expense of the Interment Rights Holder. 8.6 Should any Monument or Marker present a risk to public safety because it has become unstable, the Cemetery Operator shall do whatever it deems necessary by way of repairing, resetting, or laying down the Monument or Marker or any other remedy so as to remove the risk. 8.7 The Cemetery Operator reserves the right to remove at its sole discretion any Marker, Monument, or inscription which is not in keeping with the dignity and decorum of the Cemetery as determined by the Cemetery Operator. 10 -12 8.8 A Monument or other structure shall be erected only after the specific design plans have been approved by the Cemetery Operator including: dimensions, material of structure, construction details, and proposed location. 8.9 Only one Monument shall be erected within the designated space on any Lot. 8.10 The minimum thickness for flat Markers, including footstones, is 4 inches or 10 cm. 8.11 No Monument shall be delivered to the Cemetery for installation until the Monument foundation has been completed, and the Interment Rights Holder(s) and /or Monument supplier have been notified by the Cemetery Operator. 8.12 Every Marker for a single Grave shall be of a size as nearly as practicable, of 18" X 24" (45.7 cm X 61 cm) width, with a thickness of from 3" to 8" (7.6 cm to 20.3 cm). 8.13 No Monument shall exceed 48" (122 cm) in height, including base or footing, above the level of the adjoining ground, and when located on a Lot shall not exceed 10% of the Lot area. When located on a Plot, the base shall not exceed 14" X 38" (35.5cm x 96.5 cm). 9.0 CARE AND PLANTING 9.1 The interest generated from the Care and Maintenance Fund shall be used to maintain, secure and preserve the Cemetery grounds, including: a) re- levelling and seeding of Lots or scattering grounds; b) maintenance of Cemetery roads and water systems; c) maintenance of perimeter fences; d) maintenance of Cemetery landscaping; e) maintenance of Columbarium; and f) repairs and general upkeep of Cemetery maintenance buildings and equipment. 9.2 No person, other than the Cemetery Operator, shall remove any sod or in any other way change the surface of the Cemetery. 9.3 No person shall plant trees, flower beds or shrubs in the Cemetery except with the approval of the Cemetery Operator. 10.0 DECORATIONS 10.1 The Cemetery Operator reserves the right to regulate the articles placed on Lots or Plots that: pose a threat to the safety of all Interment Rights Holders, visitors to the Cemetery, and Cemetery employees; prevents the Cemetery Operator from performing general cemetery operations; or are not in keeping with the respect and dignity of the Cemetery. Prohibited articles will be removed and disposed of without notification. 10.2 The Cemetery Operator reserves the right to disallow or remove quantities of memorial wreaths or flowers considered to be excessive and that diminish the otherwise tidy appearance of the Cemetery. 10.3 Memorial wreaths may be placed in the Cemetery between the last day of October and the first day of April. In order to prepare the grounds for spring, wreaths must be removed prior to the first day of April. Wreaths not removed by the first day of April will be removed and disposed of by the Cemetery Operator without notification. 10.4 The following are permitted at the front of a Grave, not more than 12"(30.5 cm) from the Marker or Monument: 10 -13 a) unbreakable flowerpots; and b) planted flowers 10.5 Floral stands are to be of a single leg support type and may not exceed 48" (122 cm) with no more than two stands per Monument. The arms of the stand must not project more than 12" (30.5cm) from the Marker or Monument. Stands not in .compliance will be removed by the Cemetery Operator. 10.6 Flowers placed on a Grave for a funeral shall be removed by the Cemetery Operator after a reasonable time to protect the sod and maintain the tidy appearance of the Cemetery. 10.7 Shrubs and ornamental trees must be in alignment with and in close proximity to the Marker. Flowering plants must be grown only in front of the Marker, and shall not extend more than 12" (30.5 cm) from the Marker. Maintenance involves pruning to limit height of trees to 48" (122 cm), and laterally to within the boundaries of the Interment Rights Holder's Lot. Flowering plants must be weeded and watered. The plants. may be removed and discarded at the discretion of the Cemetery Operator. 10.8 Lettered boards, signs, items made of glass in whole or in part, crockery items or wind chimes are prohibited. 11.0 CONTRACTORIMONUMENT DEALER 11.1 Any contract work to be performed within the Cemetery requires the written pre- approval of the Interment Rights Holder and the Cemetery Operator before the commencement of the work. Work requiring pre - approval includes: landscaping, delivery of Monuments and Markers, inscriptions, designs, drawings, plans and detailed specifications relating to the work, proof of all applicable government approvals and permits, and the location of the work to be performed. 11.2 All contractors shall report to the. Cemetery Operator and provide the necessary approvals before commencing work at any location in the Cemetery. 11.3 Prior to the start of any said work, contractors must provide proof of: a) WSIB coverage; b) Occupational Health and Safety compliance standards; .c) Environmental Protection; d) WHMIS; and e) evidence of liability insurance of not less than $2 million 11.4 All contractors and all work carried but by contractors within the Cemetery shall comply with the requirements of this 'By -law. 11.5 No contractor, monument dealer or supplier shall enter the Cemetery outside of the Interment Hours unless approval has been granted by the Cemetery Operator. 11.6 No work shall be performed at the Cemetery except during the regular Interment Hours. 11.7 Contractors shall temporarily cease all operations if they are working within 100 metres of a funeral until the conclusion of the service. The Cemetery Operator, at his sole discretion, reserves the right to temporarily cease contractor operations, if the noise of the work being performed by the contractor is deemed to be a disturbance to any funeral or public gathering within the Cemetery. 11.8 Contractors, monument dealers and suppliers shall lay wooden planks on the Lots and paths over which heavy materials are to be moved in order to protect the surface from damage. 10 -14 10 12.0 COLUMBARIUM 12.1 Only the Cemetery Operator may open and seal'Niches for Interments. This applies to the inside sealer and the Niche front. 12.2 To ensure quality control, desired uniformity, and standard of workmanship, the Cemetery Operator reserves the right to inscribe all Niche fronts or install all lettering, vases, adornments, or any other approved attachment. 12.3 No person, other than the Cemetery Operator, shall remove or alter niche fronts 13.0 BY -LAW AMENDMENTS 13.1 The Cemetery shall be governed by this By -law, and all procedures will comply with the Act and Ontario Regulation 30/11, which may be amended periodically. All By -law amendments must be: a) published once in a newspaper with general circulation in the locality in which the Cemetery is located; b) conspicuously posted on a sign at the entrance of the Cemetery; c) delivered to each supplier of Markers who has delivered a Marker to the Cemetery during the previous year, if the by -law or by -law amendment pertains to Markers or their installation; and d) posted on the municipal website. 13.2 All by -laws and by -law amendments are subject to the approval of the Registrar, Cemeteries Regulation Unit, Ministry of Consumer Services. 14.0 GENERAL 14.1 By -Laws 79 -104; 81 -045; 83 -162; 86 -030; 89 -195; 89 -219; 92 -077; 93 -118; 94 -047; 95 -106; 96-44; 2001 -112 and 2005 -067 are hereby repealed. 14.2 In the event that any provisions of this By -law are deemed to be invalid or void, in whole or in part, by any court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining terms and provisions shall remain in full force and effect. 14.3 This By -law shall be effective the date that it is passed. By -law passed this 3rd day of July, 2012. Adrian Foster, Mayor C. Anne Greentree, Deputy Clerk 10 -15 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 REPORT NO. OPD- 007 -12 THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SCHEDULE "A" TO BY -LAW 2012- CEMETERIES - PROPOSED TARIFF OF RATES SALE OF PLOTS Type of Lot Dimension Bowmanville Dimension Bondhead 40% Perpetual Care Rate Rate (does not include . applicable taxes) Single TX 9' TX 9' $511.24 $1,278.11 Bab land 1.5'X 3' 1.5'X 3' $178.94 $447.34 Cremation 2'X 2' 2'X 2' $178.94 $447.34 2. SALE OF CREMATION NICHFS C61umbarium Niche Size 15'% Perpetual Care Rate Rate (does not include applicable taxes Single (including 12" X 12'X 12" $153.37 $1,022.48 Plague) $255.63 Niche Wall $127.81 Double (including 12" X 12" X 12" $230.14 $1,533.72 Plague) $127.81 Disinterment (child) including reburial at same $656.97 INTFRMFNT 4. IIISINTFRMFNT ('HARr;FR Rate (does not include applicable taxes) Adult - Sin le Depth $702.97 Adult- Double Depth $881.89 Infant / Child $255.63 Cremation $255.63 Niche Wall $127.81 4. IIISINTFRMFNT ('HARr;FR S. HOI MAY ANn nTHFR SI IRCHAR(.FR Rate (does not include applicable Monument foundation flat fee taxes Disinterment (adult) Jncluding reburial at the $1,164.63 same location or at another location in the same $76.44 cemetery $231.72 Disinterment (adult) for burial at another $985.45 cemetery $87.20 Disinterment (child) including burial at another r$732.21 location in the same cemetery $127.81 Disinterment (child) including reburial at same $656.97 rave or different cemetery Disinterment (infant / cremation) including $316.53 reburial at another location in the same cemetery Disinterment (infant / cremation) including $216.20 reburial at same grave or different cemetery S. HOI MAY ANn nTHFR SI IRCHAR(.FR R M(1NI IMFNT Pr)i INr1 ATIMIR AK]n RFTTIN(: MAPVr-PR Rate (does not include applicable, Monument foundation flat fee taxes Interment on Saturday, Sunday and Statutory $359.54 Holidays fee is additional• $76.44 Disinterment for double depth burial (fee is $231.72 additional Rental for lowering Device, set up and dressing $87.20 Provincial License Fee (except for cremation $10.00 Cremation Interment on Saturday, Sunday and $127.81 Statutory Holidays fee is additional R M(1NI IMFNT Pr)i INr1 ATIMIR AK]n RFTTIN(: MAPVr-PR 7. TRANSFER Fee $20.32 A PFRPFTIIAI CARF Rate (does not include applicable taxes Monument foundation flat fee $299.82 Flat Marker Foundations flat fee $181.57 Cremation / Baby Markers flat fee $76.44 Removal of Monuments $57.35 7. TRANSFER Fee $20.32 A PFRPFTIIAI CARF 10 -16 Rate (does not include applicable taxes Headstone Maintenance $100.00 Footstone Maintenance $50.00 10 -16 BETWEEN: ATTACHMENT NO. 3 REPORT NO. OPD- 007 -12 AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT made as of the «day» day of «month» , «year». fl «Funeral Home's full legal name» Street Ontario., City /Town Postal Code xCemetery's full legal name» Ontario, City /Town Postal Code (the "Funeral Home ") fl Street (the "Cemetery ") WHEREAS the Cemetery is licensed to operate a Cemetery pursuant to the Funeral, Burial and Cremation Services Act, 2002 (Ontario); AND WHEREAS the Funeral Home is a licensed to operate a funeral establishment pursuant to the Funeral, Burial and Cremation Services Act, 2002 (Ontario); AND WHEREAS in the course of its operation of a funeral establishment, the Funeral Home may wish to have certain of its employees who are licensed sales representatives within the meaning of the Funeral, Burial and Cremation Services Act, 2002 (the "Act "), sell interment rights, scattering rights or Cemetery services (the "Services ") to customers of the Funeral Home on behalf of the Cemetery; AND WHEREAS the Cemetery wishes to authorize certain of the employees of the Funeral Home to act as non - exclusive sales representatives for the Services, subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises and mutual covenants contained herein, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Appointment of Authorized Sales Representatives Subject to the terms of this Agreement, the Cemetery hereby authorizes the employees of the Funeral Home listed in Schedule A hereto (the "Authorized Sales Representatives ") to act as non- exclusive sales representatives for the sale of the Services. 10 -17 -2- 2. Future Appointment of Authorized Sales Representatives From time to time, the Funeral Home may submit the name of a person who is a licensed sales representative under the Act to the Cemetery, and upon delivery by the Cemetery to the Funeral Home of a written authorization permitting such person to act as a sales representative of the Cemetery, such person shall be deemed to be an Authorized Sales Representative pursuant to this agreement. 3. Responsibilities of the Funeral Home During the term of this Agreement, the Funeral Home: (a) may arrange for the sale of the Services by an Authorized Sales Representative on behalf of the Cemetery upon the request of the Funeral Home's customers. The Cemetery acknowledges and agrees that nothing contained in this Agreement shall be construed as a requirement for the Funeral Home to promote the .Services of the Cemetery to its customers; (b) shall comply with and ensure ,that all Authorized Sales Representatives comply with all federal, provincial and local laws, rules, regulations and ordinances applicable to the Funeral Home's business; (c) shall pay and discharge, and the Cemetery shall have no obligation to pay for, any expenses or costs of any kind or nature incurred by the Funeral Home or the Authorized Sales Representatives in connection with their respective functions hereunder; (d) shall ensure that no person employed by the Funeral Home, other than an Authorized Sales Representative, sells or offers to sell Services to customers of the Funeral Home; (e) shall provide to the Cemetery, at least annually, a copy of the sales representative license of each Authorized Sales Representative; and (f) The Funeral Home shall forthwith notify the Cemetery of the termination of the employment of any person who is an Authorized Sales Representative. 4. Responsibilities of the Cemetery The Cemetery shall provide such assistance with respect to the licensing of any employee of the Funeral Home as a sales representative as is reasonably necessary, provided that the Cemetery may, for any reason, decline to appoint any employee as a sales representative. Any payment to be made by the Cemetery in respect of the services of any Authorized Sales Representative shall be made to the Funeral Home. 5. Documentation and Marketing Material At its own expense, the Cemetery will supply the Funeral Home with all applicable catalogues, brochures, advertising, promotional and selling materials, literature and information as the Funeral Home may from time to time reasonably require for the purpose of selling the Services. 10 -18 -3- 6. Term and Termination This Agreement shall c6mmence as of the date hereof and continue in full force and effect until terminated by either party at any time on providing the other party with thirty (30) days prior written notice. Upon a person who is an Authorized Sales Representative ceasing to be employed by the Funeral Home, such person shall cease to be an Authorized Sales Representative pursuant to this agreement, and shall cease to be a sales representative of the Cemetery, effective as at the date of such person's termination of employment by the Funeral Home. 7. Relationship of Parties Nothing in this Agreement or otherwise shall be construed as constituting an appointment of the Funeral Home or its employees or any of them as an agent, legal representative, joint venturer, partner, employee or servant of the Cemetery for any purpose whatsoever, save and except as specifically set out in this agreement. Neither the Funeral Home nor any Authorized Sales Representative is authorized to transact business, incur obligations, or assign or create any obligation of any kind, express or implied, on behalf of the Cemetery, or to bind it in any way whatsoever, or to make any contract, promise, warranty or representation on the Cemetery's behalf with respect to products and services sold by the Cemetery or any other matter, or to accept any service of process upon the Cemetery or receive any notice of any nature whatsoever on the Cemetery's behalf, save as specifically set out in this agreement. 8. General (a) Severability. Any provision hereof that is prohibited or unenforceable in any jurisdiction shall, as to such jurisdiction, be ineffective to the extent of such prohibition or unenforceability without invalidating the remaining provisions hereof or affecting the validity or enforceability of such provisions in any other jurisdiction. (b) Assigning . The Funeral Home may not assign this Agreement without the express written consent of Cemetery. (c) Governing Law, This Agreement and any document relating thereto shall be governed by and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the Province of Ontario and the laws of Canada applicable therein. Both parties hereby expressly and irrevocably attorn to the non - exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of the Province of Ontario in respect of all matters arising out of or in connection with this Agreement. (d) Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, and/or by facsimile or e -mail transmission of Adobe Acrobat files, each of which shall constitute an original and all of which, taken together, shall constitute one and the same instrument. Notwithstanding the date of execution of any counterpart, each counterpart shall be deemed to bear the effective date first written above. Any parry executing this Agreement by fax or PDF file shall, immediately following a request by any other party, provide the other party with an originally executed counterpart of this Agreement. (e) Further Assurances. If requested by the Funeral Home, the Cemetery will provide to the Funeral Home within ten business days of such request a written authorization to each Authorized Sales Representative employed by the Funeral Home authorizing such person to act as a sales representative on behalf of the Cemetery. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date first set forth above. «Cemetery's full legal name» Per: Name: Title: I have the authority to bind the. Corporation «Funeral Home's full legal name» Per: Name: Title: I have the authority to bind the Corporation 310689.1 MUM -5- SCHEDULE OF AUTHORIZED SALES REPRESENTATIVES 10 -21 Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: June 25, 2012 Resolution #: By -law #: Report#: ESD- 010 -12 File #: Subiect: FIRE DISPATCH SERVICES RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report ESD- 010 -12 be received; 2. THAT Staff be authorized to negotiate an agreement with the City of Oshawa to provide Fire Dispatch Services and After Hour's Call Reception Services; 3. THAT Council authorize the Clerk and Mayor to execute an agreement with the City of Oshawa; 4. THAT Council approve utilizing the $189,000 approved for new staff in the fire department in the 2012 budget with the balance of the annual funding to be included in the 2013 operating budget at an estimated 0.5% tax levy increase for the purpose of absorbing the 4 existing dispatchers into the fire suppression; and 5. THAT all interested partied listed in Report ESD- 010 -12 be advised of Council's decision. Submitted by: Reviewed by : Gord Weir, Franklin Wu, Director of Emergency Chief Administrative Officer Services GW /mb 11 -1 REPORT NO.: ESD- 010 -12 1.0 BACKGROUND 1.1 Until July 1990, fire dispatch services were contracted out to residents of the community who provided this service from their homes. At that time, Council endorsed the hiring of 4 full -time firefighter /dispatchers and utilized this position as an introductory position into the full -time firefighter ranks of Clarington Emergency and Fire Services. This is still the practice today. Firefighters relieve dispatchers for breaks, vacation, lieu days and unscheduled leave. 1.2 In July 2000, a Report was submitted to Durham Region's Chief Administrative Officers recommending that the five southern fire services investigate amalgamating fire dispatch centers. With a Consultant's Report in hand, the Fire Services focused on expanding the existing Oshawa trunked radio system with the intention of creating two fire dispatch centre's; one in the west and another in the east. Today, Ajax Fire Services provides fire dispatch services to Pickering; Oshawa Fire Services provides fire dispatch services to Whitby and call alerting services to Scugog, Uxbridge and Brock Township Fire Services. In 2002, Oshawa's trunked radio system was expanded with Pickering, Ajax, Whitby, Oshawa and Clarington all becoming partners in the ownership, use and maintenance of the radio system. 1.3 Council Resolution #C- 493 -08 provided the Director of Emergency Services /Fire Chief authorization to analyze the continued ownership of fire dispatch services or to outsource the service. 2.0 COMMENTS 2.1 Since 1990, Emergency Services has progressively increased its full -time firefighter staffing by 32, the majority of whom were trained to assume the firefighter /dispatcher position. These positions were hired from Clarington's volunteer firefighter ranks and spent up to six months training /shadowing their predecessor. 2.2 The 2003 Master Fire Plan and subsequent 2008 Update addresses the gradual increase in full -time firefighters with the goal of staffing the fire stations in Courtice, Bowmanville and Newcastle with full -time firefighters along with the present volunteer firefighters. Today there are 48 full -time firefighters and 4 firefighter /dispatchers. 11 -2 REPORT NO.: ESD- 010 -12 PAGE 3 2.3 Currently, no call ratio formula exists for staffing fire dispatch centres. However, there is an expectation from both the public and emergency service community that a professional communicator be dedicated to the position. Today's fire services communicator should perform to Ontario Fire Service Standards and National Fire Protection Association Standards while: • receiving emergency calls from the public and other agencies; • analyzing the information received from the caller and dispatching required emergency vehicles; • operating console equipment, including telephones, radios, status control and computer aided dispatch software; • following established procedures in making calm, cool decisions as required in an emergency services environment; and • maintaining a working knowledge of available resources to support emergency scene operations 2.4 In 2010, Arbitrator Burkett awarded the Municipality the ability to contract out dispatch operations provided no firefighter is laid off and employees are absorbed into fulltime fire service. Council was advised of the award through confidential report, COD - 033 -10. 2.5 The four firefighter /dispatchers would either be utilized to increase suppression platoon sizes to 13 firefighters or alternatively, would be to utilize in other divisions such as training, fire prevention or administration until required in suppression. With either scenario, the firefighters would begin to move through the ranks. 2.6 Oshawa Fire Services possess an up -to -date dispatch environment and sufficient communicators to provide fire dispatch services and after hours call taking services to Clarington on a population per capita basis. The pros to having Oshawa Fire Services provide fire dispatch and after hour's services to Clarington include: • Benefit of dedicated and trained professional dispatchers with a trained supervisor • Shared current and capital costs between partners • As Scugog, Uxbridge and Brock Fire Services move from call alerting to full dispatch services the per capita ratio should decrease or at least be contained • Administration and managing radio technology in dispatch would be the responsibility of Oshawa Fire Service 11 -3 REPORT NO.: ESD- 010 -12 The cons include: r • Loss of position to accommodate, modified work for injured firefighter • Limited control of the dispatch function • Lack of cost control 3.0 FINANCIAL CONSIDERATION 3.1 In 2012, the cost to staff and maintain fire dispatch services in Clarington included $301,000 in wages and benefits and $130,000 in service /support fees and licenses. 3.2 In 2012, the cost to have Oshawa provide fire dispatch services to Clarington would be $382,000. The Oshawa fee is based on the per capita populations of Whitby, Oshawa and Clarington. Clarington would continue paying service /support fees totaling $110,000. All cost and fees are subject to annual wages and benefit increases, operating expense and fee increases. 3.3 The cost to move fire dispatch services to Oshawa and dismantle the Clarington's fire dispatch centre is $22,500. This figure includes moving Clarington response data onto the Oshawa CAD system, decommissioning the Meridian telephone system, console radio hardware and emergency back -up telephones. 3.4 Over the next two years 2013 and 2014, the Municipality will be investing capital funds in a new Region -wide radio system. In addition, capital funds will be requested for upgrades to computer -aided dispatch hardware and audio recording hardware. These capital investments will cost approximately $400,000 and would be avoided if fire dispatch was to move to Oshawa. In addition, further savings would be experienced through reduced CAD system service and support costs, Bell T1 and telephone line reductions, reductions in used worn or damaged equipment costs i.e. uninterrupted power supply failures and computer hardware failures. 3.5 The cost of absorbing the 4 firefighter /dispatchers Would be progressive. After achieving 1St class firefighter status in 2 %2 years, the 4 firefighter's wages and benefits total $400,000. An increase of $103,000 from today's wage and benefit costs. This would be gradually picked up in each successive budget year as a movement through the grid. 3.6 In general, if fire dispatch services had been provided by Oshawa through 2012, the 2012 current budget impact would have been an increase of $385,000. There would be annual operating savings of $20,000 to $30,000 and there would be a onetime capital savings of $400,000. This would also have increased the 11 -4 REPORT NO.: ESD- 010 -12 PAGE 5 firefighter complement by 4 staff being transferred from dispatch to firefighting duties. 3.7 Should Council give authorization to proceed, it is recommended that the changeover would take place during 2013. Council has set aside $189,000 in the 2012 budget towards fire staffing. As result of outsourcing fire dispatch, fire staffing would increase by four firefighters. The $189,000 could be used to fund this. As a result, the balance of the $193,000 would be required as part of the 2013 operating budget. This represents a 0.5% tax levy increase for 2013. 4.0 CONCLUSION 4.1 From an era of providing dispatch services from a private home through to today's model, fire dispatching has continued to advance with newer technology. The equipment, software, policies, procedures and industry standards used to dispatch emergency service responders to community emergencies is highly technical requiring committed professionals. 4.2 If it is Council's desire to continue to up -staff the number full -time firefighters, reduce liability and avoid costs while improving services. An opportunity presents itself and it is staff's recommendation that Clarington should consider outsourcing fire dispatch services. 5.0 CONCURRENCE Director of Finance, Nancy Taylor CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN The recommendations contained in this report conform to the general intent of the following priorities of the Strategic Plan: _ Promoting economic development X Maintaining financial stability _ Connecting Clarington _ Promoting green initiatives Investing in infrastructure _ Showcasing our community Not in conformity with Strategic Plan Staff Contact: Gord Weir, Director of Emergency and Fire Services /Fire Chief List of Interested Parties: Oshawa Fire Chief Steve Meringer 11 -5 Date: June 25, 2012 Resolution #: By -law #: Report #: ESD- 011 -12 File #: Subject: Staffing Trucks with Full -time Firefighters RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report ESD- 011 -12 be received3. 2. THAT the staffing as proposed in section 4.1 of Report ESD - 011 -12 be approved; and 3. THAT all interested parties listed in Report ESD- 011 -12 be advised of Council's decision. Submitted by: Reviewed by: Gord Weir Franklin Wu, Director of Emergency Chief Administrative Officer Services /Fire Chief GW /mb 11 -6 REPORT NO.: ESD- 011 -12 1.1 Report ESD- 016 -11 provided Council with a progress report on completing the Operational Planning document, identifying the Department's compliment of fire suppression staff and recommending the assignment of full -time firefighters to Pumper 1, Pumper 4 and the SCAT truck. 2.1 Since October 31, 2011 senior staff has utilized the following chart to assign firefighters to full -time pumper trucks and the SCAT truck. On -Duty Firefighters (excluding dispatchers) Pump 1 Bowmanville Pump 4 Courtice SCAT Truck Bowman ville Off-Duty, Firefighters 12 5 5 2 0 11 4 5 2 1 10 5 5 0 2 9 5 4 0 3 8 4 4 0 4 7 4 3 0 5 6 3 3 0 6 Less than 6 firefighters on -duty would require overtime staff 3 -4 Although this staffing has proven effective, continued efficiencies could be realized, with slight changes. 3.0 CONCURRENCE: Not Applicable 1 ' Gi ki t � • 4.1 That the Department, when possible and staffing levels permit, assign full -time firefighters to trucks in the following manner: On -Duty Firefighters Pumper in Pumper in SCAT/Tanker /Utility, Off -Duty (excluding Station 1 (Bowmanville) Station 4 (Courtice) Truck (Bowmanville) Firefighters dispatchers) 12 5 5 2 0 11 4 -5 4 -5 2 1 10 4 4 2 2 9 4 -5 4 -5 0 3 8 4 4 0 4 7 3 -4 3 -4 0 5 6 3 3 0 6 Less than 6 firefighters on -duty would require overtime staff 11 -7 REPORT NO.: ESD- 011 -12 5.0 CONCLUSION PAGE 3 5.1 Assigning firefighters as recommend, provides for vacation, lieu days, education days, unscheduled absenteeism and should allow each full -time pumper truck to respond with 4 firefighters inclusive of an officer. CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN The recommendations contained in this report conform to the general intent of the following priorities of the Strategic Plan: Promoting economic development X Maintaining financial stability _ Connecting Clarington _ Promoting green initiatives _ Investing in infrastructure _ Showcasing our community _ Not in conformity with Strategic Plan Staff Contact: Gord Weir, Director of Emergency Services /Fire Chief List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Dan Worrall, President Clarington Professional Firefighters Association Clarbgtoa EMERGENCY AND FIRE SERVICES DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE,AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: June 25, 2012 Resolution #: By -law #: Report#: ESD- 012 -12 File #: Subject: BY -LAW TO REGULATE OPEN AIR BURNING RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council.the following: 1. THAT Report ESD- 012 -12 be received; 2. THAT the attached By -Law to regulate Open Air Burning be adopted; and 3. THAT Council repeal By -Law No. 2001 -113. Submitted by: Reviewed by: Gord Weir ranklin Wu, Director, Emergency �,� Chief Administrative Officer Services GW /mb CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905- 623 -3379 11 -9 1. BACKGROUND FWgTVTW 1.1 In 2001 Council passed a by -law to regulate the setting of fires in the open air within the Municipality of Clarington amending the previous By -law 90 -178. The existing by -law has worked well regulating open -air burning throughout the Municipality, however it should use stronger language to assist with enforcement. 2. COMMENTS 2.1 The Fire Protection and Prevention Act, 1997, S.O. 1997, c. 4 authorizes Council to pass by -laws regulating the setting of open air fires, including establishing the times during which open air fires may be set. 2.2 The proposed by -law clearly identifies prohibitions, permit application requirements and conditions, revoking a permit, restricted areas, exceptions and enforcement. Attachment #2 Open Air Burning Application /Permit will be used by staff to approve or decline all open -air burning requests. Attachment #3 Open Air Burning Violation will be used by staff when dealing with open air burning complaints. 2.3 Schedule B to By -law 2010 -142 sets the fee for open air burning. 3. CONCURRENCE — Not Applicable 4. CONCLUSION 4.1 Adopting the proposed by -law provides residents and staff with an open air burning application process, conditions and enforcement provisions. CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN — Not Applicable Staff Contact: Mark Berney, Deputy Chief, Emergency and Fire Services Attachments: Attachment 1 — Open Air Burning By -Law Attachment 2 — Open Air Burning Application /Permit Attachment 3 — Open Air Burning Violation List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: none 11 -10 Attachment #1 to ESD- 012 -12 THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BY -LAW 2012- Being a by -law to regulate open -air burning WHEREAS section 7.1 of the Fire Protection and Prevention Act, 1997, S.O. 1997, c. 4 authorizes the council of a municipality to pass by -law regulating the setting of open air fires, including establishing the times during which open air fires may be set. NOW THEREFORE the Council of The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington enacts as follows: PART 1 - INTERPRETATION Definitions 1. In this by -law, "Fire Chief" means the Fire Chief of the Municipality or a designate; "Municipality" means The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington or the geographic area of Clarington, as the context requires; "owner" means the person identified in the most recent tax roll as the owner of a property; "Permit" means a'permit issued to an owner in accordance with this by -law; and "person" includes an individual, association, firm, partnership, corporation, trust, organization, trustee, or agent, and their heirs, executors, or legal representatives. References 2. In this by -law, reference to any Act is reference to that Act as it is amended or re- enacted from time to time. 3,. Unless otherwise specified, references in this by -law to sections are references to sections in this by -law. 11 -11 Word Usage 4. This by -law shall be read with all changes in gender or number as the context may require. 5. A grammatical variation of a word or expression defined has a corresponding meaning. Application 6. This by -law applies to all land within the Municipality unless otherwise specified. PART 2 - PROHIBITIONS General 7. No person shall set an open air fire or allow an open air fire to be set without a Permit. 8. No person shall set an open air fire or allow an open air fire to be set which does not comply with all of the conditions of a Permit. PART 3 - PERMITS Permit Applications 9. Any person wishing to set an open air fire shall make an application to the Emergency and Fire Services Department of the Municipality to obtain an open air burning permit. 10. Only the owner of the property on which a fire is proposed to be set, or an authorized representative of such owner, may apply for a Permit. 11. Every Permit application shall, (a) provide the name, address and telephone number of the applicant and any person who will be responsible for tending the fire; (b) describe the property on which the fire is proposed to be set and the proposed location for the fire; (c) be accompanied by the fee prescribed for a Permit; and Open Air Burning By -Law 11 -12 2 1 P a g e (d) include such other information as the Fire Chief may require to properly assess the application. Permit Conditions 12. The Fire Chief may approve or refuse any Permit application; and may impose any conditions upon an approval as he determines to be appropriate. 13. Unless specifically provided otherwise, every Permit shall be subject to the following conditions: (a) No fire shall cause smoke damage or fire damage to any property. (b) No fire shall decrease visibility or create a hazard on any public or private roadway. (c) Material must be burned in a single pile that is less than 1 metre in diameter and less than 1 metre high. (d) No fire shall be set in weather conditions that could create a fire hazard. (e) No burning of petroleum products, plastics, rubber, household garbage, building or demolition materials shall be permitted. (f) No burning that creates excessive or toxic smoke or excessive odour shall be permitted. (g) No fire shall be located within 15 metres of any building, structure, tree or overhead wire. (h) All flammable vegetation or materials within a 15 metre radius of the fire shall be cleared. (i) The person to whom the permit is issued or another responsible adult identified in the Permit shall tend to the fire until it is extinguished. (j) No fire shall be started earlier than one -half hour before sunrise or be extinguished later than-one-half hour after sunset on any day. 14. Without limiting the generality of section 12, Permits may be subject to conditions, (a) requiring that the fire be or not be in a specific location; (b) requiring fire suppression equipment; Open Air Burning By -Law 31 Page 11 -13 (c) specifying the method to be followed to extinguish the fire; and (d) relating to any other factors which the Fire Chief reasonably considers to be necessary to ensure that the fire is made and extinguished safely. Revocation of Permit 15, The Fire Chief may revoke a Permit if, (a) the Permit was issued in error; (b) any condition contained in the Permit is not being complied with; or (c) the Permit was issued as the result of false, mistaken, incorrect or misleading statements, inforrnation.or undertakings in the application. 16. If a Permit is revoked for a reason set out in section 15 (b) or (c), the application fee shall not be returned to the applicant. Restricted Areas 17. No Permit shall be issued for a property that is located within areas designated "Urban Area" or "Hamlet Residential" in the Clarington Official Plan. 18. No Permit shall be issued for a property that is located outside of areas designated "Urban Area" or "Hamlet Residential" in the Clarington Official Plan unless the property is at least 10 acres in size. Exception 19. Sections 17 and 18 shall not be applied so as to prevent open air burning that is undertaken as part of a "normal farm practice" as defined in the Farming and Food Production Protection Act, 1998, S.O. 1998, c. 1 provided that all other requirements of this by -law are met. PART 4 - ENFORCEMENT Inspections 20. (1) In this section, "Officer" means any employee, officer or agent of the Municipality whose duties include the enforcement of this by -law. (2) An Officer may, at any reasonable time, enter upon any property for the purpose of carrying out an inspection to determine whether or not the provisions of this by -law have been complied with. Open Air Burning By -Law 11 -14 4 1 P a g e (3) No person shall prevent hinder or interfere or attempt to prevent hinder or interfere with an inspection undertaken by an Officer. Offences and Penalties 21. Every person who contravenes any provision of this by -law guilty of an offence upon conviction is liable to a fine pursuant to the provisions of the Provincial Offences Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.33. PART 5 - GENERAL Short Title 22. The short title of this by -law shall be the "Open Air Burning By -law ". Repeal 23. By -law No. 2001 -113 is repealed. Effective Date 24. This by -law shall be effective on the date that it is passed. By -law passed this day of March, 2012. Open Air Burning By -Law Adrian Foster, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk 5 1 P a g e 11 -15 Attachment #2 to ESD- 012 -12 Application Information Application Date: 30 Day Permit 012 Month F] Farm Permit Name: Telephone No: Municipal Address: Burn Location Information Responsible Person: Telephone No: Property Description: Fire Location: Means of Extinguishment: Additional Conditions: Applicants Signature: Date: Authorizers Signature: Regimental #: Date: Permit Expiry Date: Permit #: See the back for Permit Approvals, Revocation, Restricted Areas, and Exceptions or the refer to www.clarington.net for a complete review of Clarington's Open Air Burning By -law. Distribution: (1) White Copy — Applicant on approval (2) Yellow Copy— Fire Administration - CLARINGTON EMERGENCY & FIRE SERVICES 2430 Highway 2, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1 C L1 C 3K7 T(905)623 -5126 F(905)623 -3073 fire(a.clarington.net 11 -16 Attachment Y3 to ESD -0'" 0 (Lieading OPEN-AIR BURNING VIOLATION Date: Property Information Time: Name of Person in Attendance: Occurrence #: Named Person the: ❑ Property Owner ❑ Tenant Municipal Address of open -air burning: Description of Items Burning: D.O.B: You are in violation of the Municipality of Clarington Open Air Burning By -law 12- XXX regulating open -air burning and in violation of the Ontario Fire Code 2.6.3.4. O. Reg. 388/97 ❑ 1St Offence This will serve as a warning. If you contravene Municipality of Clarington By -Law 12 -XXX and the Ontario Fire Code again you will be charged and be subject to the appropriate penalties. ❑ 2nd Offence You are -in contravention of the Municipality of _ - - Clarington By -law 12 -XXX regulating open -air burning and the Ontario Fire Code 2.6.3.4. O. Reg. 388/97, as amended, regulating open -air burning and are subject to the appropriate penalties. Signature of Person in Attendance: Officer's Signature: Regimental #: Date: Personal information contained on this form is collected pursuant to the authority of the Ontario Fire Code and will be used to investigate possible contraventions of the Municipality of Clarington Open -Air Burning By -Law. Any questions pertaining to the collection should be forwarded to the Municipal Clerk, Municipality of Clarington, 40 Temperance Street, Bowmanville, Ontario L1 C 3A6 (905) 623 -3379 Distribution: (1) White Copy— Named Person (2) Yellow Copy— Fire Administration CLARINGTON EMERGENCY & FIRE SERVICES 2430 Highway 2, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1 C L1 C 3K7 T(905)623 -5126 F(905)623 -3073 fire(a)clarington.net 11 -17 Clarington MUNICIPAL I Oki 4;L91 :4 1 Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: June 25, 2012 Resolution #: By -law #: Report #: CLD- 022 -12 File #: Subject: APPOINTMENT TO ORONO ARENA AND COMMUNITY CENTRE BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report CLD- 022 -12 be received; 2. THAT Gail McKenzie be appointed to the Orono Arena and Community Centre Board as the Durham Central Agricultural Society representative; and 3. THAT Gail McKenzie, John Witheridge and Pete Maartense be advised of Council's decision. Submitted by: PLB /jeg Municipal Clerk Reviewed by: Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905 - 623 -3379 13 -1 1. BACKGROUND PAGE 2 In March 2008, Council passed By -law 2008 -036 which establishes a Municipal Service Board to operate the Orono Arena. Municipal Service Boards are established under the authority of the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended. Section 195(3) of the Act outlines the rules for the composition as follows: 1. There shall be a minimum of three members, one of whom shall be the chair. 2. All members shall be appointed by the municipality and shall be qualified to be elected as a member of the council of the municipality. 3. The chair shall be the member designated by the municipality or selected by the members of the board. By -law 2008 -036 defined the composition as 8 members: 2 representatives from the Durham Central Agricultural Society; 2 representatives from the Orono Amateur Athletic Association; 2 citizens from the former Township of Clarke; and 2 members of Council. In April 2011, following consideration of Report CLD- 010 -11, Council appointed individuals to the Orono Arena and Community Centre Board. At that time, the position of one of the representatives from the Durham Central Agricultural Society was vacant. 2. CURRENT SITUATION John Witheridge, Chair of the Orono Arena and Community Centre Board, has confirmed that Gail McKenzie has agreed to be the Durham Central Agricultural Society representative on the Orono Arena and Community Centre Board. 3. CONCURRENCE - Not applicable 4. CONCLUSION In order to fulfill the requirements of the Act and By -law 2008 -036, it is respectfully recommended that Gail McKenzie be appointed to the Orono Arena and Community Centre Board, for a term concurrent with the term of Council. CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN — Not Applicable Staff Contact: Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Gail McKenzie John Witheridge, Chair, Orono Arena and Community Centre Board Pete Maartense, Orono Arena Manager 13 -2 Date: June 25, 2012 Resolution #: By -law #: N/A Report#: COD - 013 -12 File #: Subject: TENDER CL2012 -8 SUPPLY & DELIVERY OF TWO (2) VACUUM STREET SWEEPERS RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report COD - 013 -12 be received; 2. THAT Amaco Construction Equipment Incorporated, Mississauga, Ontario, with a total bid price of $420,828.48 (net of H.S.T. Rebate), being the lowest responsible bidder meeting all terms, conditions and specifications of Tender CL2012 -8, be awarded the contract for Supply & Delivery of Two (2) Vacuum Street Sweepers, as required by the Municipality of Clarington, Operations Department; and 3. THAT the funds required in the amount of $420,828.48 (net of H.S.T. Rebate) be drawn from the following Operations Department Accounts: #110 -36- 388 - 83642 -7401 2012 Replacement of Fleet Roads $200,492.64 #110 -36- 388 - 83643 -7401 2012 New Acquisition Fleet Roads $220,335.84 $420.828.48 Submitted by: Reviewed by: � —z�� Marie Marano, H.B.Sc., C.M.O., Franklin Wu, Diregjgr of Corpor to Services Chief Administrative Officer Clancy Ta lor, B A.,'C.A., Director of Finance/Treasurer MM \JB \BH \km CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T(905)623 -3379 F (905)623 -4169 14 -1 REPORT 1.1 Tenders were publicly advertised and called for the Supply and Delivery of Two (2) Vacuum Sweepers. Subsequently, two tenders were received and tabulated as per "Attachment 1 ". 1.2 The tender document made provision for the purchase of a replacement unit and a new acquisition. 1.3 The tender document made provision for bids with an option to trade in an existing unit. "Attachment 1" provides both an outright purchase price and an after trade price. 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, compliant bidder, Amaco Construction Equipment Incorporated, Mississauga, Ontario be awarded the contract for the Supply and Delivery of Two (2) Vacuum Street Sweepers. Based on staff review the bid amount offered for the after trade option is fair and reasonable. 2.2 The Municipality of Clarington has purchased construction equipment from Amaco Construction Equipment Incorporated, Mississauga and they have performed satisfactory. 3.0 COMMENTS , 3.1 The purchase of one (1) Vacuum Sweeper is a replacement unit for the Operations Department. 3.2 The Operations Department accepts the trade -in price of $19,500.00 for the 2001 Johnson Vacuum Street Sweeper (Unit #01577) as reasonable. 3.3 The purchase of one (1) Vacuum Street Sweeper is a new unit for the Operations Department, 3.4 Queries with respect to the department needs, specifications, etc. should be referred to the Director of Operations. 4.1 The funding required to complete the purchase of two Vacuum Street Sweepers is provided in the following 2012 Operations Department accounts: #110 -36- 388 - 83642 -7401 2012 Replacement of Fleet Roads $200,492.64 #110 -36- 388 - 83643 -7401 2012 New Acquisition Fleet Roads $220,335.84 420 828.48 14 -2 REPORT NO.: COD - 013 -12 PAGE 3 5.0 CONCURRENCE 5.1 This report has been reviewed by the Purchasing,Manager. The Director of Operations concurs with the recommendation. 6.0 CONCLUSION 6.1 To award the contract to Amaco Construction Equipment Incorporated, Mississauga, Ontario for the Supply and Delivery of Two (2) Vacuum Street Sweepers. CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN — Not Applicable Staff Contact: Jerry Barber, Purchasing Manager Attachments: Attachment 1 - Bid Summary List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Not Applicable 14 -3 THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BID TABULATION Attachment 1 BIDDER TOTAL BID (HST Included) TOTAL BID (net of FIST Rebate) $440,671.68 TOTAL BID (with trade-in & HST Included) TOTAL BID (with trade-in & net of HST Rebate) Amaco Construction Equipment Inc. Mississauga, ON $489,346.50 $467,311.50 $420,828.48 Joe Johnson Equipment Inc. Innisfil, ON Bid A $486,200.58 $437,838.68 $472,640.58 $425,627.48 Joe Johnson Equipment Inc. Innisfil, ON Bid B $501,419.42 $451,543.72 $487 859.42 $439,332.52 A 4 Zei A" i Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: June 25, 2012 Resolution #: By -law #: Report#: COD - 014 -12 File #: Subject: EXPRESSION OF INTEREST EOI- 2011 -3, SOLAR VOLTAIC PANEL INSTALLATION — OPA, MICROFIT PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: THAT Report COD- 014 -12 be received for information. Submitted by: ane Marano, H.B.Sc., MM /JB /km C.M.O., Director of Corporate Services r Nancy T ylor,1. .A., C.A., Director of Finance/Treasurer Reviewed by: ranklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905 - 623 -3379 14 -5 1.1 At their meeting held July 18, 2011 Council approved Report CAO- 008 -11 — Energy Management Committee — Solar Photovoltaic (PV) Program; copy appended as Attachment 1. 1.2 In summary, approval of the report authorized staff to proceed with the issuance of an Expression of Interest (EOI) to obtain additional information from the industry and to determine the interest of vendors for the potential installation of solar panel systems. 1.3 Following receipt of approval to proceed with an EOI staff undertook a further review of the Ontario Power Authority Feed in Tariff (FIT) program and concluded that, of the two options (FIT & MicroFIT programs), the MicroFIT program held the most interest given the size constraints associated with the Municipal Administrative Centre (MAC). 1.4 For clarification, a MicroFIT installation is one that produces not more than 10 kW whereas a FIT installation produces greater than 10 kW. Another determining factor was the feed -in tariff applied to MicroFIT installations vs. FIT installations. At the time this project started the maximum MicroFIT rate was $0.802 /kWh whereas the FIT rate was $0.713 /kWh (projects between 10kWh and 100 kWh). These rates have been revised following the recent review undertaken by the OPA. The revised tariff for the MicroFIT is now $0.549 /kWh while the rate for a FIT installation was revised to $0.548 /kWh, a reduction of 31.5% and 23.1% respectively. 1.5 Based on conversations with representatives from the Ontario Power Authority (OPA) it was recommended that the municipality make an application for a MicroFIT project in order to position ourselves for approval as applications take months to process. In the event there was no interest in pursuing a solar panel installation the application could be withdrawn. 1.6 At approximately the time the EOI was issued the OPA undertook a review of the FIT program which lasted several months. The outcome of that review has recently been published in a report dated March 19, 2012. 1.7 The report confirms the government's continuing support for the FIT program but does make changes to the FIT and MicroFIT tariff rates. 2.1 Late in the fall of 2011 the EOI was issued and publicly advertised on the Municipal website and the Ontario Public Buyer's Association website. , REPORT NO.: COD - 014 -12 PAGE 3 2.2 During the period following publication a total of 42 firms downloaded documents. Subsequently a total of 19 submissions were received; however 3 were rejected for failing to meet criteria established for the EOI. 2.3 A total of 16 submissions were reviewed by the evaluation team consisting of representatives from the Operations, Community Services and Corporate Services Departments. Based on a uniform method of evaluation the number of submissions was narrowed to a total of 6 submissions of interest. A list of vendors short listed and submitting acceptable submissions is appended as Attachment #2, for information. 2.4 For the purpose of the Expression of Interest the Municipal Administrative Centre (MAC) was chosen as the site for consideration of a possible installation. It presents opportunities for installations on both the 3rd floor roof and penthouse and the 4th floor roof and penthouse. The majority of the submissions chose the 4t" floor roof and penthouse as preferred location for their proposed installation. 2.5 Evaluation of the proposals submitted included a review of the following areas: • Estimated cost of installation; • System size, configuration and type of mounting (fixed versus ballasted); • Domestic content (to meet Provincial Standards); • Payback of investment; • Estimated net revenue after'20 years (term of the MicrOFIT program); • Maintenance requirements; • Warranties of various components; • Estimated life of the system • Value added services proposed by the vendors; • References; 2.6 The following is a summary of the findings: • Estimates ranged from the mid $50,000 range to the high $90,000 range for a 10 kW system. Although we specified MicroFIT installations we did receive information on FIT installations and these ranged in prices up to the mid $700,000 range. • The majority of proposals met the 10 kW requirements and proposed a ballasted installation as opposed to the fixed mounting. •. All submissions met the 60% domestic content requirement • Payback varied between 5 to 10 years. However these figures were estimates only and not all submission were based on the same Tariff. The. fact that the FIT program was under review moved some firms to estimate what the new rates might be and they based their calculations accordingly with a qualification that more accurate figures could be provided once the FIT tariff was established. 14 -7 r .�' • •1 1 • Net revenue after 20 years displayed a wide range largely because of the uncertainty of the tariff. However, depending on the system the net revenue for a twenty year period would range from the low $60,000 range to the mid $120,000 range. • Maintenance of the systems is minimal. The main concern is keeping the panels clean and clear of snow. Installers also offer maintenance programs at minimal cost per year to monitor the systems and conduct minor repairs. • Warranties of the components vary, however the key components of the system carry long term warranties and the panels usually have a guarantee that output of the panels will be at certain levels depending on age. For example after 25 years the panels should still be producing 80% of the rated output. • Expected life span of the system is 25 years • Value added services include maintenance programs and promotional programs to illustrate the steps that the municipality is taking to reduce consumption or produce power for the grid. • All firms submitting have installed multiple systems 2.7 In short, a 10 kW Solar Voltaic Panel installation at 40 Temperance Street would generate power to the grid for a period of 20 years and provide a payback of the investment long before the end of the 20 year term of the FIT program. At the end of 20 years and the FIT program the system would be adapted to feed power into the building thereby reducing operating cost for several more years. 2.8 With the recent release of the Two -Year Review Report the foregoing figures affected by the revision in the FIT will have to be recalculated using the new rate which, as noted above, has been reduced by 31.5 %. Off - setting this reduction it potential revenue is the possibility that component and installation costs have become more competitive with the increased interest in solar generation. 2.9 Should a solar voltaic panel installation be considered for installation at the Municipal offices it is recommended that the roof replacement for the area proposed for the installation be undertaken. The current roof has deteriorated since installation and is experiencing leaks from time to time. According to the Capital Plan the roof is scheduled for replacement in 2015. It would not be prudent to install a panel system on a roof that is in need of frequent repairs and is scheduled for replacement within the next few years. To do so would necessitate partial disassembly of the panel system if repairs were needed and the removal and reinstallation of the entire panel system while the roof is being replaced. Assuming a 1 to 2 week period to dismantle the panel system, up to 2 weeks to repair the roof and 2 weeks to reinstall the panel system, the Municipality would lose up to 6 weeks of revenue plus incur extra cost for removal and reinstallation of the panel system. 2.10 Based on recent estimates, the cost of a roof replacement for the fourth floor library section would be in the area of $175,000. am REPORT NO.: COD - 014 -12 PAGE 5 3. COMMENTS 3.1 The foregoing estimates, albeit based on the original FIT program, are an indication of the potential for a solar voltaic panel installation. With the recent changes in the FIT program the payback period will be extended and the revenue will be reduced. However, the amount of power that can be fed into the grid, the reduction in green house gases and the benefit to the municipality at the end of the 20 year term remain unchanged. 3.2 In order to update our information and the calculations for revenue and return on investment it will be necessary to have the vendors revisit their installation prices and recalculate the revenue stream and the payback based on the new MicroFIT program. Without a direction to pursue a solar panel installation for the MAC, staff are not in a position to pursue discussions with vendors with a view to firming up prices and selecting a preferred system. 3.3 As noted in section 3.3 of report CAO- 008 -11 the intention of the Expression of Interest was to generate adequate responses to assist the municipality in making a fully informed decision on the FIT program. The exercise was a success in that it provided the information required although complicated by the changes made to the. FIT program. The exercise also identified a number of vendors that could be considered if an installation was feasible and proposed for the near future. 3.4 This report is provided for information. Should Council wish to pursue the possibility of installing solar panels on the MAC staff would require approval to proceed with the establishment of pricing and selection of a contractor. In addition, the financial aspect would require resolution and the source of funds established. The following are options for consideration: • Undertake the project in 2012 (not recommended due to lack of funding) Include the roof replacement and solar installation in the 2013 budget discussions 3.5 Should Council wish to pursue a solar installation in 2012 given the amount of information collected to date and the short listing of interested vendors it is recommended that the requirements of the purchasing by -law be waived in order to pursue negotiations with the selected firms to establish the best package /price for a solar voltaic panel installation. A subsequent report with details of the project and a recommendation would be provided to Council prior to awarding any contract. If the 2013 Capital Budget Option is preferred it is recommended that a competitive process be undertaken as'data collected in the recent EOI will be dated and the market will have changed. 3.6 For information, a number of municipalities such as Belleville, Markham, . Vaughan, Ajax and several others have invested in the solar panel installations. 14 -9 3.7 The Green Energy Act, 2009 has identified as a guiding principle the use of renewable energy sources. Regulation 397/11 also requires public agencies to identify renewable energy generation projects, including the amount of energy generated on an annual basis, as part of the reporting requirements for their Energy Conservation and Demand Management Plans. 4. 4.1 4.2 FINANCIAL Should Council wish to pursue the installation of Solar Photo Voltaic System the following estimated funds will be required: Roof Replacement (includes consulting service): Solar panel installation (Subject to confirmation on completion of negotiations) Total Estimated Funds Required $175,000.00 $ 90,000.00 $265,000.00 To pursue the project in 2012 the funds would require direction of Council as funds are not included in any budget accounts. 4.3 Should Council elect to complete the project in 2013 the estimates would be provided as additional items in the 2013 Operations Capital Budget accounts. For clarification the roof replacement would be proposed as an additional item to the existing capital roof replacement program. 5. CONCURRENCE 5.1 This report has been reviewed by Fred Horvath, Director of Operations and George Acorn, Chair, Energy Management Committee, who concur with the comments herein. 6. CONCLUSION 6.1 The Expression of Interest has provided the information required to permit discussion of the details and the merit of considering a solar voltaic panel installation. 6.2 Although not as attractive from a revenue generating /return on investment perspective there is an opportunity to invest in the technology, derive a return on investment, contribute to the reduction of green house gases and provide for the maintenance of future energy costs once the 20 year program is completed. 6.3 To undertake this project should Council so direct, funding approval for the panel installation project as well the roof replacement would be required. 14 -10 '• i Z, a 9 k" rel A K KOT-syll PAGE 7 6.4 The options are: do nothing; proceed with the project immediately which would require the provision of funding for the panel installation and the roof replacement ahead of schedule; or provide for the project in the 2013 Capital Budget. For information, the OPA will be undertaking a further review at the end 2013 which may result in a further change in the tariff rate. A project approval in the 2013 budget would leave sufficient time to award a contract and complete installation before the end of the year. CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN The recommendations contained in this report conform to the general intent of the following priorities of the Strategic Plan: Promoting economic development Maintaining financial stability Connecting Clarington X Promoting green initiatives X Investing in infrastructure X Showcasing our community Not in conformity with Strategic Plan Staff Contact: Jerry Barber, Manager of Purchasing Attachments: Attachment 1 - CAO- 008 -11 Attachment 2 - List of Proposed Firms Should Negotiations be considered List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: NONE 14 -11 Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: Monday July 11, 2011 Resolution #: G 10)9- 6?l-IJ By -law#: N/A Report #: CAO -008 -11 File#: I ' Subject: ENERGY MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE -- SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC (PV) PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended to the General Purpose and Administration Committee that Council approves the following: 1. THAT Report CAO -008 -11 be received; 2. . THAT the requirement for formal competitive bidding in accordance with By -law 2010- 112, Part 2 be waived for this initiative; and 3. THAT Staff, in conjunction with the Purchasing Division, be authorized to advertise for Expressions of Interest for the potential installation of solar panel systems on selected municipal buildings. IN Submitted by, (J Franklin Wu Chief Administrative Officer CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO Li C 3A6 T (905)623 -3379 F (905)623 -0720 14 -12 RIEPORT NO,.'. GAO-DOM-1 I PAGE 2 1.1 Since the, formabom Oflhe, Ftmero-y MAnagemenk Committee the rrRmbera, have been Keeping iff fo,,Tned on vadous IOV7ograiirns. Of partiru1ar iniereal: in the last 12 monlhs has n the Onlaox) r1cm. e( Atithorii, � (OR4,i Food-in- TeTff' FITS i.2 In- recent month s:qlAff furs fooulvod many unsc4icfted callsfroarn Mns. praolding information on the prograra. sPeclkuqlli� the roof mounted sobr pane l cplion and king interest from the municipality In proceed with an applicntiom for aj prqject. . � I I M I -0pUoo," for building owners include the outright: purclitase of equipty)p Pq rit, ri qn'u� L a gooraMse, Of equipment grid leasing x*ftops to the contra ors. 'To date bra ha!or,- t f in the inf6!m,a4i5n gal Bring m 1 b and have adyised all firm -s !hat if we are 10, prom it v.'Il be ihrxy-qh a public pm-c-urenivet)t far rve 1, 3 The r-,vvnicj.paMy owns, a number of larger bwz�lngR thal be suitable rocations for Mid- sized roof mvm.ed solar panels. Based on epreakirninary is feasible Irt ca3,n-T.Idet, -,*;*L-a,1 pam�j prqjects in the area of 10RWI. 1A Ma recent Energy Marmigem. einl (3'Onliniltoe rneutinr�3 a, mpresentilivelfrum the Renewable Energy FarAhietiDn Office, of the Ondatir- f-Am-11sti)- W Energy and pro-Ad ed an overview of- -the FIT Program, -1 lie repr,e_,qt_-n1R),ji-at number of t`jTA t*r . wnicipalili�* hot- received ap�,_,rovels to proceed -&Wh -safer PV prcje�:ts, and many o1h . . ", oiiQ, iri,qir�ous. Magus of 11hel process. 2.1 On KCay 14 2009 7Rte- Green Energy ar.,d Green Economy Act viss pa ssed Inn Iakv I _0 I The goals of -ihis [ l.Vallcn InolvJim! triMiq Onlado. a rerawaWe energry leader-: anMuraging invest—eLl end d to r) o re- a Wor;, o 0I 608-wring a culturs of aDnaervalic-m In Odater a f, This carne -par the OPA.' began 2C 01ir1�1 C4prjli , ns vnd - , FIT COW, -or the prooror'm 14-13 REPORT NO.: CAA- 0001 -11 2.2 The FIT Program was developed t errs aiarngo the doveloprrent of smali scale rarl&ovablu fenergy pycfev s scrosrs the prc,Anee. The rra i!S lvqrsGd b she genimaiion, trimmisVon acid disiribution ,of energy into the (I q3�r s� ppl�' s'y� lgm. Anuiy f of eel ' e onergy sources are c*vered under the proggirrf inewding bium� -�, 100drill ties, biogas, onshore. grind, water pcyla er and solar phatuyv aic. Z3 IAI.Ohin the FIT Programthere are riree cab%o ieq 6-ig gi }n si Of ren FalJJe nergy i QJP,nl: *mall IOWA' or below ! P0ir.MFIT), raid -sized 1 dkA-5 - 5,9%:vv; s: nd largo ,sci11e 24 Subject: 1c, all rie-nasary tapprova .thy OPA?s Will eritur in-10 a 217 year contract for a ?iked PO;e for the 0ztri6iy they pTgiezt generate". TIC Fvicu is bawd + Vie. lies of ene7gy WNAkA arrrl U00 size of 1ha pro c. In general the 001143010. are -.54"M AUred W prv�do a6a quate guar ?ntee4 reve,r!uas to cove r k s c a p i z a I and apemiIng Ms. ts ,a:q I%ial rl vArk the projeci as v pro -AdIng, itie building owr r a ressoneble rats -tin ct We initial investment. Based on, inhorrnailon --30(f 1 -0$ r eceiv0d mgt insitillabcna are expreci�ed to rS zap r the capital vista vAthin 4he trat ten yeers or tl;r crain3rod.. .2.5 Based f rr q i, irip wax panol project sized at 1 OMN i;re contrail t prr_�f ($ i'kIP h) is $0.713 per klovile � &;f�astr��.sia�f fins adwised, the FIT program will wiwergo ga ri%il -kv dunhg 20 5 i 'whh the PM61MV nP Od4 v�ftd can1raiMl. priding,. .3,0 G►�MtENT 3.1 To dp1e lheret h0s Uxt-On no dataiisd d�scussion on the fina 74inq of 1,mq nrr gr irn. subject to the on;, tF�c Expraasi n of Interest F;L I I a de;! ailed ft-.A- r arla14lira -Mill be required if it is tit, wolxx:� w4h Vrz program. ;r. Prlor W tai ocee ding -Wth a rof mounted RV a -ysteai a erp tur;al bo required oil laaing asidwed and those cats %Wi be fc3s l r '� it in iF're_: fi=riancial c,!4ula° arpr;, I IM1. REPORT NG.: CA0408.11 I PAGE 4 3.3 It is the mlention offhks ECA -b �onarate adeqmb� raspmse from the remeima le emergy commundy that wAI a s i t rouniciolity 1u make a fult� inbuned decisian an vie F 1T PrX3gTaJn_ 4.0 - IINPUT FROM 0MIER SOURCES 41 The Menager afPurchaaing ha,,q Weil mrj!� WW during; the preparabon, of 'this repo rt -And upon approval will coarditiale the Ex,,m-.,q_-sIcjn of Ir4orv-51, -rind any subsequent negritiation-s. 4.2 Staff will ifeo a on `the. r c!� viffs cif ih e re. q u a st for tl'e E 0 1 Lra this f a I I aim .A, ! I I 4;<i v j!i mq, CauncifAvImelh-ef or not lh MUnic0alily should partiripa"a in the Fff'prop3m, 14-15 Attachment 2 EOI -2011 -3 SOLAR VOLTAIC PANEL INSTALLATION 14 -16 Date: June 25th, 2012 Resolution #: By -law#: Report#: COD - 016 -12 File #: Subiect: TENDER CL2012 -16, EROSION CONTROL RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: THAT Report COD - 016 -12 be received; 2. THAT R &M Construction, Acton, Ontario, with a total bid in the amount of $321,613.46 (net of H.S.T. Rebate), being the lowest responsible bidder meeting all terms, conditions and specifications of Tender CL2012 -16 be awarded the contract for Erosion Control as required by the Municipality of Clarington, Engineering Department; and 3. THAT the funds required for the Clarington portion of the project, required in the amount of $305,000.00 (which includes $321,613.46 for tendering, design, contract administration, material testing, contingencies and net HST less Region of Durham costs) be drawn from the following Engineering Department Capital Accounts: Soper Creek Erosion Control - 2012 Capital and funds committed in Roads Contribution Reserve Fund) 110 -32- 340 - 83284 -7401 ...................................... ............................... $221,000.00 Build Canada Fund (2009) 110 -32- 330 - 83347 -7401 ..................................... ............................... $ 84,000.00 Total funds required: .. ......................................................................... $305,000.00 4. That the tender award be subject to the approval of the Regional Municipality of Durham; and 5. THAT the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to execute the necessary agreement. 14 -17 .•' • • 1 IL f Submitted by: ��Gt Marie Marano, H.B.Sc., Director of Corporate Services MM \JDB \km 14 -18 Nancy Taylor, B.B.A., C.A., Director of Finance/Treasurer �t Reviewed by: x Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer REPORT NO.: COD - 016 -12 PAGE 3 1. BACKGROUND 1.1 Tender specifications were provided by AECOM Canada Ltd. for the Erosion Control. 1.2 Tender CL2012 -16, Erosion Control was advertised in the Daily Commercial News as well as electronically on the Municipality's website and the Ontario Public Buyer's Association website. Subsequently, tenders were received and tabulated as per "Attachment 1 ". 2. ANALYSIS 2.1 A total of five (5) submissions were received in response to the tender call. All submissions were deemed compliant. 2.2 After further review and analysis of the compliant bids by AECOM, the Engineering Department and Purchasing, it was mutually agreed that the low bidder, R &M Construction, Acton, Ontario, be recommended for the contract for the Erosion control project. A copy of the recommendation memo from the Department of Engineering and AECOM is appended as "Attachment 1 ". 2.3 The low bidder has provided similar services to the Municipality of Clarington in the past and the level of service has been satisfactory. 2.4 The references were contacted by AECOM and were found to be acceptable. 2.5 Queries with respect to the department needs, specifications, etc. should be referred to the Director of Engineering. 3. FINANCIAL 3.1 The total project cost of $419,000.00 represents the Region of Durham's portion with Clarington's portion amounting to $305,000.00 (net of H.S.T. Rebate). The total project cost includes $321,613.46 for tendering, design, contract administration, material testing, contingencies and net HST less Region of Durham costs. The funding and cost breakdown for this project is outlined in the memo from Engineering Services ( "Attachment 1 14 -19 • - - • 1 K 11. J 4 Funding for this project will be drawn from the following Engineering 2012 and 2009 Capital accounts and Soper Creek Erosion Works commitment in the Roads Contribution reserve fund: Erosion Protection Accounts: Soper Creek Erosion Control - 2012 Capital and funds committed in Roads Contribution Reserve Fund) 110 -32- 340 - 83284 -7401 ...................................... ............................... $221,000.00 Build Canada Fund (2009) 110 -32- 330 - 83347 -7401 ............................. ..................... ..................... $84,000.00 Total funds required: ........................................................................... $305,000.00 4. CONCURRENCE This report has been reviewed by Tony Cannella, Director of Engineering Services who concurs with the recommendations. 5. CONCLUSION 5.1 To award the contract to R &M Construction, Acton, Ontario for the Erosion Control. CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN - The recommendations contained in this report conform to the general intent of the following priorities of the Strategic Plan: Promoting economic development Maintaining financial stability Connecting Clarington Promoting green initiatives x Investing in infrastructure Showcasing our community Not in conformity with Strategic Plan Staff Contact: Marie Marano, Director of Corporate Services Attachments: Attachment 1 — Recommendation Memo from Engineering Services and letter from AECOM Canada Ltd. 14 -20 Attachment 1 Leading the Way LI'IJ �' 1ll�J TO: Jerry Barber, Purchasing Manager FROM: Ron Albright, Manager, Infrastructure and Capital Works DATE: June 1'9, 2012 RE: 2012 Erosion Control C1-2012=16 The Engineering Services Department has reviewed the recommendation provided by AECOM Canada Ltd. ( "AECOM ") and offers the following comments, We concur with AECOM's- recommendation to award the contract to 560789 Ontario Limited (operating as R &M Construction) in the amount of $357,137.57, inclusive of HST, or $321,613,46, net HST, for the construction of erosion control measures at two locations within the Municipality. The scope of work includes the following locations: Soper Creek at Mearns Park, between the Bowmanville Zoo and Barley Mill Crescent,. east of Mearns Avenue in Bowmanville and Concession Road 7 between Langmaid Road and Regional Road 34, north of Courtice. Funding for the Soper Creek at. Mearns Park portion of the project will be shared between the Municipality of Clarington (2/3) and the Region of Durham (1/3). The Municipality's share of the costs will come from the Soper Creek Erosion Control account included in the approved 2012 budget. There is a shortfall of $21,000.00 for. Clarington's share of the work, which will be funded by the Roads Contribution Reserve Fund (Soper Creek Erosion works commitment). Funding for the Concession Road 7 portion of the project will come from the unexpended funds in the Build Canada Fund (BCF) project from the 2009 budget. The proposed erosion control work is located within the limits of the original BCF project and is eligible for BCF funding. A detailed breakdown of the project cost is provided on the Cost Apportionment provided with AECOM's tender review letter. Due to past experiences on similar projects, a contingency amount of approximately 10 % is carried forward. Therefore, including design and tender fees, contract administration fees, and other project costs, the Engineering Department advises the following breakdown for the above referenced project: 14 -21 Attachment 1 2012 Erosion Control, CL2012 -16 2 June 19, 2012 Total Project Value $305,000.00 Budget Amount Soper Creek Erosion Control,110 -32- 340 - 83284 -7401 (2012) $200,000.00 Build Canada Fund, 110 -32- 330 - 83347 -7401 (2009) $84,000.00 Estimated Unexpended Budget $0.00 Additional Funding Required $0.00 Roads Contribution (Soper Creek Erosion Works) $21,000.00 We recommend the -report to Council move forward based on the above apportionments. Attached for your files is the recommendation provided by AECOM which includes a more detailed breakdown of estimated project costs. Should you have any further questions, please feel free to contact the undersigned. Regards, Ron Albright, P. Eng. Manager, Infrastructure and Capital Works RA/sb /dv Attachment Pc: Will McCrae, P. Eng., Manager, Cobourg Office, AECOM . Nancy Taylor,' Director of Finance A.S. Cannella, Director of Engineering Services ' � "[.•�.;:•:- :!'tl'! •'I�lt! -.� !:.!;it; ',tl•::;r.;:1.:�.; � _.t�.ai i i .;C•r >�.r 1:�.: , �t •;i��. !!:; . • . lt!_.�'�I!'._.,,:::r;; r'�C,��'.ir....-.• :�; r ., :.... r; - �.._;�;; 14 °22 CL2012-16, 2102 EROSION CONTROL PART A: SOPER CREEK AT MEARNS PARK PART B: CONCESSION ROAD 7 E W al; K I L e 4 rj le t Attachment I -p. n- zl'z- ol_j I :LI'ME A V � I' f- N Fli"W"c T L E • TF KEY MAP N,T-S, 14-23 14 -24 C—E 0 . S -r- C/- Attachm' t�iit 1— AECOM 513 Division Street 905 372 2121 tel Cobourg, ON, Canada K9A 5G6 905 372 3621 fax www..ae�com.com Yr !TI01V,t—t Note & File Discuss With • ..__._._. _.,.. ..._.._._ "',,, ;asp: Answer i:OP1ES TO J U 1 2 2012 ;r;.iurn� ine ~ r: Deport June 11, 2012 MEETING ENGINEE'. i'ts_ ;:..nViC;t_ z COMWNTS: Mr. A. S. Cannella, C.E.T. Director, Engineering Services The Municipality of Clarington 40 Temperance Street BOWMANVILLE, Ontario L1C 3A6 Dear Sir: Project No: 60224181 Regarding: 2012 Erosion Control Works Contract No. CL2012 -16 (the "Contract ") Municipality of Clarington Tenders for the above project were opened at the Municipal Offices on Friday, June 1, 2012 at 2:15p.m. A list of the bids received is provided in the table below. BIDDER TOTAL BID TOTAL BID TOTAL BID (Excl. H3T) (InCI. 13 % HST) (Incl. Net HST Rebate) 560789 Ontario Limited, $316,050.96 $357,137.57 $321,613.46 o/a R & M Construction ACTON, ON Hard -Co Construction Ltd. $331,349.77 $374,425.23 $337,181.53 WHITBY, ON Latitude 67 Ltd $347,130.10* $390,595.91- $353,239.59* KING CITY, ON TBG Landscape Inc. $356,014.17* $402,296.22* $362,280.02= BL�ynex , ON onstruction Ltd. $398,712.50 $450,545.13 $405,729.84 RD, ON `Calculation Error The Municipality of Clarington's Purchasing Department (the "Purchasing Department ") reviewed all bids to confirm compliance with the Clarington Purchasing By -Law. All bids were deemed compliant by the Purchasing Department. AECOM Canada Ltd. ( "AECOM ") has reviewed the two lowest bids and confirmed the bid values noted above. Calculation errors were noted in the bids submitted by Latitude 67 Ltd. and TBG Landscape Inc. These errors in no way affect the bid order. CUD12 -16 Tender Award Latler.Doc Attachment 1 Page 2 June 11, 2012 R &M Construction is the lowest bidder. Its submitted tender has been reviewed and is found to be arithmetically correct. As requested by the Purchasing Department, references were checked only for the lowest bidder. R &M Construction has completed projects of similar scope and value. References stated that R &M Construction has completed work to specification and to their satisfaction. Should funding be available, and based on the input provided by the references contacted regarding performance on previous projects, we are not aware of any reason why the Municipality would not be entitled, in its sole discretion, to award the Contract to R &M Construction in the amount of $316,050.96 (exclusive of HST) subject to all provisions of the Clarington Purchasing Bylaw being met. Bid Cheques or Bid Bonds shall be retained for R &M Construction and Hard -Co Construction Ltd., the second low bidder, until the Contract has been executed. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact the undersigned. Sincerely, AECOM Canada Ltd. 40111L Will McCrae, P.Eng. Associate Vice - President, East District, Water will. mccrae@aecom.com WM:cs encl. cc: Mr. Ron Albright, P.Eng., Manager of Infrastructure and Capital Works, Municipality of Claringtoh Mr. Sean Bagshaw, P.Eng., Capital Works Engineer, Municipality of Clarington 14 -25 CL2012 -16 Tender Award Letter.Doo I n ftm _ :­_ Cost Apportionment Based on Low Bid Contract CL2012-16 .. '...,,ru„1y 2012 — —1-1JIAyunurceyuUn Erosion Control Works or uurnam June 15,2012 AECOM Project#60224181 Description Total Soper Creek at Mearns Park Cone.7 Fishway Comments Municipality of Clarington 110-32-340-83284-7401 Region of Durham P.O. Municipality of Clarington 110-32-330-83347-7401 Project ID/Account Number Construction Costs Contract CL2012-16 Total Part'A'-Soper Creek Erosion Control $ 237,685.00 $ 158,456.67 $ 79,228.33 $ $ 59,365 96 Total Part'B'-Cone Rd 7 Culvert Extension and Fishway $ 59,365.96 $ - $ $ _ 79,228.33 Sub-Total Construction $ 297,050.96 $ 158,456.67 $ 59,365.96 $ 3,800.00 Total Part'C'-General Items $ 19,000.00 $ 10,133.33 $ 5,066.67 Total Construction $ 316,050.96 $ 168,590.00 $ 84,295.00 $ 63,165.96 AECOM Design Project Numbers 60239651-07160224181160117366 Design,Tendering and Approvals Preliminary Design(60239651-07)30-NOV-11 to 02-MAR-12 $3,23268 $ $ $ 3,232.66 5,171.14 $ - $9,698.03 Total Paid Previously by Clarington ($3,232.68 is Region's Share to be paid back to the project) Detailed Design(60224181)03-MAR-2012 to 01-JUN-2012 Conc.7&Fishway(60117366)03-MAR-2012 to 01-JUN-2012 Total Detail Design and Approvals $ 15,513.43 $ 3,258.25 $ 10,342.29 $ - $ _ $ 3,258.25 $ 22,004.36 $ 10,342.29 $ 8,403.82 $ 3,258.25 Construction Admin.and Materials Testing $ 9,000.00 Construction Admin.,Inspection and Materials Testing Total Construction Admin.and Materials Testing $ 35,000.00 $ 17,000.00 $ 9,000.00 Estimated $ 35,000.00 $ 17,000.00 $ 9,000.00 $ .9,000.00 Other Costs $250.00 MOE PPTW Fees $ 1,500.00 $500.00 $750.00 $ $ Golder Associates Invoice 457003 s Cl-OCA Permit Fees $ 1,500.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 500.00 i Geotechnicai Investigation $ 3,960.00 $ 2 640.00 $ 1,320,00 MTotal Other Costs } i $ 6,960.00 $ 4,140.00 $ 2,070.00 $ 750.00 Additional Project Costs $ 1,826.33 1.76%Unrecoverable HST $ 6,688.27 $ 3,521.27 $ 1,340.67 10%Contingencies(inclusive of Net HST) Total Estimated Project Costs Budget Amount Under/(Over)Budget Amount All Costs Exclude HST Unless Indicated Otherwise $ 32,296.41 $ 419,000.00 $ 17,406.44 $ 221,000.00 $200,000.00 -$21,000.00 $ $ 8,404.85 114,000.00 $ 6,485.12 $ 84,000.00 $125,000.00 $84,000.00 $11,000.00 $0.00 ev D w n AECOM = m Date: June 25, 2012 Resolution #: By -law #: Report#: COD - 017 -12 File #: Subiect: TENDER CL2012 -04, DUKE STREET RECONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: THAT Report COD - 017 -12 be received; 2. THAT Behan Construction Ltd., Cobourg, Ontario, with a total bid in the amount of $1,197,895.33 (net of H.S.T. Rebate), being the lowest responsible bidder meeting all terms, conditions and specifications of Tender CL2012 -04 be awarded the contract for Duke Street Reconstruction, as required by the Municipality of Clarington, Engineering Department; 3. THAT the funds required in the amount of $784,700.00 (which includes, $1,197,895.33 for tendering, design, contract administration, material testing, contingencies and net HST less Region of Durham costs) be drawn from the following Engineering Department Capital Accounts: Accounts: 110 -32- 330 - 83359 -7401 (2011) ............................. ............................... $75,000.00 110 -32- 330 - 83359 -7401 (2012) ........................... ............................... $709,700.00 Total funds required ............................................. ............................... $784,700.00 4. That the tender award be subject to the approval of the Regional Municipality of Durham; and 5. THAT the Ma�y -- r and Clerk be authorized to execute the necessa agreement. Submitted by: Reviewed by: �-�� arie Marano, H.B.Sc., Franklin Wu, Director of Corporate ervices Chief Administrative Officer Nancy Taylor, B.B.A., C.A., Director of Finance/Treasurer M M \J D B \km 14 -27 REPORT NO.: COD - 017 -12 PAGE 2 1. BACKGROUND 1.1 Tender specifications were provided by AECOM Canada Ltd. for the Duke Street Reconstruction. 1.2 Tender CL2012 -04, Duke Street Reconstruction was advertised in the Daily Commercial News as well as electronically on the Municipality's website and the Ontario Public Buyer's Association website. Subsequently, tenders were received and tabulated as per "Attachment V. 2. ANALYSIS 2.1 A total of five (5) submissions were received in response to the tender call. All submissions were deemed compliant. 2.2 After further review and analysis of the compliant bids by AECOM, the Engineering Department and Purchasing, it was mutually agreed that the low bidder, Behan Construction Ltd., Cobourg, Ontario be recommended for the contract for the Duke Street Reconstruction. A copy of the recommendation memo from the Department of Engineering and AECOM is appended as "Attachment 1". 2.3 Behan Construction has not provided similar services to the Municipality of Clarington in the past. However, a review of the references provided with the submission indicates that Behan Construction has completed similar work in to specifications and to their satisfaction. 2.4 Queries with respect to the department needs, specifications, etc. should be referred to the Director of Engineering. 3. FINANCIAL 3.1 The total project cost of $1,804.000:00 represents the Region of Durham's portion with Clarington's portion amounting to $784,700.00 (net of H.S.T. Rebate). The total project cost includes $1,197,895.33 for tendering, design, contract administration and contingencies. The funding and costs for this project are outlined in the memo from Engineering Services ( "Attachment 1"), 3.2 Funding for this project will be drawn from the following Engineering 2011 and 2012 Capital account: Roads and Structures Account: Accounts: 110 -32- 330 - 83359 -7401 (2011) ............................. ............................... $75,000.00 110 -32- 330 - 83359 -7401 (2012) ........................... ............................... $709,700.00 Totalfunds required ............................................. ............................... $784,700.00 14 -28 REPORT NO.: COD - 017 -12 4. CONCURRENCE 4.1 This report has been reviewed by Tony Cannella, Director of Engineering Services who concurs with the recommendations. 5. CONCLUSION PAGE 3 5.1 To award the contract to Behan Construction Ltd., Cobourg, Ontario for the Duke Street Reconstruction. CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN — The recommendations contained in this report conform to the general intent of the following priorities of the Strategic Plan: Promoting economic development Maintaining financial stability Connecting Clarington Promoting green initiatives x Investing in infrastructure Showcasing our community Not in conformity with Strategic Plan Staff Contact: Marie Marano, Director of Corporate Services Attachments: Attachment 1 — Recommendation Memo from Engineering Services and letter from AECOM Canada Ltd. List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: NONE 14 -29 Attachment 1 Leading the Way � TO: Jerry Barber, Purchasing Manager FROM: Ron Albright, Manager, Infrastructure and Capital Works DATE: June 19, 2012 RE: Duke Street Reconstruction, .Bowm.anville C.L2012 -04 The Engineering Services Department has reviewed the recommendation provided by AECOM Canada Ltd. ( "AECOM ") and offers the following comments. Prior to completing the design and tendering work for Duke Street, a Public Information Centre was held on December 14, 2011 to review the project with the public and to get their input regarding the proposed works. For more detailed information on the PIC, please refer to Report EGD- 006 -12. Duke Street is currently constructed to an urban cross section between Baseline Road and Park Drive. The scope of work for this section is rehabilitation and replacement of some of the existing storm sewer. New storm sewer will be constructed on Ann Street between Duke Street and Hunt Street. The section of Duke Street between Park Drive and Nelson Street is currently constructed to a rural . cross section. Upon completion of the works, the street will be reconstructed to an urban standard with concrete curb and gutter, new storm sewers and new road structure. The surface asphalt will be placed in 2015 under a separate contract. The _Municipality of Clarington is working in cooperation with the Region of Durham on this project and they will be replacing their watermain and sanitary servicing on Duke Street. We concur with. AECOM's recommendation to award the contract to Behan Construction Ltd. in the amount of $1,330,210.02, inclusive of HST, or $1.,197,895.33 net HST, for the reconstruction of Duke Street. A detailed breakdown of the Clarington's and the Region of Durham's funding is provided on the Cost Apportionment provided with AECOM's tender review letter. The design costs reflect design for the reconstruction of the entire length of Duke Street from .Baseline Road to.Argyle Street, as well as Nelson Street between Hunt Street and Ontario Street. The reconstruction of Duke Street from Nelson Street to Argyle Street and Nelson Street is tentatively. scheduled for 2013, pending Council approval. The design costs also reflect a considerable amount of effort coordinating utility relocations and. dealing with MTO for the work at the intersection of Duke Street and Baseline Road, due to the close proximity to the Highway 401 westbound ramps. 14 -30 Oukc� `street i-�econ truction. CL20-12-04 2 June 19, 012 Due to past experiences on similar projects, and the preliminary nature of the utility relocation estimates, a contingency amount of approximately 12% is carried forward. Therefore, including design and tender fees, contract administration fees, and other project costs such as the Municipality's share of utility relocation costs, the Engineering Department advises the following breakdown for the above referenced project: Total Project Value $784,700.00 Budget Amount 110-32-330-83359-7401 (2011) $75,000.00 110-32-330-83359-7401 (2012) $750,000.00 Estimated Unexpended Budget $40,300.00 Additional Funding Required $0 We recommend the report to Council move forward based on the above apportionments. Attached for your files is the recommendation provided by AECOM which includes a more detailed breakdown of estimated project costs. Should you have any further questions, please feel free to contact the undersigned. Regards, f Ron Albright, P. Eng. Manager, Infrastructure and Capital Works RA/sb/dv Attachment Pc: Will McCrae, P. Eng., Manager, Cobourg Office, AECOM Nancy Taylor, Director of Finance A.S. Cannella, Director of Engineering Services I - m Fla - m m �N �3�9a Creel` cQ i Z. L 0- m7m 7 LU & -T un w ui uj!� Ile i Attachment 11 June 14, 2.012 Mr. A, S. Cannella, C.E.T. Director, Engineering Services The Municipality of Clarington 40 Temperance Street BOWMANVILLE, Ontario L1C 3A6 Dear Sir. Project No: 60215500 Regarding: Duke Street Reconstruction, Bowmanville Contract No. CL2012 -04 (the "Contract ") Municipality of Clarington AECON( 905 372 2121 tel 513 Division Street 906 372 3621 fax COBOURG, Ontario K9A 5G6 stkw aecom.vane Tenders for the above project were opened at the Municipal Offices on Thursday, June 7, 2012 at 2;15p.m. A list of the bids received is provided in the table below, BIDDER TOTAL BID. TOTAL BID TOTAL BID HST) (Incl.13 % HST) (Inca. Net HST Rebate) Behan Construction Ltd. $1,177,177.01 $1,330,210.02 $1,197,895.33 Cobourg, ON Hard Cc Construction Ltd. $1,187,789.00 $1,342,201.57 $1,208,694.09 Whitby, ON Coco Paving Inc, $1,240,166.40 $1,401,388.03 $1,261,993.33 Bowmanville, ON Eagleson Construction $1,271,003.37 $1,436,233,81 $1,293,373.03 Milibrook, ON Macklin Bros, Construction $1,294,895.37* $1,463,231.77* $1,317,685.53'` Grafton, ON 'Calculation Error The Municipality ofCiarington's Purchasing Department (the "Purchasing Department ") reviewed all bids to confirm compliance with the Clarington Purchasing By -Law. All bids were deemed compliant by the Purchasing Department. AECOM Canada Ltd. ( "AECOM ") has reviewed the two lowest bids and confirmed the bid values noted above; A calculation error was noted on Macklin Bros. Construction's bid. This error in no way affects the bid order. Behan Construction Ltd, is the lowest bidder. Its submitted tender has been reviewed and is found to be arithmetically correct. i''N,,•04 t,mJ- ,!,*,alts -if 1; 14 -32 Attachment 1 • Page 2 June 14, 2012 As requested by the Purchasing Department, references were checked only for the lowest bidder, Behan Construction Ltd. has completed projects of similar scope and value. References stated that Behan Construction Ltd. has completed work to specification and to their satisfaction. With the low bid from Behan Construction Ltd., and other associated project costs noted on the attached cost apportionment, the project is within budget. Should funding be available and based on the input provided by the references contacted regarding performance on previous projects, we are not aware of any reason why the Municipality would not be entitled, in its sole discretion, to award the Contract to Behan Construction Ltd, in the amount of $1,177,177.01 (exclusive of HST) subject to all provisions of the Clarington Purchasing Bylaw being met. . Bid Cheques or Bid Bonds shall be retained for Behan Construction Ltd. and Hard -Co Construction Ltd., the second low bidder, until the Contract has been executed. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact the undersigned. Sincerely, AECOM Canada Ltd. Will McCrae, P.Eng. Associate Vice - President, East District, Water will. mccrae@aecom.com WM:cs encl. cc: Mr. Ron Albright, P.Eng., Manager of Infrastructure and Capital Works, Municipality of Clarington Mr. Sean Bagshaw, Pang., Capital Works Engineer, Municipality of Clarington Mr. Paul Storms, C.E.T., Environmental Services — Design Division, Regional Municipality of Durham �= i.,�llli -:N Frinlrf ��7mil l.+�1a��Tt:,; 14 -33 .p I W .p rvtuurcipanty or ciarmgton/Kegion of Durham Cost Apportionment Based on Low Bid 2012 Duke Street Reconstruction Contract CL2012-04 June 15,2012 ' AECOM Project#60215500/60117330 Municipality of Clarington Region of Durham Description Total Roadworks and Storm Sanitary Sewer& Walermain& Comments Sewer Appurtenances Appurtenances Project lDfAccount Number 110-32-330-83359-7401 XX)OOOOOOO= Construcdon Costs contract CL2012-04 Total Part'A'-Roadworks and Storm Sewers Total Part'B'-Sanitary Sewer and Appurtenances $ 593,546.56 $. 256,626.82 $ 396,481.86 $ - - $ 131,376.47 $ 256,626.82 $ 65,688.23 $ _ items A000rtioned at Varvind Percent It Earth Ex,Curb Removal,S/W Removal,Subdrain,Granule,'B'and'A',Extra Depth Gmnular'B',Calcium,Water,Geogdd,Geotextile,Curb,SNd,Relay Beck Pavers,Sawcutting,HL8,HI-3 in Driveways,AC Adjust,Topsoil,Sod " Total Part'C'-Walermain and Appurtenances Sub Total Construction $ 278,746,44 $1,128,919.82 $ _ $ 396,481.86 $ - $ 388,003.29 $ 27874644 $ 344,434.67 Total Part'D'-General Items $ 48.257.19 S 8977.78 $ 23.915.38 $ 15"364.03 Prorated Total Construction $1,177,177-01 $ 405,459.64 $ 411,918.67 $ 359,798.71 AECOM Design Project Number 60215500 - 60117330 60117330 - Detail Design,Tendering and Approvals Claengton-Commencementto Tender $ 101,476.09 101,476.09 $ - g - I cud Duke Street-Baseline Road to Argyle Street(inct.side-streets) Nelson Street-Hunt Street to Ontario Street Region of Durham-Commencement to Tender Total Detail Design,Tendering and Approvals Construction Administration and Materials Testing $ 57.432.76 $ - $ 27.63327 $ 29,799.49 Includine. ' Duke Street-Baseline Road to Argyle Street(incl.side-streets) Nelson Street-Hunt Streetto Ontaeo Street(W/M Only)($6,900.00 Pending) $ 155,908.85 $ 101,476.09 $ 27,633.27 $ 29,799.49 Construction Admin.and Materials Testing $ 117.717.70 $ 40 545.96 $ 41.191.87 S 35.979.87 I-!> d1D9� Total Tendering,Construction Admin.and Materials Testing $ 117,717.70 $ 40,545.96 $ 41,191.87 $ 35,979.87 Other Costs Storm Sewer Investigations $ 2,965.00 $ 2,955.00 $ - $ - Sewer Tech Invoice Springrove Invoice Gas Main Exposures $ 6,500.00 $ 6,500.00 $ - $ - Bell Relocations at Park Drive Enbedge Relocations $ 10,784.51 $ 10,784.51 $ - $ - EsBmale provided by Bell ` (Nelson to N.of Albert) $ 38,674.00 $ 38,674.00 $ - $ - Enbedge PO Value Ivan B.Wallace Invoice D8A Invoice Legal $ 3,650.00 $ 1,825.00 $ 1,216.67 $ 608.33 Geolechnical Investigations $ 3,950.00 $ 1,975.00 $ 1,316.67 $ 658.33 MTO Encroachment Permit $ 450.00 $ - $ 300.00 $ 150.00 Utility Relocations(Estimated) Bell at Nelson Street Bell at Victoria Street Bell at Albert Street Bell $ 11,000.00 $ 5,000,00 $ 11,000.00 $ 11,000.00 $ 5,000,00 $ 11,000.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Lump Sum Estimate(Unknown Scope) Lump Sum Estimate(Unknown Scope) Lump Sum Estimate(Unknown Scope) at Bell at Durham Street Veedian Total Other Costs $ 11,000.00 $ 75,000.00 $ 11,000.00 $ 75,000.00 $ - $ $ - $ - Lump Sum Estimate(Unknown Scope) Lump Sum Estimate(Unknown Scope) $ 179,973.51 $ 175,72351 $ 2,833.33 $ 1,416.67 Additional Project Costs 1.76%Unrecoverable HST $ 28,754.48 $ 12,728.41 $ 8,510.96 $ 7,515.11 12%Contingencies(inclusive of Net HST Total Estimated Project Costs $ 141,468.45 $1,804,000.00 $ 48,766.40 $ 784,700,00 $ 49,511.90 $ 541,600.00 $ $ 43,190.15 477,700.00 Budget Amount Underl(Over)SudgetAmount 'All Costs Exclude HST Unless Otherwise Noted $ 825,000.00 1 $ 40,300.00 $ - $ 541,600.00 ( ) $ - $ (477,700.00) REQUIRE R.O.02012 BUDGETVALUES Qnel.2011 fordesign) ' AECOM Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: June 25, 2012 Resolution #: By -law #: Report#: FND- 016 -12 File #: Subject: 2011 AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report FND- 016 -12 be received; and 2. THAT the 2011 Draft Audited Financial Statements for the Municipality, its Trust Funds, the Clarington Public Library and the Business Improvement Areas be approved. Submitted by: Z4 �J Reviewed by: Nancy Taylor, �'11A, CA, Franklin Wu, Director of Chief Administrative Officer Finance/Treasurer NT /blm CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905 - 623 -3379 15 -1 REPORT NO.: FND- 016 -12 1. BACKGROUND 1.0 Section 296(1) of the Municipal Act, S.O. 2001, c.25 provides that PAGE 2 "A municipality shall appoint an auditor licensed under the Public Accounting Act who is responsible for, (a) annually auditing the accounts and transactions of the municipality and its local boards and expressing an opinion on the financial statements of these bodies based on the audit;" 1.1 Grant Thornton, Markham, Ontario, were appointed as the Municipality of Clarington's auditors through RFP2010 -6 for a five (5) year term to expire January 31, 2015. 1.2 Section 5751 of the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountant's (CICA) Handbook deals with "Communications with those having oversight responsibility for the financial reporting process ". At the General Purpose and Administration Committee meeting of December 5, 2005, Council approved report FND- 019 -05 formally appointing the Audit Review Group to include the Mayor, as Chair of Finance, the Chief Administrative Officer and the Director of Finance/Treasurer. This group has the oversight responsibility for the financial reporting process. 1.3 The Municipality of Clarington's 2011 audited financial statements were resented to the Audit Review Group on June 18, 2012. A complete copy will be circulated to Members of Council, made available for public viewing, and posted on the Municipality's website. The Clarington Public Library statements will be submitted for ratification by the Clarington Library Board at their next applicable meeting. 1.4 A copy of the excerpts from the financial statements for 2011 are included as Attachment "A" to this report. 1.5 The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing also requires an audit letter as well as specialized financial reports entitled Financial Information Returns. The ministry reviews these and provides Financial Indicator Reviews based on the information submitted and comparable municipalities. 1.6 It is important to note that the financial statements are the responsibility of the Municipality's management. The financial statements have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles applicable to local governments, and conform with accounting standards established by the Public 15 -2 REPORT NO.: FND- 016 -12 PAGE 3 Sector Accounting Board (PSAB) of the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants. Where the determination of assets and liabilities is dependent upon future events, amounts are based upon reasonably determined estimates and judgments (i.e. Post employment benefit liability). 1.7 The responsibility of the auditor's is to express an opinion on these statements based on their audit. A draft copy of the Auditor's Report for 2011 is included as Attachment "B" and reflects what is generally referred to as a clean audit opinion. A final report will be issued once Council approves the financial statements. CHANGES TO FINANCIAL REPORTING: 2.0 Section 294.1 of the Municipal Act, S.O. 2001, c.25 provides that "A municipality shall, for each fiscal year, prepare annual financial statements for the municipality in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles for local governments as recommended, from time to time, by the Public Sector Accounting Board of the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants." 2.1 Effective January 1, 2009, the Municipality was required to change its accounting and financial reporting to conform to the new revised guidelines in the Public Sector Accounting Handbook on financial reporting presentation (Section PS 1200) and tangible capital accounting (Section PS 3150). These were two of the most significant changes to municipal financial reporting ever introduced and required an intense and lengthy effort by municipal staff and auditors to implement. Details of the significant policies are included in the notes to the consolidated financial statements. Further enhancements to our internal accounting procedures continued in 2011 to assist in streamlining this process. 2.2 The sheer magnitude of the changes and work required cannot be emphasized enough. It is critical to note that the financial statements are dramatically different than what was required prior to the changes and may take some time for all parties to become familiar with both the pros and cons of the new reporting requirements and the impact of the tangible capital assets on the financial statements. 15 -3 REPORT NO.: FND- 016 -12 PAGE 4 HIGHLIGHTS OF 2011 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS: 3.0 The first statement included in Attachment "A" is the Consolidated Statement of Financial Position. There are several items of note. This statement includes tangible capital assets with a net book value of approximately $391 million at December 31, 2011. Schedule 1 of the complete financial statements distributed under separate cover provides the breakdown of tangible capital assets by infrastructure category and between cost (approximately $596 million) and accumulated depreciation (approximately $205 million). 3.1 The second item of note on the Consolidated Statement of Financial Position is the accumulated surplus of $433 million at December 31, 2011. It is critical to note that this is not the "traditional" surplus in former financial reporting formats where the objective was to determine any surplus or deficit pertaining to operations that needed to be recovered in the subsequent budget year. The surplus now incorporates tangible capital asset implications and reserves and reserve funds and capital fund together as an overall number. Details on the surplus can be found in the complete financial statements under Note 18. 3.2 For clarity for Council it is worthwhile to expand on the surplus /deficit issue. The actual year end accumulated surplus at December 31, 2011 based on the former financial reporting methodology was approximately $2.0 million. As per approved Council policy, this will be transferred into the Rate Stabilization Reserve Fund in 2012. The 2011 surplus relates primarily to penalty and interest on taxes, supplementary taxation revenue and building permit revenue, which were very unpredictable in 2011 due to the prevailing economic climate. The penalty and interest on taxes should reduce in the coming years as we have seen positive activity in the reduction of tax arrears. There was also unanticipated additional Provincial Offences Act revenue in 2011. 3.3 Also worthy of note, the municipality's debt has reduced to $24.2 million at December 31, 2011. Our long -term debt is at a very reasonable level and is significantly lower than Ministry guidelines for debt capacity. Cash flow issues around development charges were in place for 2011 but are likely to lessen in the future. 15 -4 REPORT NO.: FND- 016 -12 PAGE 5 3.4 The Consolidated Statement of Operations is the second item included in Attachment "A ". Again, it is critical to be aware that the annual surplus noted of approximately $11.7 million is not the same as determined under previous financial reporting methodology. The $11.7 million annual surplus reflected on this statement is inclusive of contributed assets (i.e. assumed roads /subdivision works), amortization of tangible capital assets, changes to reserve and reserve fund balances, as well as typical operating impacts and capital activities. 3.5 Ultimately, the financial statements reflect a strong financial position for December 31, 2011. 4.0 CONCURRENCE: Not Applicable 5.0 CONCLUSION 5.1 It is recommended that the 2011 audited financial statements (complete set distributed under separate cover) be approved including those of the Trust Funds, Clarington Public Library (subject to Library Board approval) and Business Improvement Areas and the auditor's be thanked for their assistance and support provided throughout the year as various issues arose. CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN The recommendations contained in this report conform to the following priorities of the Strategic Plan: Promoting economic development X Maintaining financial stability Connecting Clarington Promoting green initiatives Investing in infrastructure Showcasing our community Not in conformity with Strategic Plan Staff Contact: Nancy Taylor, B.B.A., C.A., Director of Finance/Treasurer Attachments: Attachment "A" - Consolidated Statement of Financial Position — 2010/2011 Attachment "B" - Independent Auditor's Report - 2011 List of Interested Parties to be advised of Council's decision: None 15 -5 U• The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington Consolidated statement of financial position as at December 31, 2011 _ 1 2010 Financial assets Cash and cash equivalents 42,483,052 30,488,537 Investments (Note 5) 22,480,347 24,640,255 Accounts receivable 7,220,249 9,035,957 Taxes receivable (Note 4) 10,918,627 12,255,738 Inventories for resale 47,883 39,326 Land for resale 146,409 146,409 Promissory notes receivable (Note 6) 8,321,000 8,321,000 Investment in Veridian Corporation (Note 7) 14,088,566 13,639,630 Total financial assets 105,706,133 98 566,852 Liabilities Accounts payable and accrued liabilities 9,404,572 11,034,278 Employee future benefits liabilities (Note 11) 5,441,135 4,721,719 Net long -term liabilities (Note 12) 24,205,167 29,539,932 Deferred revenue - general 7,463,930 5,461,019 Deferred revenue - obligatory reserve funds (Note 8) 18,612,066 13,815,939 Total liabilities 65,126,870 64,572,887 Net financial assets 40,579,263 33,993,965 Non - financial assets Tangible capital assets (Note 17) (Schedule 1) 391,413,291 .386,323,159 Prepaid expenses 624,846 590,813 Inventory supplies 327,147 337,509 Total non - financial assets 392,365,284 387,251,482 Accumulated surplus (Note 18) 432,944,547 421,245,447 15 — ,,nvton FS - schedules,' 61712012; 12:34 PM The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington Consolidated statement of operations year ended December 31, 2011 2010 Expenses General government Budget (unaudited) Actual Actual Protection to persons and property 11,991,408 12,507,343 11,773,255 Revenues 20,613,509 21,228,920 19,649,216 Taxation and user charges 1,161,694 1,373,682 1,163,370 Property taxation 39,771,565 40,137,797 38,082,181 Taxation from other governments 3,069,556 3,221,290 3,266,401 User charges 8,011,499 12,058,349 9,805,861 Grants 66,925,410 70,687,073 65,811 092 Government of Canada - 416,648 2,735,275 Province of Ontario 75,000 719,315 3,003,323 Other Deferred revenue earned 8,637,260 11,335,731 9,572,950 Investment income 216,893 2,198,269 2,167,020 Penalty and interest on taxes 1,200,000 1,782,915 1,833,647 Fines 132,500 413,135 219,987 Donations and contribution from others 607,300 2,561,021 J82,629 Veridian Corporation Equity share of net income - 1,273,096 1,153,416 Contributed tangible capital assets 6,577,189 6,577,189 4,163,541 Other income - - 460,645 (Loss) on disposal of tangible capital assets - (308,582) (878,739) Total revenues 68,298,762 82,386,173 75,768,137 Expenses General government 10,309,196 10,520,631 10,110,357 Protection to persons and property 11,991,408 12,507,343 11,773,255 Transportation services 20,613,509 21,228,920 19,649,216 Environmental services 1,161,694 1,373,682 1,163,370 Health services 223,654 255,423 222,893 Recreational and cultural services 18,656,184 20,951,238 19,029,450 Planning and development 3,969,765 3,849,836 3,862,551 Total expenses 66,925,410 70,687,073 65,811 092 Annual surplus 1,373,352 11,699,100 9,957,045 Accumulated surplus, beginning of year 420,044,021 421,245,447 411,288,402 Accumulated surplus, end of year 421,417,373 432,944,547 421,245,447 CloriVfon FS - schedules,- 61712012,• 12 :34 PM 15 -7 Report to the Audit Committee -- Coninninication of audit results the Municipality For the year ended December 31, 2011 Independent auditor's report r � 1• 1 Oft To the Members of Council, Inhabitants and Ratepayers of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington We have audited the accompanying financial statements of The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington ( "the Municipality "), which comprise the consolidated statement of financial position as at December 31, 2011, and the consolidated statements of operations and accumulated surplus, change in net financial assets and cash flows for the year then ended, and a summary of significant accounting policies and other explanatory information Management's responsibility for the financial statements Management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of these financial statements in accordance with Canadian public sector accounting standards, and for such internal control as management determines is necessary to enable the preparation of financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error. Auditor's responsibility Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit. We conducted our audit in accordance with Canadian generally accepted auditing standards. Those standards require that we comply with ethical requirements and plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free from material misstatement. An audit involves performing procedures to obtain audit evidence about the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. The procedures selected depend on the auditor's judgment, including the assessment of the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to fraud or error. In making those risk assessments, the auditor considers internal control relevant to the entity's preparation and fair presentation of the financial statements in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the entity's internal control. An audit also includes evaluating the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of accounting estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our audit opinion. AWN • Tax • Advisory 15 -8 Giant Tnomtrn 1A.P. A Canaftn F.+Br,-,o, of Grant Intematic-Ml Ltd Report to the Audit Committee — Communication of audit results 10 the Municipality For the year ender! December 31, 2011 D Q Opinion In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Municipality as at December 31, 2011, and its financial performance and its cash flows for the year then ended in accordance with Canadian public sector accounting standards. Other matters Without modifying our report we draw attention to the budgeted figures which are provided for comparative purposes only. They have not been subject to audit procedures. Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the budget figures. Markham, Canada , 2012 AudB -Tax - Advisory Grant'PnornWr, LIP. P. Canau un P.'awho, of Grant Tnrilon lr,!Onakul Ud Chartered Accountants Licensed Public Accountants 15 -9 Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: June 25, 2012 Resolution #: By -law #: Report#: FND- 017 -12 File #: Subiect: MUNICIPAL PERFORMANCE MEASURES PROGRAM — 2011 RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report FND- 017 -12 be received for information. Submitted by: NT /blm Nancy �ylor,ABP Director of Finance/Treasurer Reviewed by: �___ S Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905 - 623 -3379 15 -10 REPORT NO.: FND- 017 -12 1. BACKGROUND 1.1 The Province dictates the formal requirements for Year 12 (2011) of the Municipal Performance Measures Program (MPMP). 1.2 The required measures will be filed with the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing and are included in Schedule "A ". 1.3 The Province has mandated that these measures be published to taxpayers by September 30, 2012. The information will be posted on the Municipality's website and will be presented at the Clarington Board of Trade Annual Mayor's event in September. 1.4 The provincial objectives of the MPMP are to promote local government transparency and accountability. The information is intended to provide municipalities with useful data to make informed municipal service level decisions while optimizing available resources. 1.5 The format of the attached report is a provincial form. For years where no historical data is provided, that is as a result of changes to the formulas or calculations determined by the Province which causes the new measures not to be comparable to those prior to the calculation or methodology change. 2. CONCLUSION It is recommended that the Municipal Performance Measures Program results for 2011 be received for information. 3. CONCURRENCE — not applicable CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN — The recommendations contained in this report conform to the general intent of the following priorities of the Strategic Plan: Promoting economic development X Maintaining financial stability Connecting Clarington Promoting green initiatives Investing in infrastructure Showcasing our community Not in conformity with Strategic Plan Staff Contact: Nancy Taylor, B.B.A., C.A., Director of Finance/Treasurer 15 -11 REPORT NO.: FND- 017 -12 Attachment "A" — Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP) - 2011 Results . List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing PAGE 3 15 -12 MUNICIPALITY Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP) + 2011 RESULTS Questions about MPMP results should be addressed to: Name: NANCY TAYLOR Phone: 905 - 623 -3379 ext 2602 Title: TREASURER /DIRECTOR OF FINANCE Municipality: MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON Email: ntaylor @clarington.net Related documents and links: Local Government CONTACT PERSON FOR LOCAL G;OVERNIWENT: Nancy Taylor, Director of Finance • J 2011 2010 2009 1.1 a) Operating costs for governance and corporate management as a percentage of total municipal 7.2% 8.9% 8.9% operating costs. 1.1 b) Total costs for governance and corporate management as a 5.5% 6.7% percentage of total municipal costs. OBJECTIVE: Efficient local government. NOTES & KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS: 2010 - Included Municipal Election expenditures REFERENCE: • The formulas for efficiency measures were revised in 2009 to reflect changes in the reporting of expenses consistent with accrual accounting concepts. New total cost measures were introduced and revised in 2010. Total costs mean operating costs as defined in MPMP, plus amortization and interest on long -term debt, less revenue received from other municipalities for tangible capital assets. ® Financial Information Return: 91 0206 35 (Operating costs measure) and 91 0206 45 (Total costs measure). 15 -13 MUNICIPALITY Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP) • 2011 RESULTS Fire Services CONTACT PERSON FOR FIRE SERVICES: Gord Weir, Director of Emergency Services 2011 2010 2009 2.1 a) Operating costs for fire services per $1,000 of assessment. $ 1.17 $ 1.15 $ 1.16 2.1 b) Total costs for fire services per $1,000 of assessment. $ 1.26 $ 1.25 OBJECTIVE: Efficient fire services. NOTES & KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS: Finalization of fire arbitration award. REFERENCE: . The formulas for efficiency measures were revised in 2009 to reflect changes in the reporting of expenses consistent with accrual accounting concepts. New total cost measures were introduced and revised in 2010. Total costs mean operating costs as defined in MPMP, plus amortization and interest on long -term debt, less revenue received from other municipalities for tangible capital assets. • Financial Information Return: 91 1103 35 (Operating costs measure) and 91 1103 45 (Total costs measure). 15 -14 MUNICIPALITY 15-15 MUNICIPALITY Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP) ® 2011 RESULTS a ,a ` Is CONTACT PERSON FOR BUILDING PERMITS & INSPECTION SERVICES: Tony Cannella, Director of Engineering 15 -16 MUNICIPALITY Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP) • 2011 RESULTS 2011 4.2 Median number of days to review a complete building permit application and issue a permit or not issue a permit, and provide all reasons for refusal: a) Category 1: Houses (houses not exceeding 3 storeys /600 square metres) 7 Reference: provincial standard is 10 working days. NOTES & KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS: REFERENCE: • MPMP measures for building permits and inspection services were introduced in 2011. • Financial Information Return: (a) 91 1351 07, (b) 91 1352 07, (c) 91 1353 07, (d) 91 1354 07, 5 15--17 MUNICIPALITY Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP) 0 2011 RESULTS CONTACT PERSON FOR ROADS: Fred Horvath, Director of Operations and Tons Cannella, Director of Engineering ], OOAr 15 -18 i • • t i 2011 2010 2009 5.4 a) Operating costs for winter maintenance of roadways per lane $ 1,423.78 $ 845.99 $ 1,110.41 kilometre maintained in winter. 5.4 b) Total costs for winter maintenance of roadways per lane kilometre $ 1,652.93 $ 1,096.96 maintained in winter. OBJECTIVE: Efficient winter maintenance of roads. NOTES & KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS: 2010 had moderate winter conditions with less snowfall and freeze thaw conditions. See Operations department winter budget reports for further details. REFERENCE: ® The formulas for efficiency measures were revised in 2009 to reflect changes in the reporting of expenses consistent with accrual accounting concepts. New total cost measures were introduced and revised in 2010. Total costs mean operating costs as defined in MPMP, plus amortization and interest on long -term debt, less revenue received from other municipalities for tangible capital assets. • Financial Information Return: 91 2205 35 (Operating costs measure) and 91 2205 45 (Total costs measure). '15 --19 MUNICIPALITY 15 -20 15 -21 MUNICIPALITY Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP) • 2011 RESULTS Storms Water CONTACT PERSON FOR STORM WATER: Fred Horvath, Director of Operations 2011 2010 2009 8.1 a) Operating costs for urban storm water management (collection, treatment, disposal) per kilometre of drainage $ 1,774.18 $ 1,948.31 $ 1,405.76 system. 8.1 b) Total costs for urban storm water management (collection, treatment, disposal) per kilometre of drainage $ 5,873.43 $ 5,882.15 system. OBJECTIVE: Efficient urban storm water management. NOTES & KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS: See 5.1 above - More storm water facilities have been assumed since 2009 pursuant to subdivision agreements. REFERENCE: • The formulas for efficiency measures were revised in 2009 to reflect changes in the reporting of expenses consistent with accrual accounting concepts. New total cost measures were introduced and revised in 2010. Total costs mean operating costs as defined in MPMP, plus amortization and interest on long -term debt, less revenue received from other municipalities for tangible capital assets. • Financial Information Return: 91 3209 35 (Operating costs measure) and 91 3209 45 (Total costs measure). 10 15 -22 MUNICIPALITY 11 15 -23 MUNICIPALITY Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP) • 2011 RESULTS CONTACT PERSON FOR PARKS AND RECREATION: Joseph Caruana, Director of Community Services and Fred Horvath, Director of Operations 2011 2010 2009 11.1 a) Operating costs for parks per person. $ 23.79 $ 21.46 $ 23.34 11.1 b) Total costs for parks per person. $ 31.40 $ 27.37 OBJECTIVE: Efficient operation of parks. NOTES & KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS: Costs have been fairly consistent in this area. REFERENCE: . The formulas for efficiency measures were revised in 2009 to reflect changes in the reporting of expenses consistent with accrual accounting concepts. New total cost measures were introduced and revised in 2010. Total costs mean operating costs as defined in MPMP, plus amortization and interest on long -term debt, less revenue received from other municipalities for tangible capital assets. . Financial Information Return: 91 7103 35 (Operating costs measure) and 91 7103 45 (Total costs measure). ITInN PRnGRA _ - -.- 2011 2010 2009" 11.2 a) Operating costs for recreation programs per person. $ 23.17 $ 26.72 $ 26.52 11.2 b) Total costs for recreation programs per person. $ 23.17 $ 26.72 OBJECTIVE: Efficient operation of recreation programs. NOTES & KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS: The Community Services department reviews and assesses each program offered to maximize class sizes based on popularity and trends. See Community Services department annual report for additional information. REFERENCE: + The formulas for efficiency measures were revised in 2009 to reflect changes in the reporting of expenses consistent with accrual accounting concepts. New total cost measures were introduced and revised in 2010. Total costs mean operating costs as defined in MPMP, plus amortization and interest on long -term debt, less revenue received from other municipalities for tangible capital assets. ® Financial Information Return: 91 7203 35 (Operating costs measure) and 91 7203 45 (Total costs measure). 12 15 -24 MUNICIPALITY 13 15--25 MUNICIPALITY Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP) 0 2011 RESULTS 14 15 -26 MUNICIPALITY 15 15 -27 MUNICIPALITY 15 -28 MUNICIPALITY Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP) . 2011 RESULTS CONTACT PERSON FOR LIBRARIES: Edith Hopkins, Chief Executive Officer I 2011 2010 2009 12.1 a) Operating costs for library services per person. $ 32.85 $ 28.14 $ 29.08 12.1 b) Total costs for library services per person. $ 41.73 $ 38 :36 OBJECTIVE: Efficient library services. NOTES & KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS: The impact of an allowance for the outstanding development charges appeal is reflected here. REFERENCE: • The formulas for efficiency measures were revised in 2009 to reflect changes in the reporting of expenses consistent with accrual accounting concepts. New total cost measures were introduced and revised in. 2010. Total costs mean operating costs as defined in MPMP, plus amortization and interest on long -term debt, less revenue received from other municipalities for tangible capital assets. • Financial Information Return: 91 7405 35 (Operating costs measure) and 917405 45 (Total costs measure). 17 15 -29 2011 2010 2009 , 12.2 a) Operating costs for library services peruse. $ 1.41 $ 1.63 $ 1.67 12.2 b) Total costs for library services per use. $ 2.12 $ 1.93 OBJECTIVE: Efficient library services. NOTES & KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS: REFERENCE: • The formulas for efficiency measures were revised in 2009 to reflect changes in the reporting of expenses consistent with accrual accounting concepts. New total cost measures were introduced and revised in 2010. Total costs mean operating costs as defined in MPMP, plus amortization and interest on long -term debt, less revenue received from other municipalities for tangible capital assets. • 1 The calculation of electronic library, uses was updated in 2009 to include the number of people using the public library wireless connection. In 2011 three additional categories of reference transactions were added to the definition of library uses. This may affect the comparability of 2011 results with earlier years. ® Financial Information Return: 91 7406 35 (Operating costs measure) and 91 7406 45 (Total costs measure). 17 15 -29 MUNICIPALITY Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP) • 2011 RESULTS 2011 2010 2009 12.3 Library uses per person. 19.64 19.92 17.82 " OBJECTIVE: Increased use of library services. NOTES & KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS: REFERENCE: • 1 The calculation of electronic library uses was updated in 2009 to include the number of people using the public library wireless connection. In 2011 three additional categories of reference transactions were added to the definition of library uses. This may affect the comparability of 2011 results with earlier years. • Financial Information Return: 92 7460 07. Line numbers for prior years: • The FIR reference for the measure, library uses per person, did not change in 2009. 18 15 -30 MUNICIPALITY Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP) . 2011 RESULTS o • 2011 2010 2009 12.5 Non- electronic library uses as a percentage of total library uses. 66% 70% 75% OBJECTIVE: Better information on library usage. NOTES & KEY FACTORS FOR UNDERSTANDING RESULTS: REFERENCE: . 1 The calculation of electronic library uses was updated in 2009 to include the number of people using the public library wireless connection. In 2011 three additional categories of reference transactions were added to the definition of library uses. This may affect the comparability of 2011 results with earlier years. o Financial Information Return: 92 7462 07. 19 MUNICIPALITY Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP) • 2011 RESULTS Land f g CONTACT PERSON FOR LAND USE PLANNING: David Crome, Director of Planning 20 15 -32 21 15 -33 MUNICIPALITY 22 15 -34 Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: June 25, 2012 Resolution #: By -law #: Report#: FND- 018 -12 File #: Subiect: HOST COMMUNITY STRATEGIC FUNDING POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: THAT Report FND- 018 -12 be received; 2. THAT Council approve the funding policy as summarized on Attachment "A" for the future use of the Host Community Funds received through the Agreement for the Cleanup and Long -Term Safe Management of the Port Granby Low Level Radioactive Waste Project; 3. THAT Council authorize the establishment of a new Strategic Capital Reserve Fund; 4. THAT the $10 million currently held in-Trust be transferred to the Strategic Capital Reserve Fund for future use as approved through the funding policy summarized on Attachment "A "; and 5. THAT the existing Port Granby Reserve Fund be maintained and directed in future to achieve Council objectives pertaining to the End Use Plan and other mitigation measures as deemed necessary. Submitted by: �' "'� �Y �; Reviewed by: Nancy Taylor, 1313A, CA, Director of Finance/Treasurer NT /hjl h. 1 Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905 - 623 -3379 15 -35 REPORT NO.: FND- 018 -12 PAGE 2 1.0 BACKGROUND 1.1 As Council is aware, Clarington entered into an agreement with the Federal Government entitled "An Agreement for the Cleanup and the Long -term Safe Management of Low -Level Radioactive Waste Situate in the Town of Port Hope, the Township of Hope and the Municipality of Clarington" with a final execution date of March 29, 2001. Article 7 of the Agreement established the Host Community Fee. The article states "Upon the approval of this agreement by the Treasury Board... Canada agrees, in order that the Municipalities will be enabled to address, as they see fit impacts of the presence of long -term waste management facilities within their communities, to make the following payments ...a payment of $10 million to Clarington." The parties also agreed to terms and conditions as set out in Schedule 9 of the Agreement which is entitled "Clarington Fund ". 1.2 The terms for the Clarington Fund were essentially that the funds were for the exclusive benefit of the ratepayers of the geographic area of Clarington, the principal had to remain in a trust fund and invested by Clarington, the income earned could be used by Clarington at its discretion, and once the license was approved for the construction of a new waste management facility within Clarington, the $10 million no longer had to remain in trust. If the license was refused or the waste removed from Clarington, the $10 million would have to be repaid to the Government of Canada. 1.3 It was announced on November 30, 2011 by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission that they approved the issuance of a Waste Nuclear Substance License for Port Granby valid from the effective date of the land transfer of the Port Granby Waste Management property to the Federal Government. It was announced on March 30, 2012 that the land transfer had taken place. This fulfills the terms of the agreement between the Federal Government and Clarington pertaining to the $10 million host community fee. The funds can now be released from the trust fund and used at Clarington's discretion for the benefit of the ratepayers of Clarington. 1.4 At a meeting held on March 1, 2010, the Council of the Municipality of Clarington approved the following resolution #GPA- 138 -10: "That the Finance Department be directed to prepare a report with recommendations as to the disposition of the $10 million Port Granby Funds." Now that the conditions of the agreement have been satisfied, this report fulfills the direction of Council. 15 -36 REPORT NO.: FND- 018 -12 PAGE 3 2.0 HOST COMMUNITY TRUST AND PORT GRANBY LLRW AGREEMENT RESERVE FUND 2.1 In accordance with the Federal Agreement, the principal amount of $10 million was set aside in the Host Community Trust Fund in 2001 and has been maintained at the $10 million balance as reflected annually in the Municipality's Trust Fund financial statements. The funds have been invested in Guaranteed Investment Certificates of various Schedule 1 banks. Currently there is a spread of maturities ranging from May 2013 to December 2015. 2.2 All interest earned on the $10 million principal has been deposited into the Port Granby LLRW Reserve Fund. Commencing in 2002 to date through the budget process, interest in the Port Granby Reserve Fund has been transferred, in varying approved budget amounts, to the operating budget to assist in offsetting tax levy increases throughout the 2002 to current time frame. 2.3 For the 2001 year, when the trust was created after the budget process that year, the funds earned and continued to earn interest in the reserve fund as there was no approved budget transfer to offset the levy due to the timing of receipt of the principal funds. Some of these funds were used through the 2004 budget process to top up the then public works, fire, and community services reserve funds. As a result, there remains a balance in the Port Granby LLRW Reserve Fund of approximately $150,000. 3.0 PORT GRANBY END USE AND OTHER MITIGATION MEASURES 3.1 There is currently a balance in the Port Granby LLRW Agreement Reserve Fund of approximately $150,000. It is recommended that the Reserve Fund be retitled the Port Granby Reserve Fund. While the Federal Government, through the Port Hope Area Initiative Management Office, is responsible for the construction and operation of the new waste management facility and mitigating impacts thereof, there may be some measures that Council would like to undertake in future years pertaining to the existing residents in the Port Granby area and /or the Port Granby Project End -Use concept as endorsed by Council through report PSD- 051 -10. 3.2 It is therefore recommended that the existing balance in the Port Granby Reserve Fund of approximately $150,000 be dedicated to future Port Granby initiatives, such as enhancements to the End Use Plan as approved by Council. 15 -37 REPORT NO.: FND- 018 -12 PAGE 4 4.0 INTEREST EARNED ON HOST COMMUNITY FUNDS /STRATEGIC CAPITAL RESERVE FUND 4.1 As referenced above, since 2002 interest from the Host Community Trust has been used to offset tax levy increases. Due to the decline in interest rates in the last couple of years, this value in the 2012 budget is now set at $250,000. Any reduction in this budget value in future years would therefore represent a tax levy increase as the offset would be lost. Essentially, if Council opts to redirect the interest income of $250,000 to another purpose, or uses some or the entire principal, for 2013, this would have an approximate effect of a 0.625% tax levy increase. 4.2 Since interest rates are at historical lows, it is anticipated that over the long run, interest rates will once again increase to a more favourable value. There is an opportunity to maintain the operating budget contribution at the $250,000 level but direct any increase in interest income above that to other priorities. It is recommended that any interest earned above the $250,000 be used to fund road reconstruction or rehabilitation works in order to maximize the life of our roads infrastructure. It is recommended that the $250,000 continue to be transferred annually to the operating budget to offset tax levy impacts. 5.0 STRATEGIC CAPITAL RESERVE FUND 5.1 As the conditions of the Host Community Agreement have now been satisfied, it is recommended that a new reserve fund entitled "Strategic Capital Reserve Fund" be established and that the principal amount of $10 million currently in the Host Community Trust be transferred to the Strategic Capital Reserve Fund. 5.2 The satisfaction of the terms of the trust provides a unique and positive opportunity for the Municipality to make significant long term strategic decisions to benefit Clarington taxpayers over the long term. There has been significant discussion and focus over the past several years in three areas, deteriorating condition of roads and other municipal assets, debt levels and financing opportunities, and lack of servicing hindering non - residential development opportunities. As the principal funds are non - replenishing, using the principal funds to offset operating expenditures does not sustain those services in subsequent years, while interest earned on the funds would slowly deplete as the funds were depleted. The funds should be considered from a long term sustainable perspective. REPORT NO.: FND- 018 -12 PAGE 5 5.3 This philosophy provides the basis for the recommendations that the Strategic Capital Reserve Fund be structured to address these three priorities as explained below and summarized in the Funding Policy on Attachment "A ". 6.0 ASSET MANAGEMENT 6.1 Council has had dialogue over the past several budget years over the state of Municipal Assets, especially pertaining to road infrastructure, but also other municipal infrastructure to a lesser degree. The Municipality currently owns assets of approximately $596 million (valued at historical cost), with a net book value or depreciated value of $391 million. Approximately 65% are roads or assets needed to maintain roads. While we are in the very preliminary stages of addressing a long -term asset management strategy, the percentage of paved lane kilometers where the condition is rated as good to very good has been hovering around 58% for the last three years. 6.2 This clearly indicates that the need for roads and related infrastructure financing will be a priority for a long term and sustainable asset management strategy. It is therefore recommended that the Strategic Capital Reserve Fund interest earned beyond the $250,000 be transferred for road construction and rehabilitation works from 2016 onward. It is also recommended that the Strategic Capital Reserve Fund be incorporated as a key financing tool in the development of the Municipality's long term asset management strategy. This would be incorporated as part of the funding policy for the Strategic Capital Reserve Fund. 7.0 DEBT LEVELS AND FINANCING OPPORTUNITIES 7.1 Currently, the total net long -term liabilities are $24.2 million. This is represented by Indoor Recreation and Library facilities. As Council is aware, there have been opportunities to make balloon payments on municipal debt or to renew for the final five years. Another such opportunity exists in 2014 relating to the indoor soccer /lacrosse facility. 7.2 While it is not anticipated that there will be sufficient funds in the Indoor Recreation Development Charges Reserve Fund, another opportunity does exist. The Municipality may opt to issue internal debentures. These still have to be processed through proper notifications to the upper tier in compliance with the Municipal Act and with official structured loan documentation. However, the Municipality could essentially "purchase" its own debentures. The result is that 15 -39 •' • 1 the Strategic Capital Reserve Fund could invest in Municipality of Clarington debentures at the market rate of return. This generally results in a higher rate of return to the Reserve Fund than is earned through direct investments in banking instruments. The funds would be repaid over the five years by the development charges collections, as appropriate, exactly the same as if the debenture was floated in the marketplace. 7.3 While a specific recommendation on the Indoor Soccer /Lacrosse facility is not requested at this time, it is recommended that a funding policy for the Strategic Capital Reserve Fund be approved whereby whenever Municipal debentures are being considered as a financing tool for municipal infrastructure, the Strategic Capital Reserve Fund be considered as a source of internal debenture issuance, thereby increasing the return on investment in the Strategic Capital Reserve Fund and allowing some flexibility for the Municipality in repayment options for its future debt needs. One item of future debt consideration will be the Green Road Grade Separation. Each future project would be addressed though the annual budget process. 8.0 SERVICING OF NON - RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES 8.1 This represents the third funding policy being recommended for the Strategic Capital Reserve Fund. As Council has seen through many planning documents as well as observed through presentations from the Clarington Board of Trade, servicing of non - residential lands remains a critical barrier to the development of non- residential areas within Clarington and as a result limiting the opportunities for new job creation in Clarington. This is particularly the case for industrial development. 8.2 There are some circumstances in Clarington where the lack of servicing, whether it be roads, sanitary sewers, water, or storm sewers is an impediment to development, but there are barriers for the private developers to provide the upfront costs that are required. There are some opportunities that may exist in the near future whereby a capital investment on behalf of the Municipality may provide for a sufficient level of service to "open up" those areas for development. This would create both jobs and investment in Clarington as well as converting vacant lands to lands and structures in the industrial tax class. 8.3 Should the Municipality consider up fronting the costs of the basic required servicing, the cost could be structured through a cost sharing agreement on title whereby the benefitting property owners would repay the costs incurred plus an indexing factor. In this way the principal amount of the investment would be returned to the Strategic Capital Reserve Fund over time indexed and with the potential of interest also. This would ultimately result in economic development 15--40 REPORT NO.: FND- 018 -12 PAGE 7 and job creation, as well as increased tax revenue to the Municipality. This funding policy would only be considered in circumstances whereby the principal would be returned to the Strategic Capital Reserve Fund once the development proceeds through an appropriate cost sharing agreement. 9.0 CONCURRENCE - Not applicable 10.0 CONCLUSION 10.1 This issue has been extensively reviewed with the Chief Administrative Officer and we have provided these recommendations based on long -term sustainable financial principles. As referenced above, the release of the Host Community Funds from the trust provisions provides a unique opportunity to establish and generate some significant long term benefits to Clarington residents. 10.2 It is therefore recommended that a Strategic Capital Reserve Fund be established and a Funding Policy be endorsed outlining the future uses of the funds as described in the attached Appendix "A ". CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN — The recommendations contained in this report conform to the general intent of the following priorities of the Strategic Plan: (Place an "X" in the box for all that apply) X Promoting economic development X Maintaining financial stability Connecting Clarington Promoting green initiatives X Investing in infrastructure Showcasing our community Not in conformity with Strategic Plan Staff Contact: Nancy Taylor, Director of Finance/Treasurer Attachments: Attachment A - Funding Policy for Strategic Capital Reserve Fund List of Interested Parties to be advised of Council's decision: None 15 -41 ATTACHMENT "A" TO FND- 018 -12 STRATEGIC CAPITAL RESERVE FUND FUNDING POLICY INTRODUCTION: Pursuant to Report FND- 018 -12, the Strategic Capital Reserve Fund has been established by By -Law # 2012 -XXX. The Host Community Fee received through the Agreement for the Clean -up and the Long -term Safe Management of Low -Level Radioactive Waste Situate in the Town of Port Hope, the Township of Hope and the Municipality of Clarington has been transferred to the Strategic Capital Reserve Fund. PURPOSE: The receipt of the Host Community Fee provides a unique and positive opportunity for the Municipality to make significant long term strategic decisions to benefit Clarington taxpayers over the long term. The purpose of this funding policy is to set out the authorized uses of the funds, along with interest earned to maximize the positive benefits of this funding for many years to come. FUNDING POLICY: It is approved by Committee at its meeting of June 25, 2012, and ratified by Council on July 3rd, 2012, the following policies pertaining to the newly created Strategic Capital Reserve Fund: a) The current $250,000 contribution from interest earned on the principal funds continue to be used to offset the tax levy through the current budget for future budget years; b) Interest earnings in excess of $250,000 be used for road construction and rehabilitation; and c) The principal amount of the Strategic Capital Reserve Fund be invested for three priorities: 1) Long -term asset management strategic financing tool, particularly for Roads, 2) Investment in Debt financing opportunities through internal debenture issuance, or 3) Investment in Servicing of Non - Residential areas as a front - ending tool. 15 -42 rx UNFINISHED BUSINESS ITEM #1 4' Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: June 25, 2012 Resolution #: By -law #: N/A Report #: Addendum #1 to File #: CSD- 006 -12 Subject: CLARINGTON OLDER ADULT ASSOCIATION — PARKING CONCERNS /STRATEGIC PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Addendum #1 to Report CSD- 006 -12 be received; 2. THAT Report CSD- 006 -12 be received; 3. THAT Council provide direction in regard to recommendations set out in Report CSD- 006 -12 (Attachment 1); 4. THAT the Clarington Older Adult Association (COAA) be permitted to continue to utilize the green space at the rear of the building for temporary overflow parking for large scale COAA events only; 5. THAT Council endorse the establishment of a Beech Centre Community Liaison Committee and that the matter be referred back to staff to develop a terms of reference and report back; and 6. THAT all interested parties listed in Addendum #1 to Report CSD - 006 -12 be advised of.Council's decision. Submitted by: JPC /sm Reviewed by: �o eph P. Caruana erector of Community Services Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905 - 623 -3379 18 -1 1.0 BACKGROUND 1.1 On April 2 "d the General Purpose and Administration Committee received report CSD- 006 -12 "Clarington Older Adult Association — Parking Concerns /Strategic Plan" and a delegation by Mr. Bill Humber, Resident/Community Coalition. At that meeting Committee passed the following motion: "THAT Report CSD- 006 -12 be received; That By -law #2011 -106 (Attachment 5 to Report CSD- 006 -12) be amended by adding the following to section 1: THAT the activities taking place at the Clarington Beech Centre be limited to programs and social activities of the Clarington Older Adult Centre Board and regular meetings of the Lions Club of Bowmanville; and •Oddfellows /Rebekkahs & Encampment -Lions Club of Bowmanville •Tops -CUPS Local 225 -All other rentals of significance to be determined by the Clarington Older Adult Centre; THAT there will be no increase to Beech Centre on -site parking, with a continued use of on- street parking; THAT a five (5) year lease (under Report COD -036 -11) with an option to renew to the Bowmanville Tennis Club be approved; THAT $1,000 for signage and line painting be funded from the Municipal Capital Works Reserve Fund; and THAT all interested parties listed in Report CSD- 006 -12 be advised of Council's decision. " 1.2 On April 16th Council received a delegation from Jim Boate, Vice - President, Clarington Older Adult Association, advising Council that the Clarington Older Adult Centre Board (COACB) did not support the motion passed at the General Purpose and Administration Committee Meeting on April 2"d and requested that an advisory committee comprised of members of the Bowmanville Tennis Club, Resident/Community Coalition, Clarington Older Adult Association and Municipal staff be established to work together to resolve these and future issues. 1.3 On April 16th Council passed Resolution #C- 130 -12: "THAT Item #8 of Report #1 be referred back to staff to report back by mid -June on forming a community liaison committee consisting of representatives of the Clarington Older Adult Association, the Bowmanville Tennis Club, the Old 18 -2 REPORT NO.: ADDENDUM 1 to CSD- 006 -12 PAGE 3 Bowmanville Neighbourhood Association, and the Operations and Community Services Departments to work on a parking solution satisfactory to all." At the April 30th Council meeting, Council approved Resolution #GPA- 283 -12: "THAT the community liaison committee formed in accordance with Council Resolution #C- 130 -12, be comprised of, in addition to Clarington staff, two (2) members from each of the following: -Board of the Clarington Older Adult Association ( COACB) -Bowmanville Tennis Club -Resident/Community Coalition" 2.0 COMMUNITY LIASION COMMITTEE MEETING —May 9, 2012 2.1 On May 9th Community Services Department staff convened a meeting with two (2) representatives from each of the Clarington Older Adult Centre Board, Bowmanville Tennis Club, and Resident/Community Coalition along with staff from the Engineering and Operations Departments. 2.2 Staff facilitated the meeting, and each organization was provided an opportunity to discuss the parking situation from their perspective and offer potential solutions in hopes of identifying some areas of common ground. 2.3 Representatives of the COACB presented the Board's goal of "gaining access to limited increased parking... (37 additional spaces at the rear of the building)" that would be developed "as a friendly open urban area that encourages walking and bicycling from Beech Avenue to the green park on Elgin Street." They further proposed "the addition of lighting, plantings /shrubbery and bicycle racks would enhance the design and appearance." (Attachment 2) 2.4 Representatives of the Bowmanville Tennis Club provided an overview of the history of the tennis courts. The courts were developed in 1946 on land donated by the Lions Club to provide recreation for returning veterans of World War II. Since that time, the Tennis Club has taken care of all of the costs associated with the courts, including resurfacing and lighting. 2.5 The Tennis Club is concerned and frustrated by the ongoing attempts to have the tennis courts removed from their current Beech Avenue site. They expressed the importance of knowing that long term their "home" will remain at the current location. The group expressed much concern over the recent "short- term" leases. 2.6 The Bowmanville Tennis Club stated that they have and will continue to work with the COAA regarding co- ordinating parking needs during large scale COAA events (tennis players park on the street). In addition, they have offered to open the courts for the COAA's use for outdoor programming and to provide it= introductory tennis lessons to COAA members. The Bowmanville Tennis Club is opposed to the paving of any green space for parking purposes as it is felt that there is adequate on and off - street parking for COAA events. 2.7 Representatives of the Resident /Community Coalition clearly stated that they are opposed to any increase of on -site parking. The Coalition is concerned about the undersupply of existing green space /parkland in this neighbourhood and the Coalition feels strongly that there is adequate on and off -site parking available to support the Beech Centre activities. The Coalition challenges the perception of the COACB that they have a parking issue. The Coalition believes that if there was willingness on the part of the Board there are other solutions.that could more than adequately deal with the times when there are large COAA events (management of on -site parking for individuals with mobirity challenges, improvements to walkways /access to the site from the street, acceptance of use of on- street parking, relocation of events that have "outgrown" the Beech Centre to Community Services Department facilities with necessary modifications.) On June 18th staff received written comments from the Resident/Community Coalition. (Attachment 4) 2.8 Representatives of the COACB agreed to take the comments of the Bowmanville Tennis Club and Resident /Community Coalition back to the COACB meeting on May 18th and the Community Liaison Committee would reconvene after the next COACB meeting. 3.0 COMMUNITY LIASION COMMITTEE MEETING — JUNE 11, 2012 3.1 On June 11th representatives of the three (3) groups and Municipal staff re- convened. COACB representatives provided an overview of their comments back to the Board and advised that on May 30th the Board passed the following motion: "We move that in the best interest of our membership that the COAA plan to move from the Beech Centre facility. A new location would have to address the major problem of adequate onsite parking and allow for the inevitable growth of our membership in the future." 3.2 The COACB circulated this motion to its members along with interim strategies to minimize the current parking challenges. (Attachment 3) 3.3 Significant discussion took place on the use of the grass at rear of the building as temporary overflow parking. The COAA has been using this space for such purposes during large scale events since 2008 and Municipal staff proposes this use be permitted to continue during large scale COAA events only as per report EDG- 026 -08. It should be noted that the Coalition does not support this position, as in their view it is an inappropriate use of the green space and limits other recreation pursuits on this space. 18 -4 REPORT NO.: ADDENDUM 1 to CSD- 006 -12 PAGE 5 4.0 BEECH CENTRE COMMUNITY LISASION COMMITTEE 4.1 At the June 11th meeting there was discussion regarding the establishment of a Committee that would meet on a regular basis comprised of representatives from the Clarington Older Adult Association, Bowmanville Tennis Club, Resident/Community Coalition and Municipal staff. Those in attendance at the meeting felt this would be a positive step in terms of improving dialogue and communication between the groups. 5.0 COMMENTS 5.1 At this time, the Clarington Older Adult Centre Board, The Bowmanville Tennis Club and The Resident/Community Coalition have been unable to develop a parking solution that is satisfactory to all. 6.0 CONCURRENCE: 6.1 This report has been reviewed by Fred Horvath, Director of Operations and Tony Cannella, Director of Engineering Services who concur with the recommendations. CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN — Not Applicable Staff Contact: Joseph P. Caruana, Director of Community Services Attachments: Attachment 1 — CSD- 006 -12, Clarington Older Adult Association — Parking Concerns /Strategic Plan Attachment 2 — COACB Request — May 9th Community Liaison Committee meeting Attachment 3 — Clarington Older Adult Association Newsletter (May 30th 2012) Attachment 4 — Letter from Resident /Community Coalition (June 18, 2012) List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Norma Evans, 1St Vice President, Clarington Older Adult Association Jim Boate, 2nd Vice President, Clarington Older Adult Association Malcolm McCombe, Secretary, Clarington Older Adult Centre Board Angie Darlison, Executive Director, Clarington Older Adult Association Kern Majid, President, Bowmanville Tennis Club Rod McArthur, Member, Bowmanville Tennis Club Stephen Brickell, Member, Resident/Community Coalition Roland Kuijpers, Member, Resident/Community Coalition Bill Humber, Member, Resident/Community Coalition 18 -5 REPORT NO.: ADDENDUM 1 to CSD- 006 -12 Laurie Cook, Member, Resident/Community Coalition Ellen Logan, Member, Bowmanville Tennis Club Dr. Timothy James, Member, Bowmanville Tennis Club Lois Richards, Member, Clarington Older Adult Association and Bowmanville Tennis Club ., Attachment 1 to Addendum #1 to Report CSD- .006 -12 �= ii, , =- Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: April 2, 2012 Resolution #: By -law #: Report#: CSD - 006 -12 File #: Subject: CLARINGTON OLDER ADULT. ASSOCIATION PARKING CONCERNS / STRATEGIC PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the 'General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report CSD- 006 -12 be received; 2. THAT By -law #201.1 -106 be amended (Attachment 5) by adding the following'to section 1: a) Capacity THAT the overall capacity of the Clarington Beech Centre be 250 persons. b) Programming THAT effective January 1, 2013 . activities taking place at the Clarington' Beech Centre be limited to programs and social activities of the Clarington Older Adult Centre Board and regular meetings of the Lions Club of Bowmanville; _ 3. THAT the Municipality of Clarington increase the Municipal grant provided to the Clarington Older Adult Centre Board effective 2013 by $28,500 on an annual basis to off -set the loss of rental revenue; 4. THAT Council provide direction on the following options to the parking concerns expressed by the Clarington Older Adult Centre Board :.. Option 1: No increase to Beech Centre on -site parking, continued use of on- street parking. Approval of a five (5) year lease (under COD -036 -11) with an option to renew to the Bowmanville Tennis Club. THAT $1,000 "for signage and line painting be funded from the Municipal Capital Works Reserve Fund. CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C.3A6 T 90M23 -3379 18 -7 REPORT NO., CSD- 006 -12 6 PAGE 2 Option 2: Parking increased by 54 spaces (131 total spaces) located to the west (rear) of the existing building (Attachment 2). Approval of a five (5) year lease (under COD -036 -11) with an option to renew to the Bowmanville Tennis Club. THAT the $271,000 for the new parking lot, additional trees, appropriate screening, line painting and signage be funded from the Municipal Capital Works Reserve Fund, Option 3: Parking increased by 51 spaces (128 total spaces) located in place of the existing tennis courts (Attachment 3). Two lit tennis courts-of similar quality to be constructed in Soper Creek Park (Attachment 4). Approval of a five (5) year lease with an option to renew to the Bowmanville Tennis Club or a new tennis organization, THAT $324,000 for the new parking lot, additional trees, appropriate screening, line painting and signage be funded from the Municipal Capital Works Reserve Fund and that $250,000 for the relocation of the tennis courts be funded from the Impact /Escrow Reserve Fund; and THAT all interested parties listed in Report CSD- 006 -12 be advised of Council's decision. Submitted by: JPc /sni Um da�eph P, Caruana, Director of Community Services A,S, Cannella, C,E,T, Director of Engineering Services Reviewed by: Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Office REPORT NO.. CSD- 006 -12 PAGE 3 1.0 BACKGROUND 1.1 At the November 28th, 2011 Council meeting Mr. Steve Coles, Vice - President of the Clarington Older Adult Association (COAA), appeared as a delegation regarding the Bowmanville Tennis Club Lease (COD -036 -11).. Mr. Coles expressed concern regarding the ongoing parking challenges for the Clarington Older Adult Association at 26 Beech Avenue and stated that the COAA requires a formal engineered solution to_ provide parking and accessibility to.the Beech . Centre. 1.2 On December 5, 2011 Council passed Resolution #GPA- 669 -11 "THAT Peter Spratt be authorized to undertake a review and report on the implications and findings of the Clarington OlderAdult Association's Strategic Plan... ". 1.3 Also, on December 5th Council tabled report COD - 036 -11 for-the Tennis Club — Court Lease (GPA- 665 -11) and requested that the report be brought forward once meetings had concluded with Mr. Peter Spratt with respect to the consultation with the Clarington Older Adult Centre (COAC) Board in regard to the COAA Strategic Plan. 1.4 Finally, on December 5th, 2011, the following resolution (GPA -670 -11) was passed, "THAT the Engineering Services Department be directed to investigate and to report to Committee with information, including costs, pertaining to the protection of the Bowmanville Tennis Court during the tennis "off season" with a material such, as (but not limited to) a propylene or polyester geotextile fabric, a geofabric or a geocomposite liner. This material must also be: structurally-capable of supporting the weight of small to mid -size parked vehicles; -of sufficiently durable composition as to prevent any impairment to the integrity of the tennis court surface; and capable of being cleared of snow by the Operations Department in the usual manner or, in the alternative, capable of being cleared of snow in any other recommended manner that is conducive to the preservation of both the tennis court and the covering material,` 1.5 In June 2010 the COAA endorsed the first,official Strategic Plan for the Clarington Older Adult Association. This 'plan was completed with the assistance of Mr. Peter Spratt, ROCG Global Consultants and presented. to Council on May 31, 2010. The plan identified six values and beliefs that the Board of Directors planned to utilize as a foundation for their future decision making. ® "Accessible — to create an organization that is inclusive and affordable; we will identify and address potential barriers, and create opportunities for'members, potential members and guests. • REPORT NO.: CSD- 006 -12 PAGE 4 Caring — known as a friendly and welcoming organization where members, guests and visitors can feel safe, respected and welcome. ® Community Focused — to be a. part of and contribute to the broader community; we aspire to be a cooperative, collaborative 'and respectful partner. ® Fiscally Responsible —to efficiently operate and achieve our goals in a manner that is both financially prudent and accountable to our members and partners. Member Focused— ensure that the needs of our members are reflected in what we do today and in our future priorities. ® Quality Programs —known for excellent programs that meet the diverse needs of our members; our programs. will promote social, educational and physical well- being. " 1.6 The COAA Strategic Plan also defined the six components of the COAA Vision Statement which would guide the organization into the future. The Vision was acknowledged as a.reflection of several significant features which had been identified during the strategic plan process. ® "Continued Growth in Membership" Membership growth was identified as desirable, essential to financial stability and a reality of ou,r aging population. New members are welcomed as a source of vibrant energy that helps to renew and sustain the volunteer spirit. "Facilities Throughout Clarington Designed for Older Adults" The continued utilization of the Beech Centre was acknowledged as providing a viable, short term facility solution, coupled with the use of satellite facilities. Longer term, the COAA envisions the development of multi -use community facilities with designated space, designed in partnership with the Community Services Department. Developing a Facilities Master Plan is considered an essential early deliverable. "Expanded Programs and Services" Expansion of programs and services should be accomplished in collaboration with other community providers and not in competition. The COAA is a part of the solution, not the whole solution. "Respected Community Partner" The COAA acknowledges that if must operate within the larger community and sees this as a key determinant -of future success. Establishing trust and building lasting relationships will become an essential focus for the Association. ® "Sustainable .Funding" Sustainable funding is essential to the well -being of the COAA. The COAA must broaden its appeal to secure funding to support its growth, while demonstrating prudent fiscal responsibility. 18-10 REPORT NO.. CSD- 006 -12 PAGE 5 "Effective Governance and Administrative Processes" Board development will be an important priority to ensure excellence in governance and administrative practices. Staffing levels must keep pace with growth and be tied to the Facilities Master Plan to ensure appropriate staffing levels.' 1.7 In'June 2011 Community Services staff initiated a meeting with representatives of the COAC Board as the first step in planning for, future older adult facilities. It was during these discussions that it became evident that there were divergent interpretations on-the description of the Beech Centre- as a "viable short -term facility solution ". It was concluded that there was a need to clarify the position of the COAC.Board in relation to their long -term facility vision before future older adult facility planning could be undertaken. 2.0 ROCG REPORT and CONSIDERATIONS 2,1 As directed by resolution, Peter Spratt, Vice President, ROCG Global Consultants was retained to undertake a review of the current COAC Board_ and to confirm their commitment and support of the COAA Strategic Plan. 2.2 . Mr, Spratt'.s work -took place between December 6, 2011 and February 21, 2012 and included one -on -one interviews with. members of the COAC Board of Directors, in' an effort to confirm the Board's future plans related to the Beech Centre and future facility development. 2,3 Mr, Spratt's report (Attachment 1) contained several key findings which confirmed the commitment of the volunteer Board to provide quality programs and services to the older adult community. The majority of the Board felt they were demonstrating their commitment to values stated in the Strategic Plan, although a few identified the 'Community Focus' value as needing some attention. 2.4 Most of the Board members were familiar with the COAA vision, with some mixed views being expressed on the meaning of a `Respected Community Partner'. Although there were examples of the COAA attempting to engage the broader community, there were also examples of the Board displaying actions which could be considered by some as being contrary to the spirit of being a respected community partner. 2.5 Generally, there was evidence of significant outreach on the part of the COAA to. provide programs and events to all parts of the Municipality. This was achieved through enhanced. satellite programming and partnerships with community halls, community organizations and the Community Services Department. This is consistent with the COAA Strategic Plan. 2,6 The Board acknowledged the distinction between social interaction space (the COAZY cafe) and program space. With the wide age range of members there 18 -11 REPORT NO.: CSD- 006 -12 are divergent program needs. Social interaction and active programs are both important priorities.. This is consistent with-the COAA Strategic Plan. - 2.7 Parking.at the Beech Centre continues to be a problem for members, most evident during large events..The majority of the Board would favour the relocation of the tennis courts within the community to accommodate expanded parking. 2.8 Board members acknowledged that the ability of the organization to accommodate future growth and expansion would come through current and future. satellite locations and a commitment to the development of multi -use community facilities with designated space for use by older adults. This is consistent with the COAA Strategic Plan. 2.9 Board members expressed frustration in a perceived lack of action on the part of the Municipality (Community Services Department) to.engage the COAA in consultation on the preparation of a Facilities Master Plan (Strategic Priority 3.3). This perception is not shared by the Community Services Department, as they had initiated a meeting with COAC Board representatives in June of 2011 to discuss future facility needs of the COAA. 2.10 The report identified the different interpretations of the Strategic Plan statement "Continued utilization of the Beech Centre is acknowledged as providing a viable short-term facility solution." This was the significant stumbling block in discussions between the Municipality and the COAA. The Board members see the Beech Centre as their home and the hub of their organization. They interpreted the statement to mean that they would continue to use the Beech Centre and would accommodate growth through satellite programming and additional facilities identified in the Facilities Master Plan. The Community Services Department had interpreted the wording to mean that the COAA would be leaving the Beech Centre at -some point and had initiated discussions with the COAA to discuss dedicated and shared space within future Community Services facilities. 2.11 Mr. Spratt's report also contained several suggestions for consideration by the Community Services Department. ® "Retain the Beech Centre as -the `hub' for COAA administration and further development of its `social space'. .Q Maintain the tennis courts, green space and parking "as is." ® Gradually transition high - volume events (COAA programs aid hall rentals) away from the Beech Centre to other recreation /community facilities that will be able to accommodate parking. ® Supplement COAA's revenue for lost rental income. 18 -12 . REPORT NO.: CSD- 006 -12 PAGE 7 ® Increase the number of shuttle vans and /or consider the purchase /lease of a mini -bus. Arrange tours of two, relatively new, mixed -use older adult centres operated by the Oshawa Seniors Citizens Centre (Legends Centre and Conant Centre) for Community Services and the COA Centre Board to visualize what one looks like. Visit the John Street (HQ) Centre to demonstrate how Oshawa has managed its limited parking space and transitioned to three other municipally -owned satellites. Explore how it operates its transportation service, and its community dining services. Engage the COA Centre Board in discussion about bringing -on other space; this space will be designed for older adults and designated for use by older adults, within mixed —use community facilities (consistent with the Strategic Plan)." ,3.0 26 BEECH AVENUE 3.1 The property located at 26 Beech Avenue was acquired by the Municipality from the Lions Club of Bowmanville in 1998. Since that time the property has been home to the Clarington Older Adult Association, Community Care (vacated in March of 2010), The Lions Club Daycare (vacated in June of 2010), and the Bowmanville Tennis Club, which has been in operation since the 1940's. Currently, the Beech Centre building is now fully occupied by the COAA. 3.2 Since the property,was acquired in 1998 it has undergone one expansion to the parking lot in 2002 which added 20 spaces along the south side of the facility and seven spaces along the west side of the driveway south of the main building entrance. The current number of on -site parking spaces is 77. In addition to the. additional parking lot construction the existing parking area was resurfaced and provided with a storm system at a project cost of $186,000. 4.0 ON- STREET PARKING 4.1 In addition to the formal on -site parking there is also informal on- street parking available for use by COAA members. Engineering Services has reviewed the local on- street parking capacity and determined that there are approximately 70 spaces available within a 200 metre walk of the facility and an additional 36 spots between 200 and 300 metres. 4.2 In the preparation of this report the Operations Department and Emergency and Fire Services Department have been consulted regarding any concerns with on- street parking. There are no concerns from the Operations Department with the current use of on- street parking. Emergency and Fire Services has expressed concern with on- street parking and would prefer to see no on- street parking in this area. Currently, in the event of a fire emergency fire vehicles would be able 18 -13 REPORT NO.: CSD- 006 -12 PAGE 8 to move through the area with on- street parking on the east side of Beech Avenue as long as opposing traffic was limited. 5.0 PARKING STUDY AND UPDATE 5.1 In 2008 the Municipality of Clarington undertook a Parking Study at the Clarington Beech Centre to examine the - parking situation at the Beech Centre and use the information to assist in assessing future parking needs, impacts of on- street parking restrictions, and to consider strategies for managing parking demand at the site. Many strategies recommended in the 2008 report have been implemented to some extent by the COAA. In 2011 an update was undertaken to review the current parking situation due to concerns raised by the COAA resulting from the growth of their association since the original study was undertaken. 5.2 To. provide a reasonable comparative analysis between the original (March 2008) and updated (November 2011) parking data, several conditional differences between the two sets of data have influenced parking patterns and need to be mentioned, including: loss of supply-due to snow storage on the parking lot in 2008 improved vehicular access to the grassed area on the west side of the Beech Centre in 2011 addition of a shuttle service vehicle by the COAA in 2011 5.3 Further, the purchase of a shuttle vehicle (seven -seat minivan) and implementation of a shuttle service for COAA members has eliminated some parking demand. The shuttle typically_ makes approximately six to. eight trips per day with the impact on parking demand dependent on the number of people served per trip. 5.4 Overall, parking activity during the study update was shown to be dependent on facility programming and a corresponding shift in peak demand can be seen between the two study days within the mid -day range (10 :00 am to 3:00 pm) based on programming. This pattern is similar to the original study. Total parking demand for the study update exceeded effective capacity ( >85 %) for two hours on Wednesday, November 9, and for three hours on Tuesday, November 15. . 5.5 The following table provides a comparison of data between the original study and the study update through analysis of the total hours where demand exceeded capacity and effective capacity for each parking area. 18 -14 REPORT NO.: CSD- 006 -12 PAGE 9 *Effective capacity is considered to be 85% of the total available parking for non - metered parking areas. As noted above overflow parking during larger events was observed to' be using the grassed area during the 2011 study update which was .a recommendation of the 2008 report, 5,6 In both the original and updated parking studies Beech Avenue saw limited overflow parking with roughly four vehicles from the Beech Centre using the street to park. Outside of the study periods staff have observed additional use of Beech Avenue and Burk Court for overflow parking during higher volume events ( at the Clarington Beech Centre. 5.7 In the 2008 study it was observed that over 90 %.of the vehicles arriving at the Beech Centre had single occupants. Vehicle occupancy rates were not observed in the 2011 update but COAA staff have noted that their promotion of carpooling to the Beech Centre has seen some success. ..5.8 In our most recent review of the available parking it is noted that the facility provides two accessible parking spaces. Staff suggests working with the COAQ. Board to provide additional accessible spaces, depending on which option Council selects. For example, if Option 1 is'selected, two additional accessible parking spaces would be added. If Options 2 or 3 are selected, three additional accessible spaces would be created. 5.9 Further, staff are also prepared to work with the COAC Board- to establish a Priority. Parking Program, which would allow the Board to designate who should have access to priority parking. 6.0 COAA SPECIAL EVENT ATTENDANCE 6,1 The COAA hosts a number of special events throughout the year. It is primarily during these times that parking is of the greatest concern for the COAA: 18 -15 North Lot (50 Spaces) South Lot (20 Spaces) East Lot (7 Spaces) Study Date Capacity Exceeded (hrs.) *Effective Capacity Exceeded hrs. Capacity Exceeded (hrs.) *Effective Capacity Exceeded' hrs. Capacity Exceeded (hrs.) *Effective Capacity Exceeded hrs. Ori inal'Stud 11- Mar -08 0.0 2.0 0.0 0,0 0,0 0,0 13- Mar -08 1.5 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total 1.5 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Study U date 9 -Nov -11, 0.0 1.5 1.5 2.0 0.0 2.0 15 -Nov -11 1.0 4.0 2.0 3.0 0.0 3.5 Total 1.0 5.5 3.5 5.0 0.0 5.5 *Effective capacity is considered to be 85% of the total available parking for non - metered parking areas. As noted above overflow parking during larger events was observed to' be using the grassed area during the 2011 study update which was .a recommendation of the 2008 report, 5,6 In both the original and updated parking studies Beech Avenue saw limited overflow parking with roughly four vehicles from the Beech Centre using the street to park. Outside of the study periods staff have observed additional use of Beech Avenue and Burk Court for overflow parking during higher volume events ( at the Clarington Beech Centre. 5.7 In the 2008 study it was observed that over 90 %.of the vehicles arriving at the Beech Centre had single occupants. Vehicle occupancy rates were not observed in the 2011 update but COAA staff have noted that their promotion of carpooling to the Beech Centre has seen some success. ..5.8 In our most recent review of the available parking it is noted that the facility provides two accessible parking spaces. Staff suggests working with the COAQ. Board to provide additional accessible spaces, depending on which option Council selects. For example, if Option 1 is'selected, two additional accessible parking spaces would be added. If Options 2 or 3 are selected, three additional accessible spaces would be created. 5.9 Further, staff are also prepared to work with the COAC Board- to establish a Priority. Parking Program, which would allow the Board to designate who should have access to priority parking. 6.0 COAA SPECIAL EVENT ATTENDANCE 6,1 The COAA hosts a number of special events throughout the year. It is primarily during these times that parking is of the greatest concern for the COAA: 18 -15 REPORT NO.: GSD- 006 -12 PAGE 10 6.2 During 2011 there were 40 special events offered by the COAA.. Estimated attendance at these events is summarized below: Number of Attendees Number of Events 200 -249 5 150 -199 6 100-149. 6 .99 or less 22 *one event took place in Tyrone therefore is not included in the above totals 7.0 NON -COAA USES (OTHER RENTALS) 7.1- In addition to use, by older adults, the Beech Centre is marketed as a rental facility for private and commercial functions. Non -COAA functions take. place during times the facility is not needed by the COAA in order to generate revenue. .In 2011 there were 44 rentals of the main auditorium plus numerous rentals of the smaller program rooms which generated $26,991.75 in revenue for the COAA. The 2012 COAC Board budget. identified $28,500 revenue related to facility rentals. 7.2 In 2011, there were a total of 63 non -COAA rentals (private /commercial), Estimated attendance at these events is summarized below: Number of Attendees Number of Events 200 -249 7 150-199 6 100 -149 10 99 or less 40 7.3 In addition to.the non -COAA rentals above, the Beech Centre is also utilized by the following associations: •Oddfellows, Rebekahs & Encampment (48 meetings in 2011) -Lions Club of Bowmanville (24 meetings in 2011) •Tops (46 meetings in 2011) •Hula Dancing (10 lessons in 2O 11) -Dance Classes (5 lessons in 2011) •Budda Lessons (16 in 2011) -CUPS Local 225 (8.meetings in 2011) 7.4 In some cases, non -COAA use has exacerbated the parking situation at the facility and caused local *homeowners inconvenience. It is recommended that effective January 1, 2013 this situation be alleviated by eliminating all non -COAA uses,. with the .exception of the Lions Club of BOWmanville. The Lions Club of Bowmanville have continued to use the Beech Centre for their monthly membership and Director's meetings since they sold the building to the Municipality. Due to the history and the fact their meetings do not draw a large 18 -16 REPORT NO.: GSD -006 -12 PAGE 11 ( number of people or traffic this arrangement could continue with minimal impact on the facility. 6.0 THE ZONING BY -LAW 8.1 The Beech Centre is a Municipal building. The provisions of the Zoning By -law .do not apply to the Municipality; however, the parking provisions are useful as a reference point for the issue at hand. 8:2 Parking calculations in the Zoning By -law are based on the worst case scenarios' assuming that all rooms could be used at the same time. There are alternate methods of calculating the parking requirements; the first is based on the rated occupancy of the building and the second is the building size. Based on both the occupancy and gross floor area a-a minimum of approximately 150 parking spaces would be required to be in compliance with the Zoning By. -law for the current building. In order to achieve 150 parking spaces on this site the majority of the green space behind the facility as well as the tennis courts would need to be converted to parking. 8.3- Currently there are 77 parking spaces provided on the property. If there were no plans to increase the on -site parking the Municipality could cap or limit the use of the. building to match the current parking being provided.. Based on the zoning standard, the 77 parking spaces would limit the building occupancy to 308 persons at any one time. (This-is based on the Zoning By -law minimum standard of one parking space for every four people that.may legally be accommodated at any time). 8.4 A minimum parking rate of one parking space for four occupants may be somewhat unrealistic as it pertains to O,Ider Adults. As noticed in the Parking Study of 2008, 90% of the vehicles arriving at the Beech Centre had single occupants. 9.0 USE OF TENNIS COURTS FOR PARKING DURING WINTER MONTHS (GPA- 670 -11) 9A In a subsequent review of this matter staff.has researched the possibility of converting the Bowmanville Tennis Courts into a parking lot during the winter months and back to tennis courts during the summer. In conducting this review staff-has found that the annual conversion of the tennis courts /parking lot concept is neither practically feasible nor cost effective. Staff.did determine that converting the tennis courts to a parking lot for a short duration of approximately two years or so to facilitate a specific purpose, may be possible and might be reasonably cost effective, but such a conversion on an annual basis each winter., is not recommended by staff. 18 -17: REPORT NO.': CSD- 006 -12 PAGE 12 10.0 STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS 10.1 In the preparation of this report staff.of the Community Services and Engineering Services Departments consulted with the Bowmanville Tennis Club, Clarington Older Adult Centre Board and a Resident/Community Coalition. Below is a summary of comments provided to staff by each organization. 10.2 Bowmanville Tennis Club 10.2.1 The Bowmanville Tennis.Club is a highly successful. volunteer organization, which has operated effectively for decades on the two courts located on the grounds. of the current Clarington Older Adult Association site. These courts have, been part of the playground and green space on that site since around 1 946, and are still in excellent condition today due to ongoing care by members. 10.2.2 Membership fees. have funded all of the Club's operating costs, including their. lease ($1,500 /yr), property taxes ($3,500 /yr), court maintenance and repair costs, light standards, hydro. and club tournaments and activities, Every five to six years the courts are resurfaced from these fees. They have never requested nor received funding from the Municipality. 10.2.3 Membership ranges annually from 150 -170 players of all ages, and is open to all residents of Clarington. 53% of their members are ages 50 and over. The Club also provides a summer Tennis Camp for youth and instruction for non - members and members alike. The Bowmanville Tennis Club also shares the courts from time to time with local high schools to practice for LOSSA and other events at no charge to the schools. 10.2.4 The location, history and tradition of the courts and Bowmanville Tennis Club are of vital importance to its members. While the group is very passionate about their Club, they could not confirm if the.courts were to be relocated whether the membership would follow. For relocated courts to be successful, an organization would need to exist and would most likely require new representation. 10.2.5 Kern Majid, President of the Bowmanville Tennis Club, provided this quote on behalf of the Club: ,Tennis players (non - professional) are social beings, with quality courts, good and accessible organization, safe, familiar and pleasant surroundings, reasonable and non - aggressive standards of competition,-and the sheer pleasure of playing tennis outdoors are high on their list of priorities. When you add the historical attachment -of playing the game where your grandparents, parents, siblings and school friends played, It is understandable.why the current location of the courts continue to appeal to so many. Heritage, history and tradition are priceless ingredients of our Clarington experience. And it's always possible that if you build' it, they may not come!" REPORT NO.: CSD- 006 -12 PAGE 13 10,3 Clarington Older Adult Centre Board 10,31 The Clarington Older Adult Association (COAA) currently has a membership of between 1,500 - 1,600 adults ages 50 and over. Their membership has'been . growing rapidly, putting pressure on the existing building and parking facilities, 10.3.2 Since 2009 the Clarington Older Adult Association and the Municipality of Clarington Community Services Department have worked under a Memorandum of Understanding, which allows for the provision of programs by COAA staff at Community Services Department facilities. -While this has been seen as a successful step forward, the COAA has expressed reservations and challenges with programming outside of the Beech Centre. 10.3,3 It was expressed that their more "senior.' members view the Beech Centre as home, and are not and would not be willing to travel to other locations within the Municipality. This is the location they are familiar with, and enjoy the ambiance and comfortable feel of the facility, 10.3.4 The COAC Board agreed that while the current older adults are reluctant to participate in programs at other facilities, this would most likely be received more favourably by the newer and younger membership. They would know that this would, be the expectation right from the beginning, and therefore this issue should dissolve with time. 10.3.5 The Board expressed that it is important for the membership -to have areas for programming,' but equally important are areas for non- structured socialization. They would. ultimately be looking at a multi - purpose facility. 10.3,6 Due to parking restrictions, when the auditorium at the Beech Centre is being fully utilized other programming cannot occur in the building.. The maximum tickets sold for an event is 220, with an additional 25 volunteers and staff also attending. Currently members and staff park on the grass and adjacent street when a large event or multiple programming occurs. They suggested 50 -70 additional parking spots would improve the parking situation. It was acknowledged that there will never be sufficient parking in this location to satisfy the.growing membership and demands. 10.3.7 Street parking is seen by the COAA as non - satisfactory for members with accessibility issues, and does not serve their demographic. 10.3.8 The location of additional on -site parking was not seen as much of an issue, as long as sufficient access can be obtained from the rear of the building, should additional parking be located there. 10.3.9 The COAC Board has rented out the facility for private functions for many years C to offset their operating costs. It was agreed that these functions are not part of their mandate, and they would prefer to not have to provide these services. Their responsibility is to provide programming for the older adults of Clarington. 18 -19 REPORT NO.: GSD -006 -12 PAGE 14. 10.3.10The COAA would like to see an immediate answer to their parking needs, with a direction for the future, including increased programming at satellite facilities and inclusion in a new-recreation facility in south Bowmanville. They want to ensure they are involved in the design process of the expanded south Bowmanville recreation complex. 10.4 Resident/Community Coalition 10.4.1 Staff met with representatives of a group of residents who live within the surrounding neighb.ourhood of the Beech Centre, who have formed. a Coalition for the purpose of this Report. In their words. "It's referred to as a Coalition . because it contains more interests than that found in the one -time advocacy group of the Old Bowmanville Neighbourhood Association and so reflects an emerging broader consensus within the neighbourhood and' beyond." 10.4.2 Their following statement outlines the breadth ,of their representation, and their stance on additional off- street paved parking and the Bowmanville Tennis Club; "A Coalition of seniors., youth, new residents, Heritage interests, neighbourhood advocates, business people, tennis players, taxpayers, parents of school children, residents of Horsey Street, Temperance Street, Grant Lane, Concession Street, Beech Avenue, and Centre Street met on Saturday 18. February 2012 and unanimously declared that no green space or playground land including the tennis courts should be used for off - street paved parking, and that the property tax - paying, volunteer funded and supported, Bowmanville Tennis Club, should receive a long term lease for its current site." 10.43 The Coalition expressed frustration with the fact that they have been dealing with the issue of additional parking for the Beech Centre for over ten years, and felt a. compromise had been reached in 2002 with the addition of the south parking lot. They were assured by Council at that time that there would be no more discussion of additional parking. 10.4.4 They feel that there is the potential for an additional 100 parking spots on the surrounding streets, and they heartily support on- street parking. 10,4.5 Most other downtown Municipal buildings, including libraries expect patrons to park at Municipal, lots. and on the street, and they feel this Centre should be no different, particularly if the on -site existing parking is managed to prioritize parking for individuals with accessibility issues, 10.4.6 The residents expressed frustration with buses and large . trucks servicing the Beech Centre, which are not conducive uses within a residential area. They suggest that the Board's commercial rentals should not be permitted. 10,47 The Coalition are strong proponents of the value of the green space, and appreciate the presence and service the Bowmanville Tennis Club brings to the community. 10.4.8 The Resident/Community Coalition definitely supports the future increased utilization of satellite' locations to deal with the increased presence' of the 18--20 REPORT NO.: GSD- 006 -12 PAGE 15 Clarington Older Adult Association. While they do not object to this location continuing to be utilized for the COAA,.they do not realistically feel this can be the primary , location in the years to come. 11.0 BEECH AVENUE, HERITAGE DISTRICT 11.1 Beech Avenue is a Heritage Conservation District under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act. There are also individual homes located on Beech Avenue designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act, 26 Beech Avenue (Beech Centre), however, is not designated individually. Should Council desire to increase parking at this site a Heritage Permit Application.would be completed and reviewed. by the Heritage Conservation District Advisory Committee, although approval rests with Council. 12.0 OPTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION 12.1 As a part of this review staff considered a number of options as a potential resolution to the ongoing parking issue at the Beech Centre. The options presented below are being recommended by staff as the best alternatives and take into account the position of all stakeholders. Other options considered but not advanced for Committee consideration at this time are; • Removal of playground and surrounding green space Maximization of parking by paving both the tennis courts and green space behind the building • Paid parking at the Beech Centre 12.2. The following options are being recommended for consideration by Council. 18 -21 OPTION T OPTION 2 OPTION 3 NO INCREASE TO ON -SITE PARKING INCREASE PARKING INCREASE/ TENNIS PARKING COURT RELOCATION - Current parking lot would - Parking lot would be - Parking lot would be OPTIONS remain unchanged (77 spaces) increased by 54 spaces (131 increased by 51 spaces (128 spaces in total) spaces in total) - Develop a "Priority Parking" system to provide designated - Increased parking would be - Parking would be located in parking spaces closest to the created west of the building. place of existing tennis courts main entrance for those most in The additional parking spaces (Attachment 3) need would be composed of 37 regular spaces and 17 - Develop a "Priority Parking" - Convert two spaces to additional spaces for special system to provide designated accessible parking.spaces, for large events where cars would parking spaces closest to the a total of four be "stacked" or "double parked" main entrance for those most along the west parking stalls in need - Overflow parking would ( Attachment 2) continue to be accommodated - Convert three spaces to on.neighbourhood streets - Develop a "Priority Parking" accessible parking spaces, for system to provide designated a total of five - Tennis Courts remain parking spaces closest to the main entrance for those most in need 18 -21 REPORT NO.. CSD- 006 -12 PAGE 16 18-22 OPTION 1 OPTION 2 OPTION 3, - Initiatives such as carpooling - Convert three spaces to - Two lit Tennis Courts of OPTIONS and shuttle services would accessible parking spaces, for similar' quality would be re- con't need to be continued and a total of five located to Soper'Creek Park expanded (Attachment 4) . - Tennis Courts remain - Provide a long term lease (5 - Initiatives such as car pooling years with the option to renew) - Initiatives such as car pooling and shuttle services would to the,Bowmanville Tennis Club and shuttle services would need to be continued and need to be continued and expanded expanded . - Secure a long term lease (5 - Provide a long term lease (5 years with the option to renew) years with the option.to renew) with the Bowmanville Tennis to the Bowmanville Tennis Club Club or a newly established Tennis Club - .Maintains green space for - Increases parking for COAA - Increases parking for COAA PRO'S current/future use. programs /events programs /events - Minimal financial impact - Reduces the need for on- - Reduces the need for on- - Sensitive to location/ street parking street parking neighbourhood - Tennis Courts remain on site - Opportunity to increase - Provides adequate parking for - Opportunity to increase number of designated majority of COAA events/ number of designated accessible parking spaces to programs accessible parking spaces to ensure on -site parking for - Encourages use of ensure on -site parking for those " those with physical disabilities environmentally friendly with physical disabilities - Retains green space alternatives to single occupant •- Existing mature trees would cars (car pooling, shuttle remain services, walking, cycling) - Opportunity to enhance - Opportunity to increase existing green space with number of designated additional landscaping and accessible parking spaces to trees ensure on -site parking for those with physical disabilities - Large events require on- street - Financial Impact' - Financial Impact. CON'S parking - Newly constructed parking lot - Loss of Tennis Courts/ Costs - Parking concerns of the would be located at the rear of to re- locate COAC Board are not addressed the building and would require members to "walk around" the building - Stacked parking would require some management for larger events - Loss of green space - 3 small diameter trees would be removed 1,000 -Added signage and 1,000 -Added signage and 1,000 -Added signage and FINANCIAL line painting line painting line painting IMPLICATIONS 1,000 Total 230,000 . - Parking lot 250,000 - Tennis Courts 30,000 - Landscaping/Trees 283,000 - Parking Lot 10,000 -Added Screening 30,000 - Landscaping/Trees 271,000 Total 10,000 -Added Screening - 574,000 Total 18-22 REPORT NO.: GSD- 006 -12 13.0 FINANCIAL SUMMARY PAGE 17 13.1 Staff is recommending that the $28,500 be incorporated into the 2013 operating base budget under External Agencies for the Clarington Older Adult Centre. Board grant no matter which option is selected by Council. The increase to Clarington Older Adult Centre Board grant is necessary as the Board will no longer receive rental revenue from non- COAA.rentals. 13.2 Option 1 recommends $1,000 for line painting and signage be funded from the Municipal Capital Works Reserve Fund. 13.3 Option 2 incorporates the cost identified in Option 1 ($1;000) as well as the cost of a new parking lot with additional trees and appropriate screening for a total cost of $271,000. It is recommended that the $271,000 be funded from the .Municipal Capital Works Reserve Fund. 13.4 Option 3 incorporates the cost identified in Option 1 ($1,000) as well as the cost of a new parking lot with additional trees and appropriate screening for a total cost of $324,000. It is recommended that the $324,000 be funded from the Municipal Capital Works Reserve Fund. It is also recommended that the cost of replacing the tennis courts estimated at $250,000 be funded from the Impact/Escrow Reserve Fund, 14.0 COMMENTS 14.1 Regardless of which option (if any) Council may select, staff are recommending that Council approve setting the capacity of the Clarington Beech Centre at 250 persons'(Recommendation 2 of Report CSD- 006 -12). 14.2 Further, staff is .also recommending that Council Limit the uses of the COAA at the Beech Centre to. programs and activities of the Clarington Older Adult Association, and that Council increase the Municipal Grant provided to the Board effective 2013 by $28,500 on an annual basis to off -set the loss of non -COAA revenue (Recommendation 3 of Report CSD- 006 -12).. 18 -23 Option 1 Op Lion 2 Option 3 Parking Lot Expansion N/A 230,000. 283,000 Landscaping and Trees N/A 30,000 30,000 Screening along West and South Properties N/A 10,000 10,000 Tennis Court Relocation N/A N/A 250.,000' Added Si na e and Line Painting 1,000 1,000 1,000 Su ofal.::... 0 Recommendation 3 — Increase Operating _ Grant to COAA 28,500 28,500 28,500 Total t ,_, :. ; - 29.;500 602.50.0. ;° 13.1 Staff is recommending that the $28,500 be incorporated into the 2013 operating base budget under External Agencies for the Clarington Older Adult Centre. Board grant no matter which option is selected by Council. The increase to Clarington Older Adult Centre Board grant is necessary as the Board will no longer receive rental revenue from non- COAA.rentals. 13.2 Option 1 recommends $1,000 for line painting and signage be funded from the Municipal Capital Works Reserve Fund. 13.3 Option 2 incorporates the cost identified in Option 1 ($1;000) as well as the cost of a new parking lot with additional trees and appropriate screening for a total cost of $271,000. It is recommended that the $271,000 be funded from the .Municipal Capital Works Reserve Fund. 13.4 Option 3 incorporates the cost identified in Option 1 ($1,000) as well as the cost of a new parking lot with additional trees and appropriate screening for a total cost of $324,000. It is recommended that the $324,000 be funded from the Municipal Capital Works Reserve Fund. It is also recommended that the cost of replacing the tennis courts estimated at $250,000 be funded from the Impact/Escrow Reserve Fund, 14.0 COMMENTS 14.1 Regardless of which option (if any) Council may select, staff are recommending that Council approve setting the capacity of the Clarington Beech Centre at 250 persons'(Recommendation 2 of Report CSD- 006 -12). 14.2 Further, staff is .also recommending that Council Limit the uses of the COAA at the Beech Centre to. programs and activities of the Clarington Older Adult Association, and that Council increase the Municipal Grant provided to the Board effective 2013 by $28,500 on an annual basis to off -set the loss of non -COAA revenue (Recommendation 3 of Report CSD- 006 -12).. 18 -23 REPORT NO.: CSD -006 -12 PAGE 18 . ( 14.3 In discussions with the COAA and the Resident/Community Coalition, it was suggested that if parking was extended to the west of the building (Option 2) then a new access to the facility would be required, The design of the parking lot in Option 2 provides for safe pedestrian access from the new parking lot to.the existing entrance, thus eliminating the need'for a new entrance. 14.4 The COAA should be encouraged -to use Municipal or facility parking lots for bus trips departing and returning in. the early morning or late evenings, as well as overnight trips in order to avoid unnecessary neighbourhood disturbances and cars being left in the lot taking up parking spaces. 14.5 Moving forward, the Community Services Department will continue to work with the COAA to look for opportunities to enhance current partnership programs. Opportunities may include expanded non -prime hours in various facilities, a greater number of prime time rentals for the purpose of special events, as well as exclusive access to the vacated concession areas in Courtice Community Complex and the Newcastle & District Recreation Complex. This would provide the COAA with a physical presence in these facilities to better promote their programs and services, and to provide a focal point for older adults enjoying programs within the building. 15.0 CONCURRENCE: 15.1 This report has been reviewed by Nancy Taylor, Director of Finance, Fred Horvath, Director of Operations, Gord Weir, Director of Emergency and Fire Services, Marie Marano, Director of Corporate Services, Jerry Barber, Purchasing Manager, Patti Barrie, Municipal Clerk and David Crome, Director of Planning Services who concur with the recommendations. CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN — Not Applicable Staff ContactAoseph P. Caruana, Director of Community Services Tony Cannella, Director of.Engineering Services Attachments: Attachment 1 - Peter Spratt Report Attachment 2 - Parking Option 2 Attachment 3 - Parking Option 3 Attachment 4 - Tentative Location of Tennis Courts at Soper Creek Park in Option 3 Attachment 5 - By -Law 2012- 18 -241.. REPORT NO.: GSD- 006 -12 PAGE 19 List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Malcolm McCombe, Secretary, Clarington Older Adult Centre Board Bill Humber, :Representative, Resident/Community Coalition Laurie Cook, Representative, Resident/Community Coalition Kem Majid, President, Bowmanville Tennis Club Ellen Logan, Representative, Bowmanville Tennis Club Dr. Timothy James, Bowmanville Tennis Club Member Lois Richards, COAA and Bowmanville Tennis Club Member 18 -25 Attachment 1 to Report CSD- 006 -12 ROCG Consulting ROCG1748 Saseiine Road West, Susie 200 Courtice, ON, Canaria LIE 2T1 glo6nl rn�zsullanit..,lixc:al a�Eirrirncr. I : 905 -5 7 Vii- 57' 3 ext 201 LD: 866.392 -51:72 F: 905-579-,9563 February 21, 2012 Mr, Joe Caruana Director of Community Services Municipality of Clarington 40 Temperance Street Bowmanville, ON L1C 3A6 (by email) Dear Mr, Caruana: Re: Report on Status of Strategic Plan: Clarington'Older Adult Association Background ROCG Consulting has been retained by the Municipality of Clarington to advise the Community Services Department. on the status of the Clarington Older Adult Association Strategic Plan . (2010) with specific focus on the COAA's use of the Beech Centre property in Bowmanville. Specifically, we were directed to prepare a report summarizing the findings of discussions with individual COAA Board members, confirm the status of the CPAA Strategic Plan, and confirm the COAA Board's future desire and plans related to the Beech Centre property and future facility development, Approach Per the `Germs of Reference, interviews were conducted with all ten (10) elected Directors and the Executive Director, Additional- interviews were conducted with the following Municipal Staff: the Community Services. Coordinator (Advisor to the COA Centre Board), and the Director of Operations, Broader consultation with COAA members and other community stakeholders was not within the scope of the Terms of Reference, Preliminary findings from the consultation process were shared with the Community Services . Department, in a meeting January 19, 2012. These same findings were discussed with the Clarington Older Adults Centre Board on January 26, 2012. At thai: time, the Board voted to endorse the preliminary findings as confirmation of its position.. The two Council Designates to the Board were briefed on the preliminary findings on January 30, 2012, rf t'- s4 `cz.ns' G °{.. RE ss c Ts� +o� s9�`�1�oct'119�F�i0l;t1P� z 18 -26 Report on Status of COAA Strategic Plan and Beech Avenue Facility 2 Findings The scope of these findings is limited to the COAA Strategic Plan, and specifically how the Board and the Municipality have been interpreting the essential components of the plan related to the use of facilities. It should be noted that the preliminary findings referenced earlier in this document helped to establish a starting point for confirming and communicating the Board's position on the Strategic Plan and more specifically, its intention to continue to utilize the -Beech Centre. The author has since expanded upon some points and added information and /or personal insights to enhance clarity or provide a more balanced perspective. 1. The COA Centre Board consists of hard - working, dedicated volunteers who give freely of their time and talents to support the delivery of programs and services for the older adult community of Clarington. There should be no doubt that they have the best.lnterests of their members at heart. 2. There is evidence of significant efforts by the COAA to promote the mission and values components of the Strategic Plan. The majority of Board members believe they are "walking the talk" in demonstrating commitment to the values, although a few see 'Community Focus' (e.g. collaboration) as needing further attention: 3. Most of the Board is familiar with the long -range visioh for the Association. There are mixed views on what 'Respected Community Partner' means, but the majority of the Board feels COAA is one. There are examples of where the COAA has attempted to engage segments of the broader community. There are also examples of where the Board's actions might be considered by some to be contrary to the spirit of being a respected community partner (e.g. building trust and using collaborative practices), such as in its decision to appear before Council to object to a proposed one -year lease renewal of the tennis courts. [Author's opinion: While / believe that this decision was made in good faith on behalf of its members, the COAA may have missed an opportunity to enter into meaningful dialogue with the Bowmanvilid Tennis Club (a community partner) before making its decision, and in doing so, enhance its reputation]. evidence of significant outreach by COAA* all 4. There is parts of Clarington through expanded partnerships and delivery of• events /programs at satellites: (e.g. new focus on working with community hall boards; programs continue at the Newcastle Recreation Centre, and the Courtice. Community Complex; partnerships exist with community organizations and businesses). This is consistent with recommendations contained in the Strategic Plan, 5, The COAA sees the Beech Centre as 'home'. The COAA wants the Beech Centre to remain the 'hub' of the organization. Concerns were expressed about the potential loss of volunteers (members) if the COAA loses the Beech Centre. Many of its members live within walking distance of the Centre. 18 -27 Report on Status of COAA Strategic Plan and Beech Avenue Facility 3 6. There is a significant distinction being made between .space for 'social interaction' (e.g. COAAZY Cafe) and 'program space'. Older members' needs are different from younger members. Space for social interaction is as important as program space. (This is consistent with the findings of the Strategic Plan). 7. The Municipality considers the Beech Centre to be well maintained and in 'good' condition; no major repairs or upgrading needs have been communicated to the Municipality. 8. Parking of the Beech Centre remains a problem for its members. The issue is most evident during large events sponsored by the COAA, (e.g. Tuesday lunches and special events), and during events sponsored by other organizations (hall rentals), Residents in the vicinity of the Beech Centre may be equally frustrated with the parking issue, as the over -flow spills onto neighbouring streets. The majority of Board members would like to see new parking spaces added at the Centre. They would like to see the tennis courts relocated within the community and use the vacated property for expanded parking. 9. There are expectations and an acknowledgement by the Board that increased capacity to accommodate program expansion and continued membership growth will come through the expansion of current and future satellite locations. There is still a commitment to "multi -use community facilities with designated space and designed for use by older adults ", which is consistent with the Strategic Plan, 10. The COA Centre Board is frustrated by a perceived lack of action by the Municipality on the preparation of a master facility plan (Strategic Priority 3.3, page 19), and in particular, a lack of engagementtoonsultation on the part of the Community Services Department. The COA Centre Board expects Community Services to be leading this Initiative, with COAA's active involvement (collaboration). The perceived 'lack of action' is not shared by the Community Services Department. Community Services believes that it has started the dialogue on future facility options, citing its meeting with several COAA representatives in June 2011. Some of the Board members interviewed recall meetings with Municipal Staff to discuss' COAA's future needs, but feel that a more consultative approach is needed. ' 11. There is a considerable range of interpretations of what is meant by: "Continued utilization of Beech Centre is acknowledged as providing a viable, short -term facility solution" (Strategic Plan, page 18). This is perhaps the single mostImportant finding from the review. The COA Centre Board believes that this wording means that it can continue to use the Beech Centre 'and the continued growth will be accommodated by bringing additional facilities on -line (as part of the master facility plan). Community Services Department has been interpreting this wording -to mean that the COAA will be moving out of the Beech Centre at some point (reference: 'short- term') and has been attempting to engage the COAA in looking at other facility options. I believe that this difference in interpretation is at the center of the issue. �)rpi,4up - �rp'�"f``'N' s-n u:�}•�a�- ?yfyr���a�ti.� *,,.� -* }�iiZ Y svS�n''�� �i�s"..r_7 r�.. ''3r i Report on Status of COAA Strategic Plan and Beech Avenue Facility 4 Suggestions .for Consideration by Community Services Department a) • Retain the Beech Centre as the `hub' for COAA administration and further development of its `social space':. b) Maintain tennis courts, green space, and parking "as is ", c) Gradually transition high - volume events (COAA programs and hall rentals) away from the Beech Centre to other recreation /community facilities that will be able to accommodate parking, d) Supplement COAA's revenue for lost rental Income (Strategic Plan identified $35,000 for rentals in 2010 budget), . e) Increase the number'of shuttle vans and /or consider the purchase /lease -of mini -bus; the .shuttle van services have been well received. f) Arrange tours of two, relatively new, mixed -use older adult centres operated by Oshawa Senior Citizens Centres (Legends Centre and'Conant Centre) for Co- mmunity Services and COA Centre Board to visualize what one looks like. Visit the John Street (HQ) Centre to demonstrate how Oshawa has managed its limited parking space and transitioned to three other municipally -owned satellites, Explore how it operates its transportation service, and its community dining services, g) Engage, the COA Centre Board. In discussion about bringing-on other space; this space will be designed for older adults acid designated for use by older adults, within mixed -use community facilities (consistentwiih Strategic Plan).. Thank you for the opportunity to review the COAA Strategic Plan and share these findings. I appreciate the cooperation of Staff and the COA Centre Board. If you have any questions regarding any aspect of this report, pleasee contact me. Yours truly, Z= Peter Spratt; oHRP, Q.Med Vice President 18 -29 Attachment Ke ore UbLj- uub -"IL Parking ' Existing 77 Special Event 17 Additional Rear 37 Net Total Parking 131 F. `(7 pLLL} F•- �` t f: �;y � jjj��•Y •� � ' tl +is .e i 17 fir! 6 Connecting Walkway /r s 14 ay lilt 'r-, •. 1: +'' ,�' fir r mi •, a :.► t U)j AS +s� Legend (n Q Proposed Accessible Parking 0 \ t t Existing Accessible Parking 2 2 j_ Special Event Parking ;. Sidewalk Landscape Area J:: %'`r yt f rt• ' I Pavement Parking Area l 1 Beech�Avenue ry\` +y.• \ i PROJECT. i 1� CLARINGTON BEECH CENTRE PARKING OPTIONS DRAWING: PREPARED BY: CHECKED BY: PROJECT riO.: y E. USIHSI - - 0 PARKING DESIGNED BY. APPROVEDBY: ATTACHAIEIIT. �1�°011 OPPORTUNITY /�S z Leading the TVay OPTION 2 SCALE. DATE: e 1:1,000 MAR 2012 (— 18 -30 Attachment 3 to 18 -31 Attachment 4 to Re orf CSD- 006 -1 � 11' 11' HOBBS DRIVE ] Z31i LU { MORGAN DALE CR 9 1! bb RL �SOPERCOURT j .. � �..a ( .� t� jj�l. to �.l ,� r r '� • } � ti.� �.1, 1t �`. t 71, r t+l s� r '�f itr � / .. �► �� '�' Legend Tennis Courts 10 m L L t'' his' II �; 1+ ;'• ' � 5 a8g I PROJECT: SOPER CREEK PARK DRAWING: PREPARED BY: CHECKED BN PROJECT Na.: E. LISINSKI — f jDESIGNED BY: APPROVED BY: ATTACHMENT �1i. wafi PROPOSED Leading the Way C, TENNIS COURTS SCALE: DATE: 4 1:2 50 N1AR M12 18 -32 Attachment 5 to Report CSD- 006 -12 THE CORPORATION OF.THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BY -LAW NO, 2012- Being a by -law to amend By -lave 2011 -106, being a . by -law to establish a Municipal Services Board to provide social and recreational opportunities to the Older Adults of Clarington through the operation of the Clarington Older Adult Centre WHEREAS Council has approved the recommendations contained in Report CSD- 006 -12, NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington enacts as follows: THAT By -law #2011 -106 be amended by adding the following to section 1: a) . Capacity THAT the overall capacity of the Clarington Beech Centre be 250 persons. b) Programming THAT effective January 1, 2013 activities taking place at the Clarington Beech Centre be limited to programs and social activities of the Clarington Older Adult Centre Board and regular meetings of the Lions Club of Bowmanville, By -law passed in open session this 16th day of April 2012. Adrian Foster, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk In representing the COAA Board, we limited increased parking as shown ii 006 -12. (37 additional spaces at the o Attachment 2 to Addendum #1 to Report CSD- 006 -12 �JVY1tlY1tt►'�1'� L...i Qt SOv'ti �rYwY'ti k ..�, mould like to Gain access to rj) i attachment 2 to report CSD - rear of the building) We would like to see this area as a friendly open urban area that encourages walking and bicycling from Beech'Ave to the green park on Elgin St. The addition of lighting, plantings /shrubbery and bicycle racks would enhance the design and appearance. This addition would allow for members with mobility issue parking, staff parking, Bowmanville Tennis Club parking and emergency egress completely around the building. We recognize and agree with the need for more on street parking and to that end we would like to work with municipal staff and the Resident Community Coalition to determine best street locations. We would also like to discuss the possibility of using municipal pay display parking lots. The health benefits from walking an extra 5 or 10 minutes are immense. -Walking to and from the BC can be realized as a healthy form of exercise and a positive gain from these decisions. When approaching the BC by walking, we think it would make sense to have a proper signed x -walk and a non driveway entrance path that is wheelchair or assisted walker accessible. We recognize the need to protect grggn spaces within our community from shrinking and disappearing forever. However we also recognizing that many of our citizens rely on vehicle transportatiion for a lot of their daily activities and they need somewhere close to their destination for parking. I believe that by working together with a positive outlook, we can solve these issues. 18 -34 Attachment 3 to Addendum #1 to Report CSD- 006 -12 Wednesday May 30`h 2012 Hello, Everyone... Over the last 15 years it has been obvious to *the association that one day parking at the Clarington Beech Centre would become a problem.. Those days are now. Not every day as yqu are all aware but frequently enough that-we need some solutions. Our current Board of Directors along with Staff suggested that we form a Municipal Advisory Committee made up of all interested parties. This group met recently in an attempt to come forward with agreeable alternative parking solutions for our Municipal Council to review in June 2012. There was no agreement reached that would allow us to increase the number of onsite parking spaces. Considering the needs of our membership the Board realizes that accessible parking is a high priority. With this in mind the Board passed the following motion that will be presented to Municipal Council in June: We move that in the best interest of our membership that the COAA plan to move from the Beech Centre facility. A newlocation would have to address the major problem of adequate onsite parking and allow for the inevitable growth of our membership in the future. So what does this mean? It means that we cannot solve our parking problems at our current site and with our projectedgrowth the move to a new site is in our best interest over the long term. In the meantime, the Clarington Beech Centre will remain the hub for our many programs: The "COAA Board, Staff and Volunteers are also committed to organizing and implementing programs and events throughout the Municipality of Clarington. We hope that you will continue to join us as we travel to more areas that are rural. Over the past twelve months we have had the pleasure of working with many community groups. We thank them for welcoming us into their facilities in Kendal, Tyrone, Orono and.Newtonville. We enjoyed our time and hope to return to these venues again in the future. As we continue to explore options we need each and every one of you to assist us in the following ways. We understand and realize that some of these suggestions will be more difficult for some than others. However we ask you to please just do what you can. Parking Off Site — please if you are physically well, park on the neighbouring streets or within the Municipal lots and walk, leaving the parking lot free for those that aren't.as mobile. • It's cool to carpool we have requested this in the past and hope that you will all continue to make a concerted effort to travel in larger groups to the Centre • When parking onsite — always remember to keep your car between the lines, and only:park in designated parking spots. Parking in Fire Route's and along the driveway is very dangerous for both you and your vehicle. Over flow parking is available to the south of the building as 18 -35 well as on the grassed lawn area behind the Centre during the warm weather months. • Kiss and Ride — we understand that this is not an option for all but please if you know you are conning to the Centre and someone is able to drop you off and pick you up we truly appreciate it • Wheels in Action — the COAA does provide Van transportation throughout the Municipality so please if you are interested in coming to the Centre contact the front desk and our volunteers will do their best to pick you up. Remember that on Special Events days this service is very busy so pre - booking is necessary and a small fee is charged. • Parking attendants are often available during large events so please keep a close eye out for the `bright orange vests' and follow the directions they are giving you. • When attending an event always remember that parking could be an issue so give yourself plenty of time upon arrival to find a spot. There is nothing worse than showing up late for a special event, lunch or a class and not being able to find a place to park. Trust us when we say all of your efforts will be appreciated, and please remember that the Board of Directors and staff would love to hear your feedback, comments or suggestions so feel free to contact us. Yours Truly, e. sz 69eca President Clarington Older Aduft Centre Board (905)697-2856 ex ec- director @bel lnet. ca 18 -36 Attachment 4 to Addendum #1 to Report CSD- 006 -12 June 18, 2012 Mr. Joseph Caruana Director of Community Services Municipality of Clarington 40 Temperance Street Bowmanville, Ontario L1C 3A6 Subject: Concerns and Impact of the Clarington Older Adult Association (COAA) — Parking Concerns / Strategic Plan The coalition representing children, residents, families, historic interests, Old Bowmanville advocates, and tax payers, would like to thank Clarington Staff for bringing together citizens, the Bowmanville Tennis Club, and the Clarington Older Adult Association (COAA) to discuss the issue of parking at the Clarington Beech Centre, and to arrive at a solution that is satisfactory to all. We would also like to thank the Mayor and members of council for supporting Option 1 of the report CSD- 006 -12 during the GP &A meeting on April 2 2012. At first we were frustrated to have the motion from the GP &A not ratified during the council meeting of April 16, 2012 and having it sent back to staff to hold a community meeting.between the three parties. This said, we believe it did provide the opportunity for full dialogue on a sensible outcome. During the two meetings that were held our understanding of the issues from each party's perspective were: Bowmanville Tennis Club: The tennis club which consists of a 100% volunteer membership delivers a service to the community of Clarington which is affordable, well maintained and family oriented. They offer, at no cost, their courts for school temiis teams and have offered free trials and an introductory session to the COAA. In addition they have been a great steward by maintaining the historically important and memory - laden Bowmanville tennis courts. The tennis courts were built (circa 1946) for the community by Clarington soldiers returning from WW2. Clarington Older Adult Association: The increased membership growth to date and continued growth foreseen is beyond the capabilities of their current location. Their current single facility, which is also rented out for commercial rentals to provide additional operational income, can substantially meet their current needs if the 180 available on -site and street spaces are used. However, the Beech Centre cannot keep pace with their future needs. Although parking was the first pressure point that growth in 18 -37 membership has created, it is not the only issue. Their current facility is located in a historical residential neighbourhood where the increased traffic and extended hours of use are creating an undesirable and unsafe situation for the COAA, children, residents and the historical preservation of Clarington's only designated historical street. Coalition representing children, families and residents, historical interests, Old Bowmanville Neighborhood advocates, and tax payers: The many points of view created a challenge for the two members of the Coalition. We hoped to represent and articulate the Coalition's concerns and interests. The summary of such concerns include: 1) Children - Our most significant interest is for the children of the neighbourhood who often do not have a voice at this discussion but are most affected by the actions of others. The current parkland in the neighbourhood, as mandated by the Municipality's own Official Plan, and as ratified by the Ontario government, indicates that this neighbourhood (defined in the Official Plan as the "Central" neighbourhood) is drastically underserved with only 50% of the space generally expected as a minimum standard. The thought of further reducing parkland for children to create new and infrequently used parking spaces is impossible to justify for our future generations. This parkland was already significantly reduced when the large hall was added to the Beech Centre, and paved parking added to the south side of the building. The downtown core of Bowmanville has only one Municipal Park in which children can play. The diverse population of the downtown Bowmanville includes many children from challenging social economic environments where this park represents their only green space to play. They have no front or back yards. Although Central school has a play structure the school has been reviewed for closure numerous times and this remains a future threat. The play structure at any time may be removed due to the annual safety inspections which the parent council is continually challenged to fund out of its own resources, so that it meets code. 2) Families and Residents of the neighbourhood — The families and residents of this neighbourhood have always been very accommodating with regards to street parking for COAA events. Despite several requests during the community meetings for a demonstration of the inadequacy of the available spaces to meet their needs, no evidence has been presented and it is still unclear as to the legitimacy of the parking capacity issue The COAA has a parking capacity of 180 parking spaces either on -site or within 300 meters to support a building capacity of 250. For over 12 years the neighbourhood has been very accommodating; however there is an increasing sense of frustration and anger with the continued lack of respect shown by the COAA to the neighbourhood and environment they share. There was an agreement in 2001 that the paving of green land and the removal of heritage trees to the south of the building for additional parking would be the last of the COAA's parking demands. The continuing practice however of parking on grass in the front and back of the Beech Centre has directly contributed to the premature death of mature trees due to the compacting of the soil and bruising of the root system. This past month when asked why the executive director and centre staff were parking on this parkland during the day when there were substantial numbers of empty and paved spaces on -site, we were told to "mind our own business" and that "we have a big mouth ". The lack of consideration and respect for the environment and neighbourhood has caused great strain on the relationship between the COAA and residents. We strongly request that the erosion of parkland space, attack on the environment and disrespect for the neighbourhood stop! As one neighbour said, "Even Rob Ford wouldn't pave parkland ". 3) Historic Interest — Beech Avenue is a historical and designated jewel of the municipality. This historical preservation includes the buildings and the natural environment surrounding it. The current use of on grass parking has been a direct contributing factor to the loss of old trees due to the compaction and bruising of tree roots. There have been numerous tree losses caused by parking on grass and relocation of a dumpster from the paved parking lot to a grassy treed area. The notion of expansion of the Beech Centre, either in building or parking, to accommodate the growth in membership and commercial rental by the COAA would compromise the historical preservation of the street and neighbourhood. The tennis courts have a great historical significance to Clarington in paying thanks and remembrance to those who served in WW2. On a volunteer basis our returning soldiers, almost 60 years ago, built the tennis courts for the community at the Beech location to symbolize their thanks and commitment to Clarington. The current Bowmanville Tennis Club has provided outstanding stewardship for this historically significant presence. During the community meetings it was suggested that a heritage sign be posted here for educational and commemorative purposes. We hope the Municipality will support this initiative. 4) Old Bowmanville Neighbourhood advocates — The original Old Bowmanville Neighbourhood Association started as an advocacy group to assist in the .stewardship of the historical and family nature of old Bowmanville. It is the request of these Old Bowmanville Neighbourhood advocates that no additional parking on the Beech Centre site be created as it will have significant negative impact to the delicate balance of the historical and family nature of the neighbourhood. 5) Tax Payers — The notion of spending $271,000 ($5,028 per space) on paving over parkland or to spend $574,000 ($ 11,255 per space) to remove a self funding community -based and volunteer -run tennis club to provide minimal additional parking for a situation where there has been no quantifiable evidence that more is needed beyond the 180 spaces already available on -site and on- street is an insult to taxpayers. The spending of this money would clearly communicate that the Municipality is out of touch with the financial hardships its taxpayers are enduring in very challenging times. The Beech Centre location is by COAA's own request their temporary location and there should be no thought of paving parkland or removing a well run community asset which requires no municipality funding. During the community meetings with the Bowmanville Tennis Club, COAA and the Coalition representing children, families and residents, historical interests, Old Bowmanville Neighbourhood advocates, and tax payers, and for which the municipality provided a moderator function, we completed a long and productive 18 -39 dialogue. In addition to the positive recommendations provided by Municipal staff in report CSD- 006 -12 the committee collaborated on additional opportunities to help the COAA with their self perceived parking issue. Excessive parking needs are rare or non existent once on- street parking is taken into account, but just in case additional needs arise we recommend: 1) Eliminating commercial rentals, for which the municipal report SCD- 006 -12 offered to compensate the COA.A 2) Utilizing the Rickard Complex for large COAA functions, i.e. Tuesday lunches and annual registration. 3) Leveraging more municipal facilities to offer satellite programs to better service the Clarington population and reduce the congestion on the Beech Centre site. 4) Expand the number of on -site spaces allocated for the mobility - challenged from its current number of two! We strongly recommend that the direction encompassed in Option 1 as contained in the report CSD - 006 -12 be supported, and with the additional clarification that parking on the grass parkland cease immediately, so that children are not at risk and the neighbourhood's acknowledged insufficient parkland is not further reduced. Thank -you Coalition representing children, families and residents, historical interests, Old Bowmanville Neighborhood advocates, and tax payers M1 UNFINISHED BUSINESS ITEM #2 UNFINISHED BUSINESS Correspondence D - 14 The following item was referred to the General Purpose and Administration Committee at the June 18, 2012 Council meeting: REQUEST FROM NICK KULB, PARTNER & EXECUTIVE PRODUCER, REPUBLIC LIVE FOR A TEMPORARY EXTENSION TO BY -LAWS 91 -56 AND 97 -126 FOR NOISE LEVELS THAT the request from Nick Kulb, Partner & Executive Producer, Republic Live for a temporary extension to By -laws 91 -56 and 97 -126 to allow the maximum level of audible sound to be modified from 45 -60dBA to 100- 110dBA from front of house and that the hours of operation be modified from 10:00 a.m. to midnight to 9:00 a.m, to 2:00 a.m. be referred to the General Purpose and Administration Committee meeting of June 25, 2012. "CARRIED" Correspondence D — 14 is attached. 18 -41 REYPUBI N i-E, its fl June 8, 2012 Tony Canella Department of Engineer Services 40 Temperance Street Bowmanville, ON L 1 C 3A6 Re: Temporary By -law Extension Mr, Canella, As per my letter to the Municipality of Clarington, dated April 24, 2012, and my conversation with Patti Barrie on June 6, 2012, this letter serves as our formal request for temporary extensions to By -law 91 -53 and.By -law 97 -126. Further breakdown to our request for temporary extensions is as follows: 1. Maximum Level of Audible Sound to be modified from 45 -60db to 100 -110db from FOH (Front of House). 2. Hours of operation / Level of Audible Sound to be modified as follows: a. 9:00am — 12 :30pm: Sound Check Main Stage b. 9:00am — 12:30pm: Sound Check Secondary Stage c. 1:00pm — 11:OOpm: Artist Sets / Performances I Main Stage d. 1:OOpm — 2:00am: Artist Sets / Performances I Secondary Stage e. 2:00am — 8:59am: Sound Curfew at all Stages We understand the current By -law protects the community from loud levels of noise, and adequately prevents persons from becoming a nuisance to surrounding neighbors and industry. However, this low level will severely limit the ability for Boots & Hearts Music Festival to deliver a world -class festival to our artists and those in attendance. Our request of 100 -110db limit is the standard level of audible sound for most festivals of our size and nature. For example, the average washing machine, dishwasher, air conditioner, flushing toilet and vacuum cleaner range between 50 -85db; whereas, most outdoor festivals / concerts range between 100- 120db. Our production team is taking internal steps to ensure audio levels are controlled and rarely top out at 1 l Odb. 'In doing so, our average level of sound should be around 85- 100db. We have taken steps to adequately inform all surrounding neighbors of our plans, traffic patterns, times of operations, etc., and are working closely with the Office of Communications & Tourism for the Municipality of Clarington. It is our intent to accommodate surrounding neighbors and ensure their experience during the week does not negatively impact their lives and/or private property. 611 Commerce Street; Suite 3012 PO Box 1669 / 1179 Ridgeway Road 1 Nashville, TN 37203 Woodstock, ON N4S OA9 18 -42 �-_ dw . REPUBLIC This extension will allow us to provide the best possible festival for our artists, those in attendance, the community of Clarington and the surrounding region. Therefore, we humbly request for approval of our temporary extension request by both your office and the Council of the Municipality of Clarington. Please let me know if you need additional clarity or have any questions or concerns. Again, we are honored to host this festival in Bowmanville and trust it will be an enjoyable and profitable experience for everyone associated with it. Warmest Regards, Nick Kulb Partner & Executive Producer Cc: Patti Barrie Jennifer Cook 611 Commerce Street; Suite 3012 Nashville, TN 37203 PO Box 1669 / 1179 Ridgeway Road 2 Woodstock, ON N4S OA9 18 -43 C — 1 Gallagher, June From: Michelle Viney " Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 11:24 AM To Gallagher, June Subject: FW: Intensification concerns re: South Courtice development Dear Ms. Gallagher, Please receive the below correspondence for the public meeting concerning files SC 2012 -0001 and ZBA 2012 -0008, as I am unable to attend in person. As I mentioned on the telephone, I originally sent a similar email to Mr. Crome as well as members of Council. Should you require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Michelle Speelman Viney Dear Mr. Crome, Further to the public meeting held in North Courtice two weeks ago, I am writing to you to express my concerns about the effects of the development planned for both the northwest and southeast corners of Prestonvale and Bloor on the current residents of South Courtice. During the meeting, Paddy from Dillon Consulting advised us that the Province of Ontario is requiring intensification (and that intensification is planned specifically for South Courtice) and the creation of densely populated communities where one can walk, bike or take transit to get around. Community Gardens & Ice Rinks: We were advised during the meeting that community gardens and /or small ice rinks have been created in other intensified neighbourhoods. Residential development on the southeast corner of Prestonvale and Bloor will (ironically) reduce the availability of agricultural land in Courtice (as it is currently actively farmed). South Courtice Arena already has a Qudging from the parking lot) well - utilized ice pad. The storm relief pond to the south and east of the park on Roswell, usually freezes over in winter and is a well -used ad hoc ice rink. Traffic/Transit/Access to Services: • Roswell Drive is frequently lined with cars most summer evenings; Rosswell Park is not accessible by foot for current users /residents • Many park users come from the west side of Townline Road (Oshawa) 20 -1 • It is frequently difficult to turn north onto Prestonvale from Southfield due.to large number of cars exiting the arena; adding hundreds of new residents will not improve this situation • Addition of hundreds of new residents will lead to increased traffic over the South Prestonvale CP level rail crossing, where there are currently no safety arms .(study requested by Council) • Grocery shopping is not available locally (closest grocery stores are at Townline /Highway 2 and Bloor /Grandview); minimum of two Durham Region Transit (DRT) bus routes must be used to access the above mentioned grocery stores. Additional residents will dramatically increase traffic along Prestonvale. Please note that I am NOT advocating to add a grocery store to the neighbourhood! • Medical services are not available in this area (excluding optometry and dental); ditto as above for DRT. Will significantly increase traffic primarily along Prestonvale. • Due to lack of transit and medical services, the proposed intensified area will likely be most attractive to young families rather than mobility restricted seniors (see Schools below) • In the event of emergency, accident or road closure on the 401, traffic spills onto Baseline and Bloor and creates bumper -to- bumper congestion. . • Current parking problems exist for parents during drop off /pick up at McG!Ilvary school (see Schools below) Parkland .8 ha is required for every 1000 residents. • Rosswell Park is approximately 326,105 sq ft = 3.03 ha • Parkette in Bayview North is approximately 8,655 sq ft = .08 ha Total parklands in Bayview neighbourhood = 3.11 ha • Number of residents of Bayview neighbourhood = 5,400 (bordered by Townline to the West, Prestonvale to the East and Bloor to the North) • Minimum number of ha of parkland required for existing population = 4.3 ha • Current parkland deficit = 1.19 ha (without additional residents) • This deficit.is felt by current residents when children trespass on private property due to inadequate & appropriate places to play Schools • McGillvary school is not adequate to accommodate the existing population. • Portables are currently employed to add needed classroom space. • Problem will only get worse when hundreds of new residents arrive • Moving Grades 7 and 8 to Courtice High School is being considered. • Moving French immersion students to another location is being considered. • Vacant land for two proposed schools on both Fenning and Southfield remain unlevelled /undeveloped and are an unsafe place for children to play (see Parkland section), motorbikes often use the area, becomes a dumping ground for unwanted building materials and garbage. • School is not currently within walking distance for students (see Traffic section above) Noise /Light Pollution & Environmental Concerns • Current noise studies show that the baseline acceptable noise levels are exceeded prior to additional development • Noise abatement measures need to be employed as part of the development plan • See traffic section above, increase in transit, service and private vehicle traffic. • Concerns about additional emissions from more vehicles and households 20 -2 • Further encroachment of the natural environment (loss of animal habitat, trees /vegetation) by development • Additional light pollution from development For these reasons, I urge you to reconsider a recommendation to Council to add. additional density /intensify development on the northwest and southeast corners of Prestonvale and Bloor. Please feel free to contact me, should you require additional information about this issue of concern for current South Courtice residents. Sincerely, Michelle Speelman Viney 3, 20 -3 • 1�1 11 MEMO Leading the Way CLERK'S DEPARTMENT To: Mayor Foster and Members of Council From: Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk Date: June 22, 2012 Subject: GENERAL PURPOSE & ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA — JUNE 25, 2012 — UPDATE Please be advised of the following amendments to the GPA agenda for the meeting to be held on Monday, June 25, 2012: 6. DELEGATIONS See attached Final List. (Attachment#1) 10. MUNICIPAL CLERK'S DEPARTMENT (a) OPD-007-12 Replacement page of Page 3 of the draft by-law (Agenda Page 10-8) is attached. The change was the addition of a note in Section 2.1. (Attachment#2) 14. CORPORATE SERVICES DEPARTMENT (d) COD-017-12 Page 2 of Attachment 1 to Report COD-017-12 is attached (Attachment#3) Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk PLB/jeg cc: F. Wu, Chief Administrative Officer Department Heads CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905-623-3379 F 905-623-6506 Attachment #1 of Update Memo FINAL LIST OF DELEGATIONS GPA Meeting: June 25, 2012 (a) Stephen Brickell, Member of the Resident/Community Coalition, Regarding Addendum #1 to Report CSD-006-12, Clarington Older Adult Association- Parking Concerns/Strategic Plan (b) Keith Giesbrecht, Event Producer, and Carolyn Smith, Senior Story Producer, MDN Media 2 Inc., Regarding "Million Dollar Neighbourhood - Season 2" and a Request to Use Garnet Rickard Complex Banquet Hall for Filming (c) Kulpreet Khurana, Regarding the Proposed Leader Energy Wind Turbines and Port Granby Project (d) Heather Rutherford or a Representative of Clarington Wind Concerns, Regarding the Proposed Leader Energy Wind Turbines and Port Granby Project (e) Gerry Mahoney, on behalf of the South East Clarington Ratepayers Association, Regarding the Proposed Leader Energy Wind Turbines and Port Granby Project (f) Bryce Jordan, Sernas Associates, Report PSD-034-12, Regarding Proposed Official Plan Amendment, Proposed Neighbourhood Design Plan for Village North Neighbourhood in Newcastle, Applications to Amend the Zoning By-law and for Approval of Draft Plans of Subdivision Applicants: Smooth Run Developments (Metrus Developments Inc.) Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited (g) Myno Van Dyke and Christopher Brown, Regarding the "Newcastles of the World" Event (h) Harold Hammond &Al Strike, Co-Chairs of Fundraising Project, Valleys 2000, Regarding the Valleys 2000 Fish By-Pass Channel 3 ATTACHMENT#® T 2.0 GENERAL / 2.1 HOURS OF OPERATION Visitation Hours: 8:00 a.m. to Sundown Office Hours: 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. (July and August) Interment Hours: 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Note, the Office for the Cemeteries is the Municipal Clerk's Office,40 Temperance Street, Bowmanville. 2.1.1 No person shall enter or remain in a Cemetery between sundown and 8:00 a.m. without the permission of the Cemetery Operator. 2.1.2 Subsection 2.1.1 shall not apply to a police constable and employees of the Municipality of Clarington in the performance of their duties. 2.2 CONDUCT The Cemetery Operator reserves full control over the Cemetery operations and management of land within the Cemetery grounds. No person may damage, destroy, remove or deface any property within the Cemetery. All visitors shall conduct themselves in a quiet manner that shall not disturb any service being held. 2.3 LIABILITY The Cemetery Operator shall not be held liable for any loss or damage, without limitation (including damage by the elements, Acts of God, or vandals)to any lot, plot, columbarium niche, monument, marker, or other article that has been placed in relation to an Interment, save and except for direct loss or damage caused by gross negligence of the Cemetery Operator. 2.4 PUBLIC REGISTER The Public Register shall be available to the public through the Municipal Clerk's Office during regular office hours. 2.5 PETS OR OTHER ANIMALS Pets or other lower animals, including cremated animal remains, are not allowed to be buried on Cemetery grounds. 2.6 INTERMENTS ON A STATUTORY HOLIDAY No Interment shall be made on a Statutory Holiday except in the case of a written order of the Medical Officer of the Department of Health or the Cemetery Operator. 2.7 INTERMENTS ON A SATURDAY OR SUNDAY No Interment shall be made on a Saturday or Sunday without payment of an extra charge as set forth in Schedule"A", save and except in the case of a written order of a Medical Officer of Health and in such case the extra charge shall not apply. 2.8 MEMORIAL SERVICES Before any memorial service is held in the Cemetery, the Cemetery Operator shall be given at least 10 days notice in writing,together with a satisfactory undertaking that the cost of repairing any damage which may be occasioned,will be paid. ATTACHMENT# TO e. Duke Sheet ReC011MR10ti011, � GI-2012-04 2 June Ili, 2012 e- Due to past experiences on similar projects, and the preliminary nature of the utility relocation estimates, a contingency amount of approximately 12% is carried forward. Therefore, including design and tender fees, contract administration fees, and other project costs such as the Municipality's share of utility relocation costs, the Engineering Department advises the following breakdown for the above referenced project: Total Project Value $784,700.00 Budget Amount 110-32-330-83359-7401 (2011) $75,000.00 110-32-330-83359-7401 (2012) $750,000.00 Estimated Unexpended Budget $40,300.00 Additional Funding Required $0 We recommend the report to Council move forward based on the above apportionments. Attached for your files is the recommendation provided by AECOM which includes a more detailed breakdown of estimated project costs. Should you have any further questions, please feel free to contact the undersigned. Regards, Ron Albright, P. Eng. Manager, Infrastructure and Capital Works RA/sb/dv Attachment Pc: Will McCrae, P. Eng., Manager, Cobourg Office, AECOM Nancy Taylor, Director of Finance A.S. Cannella, Director of Engineering Services