Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
PD-47-95
DN:STOLP-NE.GP THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON • 6];yl PUBLIC MEETING Meeting: General Purpose and Administration Committ, Date: Monday, May 15, 1995 PD-47- OPA 87-28/C, OPA 89-32/C, NPA Report #: �� #: NPA 91-041/CS, NPA 94-01/CSW 111H 213 N91[NIM 11 M i►1WO =file # Res. # y-I w/ - Subject: OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT #59 TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN OF THE FORMER TOWN OF NEWCASTLE SOUTH-WEST COURTICE SECONDARY PLAN (NPA 94-01/CSW) AMENDMENT #5 TO THE COURTICE SOUTH NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN APPLICANT: NEWCASTLE I LIMITED PARTNERSHIP AND NEWCASTLE II LIMITED PARTNERSHIP (formerly Stolp Homes (Newcastle) Developers) FILE NO. : OPA 89-32/C APPLICANT: 765400 ONTARIO LIMITED FILE NO'S. : OPA 95-003/C, NPA 87-04/CS, NPA 91-04/CS APPLICANT: 289143 ONTARIO LIMITED FILE NO'S. : OPA 95-004/C Recommendations: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report PD-47-95 be received for information; . and, 2. THAT Council provide direction with respect to the options outlined in Section 9 of this report. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY • Official Plan Amendment applications have been filed by Newcastle I Limited Partnership and Newcastle II Limited Partnership (OPA 89- 32/C) , 765400 Ontario Limited (OPA 95-003/C) and 289143 Ontario Limited (OPA 95-004/C) . • Council exempted the first applicant from the administrative freeze on the processing of applications in the expansion areas during the period of the Official Plan Review. Consequently, the South-West Courtice Neighbourhood Planning Study was undertaken by three proponents. • Two planning documents are forwarded for Council's consideration as a result of this planning study and public consultation: 511 REPORT NO. : PD-47-95 PAGE 2 Amendment #59 to the Official Plan, incorporating a Secondary Plan for the South-West Courtice Neighbourhood - Amendment #5 to the Courtice South Neighbourhood Plan. • In consideration of an earlier report on September 19, 1994, Council referred the report back to Staff to undertake additional work in resolving various issues. • All issues regarding the siting of the elementary schools, neighbourhood park and the impact of the amount of fill have been resolved. • The Secondary School site in Neighbourhood 2A is located to the satisfaction of the Municipality and the School Board. An alternative school site was investigated and deemed unacceptable by the School Board. • A community park site has been indicated symbolically in the area south of Bloor Street and east of Prestonvale Road. Municipal Staff and the landowner, 289143 Ontario Limited, have not agreed on a specific location for this park. These lands are also subject of a separate Official Plan Amendment application to permit residential uses on these lands. • Totten Sims Hubicki (TSH) was retained by the Planning Department in December, 1994 to undertake a traffic impact assessment and review the concerns related to Prestonvale Road. TSH concluded that the proposed residential development would result in impacts which cannot be accommodated without improvements on the regional and local road network. Traffic from the Courtice South Employment Area in the future will further increase the need for capacity on the road network. • TSH has confirmed Staff's recommendation that Prestonvale Road is essential as a Type C arterial. It would cost up to $1 million to redesign Prestonvale Road as a local road and upgrade Robert Adams Drive as a Type C arterial; this is not practical nor desirable since it would simply transfer the problems to less desirable roads. As currently proposed, the volume of traffic would at least be shared by both Prestonvale Road and Robert Adams Drive. • As the result of Council's decision to retain Prestonvale Road as a local road, Staff cannot support the adoption of Amendment #59 as currently drafted in Attachment #5. If Council adopts the recommendations of the Director of Public Works contained in Report WD-22-95, appropriate revisions will be required to the amendment document. • The developers group had a number of concerns with the text of the proposed amendment, most notably with the phasing and prematurity policies of Section 6.8.2 (iii) (c) and 6.8. 2 (iv) . Staff have made several modifications, but, the developers group remain opposed to these policies. REPORT NO. : PD-47-95 PAGE 3 • The developers group raised concerns with the interpretation policies which would result in this Amendment being superseded by the new Clarington Official Plan. In order to address this concern, the Neighbourhood Development Plan has been transformed into a Secondary Plan (a statutory document under the Planning Act) which is to be carried forward into the new Official Plan. • The proposed amendments deal only with the principle of development. The processing of the plans of subdivision and rezoning are premature at this point due to the substantial servicing requirements not incorporated into either the Region's or the Municipality's development charges. 1. APPLICATIONS 1.1 Newcastle I Limited Partnership and Newcastle II Limited Partnership (referred to in this report as NLP) Stolp Homes (Newcastle) Developers submitted an Official Plan Amendment application (File No. OPA 89-32/C) to amend the Official Plan of the former Town of Newcastle to include the subject lands in the Courtice Urban Area and to designate their lands for residential and related uses. This application was subsequently assumed by NLP. The subdivision and rezoning applications, which will be considered independently at a later date, propose 168 single-detached units, 130 semi-detached or link units, and 189 townhouse units. This application also proposes sites for a separate school, public school and a parkette. 1. 1.1 Location and Area The subject site is located on the south side of Regional Road No. 22 (Bloor Street) , immediately east of Townline Road. It is a 30.5 hectare parcel of land in part Lot 35, Concession 1, former Township of Darlington (Attachment #1) . 1.2 . 765400 Ontario Limited 1.2 . 1 The application (File No. OPA 95-003/C) seeks to amend the Official Plan of the former Town of Newcastle to allow residential development of 450 units. The subdivision and rezoning applications, which will be considered independently at a later date, propose 105 single detached units, 158 semi 1 REPORT NO. : PD-47-95 PAGE 4 detached or link units, 38 street townhouse units and 149 block townhouse units. This application also proposes a site for a public elementary school and a reserved block for a portion of the proposed "planning precinct" which will accommodate a convenience plaza, church, parkette and medium and high density housing. 1.2.2 Location and Area The subject site is located in Part Lots 33 and 34, Concession 2, former Township of Darlington. The site is approximately 25 hectares of a total holding of 33 hectares (Attachment #1) . 1. 3 289143 Ontario Limited 1.3 .1 Application The application (File No. OPA 95-004/C) seeks to amend the Official Plan of the former Town of Newcastle to allow residential development of 318 units. The subdivision and rezoning applications, which will be considered independently at a later date, propose 166 single units, 134 semi-detached or link units, and 18 street townhouse units. This application also proposes a site for a neighbourhood park, parkette, and a reserved block for a portion of the "planning precinct" which will accommodate a convenience plaza, church, parkette and medium and high density housing. 1.3 .2 Location and Area The subject site is located between Part Lots 34 and 36, Concession 1, former Township of Darlington. The site is approximately 27 hectares in size (Attachment #1) . 2. BACKGROUND These applications and the planning study for the South-West Courtice Area have a long and extensive history which is summarized below. Apr/89 - Official Plan Amendment application was filed by Stolp Homes (Newcastle) Developers, subsequently REPORT NO. : PD-47-95 PAGE 5 assumed by NLP, for the expansion of the urban area south-west of the current urban limit. Jun.5/91 - Regional Official Plan expanded the Courtice Urban Area and designated these lands as a Living Area. As a result, a Regional Official Plan Amendment was deemed not necessary. Jan.27/92 - Council exempted NLP from the administrative freeze on the processing of applications in the expansion areas during the period of the Official Plan Review. Jun. 15/92 In order to consider the NLP application for a plan of subdivision, the Official Plan required the preparation and adoption of a neighbourhood development plan. Due to time constraints for Staff, the applicant and several landowners offered to undertake the study. Staff prepared and provided the Terms of Reference (Report PD-150-92) for the study. Nov/92 - Applicant completed a Background Report and accompanying Environmental Resource Analysis Report. In addition, an Options Report was completed which presented four options for the neighbourhood. These reports were circulated to various agencies to receive comments. Feb. 17/93 - Open House was held by Tunney Planning for the general public at the Courtice Secondary School. Oct/93 - Tunney Planning produced a Draft Neighbourhood Plan. Dec. 1/93 - Public Workshop was held by Tunney Planning on the Draft Neighbourhood Plan on December 1, 1993 at the Courtice Secondary School. Dec/93 - Revised Consultant's Draft Neighbourhood Plan was submitted by the applicant and circulated to various agencies for comments. Mar.7/94 - Municipality undertakes a Public Meeting to present the consultant's Recommended Draft Neighbourhood Plan at the General Purpose and Administration (GPA) Committee (PD-23-94) . Sep. 19/94 - Public Meeting held before GPA Committee on the proposed: Amendment #59, Staff recommended Neighbourhood Plan, and, Amendment #5 to the Courtice South Neighbourhood Plan. Sep.26/94 - Council passed a resolution to refer Staff Report PD-110-94 back to Staff to address all concerns 5 15 REPORT NO. : PD-47-95 PAGE 6 which were raised by residents and councillors at the Public Meeting held on September 19, 1994. Oct.24/94 - NLP filed a private official plan amendment application with the Region of Durham to request that OPA 89-32/C and 18T-89037 be referred to the Ontario Municipal Board. Dec/94 - Municipality engaged Totten Sims Hubicki Associates to undertake a review of the transportation network for the residential and employment areas in the area of Courtice. - NLP's application is referred to the Ontario Municipal Board. Feb-Mar/95 - Chief Administrative Officer conducted four meetings with Staff and the developers group to resolve the outstanding issues. Mar.20/95 - Staff made a presentation to GPA Committee regarding the outstanding issues and the results of the transportation study undertaken by Totten Sims Hubicki Associates. 3 . EXISTING LAND USES 3 .1 The entire planning area is rural in character with agriculture being the predominant use. A major agricultural operation is located in the south-west corner of the study area. This is a mixed farm operation including hogs and crops. Also found in the planning area is a horse boarding facility. The remaining agriculture uses consist of various crops. Two parcels totalling 34 hectares, which were formerly used for agricultural purposes, are now vacant. There are a total of nine dwellings in the planning area. Six houses are presently or were formerly associated with farm operations. The remaining three units are on half hectare estate type lots which may have been severed from the adjacent farms as retirement lots. Other land uses in the planning area include a telephone communication tower located on a 0.70 ha site along Townline Road and a cemetery occupying an 8.35 ha site at the south end of the planning area. _ 516 REPORT NO. : PD-47-95 PAGE 7 4. SURROUNDING LAND USES 4. 1 The planning area is surrounded by the following land uses: North - The existing Courtice Major Urban Area, consisting of predominantly single family dwellings. East - Agricultural uses along with rural non-farm residences. South - Two rail lines and Highway 401 are located to the immediate south of the Study Area. West - A low density residential area and vacant lands is found along the west side of Townline Road in the City of Oshawa. 5. OVERVIEW OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 5. 1 The South-West Courtice Planning Study was undertaken to incorporate additional lands into the Courtice Urban Area. This resulted in expanding existing Neighbourhood 2A and adding a new Neighbourhood 4 (Attachment #2) . This is accomplished through the following planning instruments: i) Official Plan Amendment #59 which now incorporates the South- West Courtice Neighbourhood Secondary Plan (Attachment #6) ® and, ii) Amendment #5 to the Courtice South Neighbourhood Plan (Attachment #5) . The Planning Study covered an area of 154 hectares (380 acres) of which 124 hectares (306 acres) is in the new Neighbourhood 4. Some of the relevant statistics about the planned land uses are as follows: Estimated Housina Units low density medium density medium-high density Total Gross Residential Density (Units per Hectare) (Units per Acre) Estimated Population Estimated Student Yield Public Elementary Separate Elementary Total Neighbourhood 4 2A-South 1355 280 350 80 160 0 1865 360 15 15 6.07 6. 07 5900 1200 563 115 295 61 858 176 REPORT NO. : PD-47-95 PAGE 8 Public Secondary 187 36 Separate Secondary 59 7 Total 246 43 Planned Schools Public Elementary 2.42 ha 2.42 ha Separate Elementary 2.42 ha n/a Public Secondary n/a 6. 07 ha Parkland Neighbourhood Park 3 .9 ha n/a Parkettes 1.7 ha n/a Commercial Convenience Centre 0.2 ha Corner Stores Permitted in Residential Areas 6. AGENCY COMMENTS 6.1 At various stages in the Study, the South-West Courtice Neighbourhood Plan was circulated to obtain comments from other departments and agencies. After the September 19, 1994, the revised South-West Courtice Neighbourhood Plan and Amendments #5 and #59 were circulated, however, some agencies did not provide comments on the latest documents. The following is a summary of the comments provided to date. 6.2 Clarington Public Works Clarington Public Works Department reviewed the consultant's recommended South-West Courtice Neighbourhood Plan (December, 1993) and provided a number of detailed comments. Since the September 19, 1994 meeting, the Public Works Department has been engaged in ongoing discussions with other consultants to resolve outstanding issues. The issues are discussed later in Section 8. 6.3 Clarinaton Community Services The Community Services commented as follows: • the need for parkettes should be addressed in the text, but should not be shown on the Secondary Plan Map; • overland flow shall not be located on, but, may abut parkland; and, • continuation of the recreational trail east of Prestonvale Road shall be done in connection with any upgrading of this road and may be considered as a grade separation. 518 REPORT NO. : PD-47-95 PAGE 9 Due to ongoing discussions with Planning Staff and the landowners group, the Community Services Department is now satisfied with the proposed Official Plan Amendment. 6.4 Clarington Fire Department The Clarington Fire Department expressed concerns with the response time to the Courtice south area. In ideal conditions, full time firefighters can respond to the area in 6-8 minutes, but, this time barely meets the 4-6 minutes that the Department strives for. The ideal recommended response time for urban areas is 3-5 minutes. Response time to the area by part time firefighters (from 6: 00 p.m. - 6: 00 a.m. ) is approximately 9-10 minutes. Future residential growth and industrial growth will probably necessitate a fire station in the Courtice Road/ Baseline Road or Baseline Road/ Prestonvale Road area to insure quick response time. The only other alternative to address this concern, is to ensure that full time Staff are available 24 hours a day prior to growth and expansion in the Bloor Street/Prestonva le Road/Townline Road areas. This issue is discussed in Section 8 .8 of this report. 6.5 Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority Comments provided by CLOCA in November 1994, indicated that CLOCA does not have any objection to the proposed Plan. CLOCA did note the following: • Section 5.1 of Plan generally addresses CLOCA's previous concerns regarding the Robinson Creek West Tributary; • development proponents are required for revegetation of the tributary corridor as a condition of development; • current estimation of the required stormwater management facilities may have to be enlarged, once the final design of the ponds is completed; • deletion of reference to specific allotted area for the facility provides greater flexibility to accommodate the evolvement of an appropriate final design of the required stormwater management facilities; and, 19 REPORT NO. : PD-47-95 PAGE 10 • polices for Sections 6.8.2 (v) , (vi) , and (vii) promote a coordinated approach towards a phased implementation of the required stormwater management works. 6. 6 Separate School Board The Separate School Board is satisfied with the proposed school/park campus indicated on the Neighbourhood Plan. It indicated no objection to the amount of fill being used, but, the Board will exercise some control over the method of construction. 6.7 Public School Board The Public School Board noted that they are: • concerned with the amount of fill required on the site and consequently, would require engineered fill that will accept standard building footings without having to excavate to undisturbed soil; • concerned with a ditch/trench approximately two metres deep between the two proposed school sites; • requesting that the property comply with the Elementary School Site Standards from the Boards Standards and Design Guide; and, • unsure as to the format of the elementary school site and consequently, requests that six acres be allowed for the site. 6.8 Regional Public Works Regional Public Works previously provided comments on the Consultant's Recommended Neighbourhood Plan (December 1993) and these include: • servicing limits for this neighbourhood are controlled by the depth of the existing sanitary sewer on Grandview Drive in Oshawa and consequently, the Region will only accept a gravity drainage catchment area to this sewer; • Region of Durham will permit the reconstruction of a portion of the existing Grandview Drive sanitary sewer at the applicable developer's expense so that a larger gravity catchment area can be accommodated with the Neighbourhood; • proposed east-west collector should be aligned with Grandview Drive; - 2- REPORT NO. : PD-47-95 PAGE 11 • signalization is recommended on Bloor Street intersecting with Townline Road, Robert Adams Drive extension and Prestonvale Road; • servicing for the southern portion of Neighbourhood 4 will be the subject of a future study which will include the interchange with Highway 401, a weigh station and an access for General Motors from the south side of Highway 401; • Regional Works Department would not consider the installation of sanitary sewers at a depth greater than 7.5 m to provide gravity drainage for lands external to the Grandview Sub-Trunk system; and, • they have reviewed the geotechnical investigation report and preliminary sanitary servicing plans and are satisfied that engineered fill can be placed and gravity sanitary sewers can be extended to the southeast quadrant of the NLP lands. 6.9 Regional Planning Department The Regional Planning Department previously requested clarification on a number of points from the Consultant's Recommended Neighbourhood Plan (December 1993) including: • policies and designations regarding hazard lands; • policies for the protection, conservation and/or enhancement of cultural heritage resources; • policies and designations for alternative forms of housing for special needs groups; • implementation and monitoring procedures required to meet the Provincial objective of ensuring an adequate amount of new affordable residential units; • policies and designations regarding maximum unit sizes; • policies which provide for appropriate criteria to permit garden suites; • need for an analysis to ensure that the proposed convenience commercial block will not adversely affect any Community or Local Central Area currently designated; • urban design guidelines and solutions which would implement Section 8.3 . 10 c) of the Durham Region Official Plan; • policies which promote transit supportive development forms and patterns; and, • policies regarding a grid pattern of roads. 521 REPORT NO. : PD-47-95 PAGE 12 In preparing the Amendment document, Staff have addressed the concerns or will be addressing them in the context of the new Official Plan. 6. 10 Ministry of the Environment The Ministry of Environment has noted that it is unable to review the documents due to its current workload. 6. 11 Ministry of Natural Resources The Ministry of Natural Resources has noted that the Robinson Creek Master Drainage Plan Amendment Document has addressed the Ministry's concerns for this development. 6. 12 Ministry of Culture, Tourism and Recreation The Ministry has no objection to the proposed development, but, states that the subject lands have a high potential for the discovery of archaeological remains. They recommend that an archaeological assessment be completed prior to any earth disturbance as a condition of draft approval. 6.13 City of Oshawa The City of Oshawa has offered a number of comments on the Consultant's Recommended Plan (December 1993) including: • east-west collector road from Townline Road should not align with Grandview Drive, a collector road within the City of Oshawa; • Road Classifications refer to Townline Road as a Type "B" arterial whereas the Durham Regional Official Plan designates this as a Type "C" arterial; • Townline Road is subject to a Boundary Road Agreement between Clarington and Oshawa and it would have been preferable if this agreement has been referenced in the Draft Neighbourhood Plan; • City of Oshawa prefers housing types and densities similar to those which exist in Oshawa along Townline Road; and, • some concern that the possibility of servicing lands in the South-West Courtice area may affect the timing and level of servicing, in the short to midterm, of existing development areas. 522 REPORT NO. : PD-47-95 PAGE 13 7. OPEN HOUSES, PUBLIC MEETINGS AND SUBMISSIONS 7. 1 Applicants' Public Open Houses (February 17 . December 1. 1993 In accordance with the terms of reference provided by Staff for the South-West Courtice Neighbourhood Study, the applicant conducted two public open houses which were held on February 17, 1993 and December 1, 1993 . The concerns raised by Oshawa residents to the Options Report are summarized as follows: • opposition to higher density residential development; • traffic impacts on Grandview Drive and Prestonvale Road; • need for connecting bridge on Townline Road; and, • realignment of Bloor Street and intersection improvements. 7.2 Public Meeting (March 7 , 1994) A Public Meeting concerning the South-West Courtice Neighbourhood Plan as prepared by the applicant was held before the General Purpose and Administration Committee on March 7, 1994 (PD-23-94) . Verbal comments made at the Public Meeting and written submissions received indicated concerns with the proposal which is summarized as follows: • opposed to the use of agricultural land for housing; • proposed Plan would interfere with a current farming operation which has been in operation for many years; • Prestonvale Road should not be designated as an arterial road because it would allow a large number of vehicles to move at a high rate of speed on the road; • the view of the lake would be taken away with the construction of new homes; • development area north of Mother Teresa School should be completed before other projects are allowed to proceed; 523 REPORT NO. : PD-47-95 PAGE 14 • proposed church should have an appropriately sized parking lot; and, • concerned over the traffic problems in the vicinity of Old Bloor Street and Townline Road. 7.3 Public Meeting and Proposed Amendment (September 19, 1994) A second Public Meeting in which Staff recommended approval of the South-West Courtice Neighbourhood Plan and Amendments #5 and #59, was held before the General Purpose and Administration Committee on September 19, 1994 (PD-110-94) . Council subsequently referred this report back to Staff to resolve all outstanding issues. A summary of the verbal and written comments made concerning the proposal include: • letters and a petition containing 105 signatures indicating opposition to the proposed change of Prestonvale Road to a Type "C" Arterial Road; • Robert Adams Drive should be opened up to meet Bloor Street and Townline Road should be bridged to create a direct route; and, • proposed secondary school should not be located on Prestonvale Road as it would create more traffic. In addition, Mr. William D. Manson, on behalf of Courtice Heights Developments, raised a number of concerns (see Attachment #3) in relation to the development priority of lands in Courtice North Neighbourhood 3 versus the new Neighbourhood 4 proposed in Amendment #59. His main comments are: • Applications by NLP, 765400 Ontario Limited and 289143 Ontario Limited should only be considered in the context of the final Clarington Official Plan since only in that context could the full implications of the various issues be addressed. This is appropriate since Courtice Heights' applications were folded into the Official Plan Review process. 524 REPORT NO. : PD-47-95 PAGE 15 • The Draft Official Plan excludes 100 acres of Neighbourhood 3C which was designated for residential development for 15 years, but, proposes to include lands (362 acres) in the South-West Courtice area which were only included since the 1991 Durham Region Official Plan was approved. • Approving a population target automatically committing 10,400 modified Neighbourhoods 2A and 4, neglects the priority nature designated in the 1976 Regional Courtice Urban Area Plan. of 31, 000 persons and persons of that total to is inappropriate because it of those neighbourhoods Official Plan and the 1980 • Recommends that the low density target should be increased from a maximum of 25 units to 30 units per net residential hectare and that the medium density target should be adjusted from 25-60 units to 30-60 units per net residential hectare. • Concerned about the phasing policies and the policies outlining conditions in which a plan of subdivision may be considered premature. A copy of all submissions received from the public to date are included in Attachment #3 . 7.4 Public Notice for Amendments and Neiahbourhood Secondary Plan A notice for this public meeting was placed in the Courtice News, Clarington This Week and Oshawa This Week on April 12 , 1995. In addition, all residents who were on the Interested Parties List, were notified by mail. 8. STAFF COMMENTS 8. 1 Through the comprehensive planning study undertaken of the South- West Courtice area, a number of key issues were raised. The discussion of Staff comments is organized in these sections as follows: (i) Issues which have not changed from September 19, 1994 • Grandview Street Extension • Townline Road/Prestonvale Road Interchange • Residential Densities • Stormwater Management (ii) Issues which were the subject of further study as a result of Council's referral back to Staff include • Prestonvale Road • Community Park • Emergency Services 525 REPORT NO. : PD-47-95 PAGE 16 • Secondary School Site • Elementary School Campus • Fill Requirements for School Sites (iii) Issues raised by the proponents or other parties • Phasing and Prematurity Policies • Interpretation Policy and Secondary Plan • Courtice North versus Courtice South 8.2 Grandview Street Extension A number of residents and the City of Oshawa have raised concerns about a direct connection for the east-west collector to Grandview Drive (a collector road in Oshawa) . The City of Oshawa is opposed to a collector road access aligning with Grandview Drive since their Staff anticipate that it will encourage short cutting through Grandview Drive to access Bloor Street East and Highway 401. The current plan proposes a short collector road connection to Townline Road at Grandview Drive, but, the internal road configuration would serve to limit the amount of traffic directly accessing Grandview Drive in Oshawa. The Region has agreed to permit several local roads intersecting with Townline Road. It is impossible, however, to stop all traffic from using Grandview Drive due to the westerly orientation of trip movements and the need to provide access to Townline Road for a large neighbourhood. It is noted that the City of Oshawa has four roads providing access to the residential neighbourhood west of Townline Road. 8. 3 Townline Road/Prestonvale Road Interchange The South Courtice Employment Area Study recommended that a new interchange with Highway 401 be constructed in the vicinity of Prestonvale Road. While such a scheme is technically possible, more recent work has found that it may be prohibitively expensive. The Region is currently undertaking an Environmental Assessment for the Col. Sam interchange in the City of Oshawa. Access to the Courtice Employment Area is an issue in this Assessment. One alternative may be a connection to the Col. Sam interchange. The resolution of this issue will necessitate further amendments to the various planning documents. - 526 REPORT NO. : PD-47-95 PAGE 17 8.4 Residential Densities A number of residents raised concerns that housing densities will be too high. The Neighbourhood Plan proposes a gross residential density for Neighbourhood 4 of six units per acre in comparison to the current gross residential density for Courtice of approximately five units per acre. The proposed density is in conformity with the Draft Clarington Official Plan. In addition, the Durham Region Official Plan promotes urban areas to be compact, efficient, accessible and comprised of mixed uses. It states that compact form development is to take place through higher densities and by intensifying and redeveloping existing areas, particularly along arterial roads and in conjunction with present and potential transit facilities. The Secondary plan placed the higher concentration of densities in the "Planning Precinct" . It is noted that the two high density sites in Neighbourhood 4 are designated on Prestonvale Road, away from most existing residential areas in Oshawa and Courtice. The Plan amendments also propose to amend the definition of net residential densities. This is consistent with the draft Official Plan and moves the Courtice densities closer to the existing densities for the Bowmanville urban area. 8.5 Stormwater Management The stormwater detention pond is proposed for the south-east corner of the NLP lands. This location seems to be generally acceptable to all review agencies, although the detailed design can be finalized in conjunction with the plan of subdivision. The pond has been enlarged from earlier designs and will include water quantity and quality functions. The Plan requires a suitable buffer area to enable the pond to be appropriately integrated with adjacent development. It is noted, however, that the preliminary design necessitates a significant alteration to the downstream portion of the Robinson Creek tributary. The gradient of the stream will be lowered to accommodate the outfall from the pond. The policies of the Plan require the proponent to incorporate 527 REPORT NO. : PD-47-95 PAGE 18 natural channel design features and maintain or improve the ecological state of the stream. This includes revegetation of the tributary. 8. 6 Prestonvale Road In Report PD-110-94, Staff had recommended that Prestonvale Road be redesignated from a local road to a Type "C" arterial. Staff made this recommendation due to the expansion of the Courtice Urban area which resulted in a large increase in the planned population (20, 000 to 45, 000) , and, the designation of a large employment area in South Courtice, which points to the need for an improved transportation network to service these lands. It was also noted that the Durham Regional Official Plan designates the portion of Prestonvale Road south of Glenabbey as a Type "C" arterial. On September 26, 1994, Council adopted the following resolution: THAT Prestonvale remain designated as a local road from Robert Adams Drive South. In December 1994, the Municipality engaged Totten Sims Hubicki Associates to undertake a review of the transportation network for the residential and employment areas in the area of Courtice (see Attachment #4) . In their conclusions, the consultant noted that traffic volumes will increase on Prestonvale Road, Robert Adams Drive and Glenabbey Drive. Furthermore, the consultant recognized that Council wanted to maintain a local roadway status on Prestonvale Road, but noted that "such status is not considered practical and therefore it is recommended that it be designated a Type "C" arterial roadway in the Official Plan as originally envisaged, to realistically reflect its intended function and actual use. " In addition, the consultant noted that: the complete development of Phase 1 of the South- West Courtice Neighbourhood as proposed cannot be accommodated on the local transportation network without improvements to the local and Regional transportation network as described above. Only 528 REPORT NO. : PD-47-95 PAGE 19 500-600 residential units could be developed in the area until significant network improvements are effected. 8.7 Community Park One conclusion reached by the South-West Courtice Neighbourhood Study and the Draft Clarington Official Plan was that a community park of approximately 30-40 acres is required to service the south- west portion of the Courtice urban area. It would be located in the southerly portion of Courtice in the vicinity of Bloor Street and Prestonvale Road. 289143 Ontario Limited objects to the location of the proposed community park because they believe that the community park issue is a separate issue unrelated to the South-West Courtice amendments. They have proposed an alternate location which includes approximately 10 acres of their land. Amendment #59 indicates the conceptual location of the community park site and allows for future resolution of the precise location. 8.8 Emergency Services After receiving Report PD-110-94, Council raised concerns about the provision of emergency services. Since then, discussions have taken place between the Planning Department, the Fire Department, the applicant and the ward Councillors. The Developers group has indicated a willingness to assist the Municipality to improve emergency fire services and some discussion did take place concerning the location of a new site and the erection of a fire hall. It was determined that this issue does not need to be pursued further until the Neighbourhood Secondary Plan is in place. A policy has been placed in Section 10. 3 . 14.2 of the Secondary Plan to ensure that adequate fire protection and other emergency services for the area are in place prior to approval of any plans of subdivision. It is further noted that the provision of a new fireball in South Courtice is most appropriate to be addressed in the development charges currently under review. 529 REPORT NO. : PD-47-95 PAGE 20 8.9 Secondary School Site The Public School Board has stated that a secondary school will not be needed in this area for ten to fifteen years. The Official Plan currently designates a secondary school site in Neighbourhood 2A. In keeping with the Official Plan designation, the proposed Amendment #5 to the Courtice South Neighbourhood Plan designates a site on the lands owned by 765400 Ontario Limited. On-going discussions have taken place between the Municipality, the consultant, the landowner and the School Board in this regard. The applicant proposed an alternate school site which was under review at the time of the last report in September 1994. In order to allow for this review to be completed, Staff had previously proposed a policy to allow the relocation of this school with only an amendment to the Neighbourhood Plan. Since that time, the School Board has completed their review of the alternate site and stated that it is not acceptable. Accordingly, the same site is retained and the special policy has been removed. Representatives of 765400 Ontario Limited wish to either retain the previous special policy or allow for a default residential designation if the school site is not acquired by the School Board. It is Staff Is position that the public process should be followed to remove a school designation due to new residents expectations that a school will be built. 8. 10 Elementary School/Park Campus Report PD-110-94 suggested that the South-West Courtice Plan provide for a large central neighbourhood park (approximately 9.7 acres) with public and separate elementary schools on either side. This configuration has now changed due to on-going discussions with the School Boards, the applicants and the Municipality. Four alternative configurations were prepared by the applicant and an acceptable configuration to all parties was selected. The approved configuration has the neighbourhood park placed beside the two - 530 REPORT NO. : PD-47-95 PAGE 21 schools with the two schools bordering each other. A more detailed configuration will be determined through the subdivision process. Staff have indicated to the Developers Group that the approval of the neighbourhood park is dependant on four conditions: - relocation of proposed parkette; - confirmation that all land is serviceable; - satisfactory arrangement between NLP and 289143 Ontario Limited to secure and develop park site concurrently with NLP lands; and, - separate dedication for overland flow route. The Developers Group has concurred with these conditions, in principle, but the details are to be settled through the review of the plans of subdivision. 8.11 Fill Requirements A concern was raised in Report PD-110-94 about the extent of fill required to bring the lands of Stolp and 289143 Ontario Limited into the Phase 1 servicing area. Studies were prepared by G.M. Sernas to satisfy the Region of Durham and the Municipality°s Works Departments that the soils can be suitably engineered for their respective services. While cut and fill operations are a normal part of most residential development, this fill scheme is more extensive than normal. It optimizes the amount of land that can be gravity fed by placing large amounts of fill on future public lands including the school sites and the neighbourhood park. Both School Boards indicated that they would require engineered fill that will accept standard building footings without having to excavate to undisturbed soil. This issue has been resolved. 8. 12 Phasing and Prematurity Policies In the meetings convened by the C.A.O. , the South-West Courtice developers group raised a number of concerns with the proposed policies in Section 6.8.2 (iii) (c) , (iv) and (v) on phasing and the 531 REPORT NO. : PD-47-95 PAGE 22 conditions in which Council may consider a plan of subdivision premature. In the referral of Amendment #59 to the Ontario Municipal Board, NLP suggested the removal of the following phasing principles. They are: • preference for development in or adjacent to the Courtice Main Central Area; • preference for intensification and infilling; and, • preference for development of previously designated urban lands (Neighbourhoods 1 to 3) . NLP was specifically concerned that the word an arbitrariness that was not appropriate in In response to the NLP's concern, Staff have "preference" with the word "priority" and in removed the clause which gave preference to lands. "preference" implied a planning document. substituted the word addition, Staff have Dreviously designated Staff remain of the position that the phasing and prematuring policies, which are also in the Draft Clarington Official Plan, remain important in order to better manage the growth pressures on the Municipality. 8.13 Interpretation Policy and Secondary Plan In the Amendment #59 document presented to Committee on September 19, 1994, the interpretation clause of the amendment document stated that Amendment #59 would prevail in the event of a conflict until such time as the Region has approved the new Clarington Official Plan. In the meetings convened by the C.A.O. , the South- West Courtice developers group raised concerns that this amendment could be superseded by the new Official Plan putting at jeopardy the planning framework established by Amendment #59 and the Neighbourhood Development Plan. As a solution to this issue, Staff now propose that the Neighbourhood Development Plan be incorporated into Amendment #59 as a Secondary Plan which would have statutory authority under the Planning Act. As a Secondary Plan, this document would be carried forward in the new Clarington Official Plan, providing security to the proponents that the "ground rules" would not change with the new Official Plan. 532 REPORT NO. : PD-47-95 PAGE 23 8.14 Courtice North versus Courtice South-West Mr. Bill Manson, representing Courtice Heights Developments, raised concerns that their lands in Neighbourhood 3C have priority status for development and any increase in population due to their prior approval in the Courtice Urban Area. Courtice Heights currently have applications for an official plan amendment, a neighbourhood plan amendment, and two plans of subdivisions and related rezonings in Neighbourhood 3C. These lands are located north of Nash Road and east of Courtice Road. In part, they are seeking to increase the neighbourhood population from 1900 to 4500 persons. Council has referred the Courtice Heights proposal for consideration in the context of the Official Plan Review. It is Staff's opinion that the Official Plan Review is the best forum for resolving the competing interests represented by the development interests in the northerly Courtice neighbourhoods versus the development interests in south-west Courtice. 9. CONCLUSION 9 .1 Since publishing the proposed Amendment documents, Staff have made revisions to the text of the documents as a result of comments received and further consideration by Staff. These changes are indicated in the amendment document. 9.2 By dealing with the Official Plan and the Neighbourhood Plan Amendment applications, the policy framework will be established for consideration of the applicants' plans of subdivision. As noted in this report, there are many infrastructure improvements which are required to provide services to this residential neighbourhood, including upgrading of regional roads and local roads, fire services improvements and parkland. These matters would need to be reviewed in the context of the development charges study. While the principle of the land use designations can be determined, the proposed plans of subdivision and related rezoning applications are premature at this time. In reviewing these matters through meetings with the C.A.O. and Municipal Staff, it has been made clear to the applicants that the Municipality cannot REPORT NO. : PD-47-95 PAGE 24 deal with the specific development applications without the resolution of these issues. 9.3 Prestonvale Road is required as a Type "C" arterial road to accommodate future growth in Courtice. The Amendment documents in Attachments #5 and #6 reflect Council's resolution of September 26, 1994. As such, Staff do not support the Amendments as proposed. Nevertheless, if Council wishes to retain Prestonvale Road as a local road, then the following resolutions should be approved: 1. THAT Official Plan Amendment #59 to amend the Official Plan of the former Town of Newcastle be approved, that the necessary by-law to adopt Official Plan Amendment #59 be passed, and the Amendment be forwarded to the Durham Region Planning Department; 2. THAT the Regional Municipality of Durham be requested to amend the Durham Regional Official Plan by amending Map B as follows: (i) delete the Type "C" arterial road designation for Prestonvale Road between Bloor Street and Glenabbey Drive and, (ii) designate Townline Road south of Regional Road #22 as a Type "B" arterial road; 3. THAT the Neighbourhood Plan Amendment #5 to the Courtice South Neighbourhood Plan be approved; 4. THAT the application to amend the Official Plan by Newcastle I Limited Partnership and Newcastle II Limited Partnership, formerly Stolp Homes (Newcastle) Developers, (OPA 89-32) , be approved in the context of Official Plan Amendment #59; 5. THAT the application to amend the Official Plan by 289143 Ontario Limited (OPA 95-004/C) be approved in the context of Official Plan Amendment #59; 6. THAT the applications to amend the Official Plan and Neighbourhood Plan by 765400 Ontario Limited (OPA 95-003/C, NPA 87-04/CS and NPA 91-04/CS) be approved in the context of Official Plan Amendment #59 and Neighbourhood Plan Amendment #5 to the Courtice South Neighbourhood Plan; and, 7. THAT the modifications to Official Plan Amendment No. 59 and Amendment #5 to the Courtice South Neighbourhood Plan as shown in Attachments 5 and 6 are minor and that a new Public Meeting to consider the modified documents is not necessary. IM REPORT NO. : PD-47-95 PAGE 25 8. THAT the interested parties listed in this report and any delegation be advised of Council's decision. 9.4 If Council concurs with Staff's recommendation for Prestonvale Road and approves the recommendations of Report WD-22-95, items 1, 2 and 3 above should be replaced with the following: 1. That Official Plan Amendment #59 to amend the Official Plan of the former Town of Newcastle, as amended in accordance with the recommendations of Report WD-22-95, be approved, that the necessary by-law to adopt Official Plan Amendment #59 be passed, and that the Amendment be forwarded to the Durham Region Planning Department for approval; 2 . That the Regional Municipality of Durham be requested to amend the Durham Regional Official Plan by amending Map B as follows: i) designate Prestonvale Road between Highway 2 and Bloor Street as a Type "C" arterial road; ii) designated Townline Road south of Bloor Street as a Type "B" arterial road; and, 3 . That Amendment #5 to the Courtice South Neighbourhood Plan, as amended in accordance with the recommendations of Report WD- 22-95, be approved. 9.5 NLP has referred their private official plan amendment application and plan of subdivision to the Ontario Municipal Board. The other proponents may similarly request that the applications for plan of subdivision and rezoning be referred/appealed. Council should be aware that since Staff does not support the status of Prestonvale Road as a local road as shown in the attached amendments, and since this component is fundamental to support the proposed lands uses, Staff could not appear in defence of such a position at the Ontario Municipal Board. 535 REPORT NO. : PD-47-95 PAGE 26 Respectfully submitted, C) r � LS, Franklin Wu, M.C.I.P. , R.P.P. Director of Planning and Development DC*FW*df Attachment #1 Attachment #2 Attachment #3 Attachment #4 Attachment #5 Attachment #6 Reviewed by, W.H. Stogy well Chief Administrative Officer - Land Ownership Neighbourhoods 2A and 4 - Public Comments - Totten Sims Hubicki, - Amendment #59 - Amendment #5 Traffic Report Interested persons to be notified of Council and Committee's decision: Mike & Lori McNair 361 Southridge Street OSHAWA, Ontario. L1H 8A4 Robert & Josette Rene 873 Grandview Drive South OSHAWA, Ontario. L1H 8G9 Mr. Jack Crosbie 60 Centurian Drive Suite 219 MARKHAM, Ontario. L3R 8T6 Bill Reid 602 Down Crescent OSHAWA, Ontario. L1H 7X9 William & Sharon Marritt 1429 Prestonvale Road COURTICE, Ontario. L1E 2P2 S. & M. Found 1246 Prestonvale Road COURTICE, Ontario. L1E 2N9 Sam & Betty McNair 601 Down Crescent OSHAWA, Ontario. L1H 7X9 Mr. K. Tunney Tunney Planning 340 Byron Street South Suite 200 WHITBY, Ontario. L1N 4P8 Mr. Terry Wertepny, Planner City of Oshawa Planning and Development 50 Centre Street South OSHAWA, Ontario. L1H 3Z7 Glen Maughan 608 Down Crescent OSHAWA, Ontario. L1H 7X9 K. Gray 751 Down Crescent OSHAWA, Ontario. L1H 7K9 M. Freedman Hampton House 7111 Dufferin Street THORNHILL, Ontario. L4J 2K2 Paul & Vicki Groeneveld 1463 Bloor Street East COURTICE, Ontario. L1C 3K3 REPORT NO. : PD-47-95 PAGE 27 G. Bennie Tom & Sharon Fleming 1236 Delmark Court 83 Glenabbey Drive OSHAWA, Ontario. COURTICE, Ontario. L1H 8K6 LlE 1B8 Mr. Hugh A. Neil Resident 2111 Prestonvale Road 1440 Bloor Street COURTICE, Ontario. LlE 2S2 COURTICE, Ontario. LlE 2S2 LlE 2N6 Ann Mittag Resident 1415 Highway #2 41 Turnberry Crescent 38 Pinedale Crescent 20 Clematis Road COURTICE, Ontario. COURTICE, Ontario. LlE 106 LlE 1A3 120 Turnberry Crescent COURTICE, Ontario. Resident LlE 2S1 W.S. Penfound 3432 Tooley's Road WHITBY, Ontario. 2320 Prestonvale Road COURTICE, Ontario. COURTICE, Ontario. LlE 2K7 LlE 2S1 Resident Mrs. Moore 105 Glenabbey Drive 603 Down Crescent COURTICE, Ontario. OSHAWA, Ontario. LlE 2B6 L1H 7X9 Walter Fracz A. White 2212 Trulls Road 5 Bruntsfield Street COURTICE, Ontario. LlE 2N2 COURTICE, Ontario. LlE 1A5 Ron & Penny Elson 1225 Norman Court Casper Jarvis OSHAWA, Ontario. L1H 7X2 109 Glenabbey Drive COURTICE, Ontario. A. Miyanji LlE 2B7 38 Vanwat Drive SCARBOROUGH, Ontario. M1G 1G7 John Stezik 125 Glenabbey Drive R. Gossman COURTICE, Ontario. LlE 2B7 1536 Bloor Street COURTICE, Ontario. LlE 2S2 Tony Schuliga 49 Central Park Road South Sidney Worden OSHAWA, Ontario. 1592 Prestonvale Road L1H 5W5 COURTICE, Ontario. LlE 2N8 Greer Galloway Group W.D. Manson 1415 Highway #2 W.D.M. Consultants COURTICE, Ontario. LlE 2J6 20 Clematis Road WILLOWDALE, Ontario. Resident M2J 4X2 120 Turnberry Crescent COURTICE, Ontario. Mike Luchka LlE 2S1 714 Hickory Street WHITBY, Ontario. L1N 3Y2 537 REPORT NO. : PD-47-95 PAGE 28 Ida Assogna Aird & Berlis 181 Bay Street Suite 1800, BCE Place TORONTO, Ontario. M5J 2T9 Alan Baylis Group 6, Box 49 R.R.#6 BOWMANVILLE, Ontario. L1C 3K7 Kevin Fudge 10 Bruntsfield Street COURTICE, Ontario. L1E 1B4 Susan Ostler 2589 Prestonvale Road COURTICE, Ontario. L1E 1W1 Ms. Debra Clarke Valiant Property Management 177 Nonquon Road, 20th Floor OSHAWA, Ontario. L1G 3S2 Anna D'Alesandro, President AVD Planning 3800 Steeles Avenue West Suite 202, West Building WOODBRIDGE, Ontario. L4L 4G9 Robert S. Merrin 21 Living Court COURTICE, Ontario. LlE 2V6 W 538 GRANDVIE� DRIVE 3 2 � to Q O � IL O DRIL11W U W Z J Z 3 O 01 I e II i� JEWCASTi 30.5 ha I I IJULIAN MARZEC I 'f' o S'T 11.5 ha-, ERIC MA Y7 is L CfkO R ..b / R/TA"GRDENEVELD 21—IPAUL BERTUS/ESH/ ARA 27 hQ RRDDEN' II JOSEPH LUCHKA I PRESTONVALE—BLOOR HOLDINGS LTD. All IT— II � II I II I STA/�fY ARTHUR FOUND II II I I II I I•i'______------ AI NTON SHULIGA tif14RIE BOYCHYN M GARET BOYCHYN U CORPAOF EASTERI CAA AL I EXISTING CIWETIry L E G E N D NEIGHBOURHOOD STUDY AREA LIMITS CURRENT DEVELOPMENT— APPLICATIONS 539 ATTACHMENT No. 1 _ 1I � II �fio� O 289143 ONTARIO LIMITED JOHN HALIDAY i lI �� II I I II HALMINEN HOMES LTD. I I ISABEL FRANZ ( I — — I II JAMAPA INVESTMENTS II COMPANY LTD_ I I I L— - ATTACHMENT * Gt��ystP�"� N E I G H B O U R H O O D 2 A — S O U T H BL OOR FE r � � OLD BL040R STR £ £ T GRAND WE DRIVE Q 3 � O x q O � k W O �* SOUTNG NEIGHBOURHOOD DR! 4 ti q w U W � 2 W � 4 3 O i Y � �1 f` Q � f+vSnxC C�.f£TEi7Y 0 pAt!c F IL y 4 THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY S A s f t f N£ A O A O OF CLARINGTON REGONAL YUWWAUTY OF DUM"M w f G f+r A Y H P 4 0 1 SOUTH-WEST COURTICE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBOURHOODS 3A-SOUTH AND 4 540 Ou 7&n ,.';On =&� Xft 375%� .so,, Public Submissions Name Robert and Josette Rene (letter) Mike and Lori McNair (letter) Sam and Betty McNair (letter) Mr. and Mrs Gossman (letter) G. Bennie (letter) Dennis Yellowlees (letter) Sam and Betty McNair (letter) William and Pamela Jones (letter) Hugh Neil (letter and petition) William D. Manson (letter) Mr. and Mrs. Robert Cowle (letter) Hugh Neil (letter) 541 ATTACHMENT #3 Date February 24, 1993 February 26, 1993 March 1, 1993 March 1, 1993 March 2, 1993 March 7, 1994 March 7, 1994 September 16, 1994 September 19, 1994 January 9, 1995 January 24, 1995 March 27, 1995 FEB-24-933 WED 12:50 DATA SERVICES & DEVELOP FAX NO. 4164364473 P. 02 February 24, 1993 Tunney Planning Inc. 340 Byron St. S., Suite 200 Whitby, Ontario LI.N 4P8 RE: LAND USE FOR SOUTH-WEST COURTICE NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN OUR LOCATION: 873 Grandview Dr. S., Oshawa Ontario L1H 8G9 CORNER of GRANDVIEW & `I'O'4 NTLINE Sir/Madam, The following comments are per your request for input concerning the proposed land use of the South-West Courtice Neighbourhood area. First and foremost; We do not support this development at all. Just because an idea is proposed, this does not necessarily mean that we must accept the idea and generate feedback on it. If you would have given the public an option #5 of 'no development' rather than making them familiar with the concepts #1, #2, #3 and #4 (re: workshop of February*17/93), you would probably generate more 'not at all' feedback. If the area must be developed: 1) We will not accept medium or high density unit yield across from our property. Why should the atmosphere of the neighbourhood change, traffic flow increase, crime rates increase and the value of our property drop while the Town of Newcastle (Courtice) generates all the profits. Why should we be inconvenienced (noise/contractors/destruction of farm land) to generate taxable income for Courtice. When we sit at our dining room table, we look across the road at a field, and it feels like we are in the country. We purchased this house a mere 9 months ago for this very reason. .../2 - 542 I "U L" OJ WL.V 1L-J1 y � Vnlfl &JLftViVL0 U VLVL'LVI - 2 - rnn Irv, 4 I U iJU i4(J r. uj 2) Keep the bulk of development (medium and high yield) away from Oshawa re: Townline and Grandview since this is a Newcastle effort. Consider a Courtice Bike trail and larger environ-mental parkland/open space in the Grandview/Townline area. 3) We do not want Grandview Drive extended. This would generate too much (fast) traffic around our area. 4) Consider a bridge connecting Townline to handle the extra traffic flow which may be generated. Questions 1. Will property taxes increase noticeably in Courtice due to this development? (re: two extra schools)? 2. Approximately how many residents are aware of this plan? From what geographical target areas? 3. What timeframe do you have in mind? 4. What projected profits/losses do you expect from this Venture? We hope that our feedback will assist you in making decisions based on sound judgement and fairness to Oshawa residents. Please keep us informed of your actions. Truly, V2 Mr. and Mrs. Robert & Josette Rend 873 Grandview Dr. S. Oshawa, Ontario L1H 8G9 (416)728-0361 (416)433-5690 (daytime Mrs. Rend) cc: Ms. Diane Hamre, Mayor, Town of Newcastle Mr. Franklin Wu, Planning & Development, 'Town of Newcastle 543 M. McNair 361 Southridge St., OSHAWA, Ontario L1 H 8A4 Dear Sir or Madame: We attended the open house you held on the evening of February 17 at Courtice High School. Both of us live on the Oshawa side of Townline Rod. S. Both of us realize that development of this area while not favoured by us, is going to happen sooner or later. You have asked for our opinion, so here it is. A - We could live with plan # 4 - We might be able to live with plan # 3 - We could think about living with plan # 2 (opperative word here is think) - We refuse the idea of even thinking about plan # 4 B - Please think about the type of commercial development down beside the railway tracks. If this development is going to consists of a high volume of traffic, how will this flow and where. C - Please keep in mind what type of affordable housing is to be built. No apartments please! From 2 concerned residents Mike and Lori McNair Typed as Written 544 M , R&60 FEB 2 6 1993 EAY ATTACHMENT # 2b We LAS 7., or -eve Id W-e- ei 7-k fe p /on -4- We � 42; ))-k(--, j 'Y f jo V- In-leaje keo LXJ Ilows;11'1 /0 545 A t rte' 1 ,)o4 ��v-i-A,,,e l 4x I or -eve Id W-e- ei 7-k fe p /on -4- We � 42; ))-k(--, j 'Y f jo V- In-leaje keo LXJ Ilows;11'1 /0 545 A t rte' 1 COMMENTS TO THE PROPOSED OPTIONS Please feel free to note our comments to the proposed land use options, which will be considered as input into the finalized land use plan. Return to: Tunney Planning Inc. 340 Byron Street South, Suite 200 WHITBY, Ontario L1 N 4P8 (416) 666-9735 Name and Address Sam and Betty McNair 601 Down Cres., Oshawa, Ontario 1-11-1 7X9 Property Location South west corner Down Cres. and Townline Road South across from "Old Bloor Street". Comments We definitely are against option I as it calls for much higher population density. Options 2, 3, 4 are debateable. Reason 1: increase of traffic, at present we cannot open our windows due to exhaust fumes from traffic plus noises which all would increase with development. Reason 2: High density and medium density means affordable and subsidized housing and I don't know what is the answer. But crime increases in such environments. Why not continue in the same vein as the Oshawa side of Townline Road South. This is no problem for us. Typed as Written 546 1-4 I- zvw-� COMMENTS TO THE PROPOSED OPTIONS Please feel free to note your comments to the proposed land use options, which will be considered as input into the finalized land use plan. Return to: Tunney Planning Inc. 1 340 Byron Street South, 'Suite 200 Whitby, Ontario LlN 4P8 ( 416) 666-9735 Name and Address Property Location /Z' Comments "F Z(' Z/ Z/Z zz/ t�Z 4 TU BE RETURNED NO LATER THAN MARCH 1, 1993 . t �K y M COMMENTS TO THE PROPOSED OPTIONS Please feel free to note our comments to the proposed land use options, which will be considered as input into the finalized land use plan. Return to: Tunney Planning Inc. 340 Byron Street South Suite 200 WHITBY, Ontario. L1 N 4P8 (416) 666-9735 Name and Address Mr. & Mrs. Gossman 1536 Bloor Street Courtice, Ontario Property Location North East corner of Bloor St. and Prestonvale Comments Plans 1, 2 and 3 not acceptable for this area. Too high density. This housing will greatly reduce the value of our property. Typed as Written 548 REC IVE0 MAR 1 -° 19 0 COMMENTS TO THE PROPOSED OPTIONS Please feel free to note your comments to the proposed land use options, which will be considered as input into the finalized land use plan. Return to: Tunney Planning Inc. 340 Byron Street South, Suite 200 Whitby, Ontario L1N 4P8 (416) 666-9735 Name and Address �t ,r (. Property Location 1 Comments TO BE RETURNED NO LATER THAN MARCH 1, 1993 . 549 COMMENTS TO THE PROPOSED OPTIONS Please feel free to note our comments to the proposed land use options, which will be considered as input into the finalized land use plan. Return to: Tunney Planning Inc. 340 Byron Street South, Suite 200 WHITBY, Ontario Li N 4P8 (416) 666-9735 Name and Address G. Bennie 1236 Delmark Crt. Oshawa, Ontario Properly Location S W Comer of Bloor & Townline Oshawa Comments I am totally opposed to any development of the Lands on the Courtice side; until the corner of Bloor and Townline is aligned with the new extension of Bloor St. The area cannot handle the increased traffic. This will be made worse for two reasons 1: The closing of the Old Bloor St. which will force traffic through an already dangerous intersection which has a dog leg 2: Any development will increase traffic into street not made to handle the volume. If an industrial area is allowed at this point that traffic and noise (large trucks) will distrub a resident area Apparently Durham Region and tunney Planning have two different opinions as to what is happening regarding street development and the traffic. As time allows me I intend to follow up on is with every level of Government until the area can handle more noise and traffic. Typed as Written 550 RECEIVED MAR 2 - Ign COMMENTS TO THE PROPOSED OPTIONS Please feel free to note your comments to the proposed land use options, which will be considered as input into the finalized land use plan. Return to: Tunney Planning Inc. 340 Byron Street South, Suite 200 Whitby, Ontario L1N 4P8 (416) 666-9735 Name and Address `z 36 .oF�•�•s.e� G,eT �SNA�fi Property Location Comments 1 /41" 707,g4L>' oPPo3Fp �a .9NY OF�/F4o P/►oF�� Or TNT` `iv,t/OS o✓ 7,4 F Godif7/Cr S/.0 vti7/< ;;;y,, AFR o.= B<00%' 9' ;r,,/y41A11F /S �G.NFD :cJ/7N TF .tJ� .v �xTlyd�so/✓ OF '&Lcale SY, V14-Y.- Ille'A GAN!moo T "IA Al o�.F %N� �/�G�'F,gSF,Q TR,e ice/G . �"`S Witt Bf �ivper �.voRSF roe T..vo �FjrsotiS ® TNF G-�o,si�G or Tf/F O4.0 Bzoo/e S7 ,v 41tdl.:4, 004-47/Pc4F T C T/5`/f'o</GN /��✓ At/C rA.oY G3^oic/�lr�'ods ..�/TF/P SFc>�oni ��✓icN -c F A Qo4 Fie O• ,V/v Y Ocr!/2r4oP/YtF�T w,44. ,Alc.QF,9SF //ProfFiC /i✓To S/Pxrs' No �!/oOF To N/a,✓1J cF T.v F I/o 4 IVIFICF/A /s /oGc,o.s/FQ �� iNi3 �/�✓T �NAr �� g` it/oiSF <Gfl/c'GF T/c'uG�SI «/i.�c, I/S7/?�/g ,9 �FS��r-�✓T TO BE RETURNED NO LATER THAN MARCH 1, 1993. -t�.o.�ioT�-✓7 <y .DuiPNiv lPxc;/oiv `i/ .✓rt/FY ,V Alq Fz- o�+/S ' jyiv/°//o c�'i✓i NC �FG/o�P LJ i NG STit'FF T ,,�FL/F�®�'inF�✓T .I�li� ��F �- his'!ct' A<L o,.,✓_S �!F ,.,Z i/v TF �-- Dux cc AaTicultwms c/o Mrs. Karen Yallorlees 4441 Nsleala Road, Nestleton. Ontario L08 1l..0 Phone 005 986-0647 Fax 905 485-0426 March 7, 1994 . aMayor Diane Hamre Municipality of Clrlington 40 Temperance Street Bowmanvi l le, Ontario ��t; .:. N, , L:IC 3A6 �;,' Fax (905) 623-0830 Dear Mayor Hamre, . ❑❑ a'' The Durham Region Federation of Agriculture wishes to voice its concerns and opposition to the proposed Neighbourhood Plan for south-west Courtice . (Planning file OPA 89-032 ) Within the area indicated for the the Neighbourhood Plan lies what is some of Durham' s as well as Clarington 's best agricultural land . The majority of the land south of Bloor Street and east of the Oshawa tuwnline is predominantly Darlington loam. This soil type is representative of the better agricultural soils which supports general farming. In general municipal planning processes do not appear to take into . account long term need for good agricultural land . We are sure that you realize once such a resource is taken that it can not be replaced . if a shift to higher density residential urban areas is not undertaken then the contribution to Clarington 's economic fabric by the agri-food industry will continue to decline . At present the a4lri--food industry with $192 .9 M in products sold in Durham ranks second only to the Automotive industry. Urban sprawl demands more in services provided by the municipality and educational systems . This creates greater demands' on tax revenues rather than producing greater revenues : The many spin-offs of the a-3zi-food industry are of greater economic benefit in relation to Jobs and revenue created within the municipality. Not only is the subject land affected but pressures from urban areas encroaching into other neighbouring agricultural areas creates incompatible land uses.. This makes it difficult for present owner farmers to continue modern day farming practices without complaints o:r harassment from new residents who often idealize about country pastoral scenes. . . ./2 552 -A n,YELLOWLEES SSE F©2 2 - DRFA Courtice Neighbourhood Plan OPA 89--032 Any new development needs to be properly buffered from those areas which currently are in agricultural production so that both can function without disputes . Durham Region Federation of Agriculture supports higher density re.31dential development along with more efficient prl,-sentl,y developed for urban areas use of areas . Any new development should take . into consideration present agricultural use of lands and the wishes of those landowners who wish to continue on their farming operations Without urban conflict. DYi'ky U u DURHAM REGION FEDERATION OF AGRICULTURE L - F Dennis Yellow ees, President m 553 601 Down Cres. Oshawa, Ont. L1 H 7X9 Mar. 7th '94 Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington, To whom it may concern: In regard to proposed development for the South-West Courtice Neighbourhood, I would like to make our concerns known to you about this development. No.[:- The traffic at present consists mostly of General Motors &Darlington Nuclear plant in the mornings &afternoons, we dare not open our windows due to exhaust fumes from vehicles, due mostly to acceleration from the corner of old Bloor St & Townline Rd. S. as we live exactly across on the Oshawa side. No.2:- Twice since living here (1979) vehicles proceeding West have been through the STOP and crashed in our fence, and more times have ended over the curb on the boulevard. Any increase in traffic from further development would increase NO I & NO 2. Our other concern is Oshawa's BLOOR ST does not line up with Clarington's Bloor St. making it a dangerous intersection as it is now and should be corrected. Thanking you. Yours Truly Sam & Betty McNair [Sam & Betty McNair) TYPED AS WRITTEN - 554 l L% Lil-.tl 1994 I Ds �w� 67 ti i MUNliClIPALITY OF i LrtS♦ .f v E P tom. r).1 z. Yl Jr 7t7 z9z� A:7 i 55 % M� 2� /31:�7 77Y lq-�:IV� 556 COUNCIL DIRECTION l t'%4)P�1G1P�LtiT�, fr,�c'tTN1ci�`•�.._-- William Jones, 2645 Prestonvale Road, Courtice, Ontario L1E2R9 - Dear Patti, SE-P P8 34 Municipality of Clarington, C/O Patti L. -Barrie, 40 Temperance Street, Bowmanville,. Ontario L1C3A6 This letter is to inform Clarington Town Council of our opposition to the proposed change of Prestonvale Road to a Type C Arterial Road. We deem the proposed change to Prestonvale Road 's present 66 feet width to anything wider both unnecessary and unwanted. In our opinion, widening Courtice Road, which already has access to Highway 401, a more practical solution to relieving traffic congestion. Yours truly, 557 D[SJT�U i I C3 �.I CLERK RCK. BY ORIGINAL M AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION, THE ONTARIO GOVERNMENT AND DURHAM REGION DO NOT HAVE IT IN THEIR PLANS TO HAVE AN INTERCHANGE AT PRESTONVALE ROAD. THEIR THOUGHT WAS TO HAVE IT AT THE TOWN LINE ROAD BUT REQUIRED IT TO BE A SHORT DISTANCE EAST OF THE EXISTING TOWNLINE ROAD TO ALLOW BETTER GRADE ACCESS. THEY DO PLAN TO HAVE AN INTERCHANGE AT THE GO TERMINAL JUST EAST OF THE HOLIDAY INN. DURHAM REGION DO HAVE IT BACK IN THEIR PLANS TO EXTEND THE TOWN LINE ROAD NORTH ACROSS THE CREEK VALLEY WHICH WILL CERTAINLY EASE THE TRAFFIC FLOW CONCERNS. AS YOU KNOW, TOWNLINE ROAD WAS DESIGNED TO TAKE ARTERIAL TYPE VOLUME. WHY, SHOULD WE ON PRESTONVALE ROAD, BE FORCED TO TAKE ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC,NOISE,POLLUTION,INCONVENIENCE AND LOSS OF ROAD FRONTAGE PROPERTY OR FORCED TO MOVE AWAY TO ALLOW DEVELOPERS TO DEVELOP GREAT LARGE PARCELS OF PROPERTY WITHOUT SUPPLYING ARTERIAL ROADS ON THEIR OWN PROPERTY? THIS EQUATES TO DEVELOPERS UTILIZING OUR FRONTAGE FOR TIEIR FINANCIAL GAIN------THIS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE AND YOUR PLANNING SHOULD BE MORE CONSIDERATE OF EXISTING RESIDENT'S NEEDS. 558 ON A PERSONAL NOTE---- A NUMBER OF FAMILIES MOVED AWAY BECAUSE THEY WERE NOT CONFIDENT THAT THE TOWN WOULD STICK TO THEIR PROMISE. MY FAMILY STAYED, THINKING THAT THE TOWN WOULD HONOUR THESE PREVIOUS DECISIONS AND BECAUSE THIS IS WHERE WE WISHED TO CONTINUE TO LIVE,UNDER THOSE DECISIONS. AT THIS TIME I WOULD ALSO LIKF-TO ASK TO HAVE THE SPEED SIGNS CHANGED AT THE SOUTH END OF PRESTONVALE(JUST NORTH OF BLOOR) TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE OTHER SPEEDS ON PRESTONVALE ROAD. AT THIS TIME TWO SIGNS IN THIS AREA RAISE THE SPEED TO 60 KPH THIS AREA INCLUDES SIX HOMES AND APPROX. 1200FT OF NARROW ROADWAY RUNNING SOUTH TO THE STOP SIGN AT BLOOR STREET. CLARET,WEST OF PRESTONVALE ROAD, SHOULD BE MADE TO CONTINUE ALL THE WAY TO ROBERT ADAM DRIVE TO HELP DISPERSE TRAFFIC FROM PRESTONVALE ROAD.' T 559 w ! w - ON BEHALF OF THE RESIDENTS OF PRESTONVALE ROAD(NORTH OF BLOOR)I WISH TO PRESENT A SIGNED PETITION FROM ALL BUT ONE RESIDENT ON PRESTONVALE ROAD WHICH READS "WE THE RESIDENTS OF PRESTONVALE ROAD WANT OUR ROAD TO REMAINA LOCAL ROAD. WE FEEL OUR ROAD IS TOO BUSYNOWAND THE NEW SUBDIVISIONS SHOULD DISPERSE THELR OWN TRAFFIC" THIS PETITION DEMANDING TO NOT RE DESIGNATE PRESTONVALE ROAD TO ARTERIAL TYPE C FROM LOCAL IS ALSO BASED ON PREVIOUS AGREEMENTS WITH THE TOWN TO LEAVE PRESTONVALE ROAD A RESIDENTIAL STREET. THESE DISCUSSIONS STARTED AT THE COURTICE CONCEPT PUBLIC MEETINGS, TBEN ON TO THE OMB HEARINGS AND PROCEEDED TO THE "COURTICE TASK FORCE"WHICH WAS ESTABLISHED TO MIN DOZE THE INTERRUPTION OF THE LIFE STYLE OF COURTICE RESIDENTS. THE TASK FORCE MEMBERSHIP WAS COMPRISED OF TWO REPRESENTATIVES OF THE "COURTICE AREA CITIZENS ASSOCIATION" AND FOUR MEMBERS FROM THE NEWCASTLE PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTP-E(MAYOR AND THREE COUNCILORS)IT WAS DECIDED TO LEAVE PRESTONVALE ROAD A LOCAL ROAD. THIS WAS ADOPTED BY NEWCASTLE COUNCIL AND PLACED ON TODAY'S OFFICIAL PLAN. IT APPEARS THAT THE FORMER COUNCILS PROMISES ARE BEING BROKEN WHEN SUGGESTING THIS CHANGE TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN. ROBERT ADAM AND GLEN ABBY WERE DESIGNED AND DESIGNATED TO BE COLLECTOR AND ARTE_RIAT,ROADS TO ALLOW PRESTONVALE TO REMAIN A LOCAL RESIDENTIAL STREET. IF WIDENING IS NECESSARY, TBEN WIDEN THE ROADS THAT WERE DESIGNS AND DESIGNATED TO CARRY THE TRAFFIC. THE CURRENT WIDENING, JUST BEING FINISHED TODAY, ON PRESTONVALE ROAD APPEARS TO BE ON A 66 FOOT ROAD ALLOWANCE BUT THE PAVED ROAD WIDTH IS THE WIDTH OF A COLLECTOR ROAD (33 FEET)NOT THE WIDTH OF A LOCAL ROAD (28 FEET)' WHY? WHEN PRESTOIr vAi:E'ROAD IS STILL DESIGNATED AS "LOCAL" =-- , -- -- ,r cl y 560 1-2 � � KA c, >- 17'A IT 77 71 P 2 22 gv, 561 71 ell . if 1. \ �c,C / - � / ,J ct -_- I✓/G,Y-S -�/�,1,,"'�� ( �- ,C�P e4lVA (n v A7 Ael Vm� b63 . ........... -247Z 1-6 U16L C- Z6-� TdrV ,2 1-6 U16L C- Z6-� TdrV 417, ,7 ac �z xw . -Ah- -L-Q-IUI/It) C, b L I 564 11 J/ PA 93,70 v a67 bee, / L j Rd j � 'Py� L � / i 0�� � C c7u ri f�c c--• a-700 PpcsTn&-)utzi(-E Rd �ou,0-ICV C- Mr. Franklin Wu Director Planning and Development Department Wa•ti " ' Municipality of Clarington 40 Temperance Street Bowmanville, Ontario;+;:;,'y''°� L1C 3A6 Dear Mr. Wus Res Official Plan Amendment #59 to the Official Plan of the former Town of Newcastle and Amendment #5 to the Courtice South Neighbourhood Plan and Adoption of South-West Courtice_ Neighbourhood Plan Clarington File No.ss OPA 87-27/C - Three D Developments OPA 89-32/C - Stolp Homes(Newcastle) Developers now Newcastle I Limited Partnership and Newcastle IT Limited Partnership NPA 87-04/CS - Three D Developments (765400 Ontario Limited) NPA 91-04/CS - Three D Developments :`_ NPA 94-01/CSW - Stolp Homes(Newcastle) Developers now Newcastle I Limited Partnership and Newcastle II Limited Partnership Niuniciyality of Clarington I act as project manager, land development, for Claret Invest- ments Limited and Aexgate Holdings Limited, jointly carrying on business as Courtice Heights Developments. With respect to the above referenced applications, the following comments are Drovidedo 566 1. Courtice Heights Developments has been developing land in Courtice for the past 20 years and is the owner of a 24 acre parcel located in Part Lot 28, Concession 3, former Township of Darlington, adjacent to the east side of Courtice Road,_ and a 25 acre parcel located in Part Lot 27, Concession 3, former Township of Darlington, adjacent to the north side of Nash Road. 2. These two parcels were designated for Residential development in the 1976 Regional Official Plan and continue to be designated for such in the Living Area designation of the 1991 Regional Official Plan, 3. These two parcels were designated for Residential development in Amendment #12 to the Official Plan for the Darlington Planning Area (commonly referred to as the Courtice Urban Area Plan) which was approved by the Ministry in June 1980, This Courtice Urban Area Plan became part of a consolidated District Official Plan which was approved by the Minister in 1986. These two parcels continue to be designated for Residential development in this current .local District Official Plan. 4. With reference to these two parcels, Courtice Heights Developments made application in April 1992 to amend the District Official regarding Courtice North Neighbourhood 3C, particularly as it relates to lands north of Nash Road between Courtice Road and Hancock Road. The OPA application basically related to population levels,road alignments, and internal designation boundary adjustments. At the same time Courtice Heights Developments made application to establish a Neighbourhood Plan for that portion of Courtice North Neighbourhood 3C north of Nash Road (ie. 3C IT) 5• Notwithstanding the long history of Residential designation for these two parcels in the Regional and local District Official Plans, the May 1994 Draft District Official Plan released by the Caarington Department of Planning and Development is proposing to place the northern half of Courtice North Neighbourhood 3C II (also known as the Hancock Neighbourhood) beyond the Interim Urban Boundary or 20-year planning horizon of the District Plan. This proposal is completely unacceptable to Courtice Heights Developments as was indicated in our July 8,1994 written- submission on the Draft Official Plan to Council because of its effects on the 24 acre parcel and a portion of the 25 acre parcel. 567 7. It is of concern to Courtice Heights Developments that planning staff would suggest in the Clarington Draft District Official Plan the exclusion of about 100 acres of land in the Hancock or 3C II Neighbourhood which has been designated Residential for 15 years in the existing District Official Plan and yet would suggest in the Stolp Homes and Three- D Developments OPA applications the addition of 85 acres ( 34.4 Hectares) of land to Neighbourhood 2A and 277 acres ( 112.4 Hectares) of land in Neighbourhood 4 (ie. a total of 362 acres or 146.8 Hectares to both neighbourhoods) to the existing District Official Plan when such additional land has only been recently designated Living Area in the 1991 Regional Official Plans- 8,. It is noted that in OPA #59 municipal planning staff are proposing to increase the entire population of Courtice from 20000 persons-to 31000 persons in the existing District Official Plan. Such a population increase has long been warranted because approved neighbourhood population targets shown for the Courtice Urban Area in Schedule 6-1 of the existing District Official Plan total 21600 persons. If the population targets shown in existing Council-approved Neighbourhood Development Plans are used, the total population for the Courtice Urban Area would be 26300 persons ( see Table A.2 in Background Paper 3- Land Use and Settlement Patterns) . If the population target for existing Neighbourhood 3C is increased from 1900 persons to 4500 persons as suggested in my July 8, 1994 letter on the Draft Official- Plan, then the total population for existing Neighbourhoods would total 28900 persons ( ie. 26300 + 2600) . This would leave an uncommitted Donulation of 2100 persons (ie. 31000 - 2F?900) to be assigned to lands beyond the urban limits of the existing District Official Plan. 568 9. The strategy proposed by municipal planning staff in OPA #59 of approving a population target of 31000 persons and automatically committing 10400 persons of that total to modified Neighbourhood 2A and new Neighbourhood 4 is inappropriate because it : neglects the priority nature of those neighbourhoods designated in the 1976 Regional Official Plan and 1980 Courtice Urban Area Plan (ie. Neighbourhoods 1A,1B; 2B,2C,3A,3B,and 5C) and leaves them a residual population of 20600 persons (ie. 31000 - 10400) to allocate among themselves. The Neighbourhood Plans for these 7 neighbourhoods require a population of 25300 persons (ie. 4475+2800+3640+2585+2300+5000+4500 persons for 1A,1B, 2B, 2C, 3A, 3R- and 3C respectively) to develop properly. 10. Courtice Heights Developments is concerned with some of the proposed changes to the policies of the existing District Official Plan. These concerns are as follows. Section 6.1.2:(.iv)a - The Low Density Residential policy proposes a maximum density of 25 units per net residential hectare. The maximum should be 30 units per net residential hectare to more easily permit the development of street townhouses. Section 6.1.2. ( iv)b - Based on the foregoing comments, the range for the Medium-Density Residential should be adjusted from 25-60 units per net residential hectare to 30-60 units per net residential hectare. The maximum number of street townhouses per block should be increased from 6 units to 8 units. Section 6.1 . 3.( i)a - The wording should be modified to read "local roads shall be designed having regard,where practical,for the grid street system principle" . - The statement discouraging cul-de- sacs should be omitted. Section 6.8.2. ( iii)c - This section deals with the phasing of residential development,.and indicates that it "shall be based on" a series of principles . The wording should be modified to read "shall give consideration to" . 569 10. (cont'd) Section 6 .8.2. (iv)d - This section could cause a plan of subdivision to be declared premature if the non-residential assessment ratio is less than 15%. While a minimum non-residential assessment ratio is an admirable goal, it should not be used as a criterion for residential subdivision approval since market forces for residential land are not necessarily linked to market forces for industrial land. Section 6.8.2. (v) - The proposed wording "prior to the consideration for approval of a plan of subdivision, the Municipality requires the preparation of a master drainage plan . 00011 should be modified to read "during consideration of a plan of subdivision, the Municipality may require 0000" . Section 6.8.2.(vii) - The proposed wording concerning "storm water management ponds" should include the word "public" before the phrase. Section 6.8.2. (vii)d - The proposed wording "public safety through design without any requirement for fencing" should be modified to read "public safety through design and where possible avoid any require- ment for fencing. Courtice Heights Developments has attempted to outline some of its concerns with the proposed amendment applications and hopes that the Municipality of Clarington will fold these applications into its review of the District Official Plan. You 7s truly, William D. Manson 570 I would like this letter acknowledged at the meeting between Stolp Homes and the council. Mayor Diane Hamre, Members of Council, Frank Wu, Bill Stockwell and Bill Crosbie: Approximately ten years ago the residents of Prestonvale Road went to the OMB with concerns about the proposed subdivisions to the east and west. It was passed at that time that Prestonvale Road would remain a local road. The proposed subdivision would have collector roads. The new official plan was to change Prestonvale to a type 'C' arterial road, and went again before council and it was approved that our road would remain local. The subdivision that Stolp Homes has planned for the south end would further burden our road, because Robert Adams Drive which is the north, south collector road, has not been completed. The only shopping facilities in the area are at Townline and King. Traffic from this new subdivision would have to use our already busy road. Before this subdivision of 8,000 homes is approved, Robert Adams Drive should be opened up to meet Bloor Street, and the Townline should be bridged to create a direct route. The school that is to be built for this subdivision should not be on Prestonvale Road as it would create alot more traffic. A good location for this school would be on Robert Adams Drive between Glenabby and Bloor Street. It would be a central location on a road that is designed to carry a higher volume of traffic. Mr. & Mrs. Robert Cowle. TYPED AS WRITTEN 571 i �/�ll/j�� _•C/�QY��' -/7C�/�ii"l'/ ,. �a°/l?�Pi-s �J��pll���� y`/`li�� �f��c �GS Oilfrq�f' fJ Ol/lI Gv�-�1J� 7O T.�iE' l%/yl.C� r.�/i 7G.�i CO�Q�i-r�s �I�DI�T �/�Ii� �i�dS'"Cp� sCjGG�/�iS/O.�rS �G� /i�� /�°�I.ST lj•�l�' Lvdl�l�' ��ir�vi6, /v ���'lls� /L G.��i /.��a►r�s �i. �� ��7.c� .s Tile /moo•°-�, S/!l%!l/G/ r/2° , G'�/ .�/•L°!� �O Ci�'I�TZ° 6i GC/f�"G J/ �G�Gt�G.°. 0 0 7ZiO/, � PRESENTATION TO CLARINGTO_N TOWN COUNCIL MARCH 27, 1995 FROM HUGH AND CAROL ANN NEILL RE:--- REPORT FROM"TOTTEN SIMS HUBICKI ASSOCIATES" ON PAGE# 6 OF THIS REPORT, THEY RECOMMENDED MOVING THE INTERSECTION OF BLOOR AND PRESTONVALE ROAD TO THE WEST APPROXIMATELY 50 TO 100 METERS. I AGREE WITH THIS CONCERN AS I HAVE WITNESSED A TRAFFIC RELATED FATALITY AT THAT INTERSECTION. WE BELIEVE THAT IF THE INTERSECTION WAS MOVED 75 METERS TO THE WEST IT COULD RESOLVE SOME OTHER CONCERNS AS WELL. IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT THIS REPORT MADE NO MENTION OF THE"NEW' EAST WEST ARTERIAL ROAD THAT MR. WU PUBLICLY ANNOUNCED LAST MAY AT THE EMILY STOWE PUBLIC SCHOOL IN COURTICE. MR- WU SAID THAT THIS ROAD WAS PUT IN PLACE TO ALLEVIATE THE TRAFFIC CONCERNS RAISED BY THE RESIDENTS ON GLENABBY DRIVE. IT IS OUR BELIEF THAT THIS NEW ARTERIAL STREET SHOULD CONTINUE WESTERLY ACROSS PRESTONVALE AND THEN CURVE SOUTH TO THE NEW INTERSECTION AT BLOOR WHICH WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY 75 METERS WEST OF PRESTONVALE RD. THIS REALIGNMENT WOULD PROVIDE ARTERIAL ACCESS TO ALL OF COURTICE, IN A SHARED AND EVEN MANNER, WITHOUT BEING PLACED ON ANY EXISTING LOCAL ROADS. PLEASE SEE ATTACHMENT#1 INCLUDED. AS AN ALTERNATE THIS NEW STREET COULD BE DIRECTED STRAIGHT ACROSS PRESTOVALE TO ROBERT ADAM DR FOR CONNECTION TO BLOOR. WE BELIEVE THAT THIS RECOMMENDATION SHOULD BE LOOKED AT VERY SERIOUSLY. ON PAGE# 7, A RECOMMENDATION SUGGESTS DISCOURAGING EAST/WEST. TRAVEL IN THE NEW S/W NEIGHBORHOOD TO PREVENT TRAFFIC TO GRANDVIEW STREET. THE REPORT SHOULD ALSO DISCOURAGE TRAVEL EAST TO PRESTOVALE RD. ON PAGE# 7, THE REPORT DID NOT RECOMMEND THE CLOSURE OF PRESTONVALE BECAUSE OF THE COST TO PURCHASE HOMES IN THE CLOSURE AREA- THE REMOVAL OF THESE.HOMES WOULD ALLOW FOR A GRADUAL TURN ONTO PRESTONVALE, BUT THE TOWN'S PLAN DO ALLOW FOR A 90 DEGREE TURN ONTO PRESTONVALE ROAD FROM A SUGGESTED `NEW' ARTERIAL ROAD WHICH TENDS TO INDICATE THAT IT COULD BE DONE AND THESE HOMES WOULD NOT BE REQUIRED.. 4 ALSO ON PAGE#7, THE REPORT READS THAT ROBERT ADAM AND SANDRINGHAM WERE NOT DESIGNED OR PLANNED TO CARRY ALL THE NORTH /SOUTH TRAFFIC. IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT IT WAS PLANNED TO CARRY THIS INCREASED TRAFFIC FLOW AND PRESTOVALE WAS PLANNED TO BE LEFT ALONE AS ARESIDENTIAL LOCAL ROAD AS SHOWN ON TODAYS OFFICIAL PLAN. ON PAGE# 8, THE REPORT READS THAT THE TOWN LINE BRIDGE IMPROVEMENTS WOULD RESULT IN"MINOR"REDUCTIONS IN EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES. WE DISAGREE WITH THIS COMMENT AS.THE ONLY WAY A RESIDENT IN THIS AREA HAS TO GET TO THE MALL AT TOWNLINE AND HWY#2 IS VIA GRANDVIEW OR PRESTONVALE RD. IN ADDITION THE NEW COLONEL SAM DRIVE /HWY 401 INTERCHANGE SHOULD PROBABLY CONNECT TO THE TOWNLINE RD. IF THE TOWN FOLLOWS THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE REPORT AND REDESIGNATES PRESTONVALE ROAD FROM A LOCAL ROAD, IT CAN ONLY BE CONCLUDED THAT OUR PROPERTY SIZE AND VALUE WILL BE GREATLY REDUCED AND OUR RESIDENTIAL LIFE STYLE QUALITY DIMINISHED. IF A SECONDARY SCHOOL IS PLACED DIRECTLY ACROSS THE ROAD FROM OUR HOUSE OUR PROPERTY VALUE WILL DECREASE AND LIFE STYLE DD41NISH. IF HIGH DENSITY IS ALLOWED-WITHIN 300 METERS OF OUR HOME AND A MALL WITHIN 200 METERS OF OUR HOME, AGAIN OUR PROPERTY VALUE WILL DECREASE AND LIFE STYLE DIMINISH. SINCE ALL OF THE ABOVE ARE CURRENTLY ON THE TOWN OF CLARINGTON'S PROPOSED OFFICIAL PLAN AND ARE ALL REQUIRED TO ALLOW DEVELOPERS TO PROCEED AND MAKE FINANCIAL GAINS, IT HARDLY SEEMS REASONABLE OR FAIR THAT WE SHOULD BE INCONVENIENCED, LET ALONE BE INCONVENIENCED AT A FINANCIAL LOSS. IT IS OUR PLAN TO FIGHT THIS CHANGE AT ALL LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT PRIOR TO BEING FORCED TO SELL AND MOVE AWAY FROM IT. THE TOWN'S PLANNING DEPARTMENT MADE A PRESENTATION TO COUNCIL ON MONDAY THE 20TH OF MARCH THAT REPORTED THE HIGH COST OF EXPANDING DEVELOPMENT IN THIS AREA. WHAT THEY LEFT OUT OF THIS PRESENTATION WAS THE HIGH COST OF COMPENSATION TO THE EXISTING RESIDENTS OF PRESTOVALE ROAD. 576 .: 3, i 6 9 to , nuns '� s///s►►� G mtee.:ehole —�.��°�= 111111E '��u/ui►�������:�� _�= 11111. '111111m.... 11111111 1111111 =�l$�,�ti�•" ��,.. Hill� Ip :1`lii�ll'� IE ;E ecaoa sz C] i 5 P �\ C •f .�` ? (AM DOfA1Y RMCMULL - O IE4RM OEM9T1'RL•SOCIIRAL - AI _ wOl OENWV RESOENMAL W 0. :. .t -»- I Nppa0URM000 A`ARw - �.'lN:.-.`• 4 �wRCCTTC _ - oOEN m.cc --X STORY RATER fAOLITY _ v 5C7e00.- SE r puem t •-• SCHOOL-azutOTAERY - ftwj 2 OR/N" OO.h[wCNCC CCwAKR01 S RCO RI✓.NwL P _ OAL P Unum nwE RoA01 T>C • - ....��� •I' i "TER-.ROA.s —E e ARTEMA�ROACS TY►_• r II COLLECTOR 806:1 LOCH.ROA=A_C ESS - F I ......... 1 4.. ' ...............:I T . E MAN-,Z •T A 1` RAILWAY (;ANAOIAT' 1 I. I B A�Cl, I N� R O A N W A Y N C �C i SOUTH-WEST COURTICE NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN TRAFFIC IMPACT REVIEW Exhibit 1 totten sims hubicki associates Concept Development Plan engineers architects and planners P P 577 0 totten sims hubicki associates Mr. D. Crome Manager of Strategic Planning Municipality of Clarington Planning Department 40 Temperance Street Bowmanville, Ontario UC 3A6 February 27, 1995 RE: Courtice Area Transportation/Traffic Study Dear David: ATTACHMENT #4 300 WATER STREET, WHITBY, ONTARIO CANADA UN 9J2 (905)668-9363 FAX(905)668-0221 Totten Sims Hubicki Associates was retained in December 1995 to undertake a Traffic Impact Assessment in support of the South-West Courtice Neighbourhood Plan and the Draft Clarington Official Plan. It was agreed that our traffic impact assessment would be undertaken in two phases with the first phase dealing with the residential component in south-west Courtice(The South-West Courtice Neighbourhood Plan) and the second phase dealing with the land designated for industrial use. The Study Area for the overall assessment is bounded by Highway 2, Townline Road, Courtice Road and Highway 401. This letter report summarizes the results of our Phase 1 review. Our assessment has revealed that the residential development associated with Phase 1 (The South-West Courtice Neighbourhood Plan) cannot be accommodated from a traffic perspective without improvements to the local and Regional roadway networks in both Clarington and Oshawa. In addition, it appears that higher order transportation improvements are required on the Provincial Highway network to accommodate significant levels of development in the Courtice area, including the development considered within the context of the review summarized in this letter report. Only a small component of the proposed residential development could be accommodated on the existing transportation network. The development of those lands included within Phase 1 of the South-West Courtice development will also result in increased traffic volumes on Robert Adams Drive, Prestonvale Road and Glenabbey Drive; although the existing and anticipating volumes on these roadways are considered to be within the levels deemed acceptable for collector and minor arterial roadways. 1.0 DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTION Phase 1 of the South-West Courtice Neighbourhood Plan includes 2,515 dwelling units. For the purposes of our impact assessment, the development types were disaggregated as shown in Table No. 1 below. ENGINEERS ARCHITECTS AND PLANNERS During the course of our assessment it became clear that servicing constraints within the South-West Courtice area may preclude the development of all 2,515 units within the 10 year planning horizon considered within the context of this Study; as a consequence, and following consultation with staff of the Municipality, it was agreed that a development level of 1,675 units would also be assessed. This would likely represent "achievable" development levels for approximately the next 10 years. For the purposes of this documentation, the 1,675 unit phasing is referred to as Phase IA. The latest development plan for the South-West Courtice area is provided as Exhibit 1. 1 W.1 1. Residential Low Density 1,137 N/A Medium Density 438 N/A High Density 100 N/A 2. Commercial Convenience Type Retail N/A 6,500 NOTE: 1. N/A = Not Applicable 2. Phase 1 = Total Area Buildout Phase 1A = Development Level which Reflects Servicing Constraints It should be noted that north of the South-West Courtice Neighbourhood, thre are approximately 225 residential units that have Draft Plan Approval and have yet to be developed. It has been assumed in the context of this Study, that all 225 of these single family dwelling units will be developed and occupied within the next 10 years. 5 totten sims hubicki associates 1. Residential Low Density 1,785 N/A Medium Density 505 N/A High Density 225 N/A 2. Commercial Convenience Type Retail N/A 6,500 W.1 1. Residential Low Density 1,137 N/A Medium Density 438 N/A High Density 100 N/A 2. Commercial Convenience Type Retail N/A 6,500 NOTE: 1. N/A = Not Applicable 2. Phase 1 = Total Area Buildout Phase 1A = Development Level which Reflects Servicing Constraints It should be noted that north of the South-West Courtice Neighbourhood, thre are approximately 225 residential units that have Draft Plan Approval and have yet to be developed. It has been assumed in the context of this Study, that all 225 of these single family dwelling units will be developed and occupied within the next 10 years. 5 totten sims hubicki associates L. SLOCIR S SOUTH-WEST COURTICE NEIGHBOURHOOD LAND USE STRUCTURE PLAN, SCHEDULE 1 ml!as3i-ii a a�ooa sr. 00 NEICHBOURHOOD BOUNDARY 0 LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBOURHOOD P- PARKETTE OPEN SPACE STORM WATER FACILITY W SCHOOL- SECONDARY PUBLIC SCHOOL-ELEMENTARY BLIC PUBLIC SCHOOL-EL EMENTARY SEPARATE CHURCH o CONVENIENCE COMMERCIAL SPECIAL.1LAN..NC PRECINCT UTUTIES ARTERIAL ROADS TYPE A ARTER.A.ROADS TYPE ARTFRIA.ROADS TYPE COLLECTOR ROADS - ---------- / LOCAL RDA::ACCESS - 4— PEDESTRIAN AN: . ............. &CICLE ROUTES B A 5 E Li I I Q SOUTH-WEST COURTICE NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN ,�, TRAFFIC IMPACT REVIEW Exhibit 1 totten sims hubicki associates Concept Development Plan engineers architects and planners - 3 - 2.0 LOCAL TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE Exhibit 2 provided shows anticipated/planned roadway classifications within the Study Area. The following classifications should be noted: The above designations attributed to the Clarington Official Plan refer to the Draft Official Plan currently under consideration. It is these designations that are shown on Exhibit 2. It should be noted the existing Official Plan and Neighbourhood Plan previously prepared by the Municipality of Clarington, refer to Prestonvale Road between King Street and Robert Adams Drive as a collector roadway and between Robert Adams Drive and Glenabbey Drive, Prestonvale Road is identified as a local roadway. Between King Street and Glenabbey Drive, Prestonvale Road is currently constructed to collector standards (i.e. a 10 in pavement width). It is also noteworthy that a Type C Arterial is essentially a major collector roadway. The difference between a local and a collector roadway is the acceptable level of traffic that can be accommodated; there is often no difference in the physical capacities of both types of roadways. The municipality has not established, or adopted, "threshold" volumes for local or collector facilities although it is generally accepted in the transportation/planning industry that local roadways should carry in the order of 1,000-1,500 vehicles per day (vpd). In late 1994, the Council of the Municipality of Clarington passed a motion which essentially formalized their desire to recognize and maintain Prestonvale Road between King Street and Bloor Street as a local roadway. The Phase 1 assessment as summarized in this letter report included a review of the implications associated with maintaining Prestonvale Road as a local facility and considered strategies that could be implemented to reduce the volumes on this roadway to local street levels (i.e. less than 1,000 vpd). Consistent with the South-West Courtice Neighbourhood Plan, we have assumed that, east of Townline Road, Bloor Street would be re-aligned to connect directly to Bloor Street at approximately Prestonvale Road as shown on Exhibit 1. It was also assumed that Prestonvale Road between Glenabbey Drive and Bloor Street would be widened and reconstructed as part of development activities in the area, consistent with the upgrading that occurred in 1994 between Claret Road and Glenabbey Drive. - 5 8 1 totten sims hubicki associates REGYONAL CLARINGTON OFFICIAL „ROADWAY I,YNK OFFICIAL PL PLAN:(DRAFT) Prestonvale Road-Highway 2 (King Street) to Not Addressed Type C Arterial Robert Adams Drive Prestonvale Road-Robert Adams Drive to Not Addressed Type C Arterial Glenabbey Drive Prestonvale Road-Glenabbey Drive to Type C Arterial Type C Arterial Baseline Road (Highway 401) Glenabbey Drive-Prestonvale Road to Type C Arterial Collector Townline Road Robert Adams Drive-Glenabbey Drive to Not Addressed Collector Prestonvale Road The above designations attributed to the Clarington Official Plan refer to the Draft Official Plan currently under consideration. It is these designations that are shown on Exhibit 2. It should be noted the existing Official Plan and Neighbourhood Plan previously prepared by the Municipality of Clarington, refer to Prestonvale Road between King Street and Robert Adams Drive as a collector roadway and between Robert Adams Drive and Glenabbey Drive, Prestonvale Road is identified as a local roadway. Between King Street and Glenabbey Drive, Prestonvale Road is currently constructed to collector standards (i.e. a 10 in pavement width). It is also noteworthy that a Type C Arterial is essentially a major collector roadway. The difference between a local and a collector roadway is the acceptable level of traffic that can be accommodated; there is often no difference in the physical capacities of both types of roadways. The municipality has not established, or adopted, "threshold" volumes for local or collector facilities although it is generally accepted in the transportation/planning industry that local roadways should carry in the order of 1,000-1,500 vehicles per day (vpd). In late 1994, the Council of the Municipality of Clarington passed a motion which essentially formalized their desire to recognize and maintain Prestonvale Road between King Street and Bloor Street as a local roadway. The Phase 1 assessment as summarized in this letter report included a review of the implications associated with maintaining Prestonvale Road as a local facility and considered strategies that could be implemented to reduce the volumes on this roadway to local street levels (i.e. less than 1,000 vpd). Consistent with the South-West Courtice Neighbourhood Plan, we have assumed that, east of Townline Road, Bloor Street would be re-aligned to connect directly to Bloor Street at approximately Prestonvale Road as shown on Exhibit 1. It was also assumed that Prestonvale Road between Glenabbey Drive and Bloor Street would be widened and reconstructed as part of development activities in the area, consistent with the upgrading that occurred in 1994 between Claret Road and Glenabbey Drive. - 5 8 1 totten sims hubicki associates 1 - 4 - Discussions with staff of the Region of Durham have revealed that the widening of Bloor Street east of Harmony Road is not currently included in the Region's 10 year Capital Works Program. In addition, timing has not been established for either the implementation of the ultimate Harmony Road/Bloor Street interchange with Highway 401 or the new Colonel Sam Drive/Highway 401 interchange to the east of Harmony Road. Previous studies, including the Harmony Road Operational Review undertaken by TSH in 1991, revealed the need for these improvements within a 10 year horizon in order to accommodate additional development in the area of the General Motors Headquarters. A widening of Bloor Street would also involve the simultaneous construction of a grade separation of the CPR tracks west of Grandview Drive. Although a Regional initiative,this project will be funded by GO Transit as part of GO Rail's extension to East Oshawa. GO Rail has yet to establish a date for this extension. 3.0 TRAFFIC GENERATION Table No. 2 below summarizes traffic generation associated with development levels for both Phases 1 and lA of the South-West Courtice Neighbourhood Plan. Trip generation rates were based on estimates contained in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 5th Edition, and indices collected by TSH for similar studies. In reviewing the trip generation rates as shown in Table No. 2, it is fundamental to note that there is currently very little transit service to the South-West Courtice Neighbourhood. We have assumed that, in the 10 year planning horizon, there will not be a significant improvement in the level of transit service available to this area. Even with the extension of GO service to the area, it is estimated that there will be a limited reduction'in auto traffic generation. We have reviewed/confirmed this assumption with staff of the City of Oshawa and the Municipality of Clarington. For Phase IA, we have also assumed that 5% of the traffic generation would be internal to the development itself. 583 totten sims hubicki associates Medium Density 505 1 N/A 0.36 0.19 0.55 182 96 278 High Density 225 N/A 0.23 0.14 0.37 52 32 84 Commercial: Convenience N/A 6,500 7.57 7.57 15.14 49 49 98 TOTAL TRIP GENERATION 1,455 808 2,263 lA Low Density 1,137 N/A 0.66 0.35 1.01 747 401 1,148 Medium Density 438 N/A 0,36 0.19 0.55 159 83 242 High Density 100 N/A 0.23 0.14 0.37 1 23 14 37 Commercial: Convenience N/A 6,500 7.57 7.57 15.14 49 49 98 TOTAL TRIP GENERATION 978 547 1,525 NOTE: 1. Trip Rates were Determined from ITE Trip Generation Manual (5th Edition), Residential, Vehicle Trips/Unit; Commercial, Vehicle Trips/10;SF G.F.A. 2. N/A = Not Applicable; G.F.A. = Gross Floor Area 583 totten sims hubicki associates - 5 - For the purposes of impact assessment, it was assumed that the traffic generated by the commercial component of the development would be bypass traffic (i.e. traffic already on the roadways). The background traffic has also been adjusted to reflect a total of 225 additional dwelling units (low density) proposed adjacent to the north of the Study Area. 4.0 TRAMC DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT Traffic associated with the new development was distributed based upon 1991 TTS data (Transportation Tomorrow Survey). For the purposes of our analysis we have assumed that background traffic will grow at a rate of 2.7% per annum. This figure was arrived at following an assessment of historic traffic volumes in the area. The rate was also confirmed with Region of Durham staff. This figure could be considered conservative if the GO extension to Oshawa occurs within the next ten years. The GO Station will attract traffic from the east in Courtice and Bowmanville which may find Bloor Street an attractive route to the station which is to be located on Bloor Street just east of the Holiday Inn and west of Grandview Drive. Exhibit No. 3 attached provides a summary of the existing background traffic volumes as assembled by TSH. Exhibit No. 4, shows the assignment of development related traffic to the roadway network. Exhibit No. 5 shows future (year 2005) total traffic volumes on roadway links and at intersections within the Study Area and on roadways to the west in the City of Oshawa. Exhibits 3, 4 and 5 reflect Phase lA of the proposed development i.e. 1,675 dwelling units. Traffic assignments have not been provided for Phase 1. In producing a traffic assignment, it was assumed that 20% of the site-generated traffic to/from the west on Highway 401 would use the Courtice Road interchange rather than the existing Harmony Road interchange. 5.0 IMPACT ASSESSMENT Capacity analyses for the key intersections within the Study Area were conducted using the Highway Capacity Manual software associated with Transportation Research Board Special Report 209. Table No. 3 attached provides a summary of the results of the capacity analysis conducted for development levels considered within Phase 1 and Phase lA of the South-West Courtice Neighbourhood Plan. 1 IA Ring Street/ 1 0.35 1 B 1 8 1 0.46 1 B 1 9 1 0.61 1 B 1 14 1 0.61 1 B 1 14 II Prestonvale Road Bloor Street/ 0.54 B 15 0.72 C 17 1.2 F Grandview Drive Bloor Street/ 0.85 B 29 1.2 F N/A 1.20 F Harmony Road King Street/ 0.35 B 8 0.46 B 9 0.56 B Preatonvale Road Bloor Street/ 0.54 B 15 0.72 C 17 1.05 F Grandview Drive Bloor Street/ 0.85 B 29 1.2 F N/A 1.2 F Harmony Road V/C =Volume to Capacity Ratio; LOS =Level of Service; D=Average Delay(Seconds/Vehicle) Widening Bloor Street(from Harmony Road to Prestonvale Road)from 2 to 4 Lane CroasSection is required N/A = Not Aaseased 1 No Bloor Street Widening-Harmony Road to Preatonvale Drive. 2 With Bloor Street Widening 8' N/A 1 0.77 1 C 1 19 N/A 1 1.20 1 F 1 N/A 13 0.56 B 13 71 0.68 C r 15 N/A ( 1.20 1 . F I N/A E 9 i ' NON 3 ♦-600 King Street East ---------- 44 j-14--- ----i-------- -----------+-- --4� � ; I o 827--� ^ LJ 1 ! � Q 110 l O \ a 10 1 0 1 Q ®p ■ . f� C �c CD 1 a it to m p 1 CD Glenabbe Drive ' I 97 Tin k_ 40 2Bloor Street ' Bloor Street LL 726 298—�i 142 °n�° 142 1 120 _ � � 1 � a � Grandview Drive --I j LEGEND Provincial Freeway ` ' Type A Arterial .---Type B Arterial ! ! ... Type C Arterial t` �_____•_� Collector ! Local Existing Signalized Intersection 1 Study Area 1 715 Existing p.m.peak hour volumes HIGHWAY NOT TO SCALE _ SOUTH-WEST COURTICE NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN TRAFFIC IMPACT REVIEW Exhibit 3 totten Sims hubicki associates P.M. Peak Hour Volumes Existing Condition engineers architects and planners - 5 8,' . i i r King Street East = a a •Q, m v �7.,,��~89 �1�► ~ or Street 481 �e ; LEGEND Provincial Freeway Type A Arterial Type B Arterial ... .. Type C Arterial ---- -----Collector Local Existing Signalized Intersection Study Area 713 Development Traffic Grandview Drive Drive Bloor Street HIGHWAY 9 z 4114I ,UO Ta, 28 •M--�■ tC N tr 1 o .Q %Q 1 ;D ;3 ;v 1T f 3 cD �o 1 1 NOT TO SCALE SOUTH-WEST COURTICE NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN TRAFFIC IMPACT REVIEW ,M Exhibit 4 totten sims hubicki associates Development Related Traffic Assignment engineers architects and planners P.M. Peak Hour 586 _ 597 LEGEND -.,, Grandview Drive • N' N +__4 1 t Type A Arterial '-'35 .---Type B Arterial King Street East �1�. X—' -----------Collector 1 Local I� 1079 0 Existing Signalized Intersection i COURTICE RD ��" � � =s Study Area INTERCHANGE NF � tC sw 'x 715 Background and Development Traffic w �� e HIGHWAY 401 3 1x :o SOUTH-WEST COURTICE NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN ,O � 'c �(D Exhibit 5 totten Sims hubicki associates CD :a t Future (Year 2005) Background and Development im o :m 1 (°' -C `D ' ;w 1 ICD ;M IO G_lenabbey Drive ; _ -__- i CD r�i aNi°rn '�98 �52 �� I♦—298 IN'�� �' f—599 ' k, B f Bloor Street Bloor Street sa8� lass 343�;��1 ses 185::i t _ 597 LEGEND -.,, Grandview Drive • Provincial Freeway 1 t Type A Arterial E .---Type B Arterial . Type C Arterial -----------Collector Local TO/FROM 0 Existing Signalized Intersection i COURTICE RD ��" � � =s Study Area INTERCHANGE sw I f'- 715 Background and Development Traffic —► HIGHWAY 401 NOT TO SCALE SOUTH-WEST COURTICE NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN U TRAFFIC IMPACT REVIEW Exhibit 5 totten Sims hubicki associates P.M. Peak Hour Volumes engineers architects and planners Future (Year 2005) Background and Development _ 597 v As can be noted from Table No.3, there will be a number of traffic/transportation related problems with the development levels associated with either Phase 1 or Phase 1A. The intersection of Harmony Road and Bloor Street in the City of Oshawa is currently operating at capacity for some critical movements. Additional development would only serve to exacerbate conditions at this location. The Region of Durham is currently investigating techniques to improve operating conditions at this intersection which may remove short term operating constraints. One improvement being investigated includes the provision of an additional EN - W Highway 401 ramp located on Bloor Street west of Harmony Road. Any improvements in this regard, must be endorsed by MTO. The intersection of Bloor Street and Grandview Drive is currently operating at an acceptable level of service; however, with the development volumes associated with the South-West Courtice Neighbourhood Plan, this intersection will also experience capacity problems at the 2005 planning horizon with volumes associated with either the Phase 1 or Phase IA levels of development. The intersection of Bloor Street and Townline Road, which is currently unsignalized,will require signalization in conjunction with development and, without a widening of Bloor Street, this intersection will also experience capacity problems. With respect to impacts on other roadways in the community, our traffic assignment indicates that increased volumes could be anticipated on Glenabbey Drive, Robert Adams Drive and Prestonvale Road. Exhibit No. 6 shows the level of increased volumes that could be anticipated on these roadways on a daffy and peak hour basis and the total expected volumes resulting from development in the south-west Courtice Neighbourhood Plan. It must be recognized that our assignment of traffic to these roadways is somewhat subjective and was based upon travel time surveys conducted by our staff and the assessment of the convenience of each of these routes from the South-West Courtice Neighbourhood to and from Highway No. 2 (King Street). Further discussion of impacts on these roadways is contained in Section 6.0 of this letter report. We have reviewed the initial subdivision plans for the subject neighbourhood as provided by staff of the Municipality of Clarington. The internal street network associated with the plan for the South-West Courtice Neighbourhood shows an east-west collector roadway lining up with Grandview Drive in the City of Oshawa. An additional east-west roadway link with Townline Road is located south of Grandview Drive. These links, whether local or collector facilities, could result in increased traffic volumes on Grandview Drive in Oshawa. Although this increase is difficult to predict, the level will likely relate directly to prevailing operating conditions at the Grandview Drive/Bloor Street and Bloor Street/Townline Road intersections. One issue that should be addressed by the Municipality of Clarington and the Region of Durham is the lack of sufficient stopping and crossing sight distance (particularly for left turns) on Bloor Street at Prestonvale Road (currently an unsignalized location). Currently there exists significant sight distance problems as a result of the prevailing roadway grade east of Prestonvale Road. The only practical solution to these problems may involve relocating the future upgraded Bloor Street/Prestonvale Road intersection to the west and providing signalization. This problem has been confirmed in conjunction with Region of Durham staff during a field visit to the site. The assessment of sight distance constraints was undertaken for the existing posted speed of 80 kph (the prevailing speeds appear to be somewhat higher than 80 kph). Although it is recognized that urbanization will occur in the near future to the west of Prestonvale Road, to the east,the rural character will remain for some time and therefore it is appropriate to assume that there will not be a reduction in speeds. Signalization alone at this intersection will not resolve the sight distance problems. :) 88 totten sims hubicki associates v LEGEND Grandview Drive Provincial Freeway � I Type A Arterial •---Type B Arterial . Type C Arterial j ---------- Collector ....:; t Local Existing Signalized Intersection ���y . Study Area j 325(3,600) 211 P.M.Peak Hour Volume(Net Increase Only) (2,350) Weekday Volume(Net Increase Only) HIGHWAY 401 ® P.M.Peak Hour Volume(Total Background and Development) NOT TO SCALE • Weekday Volume(Total Background and Development) SOUTH-WEST COURTICE NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN ® U® TRAFFIC IMPACT REVIEW ,O Exhibit 6 totten Sims hubicki associates Peak Hour and Weekday Traffic Volumes engineers architects and planners (2-Way) - Phase 1 A 589 arm The traffic assessment has revealed that the development associated with either Phases 1 or IA of the South-West Courtice Neighbourhood Plan cannot be accommodated without improvements i.e. widening of Bloor Street from two to four lanes between Prestonvale Road and Harmony Road and other associated improvements on Highway 401 - see Section 6.0 below. It has been determined that approximately 500-600 dwelling units could be accommodated in the area within the next 10 years. This assumes that the Region of Durham can find a solution to the existing capacity problems at the Bloor Street/Harmony Road intersection which could defer the need for other major improvements within the 10 year planning horizon. 6.0 SUGGESTED TRAFFIC/TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS AND IMPROVEMENT OPTIONS The following local and Regional improvements should be considered by the Region of Durham, Municipality of Clarington and the City of Oshawa. These improvements will be required to support the proposed Phase 1 (and 1A)development in the South-West Courtice Neighbourhood, assuming that build out will occur within the next 10 years: • Widen and re-align Bloor Street from Harmony Road to Prestonvale Road. The roadway should be widened from two to four lanes and include the grade separation of the existing CPR tracks west of Grandview Drive. Realignments of Bloor Street will be required between Grandview Drive and Harmony Road and Townline Road and Prestonvale Road. The latter realignment should be effected in conjunction with development of South-West Courtice Neighbourhood. • In conjunction with the Bloor Street widening, traffic signals will be required at the Bloor Street and Townline Road and Bloor Street and Prestonvale Road intersections. • Construct the new Colonel Sam Drive interchange on Highway 401 including the connection from Colonel Sam Drive to Bloor Street. The interchange should include provision for the Highway 401 eastbound to northbound movement, not originally contemplated in the Preliminary Design Study undertaken by the Ministry of Transportation. In conjunction with this interchange construction, a ramp connecting westbound Bloor Street to eastbound Highway 401 (EN-W) should be constructed at the Harmony Road/Bloor Street intersection. • The internal roadways within the proposed South-West Courtice Neighbourhood should be designed to promote north-south travel to/from Bloor Street and to discourage east-west travel,which may result in increased volumes on Grandview Drive i.e. the internal east-west roadways could be discontinuous. We have reviewed the potential options for reducing traffic volumes on Prestonvale Road to local roadway standards (i.e. less than 1,000 vpd) and offer the following comments. Just maintaining the roadway as local road as designated in the original Official Plan, will not obviously result in any changes to roadway function,or traffic volumes. The only way to achieve reduced traffic volumes on Prestonvale Road south of Robert Adams Drive would be a physical closure of the roadway and diversion of community traffic to Robert Adams Drive. Exhibit 7 shows the roadway network that could result from this change. The cost of the modifications shown in Exhibit 7 are conservatively estimated at approximately $750,000 - $1,000,000 (1994 Dollars) including property. This improvement would displace residents in four and possibly five existing single family homes. Such a configuration would increase traffic volumes on Robert Adams Drive by a significant level. Robert Adams Drive was not designed nor planned to carry all of the north-south traffic from the area. Similar comments apply to Sandringham Drive to the east; this roadway was also not designed to carry significant volumes of traffic and should not be considered an alternative to Prestonvale Road. 590 totten sims hubicki associates 591 - 8 - It is considered that the closure of Prestonvale Road in any location is not a practical solution and will result in greater traffic related problems elsewhere in the area. From a traffic operations and planning perspective, both Robert Adams Drive and Prestonvale Road should remain open and share north-south traffic. Prestonvale Road is signalized at Highway 2 and provides the main access to/from areas to the south. The impact that extending Townline Road to Highway 2 may have on traffic operations and volumes on Prestonvale Road and Robert Adams Drive was investigated as part of this Study. This improvement would result in a minor reduction in existing traffic volumes on Prestonvale Road and potentially reduce the impact that development in South-West Courtice would have on traffic volumes on both Robert Adams Drive and Prestonvale Road; however,the overall level of anticipated development in South-West Courtice is such that volumes on all roadways in the area will continue to increase over time and the extension of the Townline Road may be an integral part of the future transportation network in the area. It is, however, not considered essential that this linkage be provided to serve Phases 1 or lA of the proposed development as considered in the context of this review, provided the other improvements discussed previously are implemented. The importance of the Townline Road/Highway 2 link will be further reviewed as part of Phase 2 of this Study. 7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The work associated with the traffic analysis summarized in this report has led to the conclusion that the complete development of Phase 1 of the South-West Courtice Neighbourhood as proposed, (or Phase lA for that matter), cannot be accommodated on the local transportation network without improvements to the local and Regional transportation network as described above. Only 500-600 residential units could be developed in the area until significant network improvements are effected. In addition, it is clear from our analysis that traffic volumes will increase on Prestonvale Road, Robert Adams Drive and Glenabbey Drive; although these volumes are generally within accepted guidelines for collector roadways (Robert Adams Drive and Glenabbey Drive) and Type C arterials (Prestonvale Road). As you are aware, residents on these roadways are unhappy with current levels of traffic and additional volumes, although considered to be within accepted guidelines, will only serve to exacerbate residents' concerns. Although the Council of the Municipality of Clarington has expressed a desire to maintain a local roadway status on Prestonvale Road, such status is not considered practical and therefore it is recommended that it be designated a Type C arterial roadway in the Official Plan as originally envisaged, to realistically reflect its intended function and actual use. This roadway, in conjunction with Robert Adams Drive, provides access to and from Highway 2 from the south. At the present time, it is not considered practical to provide any other north-south connections in the area due to existing physical, topographical, environmental and development constraints. As discussed above, the extension of Townline Road to Highway 2 (King Street) could play a role in the long term transportation system for the area; however, it is not considered necessary for the residential component.of development in South- West Courtice. 592 Cotten sims hubicki associates The assessment summarized in this letter report has confirmed that there are number of regional traffic issues in the community which should be dealt with by the Region of Durham. In particular, the analysis confirmed that there are capacity constraints at the intersection of Bloor Street and Harmony Road and that the Harmony Road/Highway 401 interchange will shortly be operating at capacity. The Region should investigate the need and timing for the implementation of the Colonel Sam Drive/Highway 401 interchange as previously planned. The Region should also undertake a Study to review options for providing additional access to the South Courtice area between Courtice Road and Townline Road; this would include reviewing all possible alternatives for connecting the South Courtice area to Highway 401 and the appropriateness of the planned Regional roadway network. I trust the above comments are satisfactory. Please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any questions. Yours very truly, totten sims hubicki associates D.I`'Allingham, P. Eng., Senior Vice-President, Transportation DIA/an ts4Wa C.C. Mr. Tony Cannella, Municipality of Clarington Works Department 5— 9 3 totten sims hubicki associates ATTACHMENT #5 DN: AMEND-59.SEC AMENDMENT NO. 59 TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN OF THE FORMER TOWN OF NEWCASTLE PURPOSE: The Purpose of this Amendment is: a) to extend the Courtice Urban Area to the southwest of the current Urban Area and to provide for appropriate land use designations and population allocations; b) to incorporate a secondary plan for the South-West Courtice Neighbourhood; c) to amend the road classifications for Townline Road and Bloor Street and to designate new collector and arterial roads as part of the expanded Urban Area; d) to amend various policies regarding the phasing of residential development and conditions in which Council will consider a plan of subdivision premature; and e) to delete the policy and schedule related to the sequence of the preparation of neighbourhood plans. LOCATION: The amendments to the general policy provisions apply to the entire Courtice Urban Area. However, the amendment generally applies to the lands located south of Glenabbey Drive, east of Townline Road, north of Highway 401 and west of Prestonvale Road, being Parts 33, 34, 35, Concession 1 and 2 in the former Township of Darlington, former Town of Newcastle now the Municipality of Clarington. BASIS: An official plan amendment application was filed by Stolp Homes (Newcastle) Developers Inc. in 1989 for the expansion of the Courtice Urban Area south-west of the current urban limit. On June 5, 1991, Regional Council adopted a new Durham Regional Official Plan which included the expansion of the Courtice Urban Area to incorporate lands subject to this amendment. The new Regional Official Plan was approved by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs on November 24, 1993. On January 27, 1992, Municipal Council resolved to undertake a review of the local official plan. At that time, Council exempted Stolp Homes (Newcastle) Developers Inc. from the administrative freeze on the processing of applications in the expansion areas during the period of the Official Plan Review. In order to consider the Stolp application for a plan of subdivision, the Official Plan required the preparation and adoption of a neighbourhood development plan. The neighbourhood development planning area applied to an area larger than the Stolp Homes application. Several landowners, specifically Newcastle I Limited Partnership and Newcastle II Limited Partnership (which assumed the lands and the application by Stolp Homes (Newcastle) Developers), 289143 Ontario Limited and 765400 Ontario Ltd. hired Tunney Planning Inc. to prepare a neighbourhood development plan for this area. A Public Meeting on the Neighbourhood Plan and proposed Amendment #59 was held on September 19, 1994. Council referred the matter back to staff for further review. Also in consideration of proposed Amendment #59 at a meeting on September 26, 1994, Council resolved that Prestonvale Road should remain designated as a local road south of the intersection with Robert Adams Drive. On March 27, 1995, two applications to amend the Official Plan were submitted by 289143 Ontario Ltd. and 765400 Ontario Ltd. This Amendment to the Official Plan is based on the South-West Courtice Neighbourhood Study prepared by Tunney Planning Inc, the subsequent review by the general public and agencies of the consultant's recommended plan, and certain work undertaken as part of the Municipality's Official Plan Review, and Council's resolution of September 26, 1994 with respect to Prestonvale Road. ACTUAL AMENDMENT: The Official Plan for the former Town of Newcastle is hereby amended as follows: i) In Section 6.1.2 (i)(a), delete the last sentence beginning with the words "Schedule 6-3 indicates the sequence for the preparation...."; 2 T 595 ii) In Section 6.1.2 (i)(c), replacing the number "20,000" with "31,000". iii) In Section 6.3.2 (ii)(a), replacing the words 'Black, Farewell and Harmony Creek Systems" with the words "Black, Farewell, Harmony and Robinson Creek Systems". iv) In Section 6.7.2 (v), (b) replacing the words "Type A and B arterial roads" with the words "Type A, B and C arterial roads". v) In Subsection 6.8.2 (iii)(c), replacing it with the following: "c) The phasing of residential development in the Courtice Urban Area shall be based on the following principles: - the sequential development of lands and the prohibition of leap-frogging; the priority for development in or adjacent to the Community Central Area shown in this Plan; - the economic use and extension of all services; the priority for intensification and infilling development; and increased density for new neighbourhoods having regard for the integration with existing residential areas. In the review of an application for draft plan of subdivision, the Municipality shall have regard for these policies and where necessary impose appropriate conditions of draft approval to implement the policies of this section." vi) Delete the existing Section 6.8.2 (iv) and replace it as follows; "iv) Council may declare a residential plan of subdivision premature if any of the following conditions apply: a) the plan of subdivision does not meet the phasing principles of Section 6.8.2.(iii)(c); K3 396 b) the municipal-wide non-residential assessment ratio is less than 15 percent; c) the capital works and services required to service the lands and the future residents are not within the 10 year capital works forecast as identified in the development charges study, as updated from time to time; and d) the Municipality does not have the administrative or financial capabilities to provide and maintain all services required by the future residents generated from the subdivision development." vii) Add a new policy 6.8.2 (v) as follows: "v) Notwithstanding Section 6.8.2 (iv)(c), the Municipality may consider the provision of capital works and services by the proponents of development where such works are not in the 10 year capital works forecast provided that: it does not affect the development charge quantum; and it is permissable under the Development Charges Act." viii) Renumber the existing Section 6.8.2 (v) as appropriate. ix) Add a new Section 10.3 as follows: "10.3 SOUTH-WEST COURTICE NEIGHBOURHOOD SECONDARY PLAN 10.3.1 INTRODUCTION The South-West Courtice Neighbourhood Secondary Planning Area comprises approximately 124 hectares of land located south of the future realigned Bloor Street, west of Prestonvale Road and east of the Townline Road. It is identified as Neighbourhood 4 in the Official Plan. 0 597 The purpose of this Secondary Plan is to detail the land uses and policies governing the urbanization of the lands within the South-West Courtice Neighbourhood. This Plan will guide Council in assessing various proposals for developments and in the exercise of powers of subdivision approval, zoning and site plan control. 10.3.2 GENERAL POLICIES The development of the South-West Courtice Neighbourhood is governed by the policies of the Municipality's Official Plan and the Durham Regional Official Plan. The development controls set out in these documents should be read in conjunction with the policies outlined in this Secondary Plan. The planned population of this neighbourhood is approximately 5,900 persons at an overall density 14.8 units per gross hectare. 10.3.3 RESIDENTIAL AREAS 10.3.3.1 It is the objective of this Plan to provide for the range and mix of housing types. In this regard, 70% of new housing will be low density units, 20% will be medium density units and 10% will be high density units. 10.3.3.2 Development within Residential Areas shall be by means of plans of subdivision prepared in conformity with this Plan and in particular urban design policies of Section 10.3.10. 10.3.3.3 The density ranges provided herein shall be used to guide development within the lands designated on Schedule 10-21'. For the purpose of this Plan, net residential density is based on residential lands excluding public roads, schools,parks, open space areas and other similar public land areas. i) Low Density Residential Low density Residential Areas will consist of housing forms similar in kind to detached, semi-detached, linked, duplex, garden suites, and limited street townhouse forms. All low density areas will develop to a maximum of 25 units per net hectare. Limited street townhouse dwelling units will be permitted within the low density residential areas and shall be generally located at the periphery of residential neighbourhoods within close proximity to collector or arterial roads. 5 598 ii) Medium Density Residential Medium Density Residential Areas will include housing forms similar in kind to street townhouses, block townhouses, maisonettes, triplex, and low rise apartments. Medium density areas will develop at a range of 25 to 60 units per net hectare. iii) High Density Residential High Density Residential Areas will permit the development of low and mid-rise apartment housing forms, at a range of 60 to 100 units per net hectare. Building heights shall not exceed six storeys. 10.3.3.4 Affordable Housing At least 30% of all dwellings proposed within this neighbourhood shall conform to the affordable housing requirements in accordance with Provincial policy. The mix of medium and high density areas is intended to provide sufficient flexibility to ensure the opportunity for affordable housing, including the provision of rent-geared-to-income housing. 10.3.3.5 Heritage House A heritage house has been identified and is indicated on Schedule 10-2". It is the intent of Council to ensure the conservation of this structure and the appropriate integration of adjacent residences. Council may require the preparation of elevations, axonometric drawings or other similar techniques to review the context, scale and design of proposed land uses adjacent to this site. 10.3.4 SCHOOLS 10.3.4.1 The student yield estimates have resulted in the identification of a need for one Public and Separate elementary school within this Neighbourhood. In addition, one Public elementary school site located in Neighbourhood 2A shall serve residents of this Neighbourhood. 10.3.4.2 Elementary schools will be sited and designed to provide a visual focus for neighbourhood activity. School Boards are encouraged to construct schools two storeys or greater in height to provide a mass and R1 599 architectural prominence reflective of this role. Elementary school sites shall be designed to meet the requirements of the respective school boards and the following: • a minim, R site size of generally 2.4 ha; and • a minimum frontage comprising at least 25% of the site perimeter. 10.3.4.3 A Public secondary school site has been identified in Neighbourhood 2A to serve the south-west portion of the Courtice Urban Area including this Neighbourhood. 10.3.5 PARKS 10.3.5.1 Parks shall be developed in accordance with the policies of the Official Plan. The acquisition of these lands will be made as a dedication under the Planning Act and the provisions of the Official Plan. 10.3.5.2 Community Park A Community Park to serve this and other Courtice Neighbourhoods has been designated in the southerly portion of Courtice in the vicinity of Bloor Street and Prestonvale Road. 10.3.5.3 Neighbourhood Park One Neighbourhood Park of 3.8 ha is required and shall be located in proximity to the elementary schools. The approximate location of a central neighbourhood park is shown on Schedule 10-2". A more precise location will be determined at the subdivision stage. 10.3.5.4 Parkettes Three parkettes are to be located in this neighbourhood as shown on Schedule 10-2". The purpose of these parkettes is to provide park space where walking distances to the Neighbourhood Park exceed 400 m. One parkette is to be located within the Planning Precinct as described in Section 10.3.9 of this Plan. 19 10.3.6 GREEN SPACE 10.3.6.1 The Green Space designation recognizes lands in and adjacent to the western sub-tributary of Robinson Creek and includes adjacent woodlands and the central stormwater management facility. The Green Space system is fundamental not only as a means of protecting a natural feature within the Neighbourhood, but also in providing a connecting link to various community facilities. It has a width conforming to the greater of the requirements of the Ministry of Natural Resources for a warm water stream (minimum 15.0 metres beyond the streambank), the requirements of the Conservation Authority for regulatory floodplain or the topographic break in slope. 10.3.6.2 As a condition of development, development proponents shall enhance the natural state of the Robinson Creek by revegetating adjacent lands. Revegetation would include planting of trees and shrubs in consideration of enhancing fisheries and wildlife habitat potential. 10.3.6.3 The alteration to the natural state of watercourses and creeks is discouraged. However, any proposal to alter a section of a watercourse must maintain or improve its ecological state, and incorporate natural channel design features to the satisfaction of the Conservation Authority, the Ministry of Natural Resources and the Municipality of Clarington. In addition, a greater width for the Green Space land may be required to accommodate natural channel design features, stable slopes, vegetation and buffer areas. 10.3.6.4 Young woodlands occupy portions of the Robinson Creek tributary floodplain and adjacent lands. This unit is comprised of vigourous young hardwoods and softwoods of high scenic quality, and in good biological health with a relatively high adaptability to disturbances. This stand of young woodlands is protected within the Green Space designation associated with the Robinson Creek tributary. 10.3.6.5 Consideration should be extended, wherever possible, towards preserving mature trees and woodlands which are outside of the Green Space designation in order to fully derive benefits relating to microclimate, wildlife habitats, hydrology and scenic quality. In this regard, mitigation measures such as tree protection fencing, silt fence/sedimentation control, dust control, and protection of soil moisture regime shall be utilized during construction. E 599 02 10.3.7 COMMERCIAL 10.3.7.1 Commercial facilities shall be developed in conformity with the provisions of the Official Plan and this Secondary Plan. 10.3.7.2 Convenience Commercial A Convenience Commercial block (0.2 ha) is located along the south side of the future intersection Bloor Street and Robert Adams Drive and is part of the designated Planning Precinct. A maximum of 500 square metres of retail and personal service floorspace is permitted. Development of this block is subject to the provisions outlined in Section 10.3.9 of this Plan. 10.3.7.3 Corner Stores Individual corner stores with a maximum of 100 square metres of gross leasable floor area may be permitted in any Low Density Residential Area to provide items of daily necessity or services for the immediate surrounding residents. Corner store sites shall be recognized in the zoning by-law. 10.3.8 CHURCH A church block of approximately 0.9 ha is reserved within the Planning Precinct designated in this Neighbourhood. Should a church facility not be warranted, development of these lands shall be for Medium Density residential uses. 10.3.9 PLANNING PRECINCT 10.3.9.1 A Planning Precinct has been established to create a mix of land uses and a focal point of activity for the community. Uses within this area are schematically indicated on Schedule 10-2". The configuration of these uses may be altered from that shown without requiring an amendment to this Plan provided that the intent of this Plan is achieved. Prime consideration shall be placed on urban design, including the spacial distribution of structures and architectural treatment. 0 599 03 10.3.9.2 An Urban Design Plan shall be approved by Council prior to the implementation of zoning by-laws and site plans. This requirement is necessary in order to provide a visual interpretation of proposed land uses, massing of buildings, configuration of roads and walkways, future transit stops, parkland uses, and any other matters identified by the Municipality. Zoning by-laws shall implement the key elements of the Urban Design Plan including provisions such as building height, lot coverage, floorspace, density, setbacks and build-to requirements. 10.3.10 URBAN DESIGN POLICIES In the review of development applications, the following urban design criteria shall be implemented: a) the street system shall be designed to address pedestrian, cycling, transit and auto-related requirements having regard for the policies of Section 10.3.11; b) street alignments and lotting should maximize passive solar gain; c) buildings should address the arterial road frontage either directly or on single-loaded (service) roads; reverse lotting generally is prohibited; d) housing designs will encourage social interaction along public streets through such means as the provision of front porches and ground-level windows, and reduced front yard setbacks; e) garages shall be located in such a manner that they are not intrusive in the streetscape. f) noise from arterial roads shall be mitigated by appropriate subdivision design; acoustical fences will be permitted only to supplement other noise attenuation measures; g) good visual access shall be provided to public spaces to promote a safe social environment h) adequate parking shall be provided for smaller frontage lots; and i) street trees, landscaping and streetscape amenities shall be provided in recognition of levels for local, collector and arterial roads. ire 5 99 04 10.3.11 TRANSPORTATION 10.3.11.1 The road network shall be based on a grid system of roads to support the desirable urban form, to facilitate the movement of people and goods, and the development of an effective system of public transit. Arterial Roads shall be designed in accordance with criteria contained within the Durham Regional Official Plan. Collector and Local Roads shall be designed in accordance with the criteria contained with the Municipality's Official Plan. 10.3.11.2 Road Classifications The road network identified on Schedule "10-2" incorporates strategic collector road connections to the boundary arterial grid system and is based upon road design standards and classifications related to function, traffic volume and vehicular operating speed. Council may require the design and installation of traffic calming measures along collector roads at the time of subdivision approval. The potential for local street connections to arterial roads is identified on Schedule 10-2" as a means of providing access to residents within the immediate area. Local streets in the vicinity of these connections will be designed to discourage through-traffic or a collector road function. Municipal Council, in the review of independent development applications will determine the need for local streets to exit onto boundary arterials. Local streets shall be designed on the basis of a grid street and modified to accommodate physical constraints. The use of cul-de-sacs is discouraged. 10.3.11.3 Bloor Street Realignment It is the intention of this Plan that the existing alignment of Bloor Street between Townline Road and Prestonvale Road be redesignated from a Regional road to a local road. For some portions it will be necessary to abandon the existing right-of-way. The existing Bloor Street shall be rebuilt to urban standards and will have the option of local road access to Townline Road. New lots fronting onto the existing Bloor Street shall not be given final approval until such time as: 11 599 05 (i) the new alignment for Bloor Street is constructed; and (ii) funding is secured and committed for the reconstruction of the existing Bloor Street to urban standards. 10.3.11.4 Intersection Improvements The need for intersection improvements have been identified for the following intersections: (i) Bloor Street/Townline Road; and (ii) Bloor Street/Prestonvale Road Prior to approval of any development application adjacent to these intersections, preliminary engineering studies shall be completed to define the right-of-way requirements and alignment having consideration for impacts on all adjacent lands. 10.3.11.5 Transit System Land uses and the road system shall be developed to support future local transit service which is intended to travel on the boundary arterial roads. A minimum of 90% of all households shall be within 400 metres of a future transit stop. This shall be achieved by: (i) locating higher density development in close proximity to future transit routes; and (ii) providing convenient pedestrian access to future transit stops. 10.3.11.6 Pedestrian and Bicycle Routes The needs of pedestrians and cyclists shall be given high priority in the design of plans of subdivision. The major pedestrian and bicycle routes are identified on Schedule "10-2". The system will follow the Green Space designation and streets linking parks and community facilities. All streets will be designed to accommodate pedestrian needs, generally incorporating sidewalks on both sides of the street. Block sizes will be limited so that mid-block walkways are not required. 12 Appropriate studies will be required as a condition of approval for a draft plan of subdivision to detail the pedestrian and cycling system requirements. 10.3.12 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 10.3.12.1 Stormwater management techniques must be incorporated to mitigate the impacts of development on water quality and quantity, consistent with the Robinson Creek Master Drainage Study. 10.3.12.2 The stormwater management facility will be sized and designed according to Best Management Practices. The facility is shown schematically on Schedule "10-2" within the Green Space designation. The land area designated shall be appropriate for incorporating natural wetland features and native vegetation with the pond design. The design of the pond shall ensure due consideration for public safety, maintenance, aesthetics and habitat potential. Storm water management facilities shall not be accepted as parkland dedication under the Planning Act. 10.3.12.3 A Storm Water Management Implementation Report shall be prepared to accompany the submission of a plan of subdivision. The report shall address the implementation requirements of the Robinson Creek Master Drainage Plan including groundwater infiltration, baseflow enhancement, the design of storm water management facilities, erosion, sedimentation and water quality controls. 10.3.13 SERVICING 10.3.13.1 All development shall proceed on the basis of urban standards with sanitary sewers, watermains and storm sewers. 10.3.13.2 Water supply and sanitary sewer services can be supplied to the northerly portion of the neighbourhood using existing plants and through improvements to the existing systems. Water supply and sanitary sewer services for the southerly portion of this neighbourhood will require the construction of new facilities and/or expansion of existing facilities on the basis of Region wide considerations. The extension of water and sanitary sewer services shall be in accordance with Regional policy. 10.3.13.3 Minor system storm sewers will be designed in a conventional manner, to function by gravity and to suit topography and street pattern. 13 599 07 10.3.14 IMPLEMENTATION AND INTERPRETATION 10.3.14.1 This Secondary Plan shall be implemented by the exercise of the powers conferred on the Municipality by the Planning Act, the Municipal Act, the Development Charges Act and other applicable statutes in accordance with the implementation policies of the Official Plan. 10.3.14.2 Prior to the final approval of any plan of subdivision or rezoning site plan approval for urban land uses, appropriate provisions shall be made for: (i) road capacity improvements for Bloor Street between Harmony Road and Townline Road in the City of Oshawa; (ii) construction of a re-aligned Bloor Street between Townline Road and Prestonvale Road; and (iii) adequate fire protection and other emergency services for this area. 10.3.14.3 The boundaries for land use areas are approximate only and shall be defined by the alignment of streets, natural features or lot boundaries in the implementing zoning by-laws. 10.3.14.4 The policies of this Plan shall be interpreted in conjunction with the applicable policies of the Official Plan. In the event of a conflict between this Plan and the Official Plan, this Plan shall prevail to the extent of the conflict." x) Amending 'Schedule 6-1 - Courtice Secondary Plan' as indicated in Exhibit 'A' to this Amendment. A) Amending 'Schedule 6-2 - Environmental Sensitivity' as indicated in Exhibit 'B' to this Amendment. xii) Deleting 'Schedule 6-3 - Sequence of Neighbourhood Development Plan Preparation'. xiii) Amending 'Schedule 6-4 - Transportation Network' as indicated in Exhibit 'C' to this Amendment. xiv) Renumber 'Schedule 6-4' and all references in the text to 'Schedule 6-3'. 14 xv) Adding 'Schedule 10-2' - Land Use: South-West Courtice Neighbourhood Secondary Plan. IMPLEMENTATION: The provisions set forth in the Official Plan of the former Town of Newcastle, as amended, regarding the implementation of the Plan, shall apply in regard to this Amendment. INTERPRETATION: The provisions set forth in the Official Plan of the former Town of Newcastle, as amended, regarding the interpretation of the Plan, shall apply in regard to this Amendment. 15 EXHIBIT "A" TO AMENDMENT #59 TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN OF THE FORMER TOWN OF NEWCASTLE INDICATE TOWNLINE ROAD EXTENSION ADJUST NEIGHBOURHOOD 2a BOUNDARY I DELETE BLOOR STREET[-*,' W EXTEND URBAN AREA 4 ADJUST POPULATION FROM "2700��T0��4500,, Ii 20 ADJUST ALIGNMENT OF COLLECTOR ROADS ADD LAND USE DESIGNATIONS FOR F> EXTENSION OF NEIGHBOURHOOD 2a ADD COLLECTOR ROAD RELOCATE SECONDARY SCHOOL SYMBOL BLOOR ST. ADD LAND USE DESIGNATIONS FOR NEIGHBOURHOOD 4 (,' ADD COMMUNITY PARK SYMBOL SCHEDULE 6-1 LAND USE - COURT-ICE RESIDENTIAL HAZARD LAND ,�,.r . MAJOR OPEN SPACE J WITH HAZARD LAND ® PUBLIC ELEMENTARY SCHOOL z ® SEPARATE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL © PUBLIC SECONDARY SCHOOL CL ® NEIGHOURHOOD PARK I © COMMUNITY PARK �iCOLLECTOR ROAD NEIGHBOURHOOD BOUNDARY �■-DURBAN AREA BOUNDARY EXHIBIT "B" TO AMENDMENT *59 TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN OF THE FORMER TOWN OF NEWCASTLE —Urban Area Boundary BEMaJor Open Space System And Environmentally Sensitive Areas -F Environmentally LIA Sensitive Areas Soil Contamination Assessment Area EXHIBIT TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN "C" TO AMENDMENT +59 OF THE FORMER TOWN OF NEWCASTLE j HIGHWAY IVO 2 a o ■ ' • ' ■ w z ■ w ■ ■ ■ z 3 v , " ■ o ■ � v e • ADJUST ALIGNMENT P� OF COLLECTOR ROADS e ADD TYPE B ARTERIAL o• ON REDESIGNATE FROM �„ DESIGNATE AS COLLECTOR ROAD TO -' LOCAL ROAD TYPE B ARTERIAL BLOOR a� ADD COLLECTOR ROAD ■ ADD TYPE A ARTERIAL ADD TYPE C ARTERIAL DELETE TYPE A ARTERIAL ADD COLLECTOR ROADS ADD TYPE B ARTERIAL ■�URBAN AREA BOUNDARY ® TYPE A ARTERIAL ROAD TYPE B ARTERIAL ROAD TYPE C ARTERIAL ROAD. EXTEND URBAN AREA COLLECTOR ROAD BOUNDARY ■■�.�■.r LOCAL ROAD 599 12 EXHIBIT "Cr TO AMENDMENT No. 59 TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN OF THE FORMER TOWN OF NEWCASTLE 5 97 13 0 J LO Q J Z Q 4 Le Q m U W LS Q •- �J Z F- Z Y I >F- U w D w W W W QQ Iro�2 c� Q O W 0 Q FQ-J F¢- : N LLJ O M nn n�nFn� :z> p w nO Fa+- w a d V Z N O ¢ U Z Fn _ Z = U W w w w Q W az O 0 0 O p Z F ¢D ¢w VO G!1 j Z o z j � 3 I 1 w J J 2 ZZ JU O Q o m D m W U 3 w O 2 2 O Z Wa J w O w w ¢ of F- U U 2 O - F , w w w WQ w W F< w X J O V O En W �} wO Z J 2 Z d U to 0 Fn U U U) O 2 Q Q Q U J x— n m 5 97 13 ATTACHMENT *6 DN:AMEND.5 AMENDMENT # 5 TO THE COURTICE SOUTH NEIGHBOURHOOD DEVELOPMENT PLAN PURPOSE: The purpose of this amendment is: a) to redefine the boundaries of the Courtice South Neighbourhood Plan and to provide for appropriate land use designations and population allocations for the additional lands; b) to amend the road classifications to designate Townline Road as a Type "B"Arterial Road, Bloor Street as a Type "A" Road, Prestonvale Road as a Local Road and to designate new collector, arterial and local roads; c) to amend the policies regarding residential density categories and their respective locational criteria and policies regarding a secondary school site for South-West Courtice; and, d) to identify the existing Gatehouse parkette. LOCATION: The lands subject of this Amendment are located east of Townline Road, north of Bloor Street, west of Prestonvale Road, being Parts 33, 34, 35, Concession 1 and 2 in the former Township of Darlington, now the Municipality of Clarington. BASIS: A Neighbourhood Plan Amendment application (NPA 87-04/CS) was filed by Akal International Inc., in 1987 for the expansion of the courtice Urban Area of Part Lots 33 and 34, Concession 2, former Township of Darlington. This application was subsequently assumed by 765400 Ontario Limited. On June 5, 1991, Regional Council adopted a new Durham Regional Official Plan which included the expansion of the Courtice Urban Area to incorporate lands subject to this amendment. The new Regional Official Plan was approved by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs on November 24, 1993. On January 27, 1992, Municipal Council resolved to undertake a review of the local official plan. At that time, Council exempted Stolp Homes (Newcastle) Developers Inc. from the administrative freeze on the processing of applications in the expansion areas during the period of the Official Plan Review. 1 5911 14 In order to consider the Stolp application for a plan of subdivision, the Official Plan required the preparation and adoption of a neighbourhood development plan. The neighbourhood development planning area applied to an area larger than the Stolp Homes application. Several landowners, specifically Newcastle I Limited Partnership and Newcastle II Limited Partnership (which assumed the lands and the application by Stolp Homes (Newcastle) Developers), 289143 Ontario Limited and 765400 Ontario Ltd. hired Tunney Planning Inc. to prepare a neighbourhood development plan for this area. A Public Meeting on the Amendment #5 to the Courtice South Neighbourhood Plan and proposed Amendment #59 was held on September 19, 1994. Council referred the matter back to staff for further review. Also in consideration of the proposed Amendment at a meeting on September 26, 1994, Council resolved that Prestonvale Road should remain designated as a local road south of the intersection with Robert Adams Drive. On March 27, 1995, two applications to amend the Official Plan were submitted by 289143 Ontario Ltd. and 765400 Ontario Ltd. This Amendment to the Official Plan is based on the South-West Courtice Neighbourhood Study prepared by Tunney Planning Inc, the subsequent review by the general public and agencies of the consultant's recommended plan, and certain work undertaken as part of the Municipality's Official Plan Review, and Council's resolution of September 26, 1994 with respect to Prestonvale Road. ACTUAL AMENDMENT: The Courtice South Neighbourhood Development Plan is hereby amended as follows: 1. Throughout the document replace the words "Darlington Official Plan" with the words "Official Plan of the former Town of Newcastle" and replace the words "Town of Newcastle" with the words "Municipality of Caarington". 2. In the second paragraph of Section 1.3, delete the number "275" 2 and replace with "297". Replace "Urban Area Boundary" with "Bloor Street and Prestonvale Road". 3. Delete Section 2.1.1 and replace with the following: "Section 6.1.2 (iv) of the Official Plan for the former Town of Newcastle, defines net residential areas as "all residential lands excluding local roads,junior elementary schools and neighbourhood parks"; and establishes a maximum of 25 units per net residential hectare for low density; a range of 25-60 units for medium density and a range of 60-100 units per net residential hectare for high density". 4. In section 2.1.2, delete subsections (i), (ii), and (iii) and replace with the following: "(i) Low Density Residential will consist of housing forms similar in kind to detached, semi-detached, linked, duplex, garden suites and limited street townhouse forms; shall generally be located at the interior of the residential neighbourhoods on local or collector roads; street townhouse forms shall be generally located at the periphery of residential neighbourhoods within close proximity to arterial roads. (ii) Medium Density Residential will consist of housing forms similar in kind to street and block townhouses, triplex and low rise apartments; and, - shall be generally located at the periphery of the residential neighbourhoods. (iii) High Density Residential will consist of low to mid-rise apartment housing forms; building heights shall not exceed six storeys; and, 3 i shall be located with the Community Central Area or adjacent to Type A or B arterial roads." 5. In Section 2.1.5, replace the number "9500" with 10800". 6. After Section 2.6.3, add a new Section 2.6.4: "2.6.4 Intersection Improvements The need for intersection improvements have been identified for the following intersections: (i) Bloor Street/Townline Road; and, (ii) Bloor Street/Prestonvale Road. Prior to approval of any development application adjacent to these intersections, preliminary engineering studies shall be completed to define the right-of-way requirements and alignment having consideration for impacts on all adjacent lands." 7. Renumber existing Section 2.6.4 to 2.6.5 8. By amending Schedule 1 (Courtice South Neighbourhood Plan) as indicated in Schedule "A" to this Amendment. 9. By amending Schedule 2 (Courtice South Neighbourhood Population) as indicated in Schedule "B" to this Amendment. Schedules "A" and "B" hereto shall form part of this Amendment. IMPLEMENTATION: The provisions regarding implementation, as set forth in the Courtice South Neighbourhood Development Plan shall apply in regard to this amendment. The provisions regarding interpretation, as set forth in the Courtice South Neighbourhood Development Plan shall apply in regard to this amendment. 4 g1/1 17 Schedule "A" to Amendment No. 5 to the COURTICE SOUTH NEIGHBOURHOOD DEVELOPMENT PLAN, SCHEDULE 1 ,Nx Ixj ii=Jattatattaaaa cr- ha �x P� Y_a y_ k' �i 0 -n - .:� y.� X. FpR wyY�:��;�...•:�. f. DESIGNATE AS « TYP E B ARTER IAI_` v• .g J♦ 6.0 h 0. • 3• j- t r t � ��• '''w. •. 2°5 ha • REDESIGNATE FROM 'LOCAL ROA01' TO •TYPE B ARTERIAL" 2.0 ho - .. ••••ADD ' REDESIGNATE FROM 'MINOR COLLECT017' TO "LOCAL ROAD? REDESIGNATE FROM "MAJOR COLLECTOi7' TO 'TYPE B ARTERIAL" AS ADD PARKETTE �::::::; i DESIGNATE "MINOR :'` :::::-:;::.::.• COLLECTOR ROAD' I DELETE LAND ADJUST !"::: ''•' USE DESIGNATIONS NEIGHBOURHOOD I BOUNDARY •` DESIGNATE "TYPE A ARTERIAL' ADJUST NEIGHBOURHOOD BOUNDARY ADD -LOCAL ROA LAS INDICATED DESIGNATE "MINOR COLLECTOR ROAD" ADD LAND USE DESIGNATIONS AS INDICATED DESIGNATE AS "LOCAL ROAD" ADD"INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT" ADD"INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT" =': : :?`==" 2-4ha P i a 52h E `=' ., ADD PARKETTE �::::::; i DESIGNATE "MINOR :'` :::::-:;::.::.• COLLECTOR ROAD' I DELETE LAND ADJUST !"::: ''•' USE DESIGNATIONS NEIGHBOURHOOD I BOUNDARY •` DESIGNATE "TYPE A ARTERIAL' ADJUST NEIGHBOURHOOD BOUNDARY ADD -LOCAL ROA LAS INDICATED DESIGNATE "MINOR COLLECTOR ROAD" ADD LAND USE DESIGNATIONS AS INDICATED DESIGNATE AS "LOCAL ROAD" ADD"INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT" Total 10725 persons ADJUST POPULATION FROM"9825" TO °10725° �.� 81-ACK HWY ADJUST POPULATION FROM "3600" TO°4500" 4500 M )ELETE FROM COURTICE >OUTH NEIGHBOURHOOD 3640 ADJUST NEIGHBOURHOOD BOUNDARY 2585 w U F O U Schedule %-7, to Amendment +5-- to the COURTICE-SOUTH: NEIGHBOURHOOD POPULATION PLAN;_�.S.CHEDULE 2 Total 10725 persons ADJUST POPULATION FROM"9825" TO °10725° �4PAI_ g"IK G� uwv ADJUST POPULATION FROM "3600" TO"4500" n IDELETE FROM COURTICE SOUTH NEIGHBOURHOOD BLOOR ADJUST NEIGHBOURHOOD BOUNDARY N 'J J 2585 Ld v t= OI U Schedule �B�, to Amendment *5-- to the COURTICE-SOUTH= NEIGHBOURHOOD POPULATION PLAN;`:SCHEDULE 2