HomeMy WebLinkAboutPSD-078-05 Addendum 2
,..
-..wi'
a~. u
Leading t;![]gro
REPORT
PLANNING SERVICES
Meeting:
SPECIAL COUNCIL
Friday July 15, 2005
Date:
ADDENDUM # 2 to l..t:-eA:fr!--3sg'- D5'
Report #: PSD-078-05 File #: PLN 38.4.1; By-law #:
COPA 2002-002; COPA 2002-009
Subject:
BOWMANVILLE WEST MAIN CENTRAL AREA SECONDARY PLAN REVIEW
AMENDMENT 44 TO THE CLARINGTON OFFICIAL PLAN
AND RELATED APPLICATIONS BY HALLOWAY HOLDINGS LIMITED AND
WEST DIAMOND PROPERTIES INC./PLAYERS BUSINESS PARK LIMITED
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is respectfully recommended to Council the following:
1. THAT Addendum # 2 to Report PSD-078-05 be received;
2. THAT subject to further detailed review by staff and report to Council, Council endorse
in principle the proposed developments illustrated by the site plan prepared by Stantec
Consulting Ltd. dated July 14, 2005 entitled "Proposed Metrus Commercial
Development" and the elevation drawings of the proposed Wal-Mart store prepared by
, dated , 2005 and the proposed Real Canadian Superstore prepared by
, dated , 2005 as illustrations of appropriate developments of the land at
the northwest corner of Green Road and Highway 2.
3. THAT subject to the making of the Agreements referred to in Recommendation 4,
Council endorse in principle modifications to proposed Official Plan Amendments 43
and 44 to accommodate the Phase 1 and 2 of the proposed Wal-Mart and Real
Canadian Superstore and the deletion of the public use facility and replacement with
additional street-related commercial f100rspace on the lands owned by West Diamond
Properties and Players Business Park and refer further consideration of them and the
Zoning Amendments recommended in Report PSD-096-05 to the GPA meeting on
September 6, 2005.
4. THAT Council direct the Municipality's solicitor in consultation with the Directors of
Engineering Services and Planning Services to settle necessary agreements with West
Diamond Properties Inc., Players Business Park Ltd., and Halloway Holdings Ltd. to
protect the Municipality's interest, including without limitation, an agreement with these
companies to contribute the developers funds portion of the cost of construction of the
proposed Stevens Road extension between Regional Road 57 and Green Road.
ADDENDUM #2 TO REPORT PSD-078-05
PAGE 2
5. THAT Council give the directions that it considers to be appropriate regarding the
location of the proposed Home Depot store, the extension of Uptown Avenue, the
location of the proposed private street running north from Highway 2, all on the lands at
the northeast comer of Green Road and Highway 2 as discussed in Sections 2 and 3 of
this Addendum and direct staff to report on the implementation of the direction to the
GPA meeting on September 6, 2005.
7. THAT the Region of Durham Planning Department and all interested parties be notified
of Council's decision.
Submitted by:
D vi . Crome, M.C.I.P., R.P.P.
Director of Planning Services
RevieWedbY:()~ ~
Franklin Wu,
Chief Administrative Officer
DJC.sn
July 15, 2005
CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARlNGTON
40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L 1C 3A6 T (905)623-3379 F (905)623-0830
ADDENDUM # 2 TO REPORT PSD-078-05
PAGE 3
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 At the Council Meeting of June 27, 2005, Council conducted a public meeting on
proposed amendments to the Zoning By-law including rezoning for the Bowmanville
West Town Centre Area. Council also considered reports on the Commercial Policy
Review, the Bowmanville West Town Centre Secondary Plan and the application by
AYT. At the meeting Council passed the following resolution:
1. That Reports PSD-077 -05, PSD-078-05, Addendum to PSD-078-05, PSD-096-05
and PSD-097 -05 be referred back to staff to enable negotiations with the
development proponents with a report to be brought back to a Special Council
Meeting on July 15, 2005;
2. That Council expresses it commitment to the support and maintenance of healthy,
vibrant historic downtowns in Clarington;
3. That Council endorses the principle of linking new commercial f100rspace to
population growth;
4. That Council endorses the principle that market, land use, urban design and
transportation issues are linked with respect to the consideration of development
applications in the Bowmanville West Town Centre;
5. That provided that market, land use, urban design and transportation issues can be
satisfactorily resolved, that Council endorse in principle that major new retail growth
should occur in the West Bowmanville Town Centre;
6. That with respect to roads, staff be instructed to negotiate appropriate arrangements
with the development proponents for:
a) the urbanization, signalization, provIsion of sidewalks, streetlighting and
streetscaping for Durham Highway 2 and Green Road
b) the acquisition and improvement of the following new public streets:
. Boswell Drive
. Brookhill Boulevard to Regional Road 57
. Uptown Avenue
c) the provision for private roads with appropriate option agreements for their
eventual transfer to the Municipality over the longer term; and
d) any other road improvements necessary;
7. That with respect to the West Diamond Properties Developments I Players Business
Park site, staft be instructed to review and report on the following:
a) suitable arrangements be made with respect to the public use facility;
b) the request for the Phase 1 and Phase 2 Wal-Mart and Loblaw's Real Canadian
Superstore and ancillary commercial space;
ADDENDUM #2 TO REPORT PSD-07S-oS
PAGE 4
c) enhanced building elevations for the Wal-Mart and Loblaw's Real Canadian
Superstore building that meet the intent of the urban design guidelines; and
d) potential commitments to meet LEED standards of the Green Building Council of
Canada specifically in the design of the large format stores.
8. That with respect to the Halloway Holdings site, staff be instructed to review and
report on the following:
a) provision for a Home Depot store in the General Commercial Area identified in
the Proposed Secondary Plan consistent with the staff Demonstration Plan for
the Halloway Holdings site;
b) securing Home Depot's commitment to provide for a Clarington-specific store
with enhanced elevations that meet the intent of the urban design guidelines,
assurances that there would be no outdoor storage and display, and meeting
LEED standards established by the Green Building Council of Canada; and
c) provision of Uptown Avenue, private roads and a publicly accessible square
consistent with the staff Demonstration Plan.
9. That staff report back on all other matters of negotiation with West Diamond
Properties, Halloway HOldings and any otherprop,onent in the Bowmanville West
Town Centre with respect to modificatiOns to the proposed Official Plan
Amendments 43 and 44 and the proposed Zoning Amendment.
1.2 Since the meeting, staff have conducted a series of meetings with various stakeholders
and have received numerous submissions.
West Diamond Prooerties
A series of very productive meetings have been held with West Diamond Properties to
review a various number of issues:
. Transportation matters were reviewed with the applicant's consultants, TSH and
municipal staff.
. Market issues were reviewed with the applicant's market consultant and
urbanMetrics.
. A series of design meetings were held with Wal-mart and Loblaws on their site plan
and proposed elevations. Significant progress was made on enhanced elevations
for these stores.
Hallowav Holdinas Ltd.
A meeting was held with Halloway Holdings Ltd. to discuss the Demonstration Plan and
another staff alternative which deleted Uptown Avenue and provided for the use of the
unopened road allowance. Discussions broke down with the applicant, although written
material was subsequently filed. There were no design meetings and the design for the
Home Depot store has not been made available to staff in advance of the Council
meeting.
ADDENDUM #2 TO REPORT PSD-G7S-GS
PAGE S
Other Meetinas
Staff conducted several meetings with other stakeholders to review their concerns and
clarify issues. This included Zellers, AYT and Holbum.
In addition to the above, an additional transportation analysis has been completed and
provided to the applicants. Additional market work has been undertaken to address the
concerns raised by various parties and a memorandum report was provided to the
applicants on July 14' 2005.
1.3 Although staff attempted to complete the reports scheduled for this meeting, there has
not been adequate time to properly review the submissions in sufficient detail to render
a decision on them. The purpose of this report is to address the most significant issues
on which Council's direction is necessary.
2.0 HOME DEPOT
2.1 At the June 27,2005 Council meeting, Council did not accept staffs recommendations
with respect to the Home Depot store on the lands owned by Halloway Holdings Ltd.
Instead, Council adopted a compromise that provided for the location of the Home
Depot store on the northwest corner of the site. Staff had expressed the opinion that
Home Depot, despite the positive enhancements offered by the company, is not an
appropriate land use in the context of the planning environment and objectives for the
Bowmanville West Town Centre.
2.2 Understanding Council's interest in the Home Depot Store with enhancements as
presented by the representative of Home Depot, staff sought to address how the Home
Depot store could be accommodated on the Halloway Holdings lands without
compromising the principles of the recommended Bowmanville West Town Centre
Secondary Plan. Staff prepared a Demonstration Plan to show one version of how the
Halloway Holdings site could develop with the Home Depot store located in the
northwest comer of the site (see Attachment 1). The proposed extension of Uptown
Avenue west of Clarington Boulevard would have been maintained on the alignment
established in the Secondary Plan.
2.3 Staff developed a second option based on the elimination of Uptown Avenue and the
development of a new road alignment along the concession road allowance (hereafter
referred to as the Stevens Road extension). The Stevens Road extension (Attachment
2) provided for a more efficient development of the Halloway Holdings site and
eliminated the 0.50 ha (1.24 acre) road allowance through the Halloway Holdings site.
It still provided for the development of street-related commercial uses along Clarington
Boulevard and the construction of a pedestrian retail environment. Halloway Holdings
Ltd. and Home Depot objected to this proposed compromise proposal based on
increased costs for grading and the ability to market the site to other tenants who would
be located between anchor stores.
ADDENDUM #2 TO REPORT PSD..()78..()5
PAGE 6
2.4 Halloway Holdings Ltd. advised that Home Depot will not come to this site unless the
proposed Home Depot store is located as shown on their proposed site plan
(Attachment 3) in the northeast comer of the site.
2.5 Staff and Halloway Holdings Ltd. have reached an impasse in the negotiations
regarding the location of the proposed Home Depot store and Uptown Avenue
extension west of Clarington Boulevard as well as the location of the proposed private
street running northerly from Highway 2 and certain urban design policies and zoning
regulations applicable to Halloway Holding's lands. The issue of the Uptown Avenue
extension and its possible replacement by the Stevens Road extension between
Regional Road 57 and Green Road is discussed in Section 3 of this Addendum.
2.6 If Council endorses in principle the deletion from the Secondary Plan of the Uptown
Avenue extension west of Clarington Boulevard and the replacement of Uptown Avenue
by the Stevens Road extension, in order to resolve the impasse referred in paragraph
2.6, Council could endorse in principle' modification to proposed Official Plan
Amendment 44 to:
. Relocate the proposed private street running north from Highway 2 to the Stevens
Road extension to the west, as proposed by Halloway Holdings Ltd. (Attachment 4);
and
. Designate the lands adjoining Clarington Boulevard for home improvement store
uses with associated parking.
2.8 Council could also direct staff, subject to further review of the submissions made on
behalf of Home Depot and Halloway Holdings Ltd. and the proposed site plan and
elevation drawings of the Home Depot store, to prepare detailed modifications to
proposed Official Plan Amendment 44 and the proposed Zoning Amendments to
implement the proposed site plan and elevation drawings. Council should also direct
staff to undertake the reviews, prepare the any detailed OPA modifications and
amendments to the recommended Zoning Amendments applicable to the Halloway
Holding lands to the GPA Committee meeting on September 6, 2005.
3.0 UPTOWN AVENUE ALIGNMENT
3.1 As referenced above, staff reviewed the alternative alignments for Uptown Avenue or an
equivalent collector road as proposed by Halloway Holdings Ltd. and members of
Council at the June 13th GPA meeting. The Municipality's transportation analysis
indicates the necessity for an alternative east-west road to be available should either or
both of the Halloway Holdings and West Diamond Properties projects proceed.
Brookhill Boulevard is the preferred road to function as a collector road since the
spacing from Highway 2 would provide adequate distance for traffic signals. In
discussions with West Diamond Properties, the timing of the construction of Brookhill
ADDENDUM #2 TO REPORT PSD..()78..()5
PAGE 7
Boulevard completed from Green Road through to Regional Road 57 cannot be
determined at the present time. It is likely at least 5 years out but it could be longer.
3.2 The staff-preferred scheme provided for Uptown Avenue to function as a collector road
for the commercial development until such time as Brookhill Boulevard was completed.
It would subsequently function as a local road providing service to the various land uses
within the Bowmanville West Town Centre. The .curvilinear" route has been part of the
Secondary Plan and both private and municipal investments including the location of the
Carson Elliott Skatepark have been made on this basis.
3.3 The alternative route referred to as the Stevens Road extension (see Attachment 5)
would provide more direct movements into the commercial centre but splits the
community park outdoor recreation area and diminishes the recreation possibilities for
the park area. The Municipality is currently using the lands as parkland and there are
some difficulties with now using this for road purposes. It is also the more expensive
route due to the following:
. additional length of roadway is required ($242,500).
. additional access to Garnet B. Rickard Centre to be provided ($147,600).
. demolition and replacement of the Carson Elliott Skatepark. or alternatively the
purchase of additional lands from the developer to the north.
3.4 If the Stevens Road Extension is selected, staff recommends that additional land be
acquired rather than using the existing road allowance for this purpose since it would
retain the Carson Elliott Skatepark, provide a buffer from the ball diamonds to the road
and retain many of the mature trees along the road allowance as part of the park.
Alternatively the Skatepark could be demolished and reconstructed on another site.
3.5 It is staffs view that since either Uptown Avenue or the Stevens Road extension is
required to service either or both the Halloway Holdings and West Diamond Properties
sites; the additional costs which are not currently included in the development charge
should be borne by the benefiting developers. The Development Charge By-law was
based on the Official Plan policy that Uptown Avenue would be built through the
Halloway Holdings site as a developer-funded infrastructure. Indeed as Council knows,
a portion of this road allowance is the subject of an agreement with the Municipality and
Halloway Holdings Ltd. Moreover, the additional cost of either demolishing or rebuilding
the Carson Elliott Skatepark or acquiring the lands necessary to build the road should
be developer-funded. At the present time staff do not have an estimate of the additional
costs of either land acquisition or the demolition and rebuilding of the skatepark.
3.6 Engineering Services has estimated the cost of constructing the Stevens Road
Extension at $2 million plus land acquisition costs or the costs of demolition and
rebuilding of the skatepark. The proposed apportionment of the costs is shown below:
ADDENDUM #2 TO REPORT PSD..()78..()5
PAGE 8
Construction of Stevens Road Extension
along or north of existing ROW from Green Road to Regional Road 57
New Box Culvert (From DC)
$335,000
Green Rd. to Clarington Blvd. 336.8 $643,288
Clarington Blvd. to 89.7 metres east of
Clarington Blvd. 89.7 $163,254
89.7 metres east of Clarington Blvd. to
Reg. Rd. 57 390.7 $711,074
Arena Access 90.0 $147,600
Total 907.2 $1,046,074 $147,600 $806,542**
Grand Total $2,000,216
* Clarington D.C. includes tax-related component for non-growth share
** Plus the cost of land acquisition or the cost of demolition and rebuilding of the
Carson Elliott Skatepark.
4.0 PHASING OF WAL-MART AND REAL CANADIAN SUPERSTORE
4.1 The Municipality's retail market analyst was requested to review the submission made
by representatives of West Diamond Properties with respect to the possibility of
eliminating the phasing recommendations contained in the Addendum Market Report.
Separate meetings were convened with the West Diamond Properties and Zeller's
representatives and their respective market consultants. A Supplemental Market
Analysis was prepared which tested the alternate phasing of new f100rspace throughout
the Municipality (Attachment 6).
4.2 The alternative phasing considered the following changes:
. The West Diamond Properties project would be delayed so that the first full year of
operation would be 2008.
. The expansion of the existing Loblaws would be delayed to 2016.
. The Courtice Main Central Area would be phased in over the longer term.
. Minor adjustments to the Torgan DSTM f1oorspace, the retenanted Loblaws DSTM
and the amount of DSTM in the new Real Canadian Superstore.
The main difference between the earlier analysis is the delay in the opening of the West
Diamond Properties site, delay of the Courtice Main Central Area and moving from a
"worst case" scenario to recognize that there will be some natural phasing of
commercial facilities that would see certain tenants construct somewhat later than 2008.
ADDENDUM #2 TO REPORT PSD..()78..()5
PAGE 9
4.3 It is the analyst's opinion that the additional space could be accommodated without
affecting the planned function of existing centres. He did note however, the store in
Bowmanville would experience a higher sales decline than previously (moving from
10% to 11%) and that Zellers declines would be 34%. Constructing the major stores in
one phase makes sense, given the relative closeness between phases but provides is a
less cautious approach than previously taken.
5.0 URBAN DESIGN ISSUES AND SITE PLANS
West Diamond
Several meetings were held with West Diamond representatives and their anchors Wal-
Mart and Loblaws (Real Canadian Superstore). There was substantial progress made
with respect to the proposed design of the two stores having regard to the urban design
policies contained in Official Plan Amendment 44.
The Real Canadian Superstore is a contemporary design with a large mezzanine which
has been designed as a significant architectural element. The building design provides
for a significant amount of glazing but not at street level. Primary concerns were the
need for additional articulation of the horizontal wall plane and roofline on the Green
Road building face; the introduction of masonry elements on the building wall, additional
glazing, and the relationship of the building to the landscaping, and landscaping in the
parking areas. These issues have been satisfactorily addressed. There are concerns
about the storage/display area under the mezzanine extension and the landscaping in
the parking lot, which are to be further addressed.
Wal-Mart first proposed a standard elevation, then a slightly enhanced elevation and
finally a significantly improved elevation. Primary concerns were the location of the
proposed garden centre, tire lube express and one of the loading areas facing Boswell
Street, the lack of articulation of the horizontal wall plane and roofline, building
materials, the amount of glazing, the narrow sidewalk in front of the store, the
placement of exterior vending machines, the lack of a canopy, the landscaping of the
parking areas and the proposed screening for the loading and service areas.
Staff are pleased that the proposed elevations of both stores meet most of the urban
design principles although not precisely in the manner prescribed in the proposed
Secondary Plan and Zoning By-law amendments. It is recommended that the proposed
elevations and conceptual site design (Attachment 7) be endorsed in principle as the
basis for finalizing the Official Plan and Zoning for the site.
Halloway Holdings Limited
Home Depot provided a rendering at the June 13th GPA meeting and subsequently
provided the sample of the pre-cast masonry panel shown at that time. They provided a
list of proposed enhancements by letter dated July 14' 2005 but did not submit building
elevations or have had any discussion with staff on this matter. A site plan was
submitted but there has been no discussion with the applicant on this either.
ADDENDUM #2 TO REPORT PSD..()78..()5
PAGE 10
Staff is not in a position to comment on their proposal. It is recommended that if Council
endorses a Home Depot store on the Halloway Holdings site, that the proposed
elevations and site be referred to staff for consideration prior to finalizing the Official
Plan and Zoning for the site.
6.0 CONCLUSIONS
6.1 This report provides interim recommendations and seeks Council's direction on a
number of matters so that staff may finalize its recommendations and the planning
instruments. The situation is not ideal given the OMB pre-hearing conference on
September 6, 2005. Should Council wish to discuss issues related to the Municipality's
legal position, the Solicitor and staff can provide further briefing in-camera.
Attachments:
Attachment 1 - Home Depot and Uptown Avenue Alignment
Attachment 2 - Home Depot and Stevens Road Alignment
Attachment 3 - Halloway/Home Depot Proposed Site Plan
Attachment 4 - Halloway Holdings' Proposed Private Street Relocation
Attachment 5 - Proposed alignment for Stevens Road
Attachment 6 - Supplemental Market Analysis
Attachment 7 - West Diamond/Players Conceptual Site Plan
ADDENDUM #2 TO REPORT PSD..()78..()5
PAGE 11
List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision:
Henry Joseph
Ari Yasa
Ron Worboy
B. Westerman
Beth Kelly, Valiant Property Mgmt.
Bob Hann, Valiant Property Mgmt.
John Vanderkooi
Eileen Costello, Aird & Berlis LLP
Gwen Wallace
Lyn Townsend, Lynda Townsend-
Renaud Law
Brent Clarkson, MHBC Planning
Limited
Heather Muir
Carol Duffy
Bruce Curl
Jim and Suzanne Gregory
Stan Stein, Osler Hoskin & Harcourt
Todd Gibbon
Bill Humber
Linda Moore
Ron Hooper
George Kloos
Richard Lange
Leroy Clarke
Ted Watson
Hannu Halminen, Halminen Homes
Limited
Jennifer Stone, This Week
Newspapers
Brian O'Connor
Richard Marchant
David Butler, The Butler Group Inc.
Peter Smith, Bousfields Inc.
Bryce Jordan. G.M. Semas Associates
Carmela Cupelli
Scott Houghton
Nancy Lewis
Maryann Fines
E.C. Braham
Sue Sedlak
N. Gummon
Otto Provenzano
S. Fraser
Bill Hinbert
Doug Finnson and Terri Bickwell-Potts
Duncan McPherson
Trevor Small
Ellen Cowan
Peter Vogel
Ray and Joyce Atkinson
Margaret Zwart
Ira Kagan, Kagan, Shastri, Barristers & Sol.
Brian Fraser
Mark Rowe
Rudi Van Wijngaarden
Paul & Anne-Marie Halliday
John Huber
James Scarth
John and Lilian Bouma
B. Haines
Lilly T. Hinton
Mary-Ann Kalotai
Diane James
Costantine Bruno
Richard Rekker
Alan Vaillancourt
Mavis Carlton
Rick Hofstede
The Greater Toronto Transit
Robert DeGasperis, Metrus Properties Inc.
Yolanda Gjaltema
John & Lillian Bouma
Marvin Green, River Oaks Group
Kathy Pandell. Geoffrey L. Moore & Associates
Ltd.
Marianne Zwyers
Lakeshore Group
Carmine Cupelli
George Ibanez
Lawrence Hellinga
R. Tukker
A. Sorg
Bryan MacLean
Linda Hallett and George loanidis
Doug Woods
Frank W. Lockhart
J. Sproatt
ADDENDUM #2 TO REPORT PSD..()78..()5
PAGE 12
Mike Dome
Celeste Terry, Durham Regional
Planning
Gail Rickard
James Vinson
Ian Smith
Anthony Turnbull
Evelyn Rosario
Steve Zakem, Aird & Berlis LLP
Scott Arbuckle, Planning & Engineering
Initiatives Ltd.
David Crowell, A & P Properties Limited
Suzanne McCrimmon, Clarington Board of Trade
Jim Russell
John Shewchuk, Royal LePage Frank Real Estate
Paul Wilson
Philip Brent
Peter Walker, Walker Nott Dragecivic Associates
Limited
Terry and Phyllis Price
Roslyn Houser, Goodmans LLP
Rick Gay, Gay Company Limited
Mark Pepper
1111111111111111111111111111111111111
Attachment 1 - Home Depot and
Uptown Avenue Alignment
iJ D
o
~
ill
~\
~
!~
"
001//111111111::1/:1101111111111111
011111::1::1::111111111111//1111::11110
II ~:OIl:lIIIIIlIIIlIIlIIOIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIO
III 011111111::111111111::1111//11/1:111110
~
O~\
O~ ,.'~.
\.-.. -"" '," /~- ,
\1 '-"y'/ ..J.;
\\ \v
. .....--.
.' . -.--:::
~~.
~
\
\
.\
\
\
\
---
'\
; /"--"-.... '\
f \; '% .
'~ / .-----'
\ ..L___----
~~~, , ~. t.
~O""
'0 c/X'I" / ~"
(0','7'(,., ~'
0~:;/"\<\', .)
)Y/~ \\\
/,,/ \\"
\ ,,~ -'f;;:.~< ~ \:)\ \.,;.~~
\'<\"& I '{" I'~\ (y
\... 'G:. f l .~\\-\
\ 'to ~~ t'~_ IF.)
\.... 0 \. :;,.. j \
Attachment 2 - Home Depot and
Stevens Road Alignment
'- """''''''''''''''''''','''':::,? I! lil, ~>=I jl t,,~,'" 1/
~lWJl1lillillJllWJ ~IIIIIJ~ l' ~~~-~~-~~--1;;==E!J _~J
. '-- ---' 'Jd\.:/\-:JliHJ8=
---------c
I
~--~l
\
\
'I
I
/
o
'''--../
I 0
\
uI b
~ ~
::t. P
o s:
'<l:--O-
o .
0:: 0::
E E
'" <<
. 0
'" N
,
I' I
~ I i I ~
o 0
~ 0::
E E
o '"
ci m
N
~
11111111
L
l
0,
/
\.;
A~TACHMENT 3
ln~
III
Ii 1111
ll~ I'"
a",,^TID. -:"" ~
"''''N'',.,.
.
Ii
-
I~
i
~
I ~
Ii
II
I
.
I I
..
""'"
""'"
Attachment 4 - Halloway Holdings
Proposed Private Street Relocation
L--. /
i- .m:>' "
{"
d
I
-i_
~
J
r
~] l=REffi=j
I i
r- ;
.
W
W ;
0::: .
r-
v')
._-...;::..........
--"-----
--
I (------
< -'
iff/-
I) ~~=J=
II/IfI / /,1 ~ - /IJI
II p
/ I.
fi
Vi
\ / ,-
(
;
.
~
8-ttH1#ttD-Httt
~
',-
.,;
-------
. .
"=
--'-..-.,-,..., .;
I
.
=
~
M
-.:
CC
//
/
-== \- ,~~~-==:=--~~i"""-"'/~::-~ 73=~~-=-
ATTACHMENT 5
o
z
o
z
"
.
d
o
!~! I
~
II!!!.! 11 hi'
11I,,!h I'i Il!i
-jl, 'n-
il!1: "'H
tlH lUll!1
.'I!l ihj
~1"!i!l!
I.I!IIII
..._. ......o.s... __
W
::>
Zz
Wo
>-
",en
zZ
,,~
OX
~w
~
~
~ ~
i ~ ~
~ I '
.
~ ~~~I ~
g ~ ~ .
2 i !
u
i.1 !
i'l'i
I
%
c
o
ATTACHMENT 6
Memorandum Report
Clarington Commercial Policy Review
Supplementary Market Analysis
Scenario D-l (s)
Prepared for: Municipality of Clarington
Date: July 14, 2005
market, economic and strategic advisors
urbanMetrics inc.
144-146 fronl Street West. Suite 460
Toronto. ON M5J 2L7
'.
urbanMetrics inc.
market, economic and strategic advisors
144-146 Front Street West Suite 460
Toronto. ON. M5J 2L7
416-351-8585
Toll Free 1-800-505-8755
(4161345-8586 (taxi
www.urbanmetrics.ca
MEMORANDUM
From:
Date:
Subject:
Mr. David Crome,
Municipality of Clarington
Doug Annand, Lynne Davidson
July 14, 2005
Commercial Policy Review.
Joseph Urban Consultants Memorandum, June 9, 2005,
Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP, Letter from Mr. Stan Stein to
Clarlngton, June 15, 2005 ond
Goodmans LLP, Letter from Ms. Roslyn Houser to Clarington, June 13, 2005
Newcastle IGA, Letter from Tenzln Gyaltsan, June 9, 2005
To:
As requested by the Municipality of Clarington, urban Metrics inc. has provided our comments with respect
to the following correspondence received by the Municipality in response to the Clarington Commercial
Policy Review and the Addendum Market Analysis, dated May 9.2005 prepared by urbanMetrics inc,:
. Joseph Urban Consultants, Memorandum to the Municipality of Clarington on behalf of Zellers inc.
June 9, 2005
. Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP, Letter to the Municipality of Clarington on behalf of Zellers inc.. June
15,2005
. Goodmans LLP, Letter to the Municipality of Clarington on behalf of West Diamond Properties Inc.
and Players Business Park Ltd. ("West Diamond"), June 13. 2005
. Newcastle IGA, Letter to the Municipality of Clarington, June 9. 2005
JoseDh Urban Consultants Memorandum ("JoseDh")
Joseph has provided a number of comments with respect to our Addendum Report Scenario D-1 analysis
and the implications for existing retailers, with a focus on the Zellers in Clarington Centre. The following
summarizes our response.
urbanMetrics inc.. Memorandum, June 23, 2005
1
urbanMetrics inc.
market, economic and strategic advisors
. Department Store Potential and Impact
Department store share - Joseph has provided an analysis which assumes a higher department store
share of DSTM than utilized by urban Metrics in our Scenario D-1 analysis, It is our opinion that the
department store share utilized by urban Metrics for this scenario, which increases from an estimated
existing level of 26.5% to 29%, is realistic as it recognizes that despite the addition of the Wal-Mart, over
400,000 square feet of non-department store DSTM is included in Scenario D-1, which is far in excess of
the Wal-Mart space proposed. The affect of this large amount of non-department store DSTM space
offsets any significant increase in the department store share assumed by Joseph.
Inflow - The inflow figure of 30% utilized by urban Metrics inc. for the Wal-Mart is based on the existing
inflow for the Zellers, as determined from the licence plate survey data conducted at the Clarington
Centre. With additional regional serving space added to the Bowmanville West area, the area has the
potential to draw more dollars from outside Clarington, including visitors and empioyees who work in the
area. Therefore, we have no reason to assume that the inflow factor would be reduced,
Impacts - In our Scenario D-1 analysis, to determine the impact of the Phase 2 expansion of Wal-Mart on
Zellers, it was tested with a first full year of opening in 2008. Based on the resulting sales pertormance
leveis for the Zellers, we recommended a first full year opening of the Phase 2 expansion be delayed until
2010 to minimize impacts.
. Non-Department Store DSTM ("Specialty DSTM") Potential & Impact
Non-Department Store DSTM Share - For the reasons stated above, we support our 71 % future forecast
of the non-department store DSTM share of total DSTM based on the space assumptions in Scenario D-
1,
Inflow - The forecast average inflow levels are based on existing infiow levels in Bowmanville and
Courtice, as determined from empirical research, applied to the proposed space. It should be noted that
in Courtice, a higher inflow level (based on the results of the Courtice licence plate survey) was utilized for
the space in the Courtice Main Central Area, which results in the higher overall 33% inflow figure for
Clarington as a whole.
Impacts - As a worst case scenario, most of the proposed non-department store DSTM space was
introduced with a first full year opening in 2007 in Scenario D-1. The results of our analysis indicated that
some phasing would therefore be required to minimize impacts. Recognizing that a significant amount of
space included in our analysis for 2007 will not likely be developed until after 2007 and/or will be phased,
we have carried out a sensitivity analysis in the later part of this memorandum that assesses changes to
our assumptions (supplementary analysis Scenario D-1 (s)).
urbanMetrics inc.. Memorandum, June 23, 2005
2
urbanMetrics inc.
market, economic and strategic advisors
. Market Projections vs Proposed Retail Floorspace
Joseph states that urbanMetrics has made aggressive assumptions of outflow recovery (i.e. recapture)
and inflow sales opportunities. We would consider our recapture assumptions as conservative.
Clarington residents are currently making 65.8% of their specialty DSTM purchases, which equates to
$137.4 million, outside of Clarinaton, Therefore, only 34.2% of Clarington residents' specialty DSTM
expenditures are currently made in Clarington. In the future, we have estimated in Scenario D-1 that this
share would increase to 53.5% with over 400,000 square feet of additional non-department store DSTM
space added to the Clarington market. In our opinion, the capture leveis used in our analysis are still
below what we wouid consider normal capture rates for a community the size of Clarington.
Although we would agree that the forecast growth in population can be considered modest, as indicated
by Joseph, the fact that Clarington residents' are not well served with retail facilities in their community is
the major issue. There is a significant opportunity to recapture a large portion of outflow sales with the
development of regional scale retail facilities in Clarington that will effectively compete with retail facilities
in other municipaiities, such as Oshawa and Whitby. As a future planned integrated/urban community
with strong retail areas, Clarington wili have the ability to stem a large portion of this current outflow.
On a geographic sub-sector basis, based on the results of the telephone survey (urbanMetrics inc.fTate
Economic Research Background Report), Bowmanville Urban Area residents are currently making 56% of
their non-department store DSTM expenditures outside of Clarington with those in West Clarington
(including Courtice and the former Darlington Township) making about 82% outside. For East Clarington
residents (including Newcastle Village, Orono, and former Clarke Township) over 50% of these
expenditures are made outside. East Clarington residents are actually by-passing retail facilities in
Bowmanville in favour of new format and regional retail facilities in Oshawa, Whitby and Ajax. With new
retail facilities offered in Clarington, significant opportunity exists to intercept outflow sales, and particularly
those occurring from Bowmanville and East Clarington residents. Our forecast Clarington share
assumptions recognize that approximately 60% of the population in Clarington is comprised of
Bowmanville and east Clarington (including Newcastle Village, Orono, and former Clarke Township). The
remaining 40% includes west Clarington (i.e. Courtice and the former Darlington Township). Given the
close proximity of Oshawa, this west portion of the municipality is considered more likely to continue to
shop for a large portion of their non-department store DSTM expenditures outside of Clarington.
With the additional non-department store DSTM space added to the Clarington market, we believe that
outflow will decline to 46.5% with an average of some 53.5% spent locally in Clarington, which is still a
conservative estimate. The derivation of the average forecast factor of 53.5%, as utilized in Scenario D-l
for the years 2007 to 2016 was based on our review of expenditure characteristics on a geographic sub-
sector basis as follow:
urban Metrics inc.. Memorandum, June 23, 2005
3
urbanMetrics inc.
market, economic and strategic advisors
. Bowmanville - estimated at 39% of the Clarington non-department store DSTM expenditure potential,
with an existing Clarington share of 44% estimated to increase to the 70% range by 2007
. West Clarington - estimated at 43% of the Clarington non-department store DSTM expenditure
potential, with an existing Clarlngton share of 18% estimated to increase to about 25% by 2007
. East Clarington - estimated at 18% of the Clarington non-department store DSTM expenditure
potential, with an existing Clarington share of 50% estimated to increase to about 75% by 2007
We note that even by 2007, the application of a 53.5% average Clarington share still results in a
significant outflow of non-department store DSTM sales from Clarlngton at $113.2 million, increasing to
$149.6 million by 2016.
. Orderly Department Store Expansion
Joseph indicates that they "do not see the necessity to strengthen the department store anchor capability
of the municipality for another five years". We see this statement as an attempt to limit the introduction of
Wal-Mart into the community purely on the basis of restricting competition and protecting the market share
of Zellers; a store which is performing significantly above the Zellers industry average (I.e. the Clarington
Zellers performing at an estimated $205 per square foot in 2003 compared to Zellers' Canadian average
of $158 per square foot in 2003). Our telephone survey indicates that residents of Clarington are already
shopping at Wal-Mart in other Durham Region municipalities and therefore the addition of a Wal-Mart in
Clarington will provide a more convenient location. Wal-Mart is also considered by urbanMetrics as a key
store that will improve the recapture of outflow sales and an important anchor tenant for Bowmanville
West that will help attract other retail development and improve the level of retail service for residents.
. Orderly Specialty DSTM Expansion
Although the orderly approach to developing other retail facilities in Clarington is important, the Joseph
phasing plan must be viewed in the context of the likelihood of other retail projects included in our
Scenario D-1 analysis and their realistic timing of entry into the market. A sensitivity analysis which
includes revised phasing assumptions has been included in this memorandum report.
. Lack of Direclionallmpact Analysis
In our Addendum report of May 9, 2005, urban Metrics was only asked by the Municipality and the Region
to test the directional impacts with the AYT application included. Recognizing this concern, we have
provided a directional impact analysis in this memorandum report based on our supplementary scenario
(Scenario D-1 (s)) which evaluates different phasing assumptions than utilized in our Scenario D-1.
urban Metrics inc" Memorandum, June 23, 2005
4
urbanMetrics inc.
market, economic and strategic advisors
Osler. Hoskin & Harcourt LLP, Wal-Mart Sales Performance Levels
Mr. Stein has indicated that the sales performance levels utilized by urban Metrics for the proposed Wal-
Mart Ciarington are too low by $100 per square foot (we have assumed $400 per square foot in 2008,
increasing to $500 per square foot by 2016, expressed in 2003 dollars in our supplementary Scenario D-1
(s)) and Scenario D-1 in our Addendum report). Mr. Stein has utilized the Guelph OMB decision as the
basis for his conclusion. We note that at the public meeting he initially quoted $405 per square foot for the
Guelph settlement but later revised this figure to a much higher figure based on the Gueiph OMB decision
dated July 25, 2003. Aithough we are aware of the Guelph decision, it is our opinion that the
characteristics of each market must be taken into account, including the proximity to other Wai-Mart
competition and other factors, such as store size. Based on our knowledge of Wal-Mart sales, they do
vary by location, reflecting different market characteristics. We note that Clarington has a current
population of some 80,000 persons that are not geographically centred (i.e. in a number of urban areas
and dispersed villages), whereas the City of Guelph has a concentrated urban population of some
125,000 persons with at least some 200,000 persons in its trading area. Therefore, there is no reason
that the expected Wal-Mart sales in Clarington would be as high as those assumed in Guelph.
Goodmans
Based on our review of the Goodmans response and discussions with the Municipality, we have prepared
a supplementary analysis (Scenario D-1 (s) with additionai years added), based on Scenario D-1 in our
Addendum report) that tests the following new phasing in store size assumptions as outlined in the
Goodman's letter:
. West Diamond Centre - all space built with a first full year of operation in 2008, including the Wal-
Mart (revised size of 151,000 square feet based on input from Goodmans) and Loblaws (Phase 1 and
2).
. Clarington Centre expansion - potential expansion of the existing Loblaws space for non-food uses
delayed to 2016
. Clarington Centre Loblaws retenanting - 40,000 square feet of non-department store DSTM space
rather than the 50.400 square feet assumed in our Scenario D-1 to delete mezzanine space and to
allow for other non-retail uses; first full year of operation 2009
. Torgan Site - due to floodplain issues, a reduction in the non-department store DSTM floor space
from 75,000 square feet to 65,000 square feet
. Loblaws - Non-Department Store DSTM merchandise in the new store - revision from the 21,300
square feet tested in our Scenario D-1 to 30,000 square feet with a first full year in 2008
. Courtice Main Central Area - phased in space over the longer term
We would agree with Goodman's that it is highly unlikely that all the non-department store DSTM space
built into our Scenario D-1 anaiysis will have a first full-year of operation in 2007. Our Scenario D-1 was
urbanMetrics inc.. Memorandum. June 23. 2005
5
urbanMetrics inc.
market, economic and strategic advisors
intended as a "worst case" scenario, while Scenario D-1 (s) has been provided in this memorandum to
recognize that there will be some natural phasing of commercial facilities.
In addition to Scenario D-1 (s) phasing assumptions, a number of modifications were aiso made to the
department store share of DSTM and the Clarington share as follows:
. A department store share of 30% in 2008 declining to 29% (as utilizing in Scenario D-1) over the
study period recognizing the reduction in the proposed non-department store space evaiuated in
the short term
. Ciarington share for non-department store DSTM of 42.5% in 2007, increasing to 53.5% in 2010
(a figure of 53.5% was utilizing over the entire study period for Scenario D-1) to recognize the
phasing and reduction In total non-department store DSTM space analyzed.
Based on the results of our Scenario D-1 (s) analysis, impacts in the non-department store DSTM
category will be reduced to levels that are not expected to affect planned function (declines of 10% in
2008, 8% in 2010, with recovery to above existing levels after 2010). Higher sales declines are expected
for stores in the Bowmanville Urban Area (average of 11 % decline) with lower sales declines elsewhere in
Clarington.
In the department store category, the existing Zellers can expect to experience declines in sales
performance of some 34% in 2008, although the resulting sales performance level of $135 per square foot
is not expected to result in store closure recognizing that the existing average performance level for
Zellers stores in Canada is $154 per square foot in 2004. As a sensitivity test, we note that if the
Clarington share for the department store category is increased from 50% (as utilized in Scenario D-1 and
D-1 (s) to 51 %or 52% respectively, sales per square foot for the existing Zellers would only decline in
2008 to $150 and $165 per square foot respectively. This illustrates the sensitivity of the shares utilized.
Newcastle IGA, Supermarket Issue
The owner of the Newcastle IGA has raised a number of issues with respect to the food store market in
Clarlngton. Based on our review of these issues, we offer the following comments:
. According to the Municipality, the A&P in Bowmanville Mall has recently made an application to
expand their store to 52,700 square feet. This represents an expansion of 24,900 square feet. At
the time of our initial market analysis, this application did not exist. We have addressed this
expansion and potential impacts in our supplementary market anaiysis as provided in this
memorandum (Table 7-D-1 (s)). Based on our recapture assumption (i.e. existing Clarington
share increasing from 66.9% to 75% in future years), with the proposed Loblaws (net traditional
food component) and A&P expansion, average sales for existing Clarington supermarkets would
decline from the current average performance level of $545 per square foot to $525 per square
urbanMetrics inc" Memorandum, June 23, 2005
6
urbanMetrics inc.
market, economic and strategic advisors
foot in 2008. These sales levels are both considered significantly above typical industry norms
and therefore no critical sales impacts are expected. A full recovery to above existing levels
would occur by 2010, with at least $17 million of additional residual sales potential available for
new supermarkets facilities in Clarington by 2016.
. Based on discussions with the municipality, they have only heard rumors of Sobey's opening a
store in Bowmanville. There has been no application to date.
. Based on correspondence we have received from Aird & Berlis, the legal counsel for Loblaws, the
existing Loblaws store will be retenanted for non-food store uses. Loblaws has complete control
over this site and there is no lease ciause which states that the building must be a grocery store.
We note, however, that the existing zoning by-law requires that the Clarington Centre have a
supermarket. Based on discussions with Steven Zakem of Aird & Berlis, an application has been
made to amend the zoning by-law to allow other uses for the Clarington Centre Loblaw property
and therefore to remove the requirement for a supermarket.
. We are fully aware of the merchandise overlap between various store types. For the proposed
Loblaws, the non-food store merchandise was analyzed separately as it represents a significant
component of this store. Recognizing that other food stores in the Clarington market do not
include significant non-food store merchandise, this methodology is considered appropriate in
evaluating sales impacts on existing local food stores. However, for department stores, other
general merchandise stores and other retailers, we have not extracted the potential food
component and analyzed this separately, although it is recognized that there will be some overlap
with other retailers, including supermarkets. We note that a large portion of the sales support for
the proposed Wal-Mart would be available from the transfer of sales already made in existing
Wal-Mart stores and other DSTM stores with food store related merchandise. Therefore, the
magnitude of the impact on food stores would be difficult to ascertain. We note, however, that
based our supplementary supermarket analysis, as detailed in Table 7-D-1(s), even with the
Loblaws expansionlrelocation and A&P expansion, the existing stores could withstand additional
sales transfers as a result of the addition of food store related merchandise being offered in Wal-
Mart or other DSTM stores offering food merchandise..
Conclusions
In conclusion, and recognizing the various phasing and size assumptions discussed above, our
supplementary analysis would suggest that phasing of the Wal-Mart and Lobiaws on the West Diamond
site is not required if their first full year of operation is delayed until 2008. However, in order to minimize
potential impacts on Clarington retail facilities, and specifically downtown Bowmanville, it may be prudent
for Clarington to structure the West Diamond zoning by-law to ensure that Wal-Mart and Loblaws do not
open prior to 2007.
urban Metrics inc.. Memorandum, June 23. 2005
7
Table 1-0 -1 (5)
CLARINGTON
SCENARIO 0-1 (s)
HOME AND AUTO WARRANTED SPACE ANALYSIS ($ Millions)
2003 Dollars 2003 2005 2007 2008 2009 2010 2013 2016
Clarinaton
Home & Auto Expenditure Potential $20.5 $22.4 $23.8 $24.7 $25.7 $26.8 $29.6 $32.4
C1aringtonShare(%)(1 76.5% 80.0% 80;0% 80.0% 80,0% 80,0% 80.0% 80.0%
Clarington Share ($) $15.7 $17.9 $19.0 $19.8 $20.6 $21.4 $23.7 $25.9
Less: Effective Competition $15.7 $15.7 $15.7 $15.7 $15.7 $15.7 $15.7 $15.7
Residual Potential from Clarington Residents N1A $2.2 ~ $3.3 $4.1 $4.9 $5.7 $8.0 $10.2
Prooosed Canadian TIre Exoanskm
Square Feet GlA Expansion 15,ZOO 1$,ZOO 15,200 15,200 15,200 15,200
SalesiSq. Ft GLA $275 $285 $290 $295 $300 $315
Total Sales Volume $4.2 $4.3 $4.4 $4.5 $46 $48
Less Inflow@ 30% 12 $1.3 $13 $13 $14 $1.4 $14
Tolal Sales Required from Clarington Residents $2.' $3.0 $3.1 $3.1 $3.2 $3.'
TOIaI Home and Auto Residual Sales Potenhal Available from Clanngtoo Resklents $3.3 $4.1 $4.9 $5.7 $8.0 $10.2
Sales Transfers Required trom ExiSting Clarington Stores {including Canadian Tire and DSTM
Slores) based onAllailable Residual 000' 000' 000' 000' none 000'
ADDITIONAL H & A RESIDUAL AVAILABLE FOR OTHER NEW STORES/EXISTING (3 $0.. $1.1 $1.8 $2.' $4.' $6.8
EXISTING CLARINGTON HOME & AUTO SPACE:
Sales from Clarington Residents ($ Millions) (irlCludlng add'l r..sldual) $15,7 $16.1 $16.8 $17.5 $18.3 $20.5 $225
Less: Sales Required from Existing Clarington H & A stores for Home
Improvement Centres (see Table 2-0-1 (s)) $00 $0.8 $0.9 $0.9 $0.8 $1.0 $0.9
Net Sales from Clarington Residents $157 $153 $159 $16.6 $175 $195 $21.6
Plus: ESlimated Inflow 30% (2 $67 $6.6 $6.8 $71 $75 $8.4 $9.3
TOTAL ESTIMATED SALES (Canadian Tire) $22.4 $21.9 $227 $23.7 $25.0 $27.9 $30.9
Total SQ FtGLA 74,600 74.600 74.600 74,600 74,600 74,600 74,600
Existing Sales Per Square Feet GlA (4 $300 $295 $305 $320 $335 $375 $415
Channe In Total Sales From Existing Level -2.5% 1.3% 5.7% 11.5% 24.2% 37.6%
Source urbanMetricsinc
11 BasedonthefesullsoflhetelephoneGOnsumersurveyforCanadianTireStoresooly
'I urbanMetricsinc.estimate
31 Exdudinganyaclditiol1a1 residual potential required from olher sloretypes analyzed
'1 Rounded 10 the nearest $5 per square fool GLA
.
Table2MO-1 (s)
CLARINGTON
SCENARIO 0-1 (s)
HOME IMPROVEMENT (HI) STORE WARRANTED SPACE ANALYSIS ($ Millions)
2003 Dollars 2003 2005 2007 2008 2009 2010 2013 2016
Clarinaton
Home Improvement Store Expenditure Potential $18.1 $19.6 $21.2 $22.1 $22.6 $23.6 $26.2 $28.8
Clarington Share (%) (1 12.3% 65.0% 80.0% 80,0% 80.0% 80.0% 80.0% 80;0%
Clarington Share ($) $2.2 $12.7 $17.0 $17.7 $18.1 $18.9 $21.0 $23.0
Less: Effective Competition $2.2 $2.2 $2.2 $2.2 $2.2 $2.2 $2.2 $2.2
Residual Potential from Clarington Residents NfA $10.5 $14.8 $15.5 $15.9 $16.7 $18.8 $20.8
PROPOSED HOME: IMPROVEMENT SPACE
.. Valiant - Home Depot - SQuare Feet GLA 83,900 83,900 83,900 83,900 83,900 83,900
SaleslSQ. Ft. GLA $230 $240 $245 5250 5260 $280
Total Sales Volume $19.3 $20.1 $20.6 $21.0 $21.8 $23.5
Less: WholesalelContractor Trade@30% (2 $5.8 $6.0 $6.2 $63 $6.5 $7.1
Less: Inflow@(2 30% (2 $41 $4.2 $43 $44 $46 $4.9
Total Sales ReQuired from Clarington Residents $9.4 $9.9 $10.1 $10.3 $10.7 $11.5
B. Torgan - Rena - SQuare Feet GLA 76,400 76,400 76,400 76,400 lJ4,700 94,700
SaleslSq Ft GLA $230 $240 $245 $250 $260 $280
Total Sales Volume S17.6 $18.3 $18.7 $19.1 $24.6 $26.5
Less Wholesale/Contractor Trade@30% (2 $5.3 $55 $5.6 $57 $7.4 $8.0
Less: Inflow@(2 30% (2 $37 $3.8 $3.9 $4.0 $5.2 $5.6
Total Sales Required from Clarington Residents $8.6 $9.0 $9.2 $9.4 $12.0 $12.9
TOTAL SALES REQUIRED FROM CLARINGTON RESIDENTS FORA & B $18.0 $189 $19.3 $19.7 $22.7 $24.4
Total HI Residual Sales Potential Available from Clarington ResIdents $14.8 $155 $15.9 $16.7 $18.8 $20.8
Sales Transfers ReqUIred from Existing Clarington Stores (induding Home Improvement
and DSTM) Based Cfl Availa,="e Residual $3.2 $34 $3.4 $3.0 $3.9 $3.6
(2 Estimated Transfers from Existing HI Stores in ClaringtOll 10% $03 $0..3 $0..3 $0..3 $0..4 $0.3
(2 Estimated Transfers from Non-Department Store DSTM 60.% $1.9 $2.0. $2.0. $1.7 $2.3 $2.2
(2 Estimated Transfers from Department Store OSTM 5% $0.2 $0.2 $0.2 $0.2 $0.2 $0.2
(2 Estimated Transfers from Canadian Tire 25% $08 $0.9 $0.9 $0.8 $1.0 $0.9
10.0% 3.' 3.4 3.4 3.0 $3.9 3.'
U 1 (3 "O~ ~ "00' "O~ "00' OO~
EXISTING CLARlNGTON HI SPACE:
Sales from Clarington Residents ($ Millions)
Less: Sales Required from Existing CJ8ringtQr1 HI Stores for Home
& Auto Stores (from Teble 1-[)'1 (s))
Net Sales from Cl8n'ngton Residents
Plus: Estimated Innow 30% (2
TOTAL ESTIMATED SALES
Plus Wholesale Trade@30%
GRAND TOTAL ESTIMATED SALES
Total Sq Ft GLA (Home ImprovemenVLumber stores only)
Existing Sales Per Square Feet GLA (4
Chan<l~ in Total Sales From Existing Level
$2.2
$1.9 $1.9 $1.9 $1.9 $1.8 $1.9
$0.0 $0.0 $00 $0..0 $0.0 $0.0.
$1.9 $1.9 $1.9 $1.9 $1.8 $1.9
$0.8 $0.8 $08 $0.8 SO, $08
$2.7 $2.7 $2.7 $2.7 $2.6 $27
$1.2 $12 $1.2 $1.2 $1.1 $12
$39 $3.9 $3.9 $3.9 $3.7 $39
15,800 n,800 15,800 15,800 15,800 15,800
$170 $170 $170 $170 $165 $170
-13.6% -13.6% 13.6% -136% -18.2% -13.6%
$0..0.
$22
$0.9
$3.1
$1.3
$45
15,aoO
"00
Source
11
')
3)
4)
urbanMetricsinc
Based on the results of the telephone consumer survey for home improvement centre stores only
urbanMelrk:sincestimate
Excluding any additional residual potential required from other store types analyzed.
Rounded to the nearest $5 persquarefootGLA
Tab'ea.D-1(_,
CURINGTON
OSTM EXPENDITURE POTENTIAL OF CLARlNGTON RESIDENTS
2003 DoHa,.
2003_
l<iIrJnaI2!!
Income Index To Province
DSTM Index to Province
Per Capita OSTM Expenditures (3
Population (From Table 1)
Total DSTM Potential ($ Milhoos)
Department Store Share@{4
Department Slore Share Potential ($Mlllioos)
Non-Department Store OSTM Share@
Non-Department Store DSTM Potential (5Millioos)
2003
$3.594
$100
$3,694
2003 ,"'. 2007 'DOl .... '01. 2013 2015
99.40
99.64
$3.680 $3,790 $3,900 $3,955 $4,010 $4,065 $4,230 $4,400
77200 81,500 84910 86,600 lliJ,00 90,800 96,900 103 000
$284.1 $308.9 $331.1 $342.5 .7 $369.1 $409.9 $453.2
26.5% 26.5% 26.5% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% 29.0% 29.0%
$75.3 $81.9 $87.7 $102.8 $106.7 $110.7 $118.9 5131.4
73.5% 73.5% 73.5% 70.0% 70.0% 70.0% 71.0% 71.0%
$208.6 $227.0 $243.4 $239.8 $249.0 $258.4 $291.0 $321.6
Provine. of Ontario
Per Capita DSTM Expenditures (1
Plus: Selected Wrolesale (Computer/Office Supplies) (2
Total Per Capita DSTM Expend~ures
Source:
1)
'}
3)
urbanMelricsinc
Estimated based on Statistics Canada, Retail Trade (Publication 63-0(5) and Monthly Retail Trade data
Estimeted based on Statistics Canada, Wholesale Trade (special tabulation).
Based on the income relationship between the Province and Study Area residents using the OSTM regression equation of y" 40 + O.6(x) where x is the
inCOl1le index. Rounded to the nearest $500. Forecasl to inCf8ase in real terms at a rate rJ 1.5% per year (not COI1lpOJnded)
Estimated based an evaluation of the survey results, lhe provincial average and knowledge of the local market
4)
TabIe4.D.1 Is)
CLARlNGTON
SCENARIO D. 1 ($)
NON DEPARTMENT STORE DSTM WARRANTED SPACE ANAl. YSJ5 IS MIllions)
2003 DolUtrs
~
Non-Departmenl Store OSTM Potential ($Millions)
Clarington Share (%) (1
Clarington SIlare ($)
Less: EffectiveCompetitiOl1
Resiooal Potentiallrom Clarington Residents
2003 2005 2001 2008 200. 201. 2013 2018
$208.8 $227.0 $243.4 $239.8 $249.0 $258.4 $291.0 $321.8
34.2% 34.2% 42.5% 48.5% 50.0% 52.5% 53.5% 53.5%
$71.4 $77.6 $103.4 $116.3 $124.5 $135.7 $155.7 $172.2
$71.4 $71.4 $71.4 $71.4 $71.4 $71.4 $71.4 $71.4
NlA $6.2 $32.0 $449 $53.1 $64.3 $643 $100.8
PROPOSED NON..oEPARTMENT STORE DSTM SPACE
West Diamond & Plavers . Loblaw. OST'" ComDOnantiOther Ancillarv DSTM SDaCe 0 "',100 46.800 ...... 40,'" ......
SalesfSq. Ft GLA $0 $310 $315 '320 '335 '300
Total Sales Volume $0.0 $14.5 $14.7 $15.0 $157 $16.8
Less: lnflow@ 30% (2 $0.0 $4.' $4" $4.5 $47 $5.0
Total Sales Required from Claringlon Residents 0.0 10.1 10.3 10.5 11.0 11.8
West Diamond & Plavers . Lob18ws ElCOlU\SionIRelocatlon la.....me DSTMI 0 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000
Sales/Sq. Ft. GLA $0 $310 $315 $320 $335 $360
Total Sales Volume $0.0 $9.3 $9.5 $9.6 $10.1 $10.8
Less lnnow@ 30% (2 $0.0 $2.8 $2.9 $2' $3.0 $3.2
Total Sales Required from Claringlon Residents 00 .5 , .7 71 7'
Clarlnoton Place Exoan.ion 11,100 81,100 81,toO 81,100 81,toO 81,SlOO
SaleslSq Ft GLA $275 $285 '290 $295 $310 '34<)
Total Sales Volume $22.5 $23.3 $23.8 $24.2 $25.4 $27.8
Less: Inf\oN@ 30% (2 $6.8 $7.0 $7.1 $7.3 $7.6 $a3
Total Sales Required from Clarington Residents 15.7 16.3 16.7 16.9 17.8 19.5
!2w!l ",000 8~000 65,000 65,000 ",000 65,000
SalesfSq. Ft.GLA $2'0 $270 3275 $280 '300 $320
Total Sales Volume $16.9 $17.6 $179 $18.2 $19.5 $20.8
Less: Inflow@ 30% (2 $5.1 $53 $5.4 $5.5 $59 $8.2
Total Sales Required from Clarington Residents 11.8 12.3 12.5 12.7 13.6 14.6
Clarlnaton Centre . Loblaws RelenanUna 0 0 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000
SalesJSq. Ft GLA $0 $0 $290 3295 $310 '34<)
Total Sales Volume $0.0 $0.0 $11.6 $11.8 $12.4 $13.6
Less: Innow@ 30% (2 $0.0 $0.0 $3.5 $3.5 $37 $4.1
Total Sales Required from Claringtoo Residents 00 0.0 1 8.3 7 95
Other Bowmanvllle . Local Central Area. 1MOO 15,000 15,000 15,000 1~000 16,000
Sales/Sq. Fl. GLA $200 $210 $215 $220 $230 $250
Total Salas Volume $3.0 $3.2 $3.2 $3.3 $35 $3.8
Less: Inflow@ 15% (2 $0.5 $05 10.5 105 $05 10.6
Total Sales Required from Claringlon Residents 25 27 .7 .8 3.0 .2
V.llant. Courtlce Main Central Area . 0 0 80,000 75,000 75,000
SaleslSq. F1. GLA 10 $0 $265 $270 $280 '300
Total Sales Volume 100 $0.0 $0.0 $16.2 $21.0 $22.5
Less: Inflow@ 50% (2 10.0 $00 $0.0 $a1 $10.5 $11.3
Total Sales Required from Clarir'lgton Residents .0 .0 0 1 10.5 11.2
Newcastle Villaae 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000
SalesfSq. Ft. GLA $200 $210 3215 '220 $230 '250
Total Sales Volume $20 $2.1 $2.2 $2.2 $2.3 $25
Less lnflow@ 15% (2 $0.3 10.3 $03 103 $03 $04
Total Sales Required from Clarington Residents 1 1.8 " 1.. .0 1
contin
Table4-D-1 (8) conijnued
CURINGTON
SCENARIO D - 1 (a)
NON DEPARTMENT STORE DSTM WARRANTED SPACE ANAlYSIS 1$ Millions)
2003 Dollars
20.7
2008
200.
2010
2013
2016
Total Clarington - ProposedlPotential Designated Non-Departmenl Store DSTM Space (Net) 171,900 248700 288,700 348 700 383700 383,700
TOTAL SALES - PropcisedlDesignaled Non-Department Store DSTM Space ($ Millions) $44.4 $70.0 $82,9 $100.5 $109,9 $118.6
Average Sales Per Square Feet - Proposed $260 $280 $285 $290 $300 $325
Less: TOTAL Wholesale Trade (if WMC) $0.' $0.' $00 $0,0 $00 $0.0
Less: TOTAL ESTIMATED INFLOW SALES" ProposedlOesignated Non-Department Slore DSTM Space
($MiIIiOlls) $12.7 $20.3 $24,1 $32.6 $36.2 $39.1
Average Inflow 29% 29% 29% 32% 33% 33%
A TOTAL REQUIRED FROM CLARINGTON RESIDENTS $31.7 $49.7 $58,8 $67.9 $737 $79.5
B, TOTAL NON-DEPARTMENT STORE RESIDUAL POTENTIAL AVAILABLE $32,0 $449 $53.1 $643 $84.3 $100.8
TOTAL SALES TRANSFERS REQUIRED (A. LESS B.) none $4.' $5.7 $3.6 none none
NET ADDITIONAl RESIDUAL POTENTIAL FOR EXISTING /OTHER FUTURE PROPOSED SPACE (4 $0.3 none none "~. $10.8 $21.3
EXISTING ClARlNGTON NON-DEPARTMENT STORE DSTM SPACE:
Sales from Claringlon Residents ($ Millions) (,neluding add'l residual I 571.4 $71.7 $66,6 $65.7 $67,8 $82.0 $92.7
Less: Sales Required from Existing Ciarington DSTM Stores for Can.
Tire expanSion (see Table 1-0-1 (s)) $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0
Less: S8les Required from Existing Clerington DSTM stores for 12.3 '22
proposed Home Impr. Centres (500 Table 2-0-1 (5)) $0.0 $1.9 $2.0 $2.2 $2.3
Net Sales from Clarington Residents ($Millions) $71.4 $69.8 $64.6 $63.4 $65.6 $79.7 $90.5
Plus: Estimaled Inflow 32.3% (2 $34.1 $33,3 $30.8 $302 $31,3 $38,0 $432
TOTAL SALES $105.5 $103,1 $95.4 $936 $96,9 $117.7 $133.7
Total Sq Ft GLA 460,900 460,900 460,900 460,900 460,900 480,900 460,900
Existing Sales Per Square Feet GLA (3 $230 $225 $20. $:205 $210 $255 $280
Chanoe in Total Sales From Exislino Lellel -2% -10% -11% "'% 12% 27%
Source:
1)
'I
3)
4)
urbanMetricsinc
Based on the results of the teiephone consumer survey (2003)
urbanMetrics inc, estimate based on licence plate surveys and the localionltype of proposed/existing space
Rounded to 100 nearest the nearest $5 per square foot
Excluding any additional residual potential raquiredfrom other store Iypes analyzed
Table5-0.1 (a)
CLARINGTON
SCENARIO D - 1 (5)
DEPARTMENT STORE DSTM WARRANTED SPACE AND IMPACT ANALYSIS ($ Millions)
2003
'005
2007
2008
2009
2010
2013
2016
Clarlncton
Department Store Expend~ures
ClaringlonShare (%)(1
Claringlon Share ($)
Less' Effective Competition
$75.3
170%
$12.8
$128
$81.9
170%
$13,9
$128
$87.7
170%
$149
$128
$102.8
50,0%
$51.4
$128
$106,7
50.0%
$53,4
$128
$1107
50.0%
$55,4
$128
$118.9
50.0%
$595
$128
$131.4
50.0%
$657
$128
Residual Potenoal from Claringlon Residents NlA $11 $2,1 $38.6 $40.6 $426 $46,7 $52.9
PROPOSED DEPARTMENT STORE
Proposed Wal-Mart (Phase 1 and Phase 2 Expansion) Square Feet GLA 0 151,000 151,000 151,000 151,000 151,000
Wal-Mart Departmenl Slore Sales Per Square Foot $0 $400 $415 $430 $450 $500
Total Estimated Sales Volume $0,0 $60,4 $62.7 $64.9 $68.0 $75,5
Less: Inflow@ 30% (2 $0.0 $18,1 $18.8 $19.5 $20,4 $22,7
Total Sales Required from Clarington Residents $0.0 $423 $43,9 $45.4 $47,6 $528
TOTAL RESIDUAL SALES AVAILABLE FROM CLARINGTON RESIDENTS $2.1 $38.6 $40,6 $42.6 $4tH $529
Sales Transfers Required from Ex.isting Clarington Zellers none $3.7 $3.3 $2.8 .... none
NET ADDITIONAL RESIDUAL FOR OTHER CLARINGTON PROPOSEDfDESIGNA TED SPACE (4 $2.1 "~. none none None $0.1
EXISTING CLARINGTON DEPARTMENT STORE DSTM SPACE:
Sales from Clarington Residents ($ Millions) $128 $14.9 $91 $9,5 $10.0 $11.9 $12,9
Lass: Sales Required from Existing CI8fington Dept. Store for Can. T"
expansion (see Table 1-0-1 (s)) $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0
Lass: Sales Required from Existing Clarington Dept. store for proposed ~0.2
Home Imp. Centres (see Table 2-D-1 (s)) $0.0 $0.2 $0.2 $0.2 $0.2 $0.2
Net Sales from Clarington Residents ($Millions) $12.8 $14.7 $8.9 $9.3 $9.8 $11.7 $12.7
Plus: Estimated Inflow 30% (2 $5.5 $63 $3.8 $40 $42 $5.0 $5.4
TOTAL SALES $18.3 $21.0 $12.7 $133 $140 $16,7 $18,1
Tolal Sq Ft GLA 90,000 95,600 95,800 95,600 95,600 95,600 95,600
Existing Sales Per Square Feet GLA (3 120. 1220 $135 1140 $145 $175 1190
Cha",'~ in TOTAL Sales From Existin'" Levels m -34% ~,% -29"1. -15% -7%
Source urbanMetricsinc
1) Based on the results of the telephone consumer survey (2003).
2) Inflow eslimated based on the results of the licence plate survey conducl:ed in 2003 at Clarington Centre
3} Rounded to Ihe nearest $5 per square foot gross leasable area
4) Excluding anyaddrtional residual potential required from olhersto re tjpes analyzed
SCENARIO D.1 (s)
DEPARTMENT STORE ANALYSIS
S-s/tlvlty Test
Department Store Share of TOTAL DSTM
2003 2008 2_ 2010 2013 2016
26.5% 30-'" 30.0% 30.0% 21.0% 21.0%
$400 $415 $430 $450 $500
17% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50%
$205 $135 $140 $145 $175 $190
17% 51% 51% 51% 51% 51%
$205 $150 $155 $165 $190 $210
17% 52% 52% 52% 52% 52%
$205 $165 $170 $180 $210 $230
Wal-Mart Sales Per Square Foot
ScenariO 0-1 {s) Clarington Share
Zellers Sales Per Square Foot
SenSitivity Tests:
Clarington Share
Zellers Sales Per Square Fool
Claringlon Share
Zellers Sales Per SQuare Foot
Zelle....
2002
2003
2004
...erage
$
$
$
,..
180
158
154
uars Foot an
Source Based on Hoc. 2004 AnnL.lalFinancialRerx>~
SOURCE: urbanMelrics inc
TABLE6-D-1(s)
CLARfNGTON
SCENARIO D -11&1: NON-DEPARTMENT STORE OSTM IMPACT ANALYSIS
Total Support
From %Chan~in
Clarlngton % Distribution Sales/Sq. TOTAL Sales
20030011011'$ Resldelltsl1 -Clarington Plus Inflow 12 TOTALSALES Sq.Ft. Fom from Existing
I 2003 I ($Mlllions) (Est.) ($MlIllons) (Rounded)
Bowmanvilkl Urban PlY
Bowmanvllle East Main Central Area - Bowmanville Mall $27.3 38,2% 25,0% '364 67.600 ,,",0
Other Bowmanville East Main Central Area $11.2 157% 250% $149 106,000 $140
Bowmanville West Main Central Area - Clarington Centre $6.5 '" 30,0% $9,3 27,700 $335
Other Bowmanv,1e I." 6,0% 15,0% $5.1 42300 $120
Total Bowmanville 93 69,0% 25,0"10 $65.7 243.600 $270
Courtica/Othrw"lOIClarinolon
Total West Clarington, Including Courtice and Former Darlington TP $16.7 23.4% 50.0% $33.4 lBO.700 $185
EaatClllorinmon
Tolal East CJaringlon, Including Newcastle Village, Orono, Former Clark TP $55 7.7% 15.0% $6' 36.600 $180
TOTAL CLARINGTQN $71.5 100.0% 32,3% ".... ...,... ....
TOTAL OUTSIDE $137.3
TOTAL, ALL LOCATIONS $208.8
I lIHIll I
Bow-man"UIeUrbanArea
Bowmanville Easl Main Central Area - Bowmanvilie Mall $246 21.5% 25,0% $32.B 67,600 "" -10%
Other Bowmanville East Main Central Area $9,9 8.7% 25.0% $13.2 106,000 $125 -11%
Bowmarwllle West Main CeI1tral Area - Claringlon Centre ,se 5.1% 30.0% '" 27,700 $295 -12%
Other Bowmanville $39 3.4% 15.0% '" 42.300 $110 -10%
TOIai Bowmanville $44,1 36.6% 24.9% $58,8 243.600 $240 -11%
Courtic..IOlherWlllstCI~rinaton
Total West CleringtM, Including Courtk:e and Formar Darling/on TP $15.3 13.4% SO,O% $30.6 180,700 $170 -6%
EastClarlnaton
Total East Claringlnn, Including Newcastle W/age, Orono, Former Clark TP $52 4,5% 150"10 $6.1 36.600 $165 ~"
Sub-Tota/&/stllJfl $lU.6 32.4% $95.5 -,"", Utl5 ~10%
ProaosedlDAsionated Sn.a.... In Clarlnaton W.7 43.5% 29.0% $70.0 248.700 $280 M
TOTAL CURINGTON INet of Transfel'$10 HOmllllmprov.) $114.3 100.0% 30.1% $165.5 101,tiOO $235
TOTAL OUTSIDE $UJ,~
TOTAL, ALL LOCATIONS (net of Tran,fellllo HOmlllmprov.) $237.6
I 2D10 I
Bowman"III11l11m"n Arllla
Bowmanville East Main Central Area _ Bowmanvile Mall $24.9 187% 25.0% $33,3 67,600 $495 ~9%
Other Bowmanville East Main Central Area $10.1 7.5% 250% $13,4 106.000 $125 -10%
Bowmanville West Main Centritl Area - CtaringlOn Centre $5,9 4.4% 30,0"/. $8A 27.700 $305 -10%
Other Bowmanville $39 3,0% 15,0"10 '''' 42300 $110 -10%
TotaJBowmanvilm $44,8 336% 249% $59.7 243,600 $245 ~9%
COllrticAlOlhlllrWutClarinoton
Tolal West Clllrington, Including C<WrIice and Former Darlington TP $155 11.6% 50.0% $310 180,700 $170 -7%
Ea&tClarinatan
Total East Clarington, Including Newcastle Village, Orono, Former CIBrl< TP $52 3.9% 15.0% $62 36.600 $170 -5%
SlIb-TotaJ ExlstJng $55.6 32.3% ..... 450.900 $210 -8.
ProDOSMI/D&.lonalllld S""c& In ClatlnolOn $67.9 50,9% 32.4% $100.5 348,700 "" "
TOTAL CLARINGTON (Net otTranste... to Homs lmprov.) $133.5 100-0% 32.4" $197.4 - ....
TOTALOUTSlDE $122,7
TOTAL, ALL LOCATIONS (net of Transfers to Homs IlTlJlrov.) $2562
I 2013 I
Bow""'nviII&UrbanAra;,
Bowmanvilie East Main Central Area - Bowmanville Mall $303 19.6% 25.0% $40.4 67,600 '600 11%
Other Bowmanvile East Main Central Area $12,3 8.0% 25.0% $16,4 106.000 $155 10%
Bowmanville West Main Cenlral Area. Claringtlf1 Centre $11 4.7% 30.0% $102 27,700 $310 10%
Other Bowmanviile ".. 31% 15.0% 556 42,300 $130 '"
TotalBowmanville $54.6 356% 249% $726 243,600 '30' 11%
Coortlca/OtherWestClarlnaton
Total Wast Claringlon. Including Caurtice and Former Darlington TP $18,8 12.3% 500010 $37.6 180,700 $210 13%
EastClarinaton
Tolal East CJarlngton, Including Newcastle V'lilage, Orono, Formar Clark TP $83 41% 150% $7.4 36,600 $200 14%
Sub-Totaf&lstfnr/ $lfI.7 32.2% $117.8 460,900 $255 11%
PrODOlledIDM.ionated Soace In Clarinaton $73.7 48.0% 329% $109,9 363,700 $300 "0
TOTAL CLARtNGTON (Net of Transfers 10 Horr.lmprov.~ $153.4 100.0% "'6" ""~ ...,... '275
TOTAL OUTSIDE $135.3
TOTAL, ALL. LOCATIONS (net of Transfer. 10 Home Impro".1 $288.7
SOURCE: urba1Metrics ine
1) Based on telephoneoonsumersurvey
2) urbanMelries estimates based on licence plate and intercept surveyresulls
Table7-D-1Is)
CLARJNGTON
SCENARIO D. 1 (s)
SUPERMARKET WARRANTED SPACE ANALYSIS 1$ Millions}
2003 Dollars '003 200. 2007 2008 '000 2010 ..13 2016
-
Supermarket Expenditure Potential ($ MilDons) $115.8 $123.5 $127.4 $133.0 $1370 $141.0 $152.7 $164.4
ClaringtonShare(%)(1 66.9% 75.0% 750% 75.0% 75.0% 75.0% 75.0% 75.0%
ClaringtonShare($) $77.5 592' $95.6 $99.8 $102.8 $105.8 $114.5 $123.3
less: EffectiveCompelition $77.5 $77.5 $77.5 $77.5 $77.5 $77.5 $77.5 $77.5
Residual Potential from Clarington Residents NJA $15.1 $18.1 $22.3 $25.3 $28.3 $37.0 $45.8
PROPOSEDSUPERMARKET5PACE
.. loblaws . RelocalioniEllpansiOn to Meirus Site - (addilicoal traditional food component) . 35,300 35,300 35,300 35,300 35,300
5alesJ5Q. FI. GLA SO 5475 5400 5405 5500 '''5
ToIal Adclitiooal Sales SO.O $16.8 $16.9 $17.1 $17.7 $18.5
less: Inflow@(2 10% SOO $1.7 $1.7 $1.7 'f,1.B $1.9
Total Sales Required from Clarington Residents SO.O $15.1 $15.2 $15.4 $15.9 $16.6
A. Expansion of A&P, Bowmanv~le Mail 24,000 24,900 24,... 24,900 24,900 2....900
SaleslSQ. Ft GLA 5400 5455 "'0 "'5 '500 $525
Total Additionat Sales $11.2 $11.3 $12.0 $12.1 $12.5 $13.1
Less: Inflow@(2 10% $1.1 $1.1 $1.2 $1.2 $1.3 $1.3
Total Sales ReqUired from Clarington Residents $10.1 $10.2 $10.8 $10.9 $11.2 $11.8
TOTAL SALES REQUIRED FROM CLARINGTON RESIDENTS $10.1 $25.3 $26.0 $26.3 $27.1 $28.4
Total Residual Sales Potential Available from Clarington Residents $18.1 $22.3 $25.3 $28.3 $37.0 $45.8
Sales Transfers ReqUired from Existing Clarington Supermarkets .$s.o $3.0 $0.7 none non. none
Net Additional Residual Potential Available for Oll1er Supermarkets 0'"'' ~. 0"'" $2.0 $9.9 $17.4
EXISTING CLARlNGTON SUPERMARKET SPACE:
Sales from Claringlon Residents ($ Millions) (including add'1 resi $77.5 $85.5 $74.5 $76.8 $79.5 $87.4 $94.9
Plus: Estimaled Inflcm@198%(4 $19.1 $21.1 $18.4 $19.0 $19.6 $21.6 $23.4
TOTAL SALES $96.6 $106.6 $92.9 $95.8 $99.1 $109.0 $118.3
Tolal5q Fl GLA 171,100 177,100 177,100 177,100 177,100 177,100 177,100
Existing Sales Per SQuare Feet GLA (3 .... "DO '52' .... .... "15 .."
Change in Total Sales From Existing Level 10.3% -39% -0.9% 2.6% 12.6% 22.5%
SOURCE: urbanMetrics Jnc
11 Year 2003 based on lt1eresulls oflheteleohonesuf'lev.
21 urbanMelricsinc. estimate
31 Rounded to the nearest $5 oer-sauare foot
4) urtlanMetrics inc.eslimate basad on Ihe licence plate survey results and telephone survey resUlts
ATTACHMENT 7
Z
" Z
.... 0
D.a:::i=
...Jo(.)
,,"-'"
'" '"
1-1-1-
"0.,
WZZ
o 0
i5 0
o
~
.
.
;:-1I
'.
.
.
.
':..
.
!
I
~i
}.;
.~ ,
I .
. !
. . -
I.H I !in. ;
!~! .,,! :l! Ji'j
';1 iii' =:' 'd
~ !jI 1111 !~! 1111
ill! Ib! III Iii!