HomeMy WebLinkAboutPSD-088-04
.
CJ~mglOn
REPORT
PLANNING SERVICES
Meeting:
COUNCIL
Date: Monday, June 28, 2004
i.-e~~ *c- E3s 7-D~
By-law #:
Report #: PSD-088-04 File #: PLN 31.5.5
Subject:
BROOKHILL NEIGHBOURHOOD DESIGN PLAN
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is respectfully recommended to Council the following:
1 . THAT Report PS D-088-04 be received;
2. THAT the Brookhill Secondary Plan be deferred until 2005 or until appropriate funds can
be secured to undertake the study; and
3. THAT all interested parties listed in this report and any delegation be advised of
Council's decision.
Submitted by:_
~avla J. em , CIP, R.P.P.
. Director of Planning Services
...-/'.
Reviewed by:
:j,,-=--t~ ( -___ _ {'--~l.."
Franklin Wu,
Chief Administrative Officer
HB/CP/DJCl*lw/sn
June 24, 2004
CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON
40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T (905)623-3379 F (905)623-0830
REPORT NO.: PSD-088-04
PAGE 2
1.0 BACKGROUND
1.1 On March 1, 2004, Council endorsed Planning Services Report PSD-022-04 authorizing
staff to prepare a Secondary Plan for the Brookhill Neighbourhood, investigate a new
urbanist approach for the design of this neighbourhood and enlarge the Brookhill
Neighbourhood Study Area to incorporate the area shown in Attachment 1 to this report.
Staff proposed a municipally-led secondary plan process, however due to the
municipality's financial limitations funding contributions from the development interests
within the neighbourhood was expected. Funds were allocated in the 2004 Planning
Services Budget for a portion of the costs.
2.0 RESPONSE FROM DEVELOPMENT INTERESTS
2.1 After receiving Council authorization to proceed, staff met with the development
interests that are currently funding the Brookhill Subwatershed Study on 3 separate
occasions. They are: Metrus Developments, Avilon and Tonno Construction Ltd.
(Developers Group). During those meetings the Developers Group raised concerns
regarding the approach the Municipality is taking with respect to this study. Concerns
expressed by the developers included:
i) The Expanded Study Area
The Developers Group own the majority of the lands south of the future Longworth
Avenue extension. They are concerned that the larger study area will add time and
expense which should not be borne by them.
ii) Review of New Urbanism
Part of the scope of work is a review of new urbanism and alternative design
standards implemented in the GTA. The Developers Group is concerned about the
time and cost of this review and whether they should fund this portion of the work.
iii) Additional Time of a Secondary Plan Process
The Developers Groups is concerned that a secondary plan process is more time
consuming than a neighbourhood design process.
iv) Additional Time for a Municipally-Led Process
The Developers Group is concerned that with all the demands on staff time, a
municipally-led process would be more time consuming. The Developers Group
indicate that they could undertake the work in a much shorter timeframe.
2.2 As an alternative, the Developers Group proposed to undertake a Neighbourhood
Design Plan for the lands south of the future Longworth Avenue extension. A copy of
their proposal is attached (Attachment 2).
3.0 COMMENTS
3.1 The Brookhill Neighbourhood has the potential to be a truly new type of neighbourhood
that would benefit from the close proximity of the emerging West Main Central Area.
The new urbanist approach to planning offers an alternatiye to other suburban
REPORT NO.: PSD-088-04
PAGE 3
development. In order to implement new urbanism, a secondary planning approach is
essential; new neighbourhood policy directions will be developed and there must be a
statutory means of implementing evolving directions.
3.2 The enlarged Brookhill Neighbourhood Study Area is an appropriate size to provide for
more cost effective planning resulting in one planning study rather than two separate
planning studies. Moreover, the larger study area closely corresponds to the
Subwatershed Study Area and allows for the implementation of this study's findings.
3.3 Staff understand the reluctance of the Developers Group to fund an enlarged study.
Other larger landowners should participate and they could be approached on a cost-
sharing formula. One landowner in the northerly portion of the study area has verbally
indicated a willingness to participate. Staff have not approached other landowners.
3.4 The Planning Services budget provided for $40,000.00 for the Brookhill Secondary
Planning Study to address, in part, the review of new urbanism principles and practices
in the GTA and their applicability to the Brookhill Neighbourhood.
3.5 In light of the proposal by the Developers Group, there are at least three alternatives for
conducting this study:
1. Defer Secondary Plan Study until 2005
The Srookhill Secondary Plan Study could be deferred for one year so that the funds
allocated through the 2004 and 2005 budget years could be combined to provide a
sufficient funding base for a municipally led Study.
2. Proceed with Secondary Plan Study in Phases
The Brookhill Secondary Plan Study could be designed in two phases, with only
Phase 1, awarded in 2004. The full study could be tendered with the bidders
understanding that moving to Phase 2 was contingent on future budgets. It also
could be scoped so that certain elements (e.g. conceptual servicing plan, urban
design guidelines) are the responsibility of the development interests.
3. Proceed with Deyelopers Group Proposal for a Limited Neiqhbourhood Desiqn Plan
The attached proposal could be the basis for Neighbourhood Design Plan process
for a much more limited area. The Municipality would still need to hire peer review
consultants familiar with new urbanism to assist in the developer-led planning study.
3.6 Of the three alternatives, staff recommend that the Brookhill Secondary Plan be
deferred. This is preferred since it would allow staff to concentrate on the new zoning
by-law and other priority projects underway, including the Commercial Policy Review. It
would not stretch the study timing out like a phased approach would.
3.7 Staff do not recommend the Neighbourhood Design Plan Approach proposed by the
Developers Group. It would require concentrated staff resources and the assistance of
a peer review consultant. It would only deal with the south portion of the proposed
study area in a developer-led process. A review of practices in other municipalities
found that neighbourhood planning studies are generally a municipally-led process.
REPORT NO.: PSD.088-04
PAGE 4
Moreover, the final product does not include a statutory policy plan that would ensure
that a new urbanist design direction is followed in the preparation of draft plans of
subdivision.
4.0 CONCLUSION
The Brookhill Neighbourhood is a significant new residential area that, with its unique
locational attributes, should be planned with great care. Staff believe that this should be
a municipally-led process and that, given the lack of developersllandowner funding, it
should be deferred until either municipal budgets penmit the study to proceed or
satisfactory arrangements can be made with the developers/landowners for funding.
Attachments:
Attachment 1 - Key Map
Attachment 2 - Developers Group Proposal
Interested parties to be notified of Council and Committee's decision:
Greg Milosh
357 Turf Court
Oshawa, ON L 1J 7B2
Bruce Fischer
Metrus
1700 Langstaff Road, Suite 2003
Concord, ON L4K 3S3
Attention: Roslyn Houser
Goodmans
250 Yonge St. Suite 2400
Toronto, ON M582M6
James Reininger
Avilon
120 Dynamic Drive, Suite 26
Scarborough, ON M1V 5C8
Lucy Stucco
Tribute Homes
1815 Ironstone Manor, Unit 1
Pickering, ON L 1W 3M9
Tonno Construction
121 Marcia Ave
Oshawa, ON L 1 G 3G9
Bryce Jordan
Sernas
110 Scotia Court, Unit 41
Whitby, ON L 1 N 8Y7
Peter Smith
Bousfields Inc.
3 Church Street, Suite 200
Toronto, ON M5E 2M2
~ / Bowmanville
l' Creek
~ 7/'-1--'.-' ./ I--
~ ~ ~\:rrrn
x ~ ~ ~~v \ ~"\~~I~
\( .....1-- ~
XXX X ~ ~
v
Longworth Avenue v~ ~ v ~t \ I v/
)( Extension v IX '\ I!' A i:-
/;//~~~_~Mh-C~
~ //C/h:0 ~J~~~ ~~F~
- ~~ '/ ~ rpt r7(~millt::Ji
~~_ ~ / ~~ ~~ '\ IIRt.~""'~
~~ ~ :c; 3~~t% ~ ~g
~, West Main 'l' 1~%v1- l~1
~, Centr~1 Area ~Rii'l.iV7~ ~ ~~
~ U"l9I~n ~ <<.;
GW..0::8 rTir----. :::::--a ~ J ^----
. ):~IIII ~m _~~ ___~~
II'D? :l~l(j ! \,~. ~ ~
RU~ -1RINCEWIWAM'~ I~ 19:\lC
i')(')(x
j i')( ~ X
1 ~)(
X
Y
~
'X.,r,
~)(
x
~
x~
">I
~x
xv
x
)( )(
~
IX
)()(~
ATTACHMENT 1
~)(NAS;)( "; x)<
X )(X)(X)()(
\
~
::.--
JIDII]L
v )()(X
v
v
y x
y ~
x x
)(~ X
~~)(
,,)< x ~
x ~
x
x
"."--
xx~
x
xx
x
x X7X
IlCX
~
"'c
it,
~
-
-
y
x
x
x
x
IX
IX
C\.X
)()(
x
D Brookhill Neighbourhood Study Area
~ Current Brookhill Neighbourhood Area
~ Additional Lands to be Included Within the Study Area
ATTACHMENT 2
May 18, 2004
PROPOSED FRAMEWORK DOCUMENT
BROOKHILL NEIGHBOURHOOD DESIGN PLAN
Backaround
The three major landowners within the BrookhiU Neighbourhood have
expressed serious reservations regarding the approach to undertaking the
Brookhill Neighbourhood Design Plan as outlined in Report No. PSD-022-
04, adopted by Council on March 1, 2004.
While indicating their willingness to consider appropriate new urbanist
principles as part of the Neighbourhood Design process, they have
concerns regarding:
. timing (particularly given that the master drainage plan component of
the Neighbourhood Design Plan is significantly behind schedule)
. process (specifically related to the proposal to proceed by way of a
Secondary Plan)
A cost.
Accordingly, they have advised that they are unwilling to fund the
Municipality's retainer of an outside consult,mt to undertake the work
program outlined in Report PSD-022-04.
Alternative Approach
Instead, the consultants for the three major landowners have prepared an
alternative work plan (see Attachment 1) which attempts to satisfy staff's
objectives for the Neighbourhood Design process, particulariy in terms of
the identification of appropriate new urbanist principles for incorporation in
the design, while at the same time ensuring a process that is timely,
flexible and relies on expertise that the landowners and their consultants
have previously developed with other similar residential developrnents in
other Jurisdictions.
The work plan that has been put forward is a co-operative one in which
the landowners' consultants would undertake most of the plan preparation
(as is typically the case with the Nelghbourhood Design Plan process) but
would provide for the Municipal staff to olay a pro-active role by providing
direction from the earliest phases of the process.
The work plan provides for an up-front identification of appropriate new
urbanist principles and approaches that can be incorporated into the
Neighbourhood Design Plan (see Phase I and Phase III of the work
program). The process outlined is a consultative one that would bring
together staff from the relevant Municipal departments, Council members,
~...., .Ao....., "'-.. .&."-........ ....<J........ ...n...... .......v .,...., v, v....
v V .LL ..... ~ ...!~......
~vv.)
2
the landowners and their consultants in a workshop setting to identify
potential design approaches that are desirable, workable and consistent
with Provincial, regional and municipal policies encouraging the cost-
effective use of land and public infrastructure.
Secondary Plan
The three major landowners and their consultants have indicated that they
are opposed to the adoption of the Neighbourhood Design Plan as a
Secondary Plan.
They point out that the wording of the Official Plan (Section 9.5)
contemplates that secondary plans will generally not be required for
neighbourhoods and that, instead, neighbourhood design plans will
generally be prepared by deyelopment proponents.
They also indicate that the urban design principles set forth in Section
9.5.5 (e.g. the use of a grid street system, the creation of view corridors
and vistas, the siting of public buildings on prominent sites, the siting of
houses with consistent street setbacks and prominent entrances and.
features, the siting of garages to reduce their yisual dominance, the
creation of a transit supportive land use pattern, "designing with nature",
consideration of public safety and security, and so on) already provide the
Municipality with a strong policy basis on which to incorporate new
urbanist principles in the Brookhill Neighbourhciod Design Plan..
The landowners acknowledge that, through the neighbourhood design
plan process for Brookhill, it is possible that other elements of the ne'lll
urbanist approach may be identified that should be specifically
incorporated as policy within the Official Plan. Howeyer, their position is
that, if such elements are identified as having merit, they should be added
to the "menu" of design approaches that may be used generally for
neighbourhoods throughout the Municipality rather than being confined to
one neighbourhood by way of a Secondary Plan. .
Accordingly, the work plan specifically provides for the identification of
desirable Official Plan changes that may emerge frorn the experience of
the Brookhill Neighbourhood Design Plan process. These changes couid
then be made through a subsequent Municipality-wide Official Plan
Arnendment or be referred to staff for consideration as part of the overall
Official Plan Review.
.,
"
PROPOSED WORK PLAN
PHASE 1- REVIEW OF NEW URBANISM DESIGN CONCEPTS
Purpose:
To provide Municipal Staff and Council and the landowners
with an understanding of New Urbanism concepts (planning
and engineerin9) including their successes and failures in the
Southern Ontario context.
What:
presentation/seminar of New Urbanism concepts and
experiences to be held in the Clarington Municipal Building
bus tour of GT A communities to view developments with
New Urbanism components and hear the views of
Municipal Staff in these communities
Who:
to be attended by Municipal Council, Municipal Staff, the
landowners and their consulting teams
to be organized and presented by the landowners'
consultants
Decision
Makinq:
identify concepts/ideas worthy of further examination (in
Phase III)
Timinq:
Week 1 to 3
PHASE II - ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE NEIGHBOURHOOD
Puroose:
To establish the overall engineering requirements of the
neighbourhood, which will apply regardless of the approach to
urban design.
What:
meetings with Regional Staff, Town Staff and CLOC Staff
to confirm: .
o servicing capacity issues/solutions
o arterial and collector road capacity and alignment
issues
" stormwater management requirements (i.e.
number and location of ponds)
" natural heritage constraints/opportunities
generate list and mapping of engineering and natural
heritage requirements for !he neighbourhood
Who:
meetings to be set up and administered by landowners'
consultants
maps and drawings to be compiled by landowners'
consultants
agencies will provide independent, direct input (i.e. no
need for large meeting at this stage)
4
Decision
Makino:
Timino:
not required at this hme, background inforrnation
this phase can be conducted in parallel with Phase I (i.e.
Weeks 1 to 3)
It is crucial to have the Subwatershed Study (at least to
Phase II) complete in order to complete Phase II of this
process
PHASE 11I- ESTABLISH DESIGN PRINCIPLES
Puroose:
To reach decisions on the urban design and engineering
design principles to be explored/tested in the future phases of
the study process.
What:
working meeting to discuss the. alternative design
concepts and their pros and cons
direction from Municipal Staff as to which concepts should
be pursued
Who:
meeting to be conducted by Planning Department
meeting to be attended by Municipal Staff, landowners
and their consulting teams
Decision
Makino:
the decision on the range of new urbanism design and
engineering principles to be explored would be made by
consensus
Timinq:
SP.r'"'~ar1n Week 4
prov;u\;I one week for Municipal consideration (to Week 5)
meeting with landDwners/consultants to discuss/settle
principies (Week 6)
PHASE IV - ALTERNATIVE NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN
Purpose;
To prepare alternative plans which incorporate the design
principles from Phase III.
\/\/hat:
the alternatives wiii each inc!uCe a different sub~set of
design concepts and/or a different degree of utilization of
same
in total, all design concepts will be included in at least one
alternative
each alternative will be for the entire nei9hbourhood taking
into account the engineerin9 and natural heritage
requirements identified in Phase II
.....vr ........r....,., .......~,&.u. ""'v .LH.=' .......~ ~...., ...........
~
;:J
.
the aiternatives will be presented at a working meeting
Who:
the alternatives will be prepared by the landowners'
consulting teams
input from individual agencies will be sought as needed
the meeting will be attended by Municipal Council and
Staff, CLOe Staff, the landowners and their consuitants
and members of the public and other relevant agencies as
invited
the meeting will be organized and managed by the
landowners' consultants
DeciSion
Makinq:
at this stage, no decisions wiil be made, but input from all
parties will be received
Municipal Staff will be provided with an additional two
weeks in order to further consider the alternatives and
provide inpuUdirection
Timinq:
the workshop will be held in Week 9 .
final inpuVdirection will be received up to Week 10
PHASE V - PREFERRED OPTION
Purpose:
To prepare a preferred nei9hbourhood design plan and
present it for formal comment.
What:
prepare a preferred option based on direction from
Municipal Staff that is acceptable to the landowners
hold a public open house
receive comment and direction on the preferred option
Who:
preferred. option to be prepared by landowners'
consultants
general public and Council invited to public open house
Municipal and Agency Staff are circulated the preferred
option
Deds ion
public and Council provide comments to Municipal Staff
agencies provide comment to Municipal Staff
Municipal Staff provides direction for changes/revisions
wiakln~:
Timinq:
preferred option completed by Week 13
preferred option circulated for agency comment by Week
15
public open house held Week 15
Municipal Staff direction Week 16
"
v
PHASE V'- FINAL PLAN AND FOLLOW.UP DOCUMENTS
Puroose:
To prepare and approve a final Neighbourhood Plan and any
follow-up documents such as amendments to the Official
Plan.
What:
prepare final Neighbourhood Plan for approval
prepare any implementation documents such as OPA's for
approval
give final approval to the plan and other documents
Who:
final Neighbourhood Plan and other documents to be
prepared by landowners' consultants under Municipal Staff
direction
Neighbourhood Plan and other documents to be
presented to Council for endorsement/approval
TiminQ
completion of Plan and other documents - Week 18
endorsement/approval by Council - as SOon thereafter as
Council's schedUle permits
BLJ/br