PI" RECOMMENDATION REPORT Application to Amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-Law KLM Planning Partners Inc. - BRASUN DEVELOPMENTS C/O

Transcription

1 BRAMPTON PI" Report Planning, Design and brampton.ca FlOWef City Development Committee Committee of the Council of Date: February 22, 2013 The Corporation of the City of Brampton Files: Subject: Contact: C05E RECOMMENDATION REPORT Application to Amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-Law KLM Planning Partners Inc. - BRASUN DEVELOPMENTS C/O METRUS DEVELOPMENT INC. (to redesignate two portions of the site from "District Retail" to permit residential townhouses) Part of Lots 13 & 14, Concession 5, East of Hurontario Street Ward: 9 Allan Parsons, Manager, Planning Design and Development Department Overview: This report recommends refusal of the proposal, as submitted, for 432 townhouse units (446 units originally proposed) on two portions of the currently designated and zoned "District Retail" site. Staff are recommending the removal of the 99 townhouse units proposed (113 units originally proposed) on northerly portion of the site (1.67 ha./4.13 ac), and replacing these with a public park, with play facilities and water features, and community library, with accessory day care, seniors meeting centre and retail uses. This recommendation is to address the community impact concerns raised by the area residents. Staff's recommendation for the approval of the balance of the proposed townhouses is contingent upon the applicant providing financial contributions and a gratuitous land dedication towards the delivery of a public park and community library facility. The townhouses proposed for the easterly portion of the site (333 units) are supported through technical analysis and Official Plan policy. The approved traffic study concludes that the development of part of the site for townhouses will result in less traffic during peak afternoon periods than if the entire site was developed for commercial uses. Townhouses on the easterly portion of the subject site will create a buffer for the existing houses on the east side of Sunny Meadow Blvd from the soon to be developed commercial plaza. The already permitted commercial development that is to be constructed next year will provide a full range of uses for the area residents, consistent with what is expected of a District Retail site. The applicant has informed that

2 pi-z tenancies are confirmed for the following uses: supermarket (Sobey's), banks (Royal Bank, Scotia Bank, TD, BMO), pharmacy (Shoppers Drug Mart), restaurants (McDonald's), offices, medical office, dentist, clothing stores, and service establishments (i.e. hairdresser, dry cleaning establishment); and is expected for a fitness centre. The applicant has appealed this application and an OMB pre-hearing conference took place on February 19, A further pre-hearing conference is scheduled for June 6, 2013 and a three week hearing has been scheduled to begin on September 23, This report recommends that staff attends these OMB proceedings to defend Council's position and City policies. Recommendations: 1. THAT the report from Allan Parsons, Manager, Planning Design and Development Department, entitled "RECOMMENDATION REPORT," dated February 22, 2013 to the Planning, Design and Development Committee Meeting of March 4,2013, re: Application to Amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-Law, KLM Planning Partners Inc. - BRASUN DEVELOPMENTS C/O METRUS DEVELOPMENT INC., Ward: 9, File: C05E be received; 2. THAT staff be authorized to attend OMB proceedings associated with the applicant's appeal of the subject application to defend Council's position and City policies. 3. THAT the application as submitted be refused, and the Planning, Design and Development Committee and Council give consideration to approve an amendment to the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, and staff be directed to prepare appropriate documents for consideration by City Council, in general accordance with the following: a) THAT Schedule 'A2 (Retail Structure)' of the Official Plan be amended to remove the 'District Retail' designation from the two portions of this property that are subject to this application. b) THAT the Sandringham-Wellington Secondary Plan be amended to change the land use designations as follows: i) the easterly portion of the subject site, as identified on Map 1, is to be redesignated to permit the development of townhouse units with policies to address the following requirements: limitations on the maximum residential density that is to be permitted on the site, in conformity with the proposal. upscale architectural treatment on all units facing public roadways,

3 upscale landscape and hardscape design to be used in prominent areas of the site, including areas adjacent to and visible from public roads, with superior treatment used at principle entries to the site. ii) The northerly portion of the subject site, as identified on Map 1, is to be redesignated from 'District Commercial' to 'Neighbourhood Park'. iii) The existing "Institutional (Library)" designation on the subject site is to be relocated to the northerly portion of the subject site, as identified on Map 1. c) THAT the Zoning By-law be amended to change the land use designations as follows: i) the easterly portion of the subject site, as identified on Map 1, is to be amended to permit townhouse units, specifically 'stacked' and 'back to back' townhouses, and subject to the following specific requirements: 1) Maximum number of units: 333 2) Minimum landscape buffer: 3 metres along the Sandalwood Parkway frontage 5 metres along the Sunny Meadow Boulevard frontage. 3) Maximum building height: 10.5 metres ii) the northerly portion of the subject site, as identified on Map 1, is to be amended to permit a public park with play facilities and water features, and community uses, including a library and accessory daycare, seniors meeting centre, and retail uses. THAT prior to the adoption of the Official Plan amendment and the enactment of the Zoning By-law amendment, the owner shall convey approximately 1.28 hectares (3.18 acres) of the subject property to the City for parkland dedication and community service purposes, in accordance with the City's parkland dedication policies and, in addition, provide a gratuitous conveyance of 0.4 hectares (1 acre) of land towards the public park, and, further, the owner agree to provide a minimum financial contribution of $300,000 towards the delivery a community library facility, to the satisfaction of the Commissioner of Planning, Design and Development. THAT prior to the adoption of the Official Plan amendment and the enactment of the Zoning By-law amendment, revisions shall be completed to the Urban Design Brief dated July 2011, as submitted by MBTW / Watchom Architects to recognize the recommended proposal to the satisfaction of the Commissioner of Planning,

4 "Dl-M Design and Development. The Urban Design Brief shall outline development principles for the subject property which will generally include: a) The use of high quality architectural materials and superior design for all residential units facing a public road. b) The use of high quality landscaping materials including masonry columns and decorative fencing in proximity to public roads, with superior treatment used at principle entrances to the site. 6. THAT prior to the adoption of the Official Plan amendment and the enactment of the Zoning By-law amendment, written confirmation shall be received from the Trustee that the applicant has signed the applicable Landowners Cost Share agreement and has fulfilled all obligations of the agreement. 7. THAT prior to the adoption of the Official Plan amendment and the enactment of the Zoning By-law amendment, revisions shall be completed to the Noise Attenuation Study, as prepared by Jade Acoustics, dated January 17,2013, to recognize the recommended proposal to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering and Development Services. 8. THAT prior to the adoption of the Official Plan amendment and the enactment of the Zoning By-law amendment, revisions shall be completed to the Traffic Impact Study, as prepared by Cole Engineering, dated July 2011, to recognize the recommended proposal to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering and Development Services. 9. THAT prior to the adoption of the Official Plan amendment and the enactment of the amending Zoning By-law, the owner shall enter into a rezoning agreement with the City that shall include the following: i. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a site development plan, a landscape plan, a grading and drainage plan, elevation drawings and an engineering and servicing plan shall be approved by the City, and proper securities shall be deposited with the City to ensure the implementation of these plans in accordance with the City's Site Plan Review Process. ii. iii. Prior to the issuance of site plan approval, the recommendations of an approved Noise Impact Study shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Commissioner of Planning Design and Development. An amended noise impact study shall be completed at the request of the Director of Engineering and Development, if required, to identify noise mitigation measures required for the specific type of uses that are intended to develop on the commercial portion of the subject. Prior to the issuance of site plan approval, a preliminary homebuyer's information map is to be approved by the City and shall be posted in a prominent location in each sales office where dwellings are being offered 4

5 T)I~S~ for purchase and sale. This map shall contain the applicable information prescribed within the City of Brampton List of Standard Conditions for Residential Plans of Subdivision as it pertains to Sales Office Homebuyer's Information Maps, including City approved street names and the possible temporary location of Canada Post mailboxes, including the number and duration. 10.THAT staff be directed to initiate a Request for Expression of Interest (RFEI) for the delivery of a public park with play facilities and water features, and a library with accessory daycare, seniors meeting centre and retail uses to be located on the northerly portion of the subject site, as identified on Map 1, with the construction anticipated to commence in 2014/ THAT the Site Plan Approval process shall occur in consultation with the area councillors and select members of the public. 12.THAT the decision of approval for the subject application be considered null and void and a new development application be required, unless a zoning by-law is passed within 18 months of the Council approval of this decision. BACKGROUND Previous Development Application (File: C05E13.006) In 2008 an application by the current owner of the subject property was approved by the City to designate and zone the entirety of the subject property to permit district retail uses. That application also: redesignated a small portion of the site from 'Highway Commercial" to "District Commercial", increased the maximum amount of retail gross leasable floor area (GLFA) permitted on the property (from 27,950sq.m./300,000sq.ft. to 46,450sq.m./500,000sq.ft.), increased the range of permitted commercial uses (to include retail warehouses uses), and deleted an east-west 'Collector Road' designation that divided the property. Since that time, only a small portion of the subject site has been developed. Specifically, the portion of the site located at the north-east corner of the Bramalea Road and Sandalwood Parkway is developed for a gas bar/service station and car wash (Site Plan File: SP ).

6 DM* Current Proposal The subject application was submitted in July 2011 by Brasun Developments (c/o Metrus Development Limited) and proposes to amend the Official Plan, Secondary Plan and Zoning By-law to resdesignate two portions of the subject property from district retail use permissions to allow the development of 432 townhouse units (446 units originally proposed). No changes are proposed to the remainder of the subject property, which is to maintain the existing commercial use designation. That portion of the site is expected to develop with a commercial centre next year and will include a full range of uses for the area residents, consistent with what is expected of a District Retail site. The commercial development will be 8.99 hectares (22.2 acres) in size and will develop with approximately 20,630 sq.m. (222,100 sq.ft.) of commercial gross floor area (GFA). The applicant has informed that tenancies are confirmed for the following uses: supermarket (Sobey's), banks (Royal Bank, Scotia Bank, TD, BMO), pharmacy (Shoppers Drug Mart), restaurants (McDonald's), offices, medical office, dentist, clothing stores, and service establishments (i.e. hairdresser, dry cleaning establishment). The applicant expects to be able to confirm a tenant for a fitness centre soon. The portions of the property to be redesignated for townhouse uses are as follows (please refer to Map 1): Northerly portion ha. (4.13 ac.) in size - located along Bramalea Road. Easterly portion ha. (12.53 ac.) in size - located along Sunny Meadow Boulevard. The applicant submits that although an increase in the amount of commercial floor area was previously considered to be appropriate (as approved through file C05E in 2008), the market demand for commercial uses in this area have changed and there is now insufficient demand to develop the entirety of this 15.7 hectare (38.8ac.) site for commercial uses. This rationale stems from a new district retail centre that is now being developed on a site located to the north of the subject property, at the south-east corner of Mayfield Road and Bramalea Road (see Map 4). That development will deliver approximately 23,400 sq.m (251,800sq.ft.) of gross floor area. A Walmart store, which will occupy a 14,248 m2 (153,377 ft2) building, will be an "anchor" tenant on that site.

7 Dl-T- Public Meeting A public meeting was held on November 7, 2011, however, due to the significant number of residents that attended the meeting for this application, the Committee deferred the meeting to allow a larger venue to be used to better accommodate the attendees. A special public meeting was held on January 18, 2012 at the Brampton Soccer Centre. Over 800 members of the public attended the meeting. Many members of the public spoke at the meeting about concerns relating to the application. Attendees of the public meeting were also encouraged to complete public comment sheets that were supplied by Planning staff. Through the resident presentations and comment sheets, a variety of concerns were identified which include, but were not limited to the following: increased traffic congestion, the loss of retail and commercial services, insufficient school facilities to accommodate the proposed new residential uses, health and safety issues, and lost tax revenues to the City. Please refer to a comprehensive summary of the issues identified through that public meeting in Appendix 8 of this report. Appeal to Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) On June 13, 2012 the City received Notices of Appeal to the OMB from legal counsel for Brasun. Brasun has appealed pursuant to Sections 17(40) and 34(11) of the Planning Act. On February 19, 2013 staff from Legal Services and Planning Design and Development attended an OMB pre-hearing conference for this matter. As there was no Council position on this application in time for the pre-hearing conference several preliminary procedural matters were dealt with as follows: o Numerous residents in the vicinity of this site attended and approximately 25 indicated they wanted to be participants at the OMB proceedings. As participants they will be allowed to make submissions at the hearing, but unlike parties they will not be entitled to cross examine witnesses or bring forward any expert evidence. o It was confirmed that at this time only the City and the applicant are parties at the hearing. o A further pre-hearing conference is scheduled for June 6, 2013 where an issues list will be discussed and finalized.

8 Dl-* o A three week hearing was scheduled which will begin on September 23, This report recommends that staff attends future OMB proceedings associated with the applicant's appeal of the subject application. Planning. Design and Development (PDD) Committee Meeting - Special Meeting Due to the significant public interest that is associated with this development application, Planning staff have completed additional steps towards notifying residents of the March 4,2013 PDD Committee Meeting. In addition to providing a "Public Meeting Follow-Up" letter to all individuals that have provided their names and addresses in association with this application, staff have also provided notice of this meeting within the following newspapers: Brampton Guardian. Weekly Voice. Hamdard Weekly - Notice translated into Punjabi. Punjab Starr- Notice translated into Punjabi. Parvasi - Notice translated into Punjabi. Punjabi Post - Notice translated into Punjabi. PROPOSAL The subject property is ha. (38.8 ac.) in size. This application proposes to redesignate two portions of the subject property (refer to Map 1) to permit townhouse development as follows: The northerly portion of the site (1.67ha. / 4.13ac.) is proposed to develop with 99 'stacked' townhouse units (113 units as originally proposed). The easterly portion of the site (5.07 ha. /12.53 ac.) is proposed to develop with 333 'stacked' and 'back to back' townhouses. Cumulatively, the portions of the subject property that are to be redesignated for townhouse purposes are 6.74 ha. (16.6 ac.) in size.

9 DH No redesignation is proposed for the remaining portion of the subject property (8.99 ha. / 22.2 ac), which the applicant intends to develop for district retail purposes, in conformity with the existing land use designations. Approximately 20,630 sq.m. (222,110 sq.ft.) of commercial gross floor area could be developed on the portion of the site that is proposed to develop for commercial purposes. Other details related to the proposal are as follows: A maximum building height of 3 storeys is proposed for the townhouse units. Please note that for zoning purposes, however, a four storey structure must be referenced because the lowest floor of the unit is located mainly below grade. The townhouse proposal would result in a total net residential density of 64 units per hectare (26 units per acre). The densities that are applicable to each of the two portions of the subject property that are to be redesignated are as follows: Northerly portion units per hectare (27.3 units per acre). Easterly portion - 65 units per hectare (26.5 units per acre). Property Description and Surrounding Land Use The subject property has the following characteristics (See Map 2: Location Map): the portion of the property located at the intersection of Sandalwood Parkway and Bramalea Road is developed with a gas station. The remainder of the site is vacant. the total site has an approximate frontage of 550m on Bramalea Road, 400m on Sandalwood Parkway, and 280m on Sunny Meadow Boulevard. The portions of the subject property subject to the residential redesignation have the following road frontages: o northerly portion - 20 metres frontage on Bramalea Road. o easterly portion -190 metres frontage on Sandalwood Parkway, and 280 metres frontage on Sunny Meadow Boulevard.

10 DHO Concept Site Plan (Figure 1) 1.67 Ha. (4.13 Ac«. 99 RESIDENTIAL UNITS A 107 Ha (12.53 Ac«.) 333 RESIDENTIAL UNITS 10

11 PHI Location Map (Figure 2) SUBJECT LAND ^ PORTION OF SITE PROPOSED FOR TOWNHOUSES A Aerial " '/ Photo W:'ZM (Figure 3) 11

12 Vr\1 Surrounding Land Uses: North: South: East: West: Valleyland, beyond which are existing residential uses (townhouses and single-detached units), and Stanely Mills Junior Elementary Public School; Sandalwood Parkway, beyond which are residential uses (semi-detached and single-detached dwellings); Sunny Meadow Boulevard, beyond which are residential (semi-detached and single-detached dwelling units), and a retirement home (Leisureworld Caregiving Centre) at the northeast corner of Sandalwood Parkway East and Sunny Meadow Boulevard; and Bramalea Road, beyond which are existing residential uses (semi detached dwellings and townhouses). Please refer to the following image which depicts the land uses that are adjacent to the subject site. Adjacent Land Uses (Figure 4) SUBJECT LANDS Id.

13 PI-15 PLANNING ANALYSIS SUMMARY The proposal for the 432 townhouse unit development (446 units originally proposed) on two portions of the subject property is based upon the applicant's opinion that there is a reduced demand for commercial development on the subject property. Specifically, they believe that the reduced market demand is caused by the development of another large scale commercial centre located to the north of the subject site. Official Plan Policies The City's Official Plan including the Growth Plan policies identifies growth areas in the City to massing and density targets for sections of the City in order to accommodate intensified forms of development and additional residential units. Although the subject site is not in a growth area, the Official Plan does allow for additional residential development outside of growth areas, subject to specific criteria. These criteria assess whether the development: contributes to the City's overall housing mix, has access to public roads and transit, is compatible with adjacent land uses, protects environmentally significant areas. When this application is assessed against these criteria, and it is also considered that Bramalea Road is classified in the Official Plan as a 'Primary Transit Corridor', there is merit for some additional residential land use on this property. There is no expressed Official Plan policy basis to oppose additional residential uses in this area. Technical Analysis The proposal has been thoroughly reviewed by Engineering, Urban Design and Traffic experts who have determined that the technical aspects of the plan are supportable. With respect to traffic impacts, an analysis has determined that the development of townhouses on a portion of the subject property will have less of an impact on traffic during afternoon peak periods than if the site were to develop entirely for commercial uses. The School Boards have confirmed that they do not object to this proposal. To increase service levels in this area of the City the Peel District School Board plans to construct a new school on lands located south of Countryside Drive and west of Dixie Road, by They anticipate that the new school will improve service levels throughout this community. Further, the School Board informed that that they are currently reviewing the need to expand schools in this area of the City, the programming of these schools, and the catchment areas for the schools to determine how to improve service levels. 13

14 Dl-Kj Recommendations - Reducing Community Impact To address as much as possible the community impact raised by area residents, within the confines of the planning policy and technical expert evaluation, staff are recommending: refusal of the townhouse development that is proposed specifically for the northerly portion of the subject property - 99 townhouse units (113 units originally proposed), a requirement for the applicant to provide a park and community facility, with provisions to accommodate a library, on the northerly portion of the property (see Map 3), and that the easterly portion of the subject property be permitted to develop with townhouses, subject to: o a maximum of 333 units being permitted, o upscale architectural and landscape treatment on prominent areas of the site. Commercial Function Although this proposal, and the recommendations of this report, will result in a reduction to the amount of land area for commercial purposes, the size of the commercial land parcel that will remain is consistent with the attributes of a 'District Retail' centre as identified by the City's Official Plan. Approximately 9 ha. (22 ac.) of the subject site will remain for commercial development, which would translate into approximately 20,630 square metres (22,100 square feet) of commercial gross floor area (GFA). A commercial site of this size will be sufficient to provide the full range of retail and service commercial uses that are typically provided within district retail centres. The applicant has informed that the following tenancies for the district retail centre are now confirmed: pharmacy (Shoppers Drug Mart), supermarket (Sobeys), banks (Scotia Bank, TD, Royal Bank, BMO), restaurants (McDonald's), office, medical office, clothing stores, and service establishments (i.e. hairdressers, dry cleaning establishment), 14

15 Pl-fS" Two of the buildings that are planned (total GFA of 8,600sq.m/92,500 sq.ft.) will accommodate multiple retail units and will be provided as tenants become available. This staged delivery of commercial GFA represents an opportunity for prospective business owners to secure a location on this site. Conclusion The refusal of the 99 townhouse units (113 units originally proposed) for the northerly portion of the property, and its replacement with a public park and future library, will reduce the community impact of the proposal. The size and extent of the commercial portion of this property will satisfy the retail and commercial service needs of the community. The revisions that are recommended by this report will result in a development that represents good planning. Respectfully submitted: MCIP, RPP /Acting Director, Land Development Service Dan Kraszewski, MCIP, RPP Acting Commissioner, Planning, Design and Development Authored by: Allan Parsons, Manager of Development Services 15

16 T> (a Map 1 - Concept Site Plan Map 2 - Location Map MAPS, DRAWINGS AND APPENDICES Map 3 - Concept Site Plan - Staff Recommended Change to Create Park/Library Map 4 - Proximity of Subject Property to Commercial Centre (including Walmart) to the North May 5 - Existing Townhomes in the Surrounding Area Appendix 1- Official Plan Designations Appendix 1A - Official Plan Schedule A2 - Retail Structure Appendix 2- Secondary Plan Designations Appendix 3- Zoning Designations Appendix 4- Aerial Photo / Land Uses Appendix 5 - Secondary Plan Sub-Area and Location Reference Map Appendix 6 - Secondary Plan Housing Mix Percentage Ranges by Sub-Area Appendix 7 - Detailed Planning Analysis Appendix 8 - Public Meeting Appendix 9 - Results of Application Circulation Appendix 10 - Correspondence Received Appendix 11 - Annual Property Tax Revenue Estimates for Development Scenarios Appendix 12 - Peel District School Board - Proposed 10 year Capital Projects 16

17 PI-IT 1.67 Ha. (4.13 Acs.) 99 RESIDENTIAL UNITS 5.07 Ha. (12.53 Acs.) 333 RESIDENTIAL UNITS H BRAMPTON bmpui FlowerCity PLANNING, DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT MAPI CONCEPT SITE PLAN KLM PLANNING PARTNERS INC. Brasun Developments Inc. Date: Drawn By: CJK CITY FILE: C05E13.007

18 2 Seals 1:50,000 i SUBJECT LAND V///A PORTION OF SITE PROPOSED FOR TOWNHOUSES PROPERTY LINE OPEN SPACE WARD BOUNDARY NOTE: OPEN SPACE IS AN EXTRACT FROM SCHEDULE A (GENERAL LAND USE DESIGNATIONS) FROM THE BRAMPTON OFFICIAL PLAN MAP 2 - LOCATION KLM PLANNING PARTNERS INC. Brasun Developments Inc. SCHOOL CITY FILE: C05E M BRAMPTON I.:..j ;(1_i-l "lb bnnptaua Flower City Drawn By: CJK PLANNING, DESIGN & DEVELOPMENT Scale 1:8,000 Dale:

19 Phil 1.67 Ha. (4.13 Acs.) 99 RESIDENTIAL UNITS MAP 3 & BRAMPTON m' CONCEPT SITE PLAN - Staff Recommended btumpicn. Floweruty Change to Create Park/Library PLANNING, DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT KLM PLANNING PARTNERS (NC. Brasun Developments Inc. Date: Drawn By: CJK CITY FILE: C05E13.007

20 Dl-2o H BRAMPTON br^?to(q Flower City PLANNING, DESIGN &DEVELOPMENT ] f CENTRE (INCLUDING WALMART) TO THE NORTH Drawn By: AH Dalo:?OI3 0??1 MAP 4 - PROXIMITY OF SUBJECT PROPERTY TO COMMERCIAL ^_ Walking distance 1.8 km, 23 mins Driving distance 1.8 km, 2 mins

21 Dl-2 BRAMPTON j f bromploaco Fl0Wei" City I I Subject Property PLANNING, DESIGN & DEVELOPMENT Townhomes (1423) Drawn By: AH Dale: MAP 5 - EXISTING TOWNHOMES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA

22 PI-22. STREAM AVE' EXTRACT FROM SCHEDULE A (GENERAL LAND USE DESIGNATIONS) OF THE CITY OF BRAMPTON OFFICIAL PLAN ] SUBJECT LAND RESIDENTIAL PORTION OF SITE PROPOSED FOR TOWNHOUSES M BRAMPTON \mfkua Flower Gty PLANNING, DESIGNS DEVELOPMENT L Metres APPENDIX 1 >< OFFICIAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS KLM PLANNING PARTNERS INC. Brasun Developments Inc. Drawn By: CJK Dalo: CITY FILE: C05E13.007

23 PI-23 EXTRACT FROM SCHEDULE A2 (RETAIL STRUCTURE) FROM THE DOCUMENT KNOWN AS THE BRAMPTON OFFICIAL PLAN SUBJECT LANDS li BRAMPTON bended Flower City I PLANNING. DESIGN & DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT RETAIL APPENDIX 1A SCHEDULE A2 -RETAIL STRUCTURE X KLM PLANNING PARTNERS INC. Brasun Development Inc. Drawn By. CJK CITY FILE: C05E Date:

24 PI-2H SUBJECT LANDS PORTION OF SITE PROPOSED FOR TOWNHOUSES EXTRACT FROM SCHEDULE SP?8(A) CF THE DOCUMENT KNOWN AS THE SANDRINGHAM WELLINGTON SECONDARY PLAN LEGEND Low Density Residential " -- Medium Density Residential Valleyland Institutional thospltal1chutejt FirBStatioii.Ubniy(D.PoHceSlaHon & Community Club C, Nursing Homo N ) ii District Commercial hc Highway Commercial SS Service Commercial (Office) ] Minor Arterial Road Collector Road ^^! Lands Affected By The New Housing Mix &Density Categories SH BRAMPTON impmui FlowerCity PLANNING. DESIGN ANDDEVELOPMENT APPENDIX 2 SECONDARY PLAN DESIGNATIONS KLM PLANNING PARTNERS INC. Brasun Developments Inc. Dale: Drawn By: CJK CITY FILE: C05E13.007

25 S3 R3E s R3 6-i T7I-2S RIDGE DR o n 0 o 3 7 R1 J 11 > R1C y \ m IZZI Y////\ ' ' ' : ' < "' - -'' SUBJECT LAND SITE PROPOSED FOR TOWNHOUSES RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL INSTITUTIONAL OPEN SPACE APPENDIX 3 m BRAMPTON ZONING DESIGNATIONS hapten Flower City KLM PLANNING PARTNERS INC. PLANNING, DESIGN &DEVELOPMENT Brasun Developments Inc. so 100 Drawn By: CJK Moires Date: CITY FILE: C05E13.007

26 V\-2U SUBJECT LAND OPEN SPACE Air Photo Date: Spring 2012 '/ /A PORTION OF SITE PROPOSED SCHOOL FOR TOWNHOUSES 11 BRAMPTON APPENDIX 4 - AIR PHOTO >< KLM PLANNING PARTNERS INC. hnvkma Flower City Ontario Inc. PLANNING. DESIGN & DEVELOPMENT Drawn By: CJK Date: CITY FILE: C03W03.014

27 Dl-21 SUBJECT LANDS COUNTRYSIDE DRIVE EXTRACT FROM SCHEDULESP2B(B) - SUB-AREA &LOCATION REFERENCE OF THE DOCUMENT KNOWN AS THE SANDRINGHAM-WELLINGTON SECONDARY PLAN LEGEND A1 T1 Sub - Area Reference High Density Residential Designation Location Reference Medium Density Residential Designation Location Reference H BRAMPTON hm&un FlowerCity PUNNING, DESIGN ANDOEVELOPVENT APPENDIX 5 j f SUB-AREA & LOCATION REFERENCE MAP KLM PLANNING PARTNERS INC. Brasun Development Inc. Date: Drawn By: CJK CITY FILE: C05E13.007

28 PI-2S SECONDARY PLAN NUMBER 28 HOUSING MIX PERCENTAGE RANGES BY SUB-AREA (SUB-AREA BOUNDARIES'ARE SHOWN ON SCHEDULE SP28(B)) Housing Density Type Single Family Density 1 0% % % % Sub Area % 6 0% % % % % Total Area 30-48% Semi-Detached Density Mixed Low Density (Sub-Total) 0% 0% % 19-36% 39% 68-76% 72-80% 64-73% 23-42% 76-83% 0% 0% 28-48% 93-95% 19-37% 67-73% 18-35% 61-70% 18-35% 61-71% 17-35% 58-69% Townhouse Density 31-40% 24-32% 20-28% 13-18% 17-24% 9-15% 5-7% 11-16% 11-16% 16-22% 13-20% Cluster Housing & Apartment Density 60-69% 0% 0% 14-13% 0% 85-91% 0% 15-20% 18-24% 13-18% 16-24% AllDensities (Total) 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% (OPA213) (OP93-96) 'Note: Thissame tableis also contained within and forms an Official Partof Chapter21 of Parti V of the Official Plan. Amends Sub-Area 2 density mix. tefta? FlowerCity PLANNING, DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT APPENDIX 6 HOUSING MIX PERCENTAGE RANGES BY SUB-AREA KLM PLANNING PARTNERS INC. Brasun Development Inc. Date: Drawn By: CJK CITY FILE: C05E13.007

29 DI-21 APPENDIX '7' DETAILED PLANNING ANALYSIS Provincial Policy Statement The subject application is consistent with matters of provincial interest as identified in the Provincial Policy Statement. Strategic Plan One aspect of the proposal is not consistent with the City's Strategic Plan. This application proposes an exclusively private access arrangement for the townhouses that are to develop on the northerly portion of the subject property. That access is to be provided over a proposed easement that will be located on a future commercial property, rather than directly from the public road (Bramalea Road). This exclusive private access arrangement creates concerns related to potential future legal matters between the eventual condominium owners of the residential and commercial properties, and its future maintenance. The proposal does not satisfy the City's goal of constructing a road network that provides a high level of service. A shared access arrangement will however be appropriate in conjunction with staff recommended public park and community library facility. A City owned use is not as sensitive from a land use compatibility perspective, and the City has the necessary expertise to ensure the access is managed/maintained appropriately through the execution of mutual use agreements. Official Plan The subject lands are designated 'Residential' on Schedule A - General Land Use Designations of the Official Plan. This designation permits a range of residential dwelling types, including townhouses, as proposed by this application. The Official Plan also applies a sub-designation to the subject property, being 'District Retail', as per Schedule A2 - Retail Structure. Due to the sub-designation, regard is given to Policy 1.4 of the Official Plan which identifies that: all of the Schedules of the Plan must be consulted in order to determine the Official Plan policies that are to apply to a particular area. Schedule "A" identifies the General Land Use Designations of a property and the other Schedules of the Plan should be considered 'overlays' that impose further restrictions or indicate additional detail. In order to accommodate any development of the subject lands for residential uses, as proposed by this application, an amendment to the Schedule A2 of the Official Plan is 17

30 Dl-2 needed to remove the 'District Retail' sub-designation from the two subject portions of this property. Growth Plan Official Plan Amendment (OPA ) The Growth Plan Official Plan Amendment identifies massing and density targets for sections of the City in order to manage growth to build a strong and prosperous City. Sections and of this policy confirms that although the subject property is not located within an 'Urban Growth Area' (such in proximity to a mobility hub, major transit station, or along an intensification corridor), it may develop with residential densities greater than 50 units per hectare, provided the development conforms to applicable criteria. Criteria to be considered include, whether the proposal: contributes to the City's overall housing mix, has access to public roads and transit, is in proximity to supportive land uses, is of a form that is compatible with adjacent land uses, and is setback a sufficient distance from the natural heritage system. Consideration to these criteria, including the Official Plan's classification of Bramalea Road as a "Primary Transit Corridor", result in a determination that the proposal conforms to criteria and the proposed density of 65 units per hectare (26 units per acre) is justified. The proposed residential densities do not conflict with the density policies of the Official Plan. Secondary Plan The two portions of the subject property that are proposed for residential townhouses are currently designated "District Commercial" in the Sandringham-Wellington (Springdale) Secondary Plan (Area 28). This application proposes an amendment to the Secondary Plan to redesignate the northerly and easterly portions of the subject site (see Map 1) to "High Density Residential". Density The "High Density Residential" designation of the Secondary Plan includes policies that contemplate a maximum density of 125 units per hectare (50 units per acre), which significantly exceeds the requested density of 65 units per hectare (26.5 units per acre). If residential is supported, a site-specific reference in the Secondary Plan policy should be created to ensure densities on this site, beyond what is contemplated by this report, are not permitted. 18

31 Dl-2.1 Housing Mix A further amendment to the Secondary Plan is proposed to revise Table 1 of Appendix 'A' which outlines housing mix percentage requirements for sub-areas of the Secondary Plan. The subject lands are contained within Sub-Area 9, as identified by Schedule SP28(B) of the Secondary Plan, which is bound by Bramalea Road to the west, Sandalwood Parkway to the south, Torbram Road to the east, and Countryside Drive to the north (See Appendix 5 and 6). This table identifies that townhouses within Sub-Area 9 should comprise between 11% to 16% of all housing types within this sub-area. Policy of the Secondary Plan identifies that fluctuations to the composition of housing types within any sub-area may be permitted in accordance with market demands provided that the ranges of the policy are respected. The housing mix that would result from the proposal is found to satisfy the requirements of the Secondary Plan without any amendment to Table 1 of Appendix 'A' of the Secondary Plan. Redesignate Northerly Portion of Property This report recommends that the northerly portion of the subject site be conveyed to the City for the purposes of a park and community library use. To accommodate this recommendation amendments to the Secondary Plan would be required to redesignate the subject portion of the site to "Neighbourhood Park" and "Institutional - Library". Zoning The subject property is zoned "Service Commercial - Section 1413 (SC-1413)" by Zoning By-Law , as amended. An amendment to the Zoning By-law is requested for two portions of the subject site (northerly and easterly portions of the site - see Map 1) to accommodate the proposed residential townhouse development. Specific provisions will be included within the Zoning By-law to facilitate the specific types of townhouse units proposed ('stacked' and 'back to back' townhouses), limitthe number of dwellings that can be developed on the property, and limit the height of the dwellings (3 storeys). This report recommends that the townhouses that are proposed for the northerly portion of the subject site (see Map 3) be replaced with a public park and community library facility. To accommodate these public facilities the northerly portion of the property will need to be zoned to a site-specific "Institutional" designation. Land Use In general, the proposed townhouses are compatible with the existing residential nature of this community. The community is made up of detached, semi-detached and townhouse dwellings - please refer to Figure 4, page 11 which includes photographs of adjacent residential uses, and Map 5 which depicts the location of townhouse developments in the community. 19

32 WIT- Specific Land Use Issues: Interface with Public Streets and Adjacent Residential Uses The particular type of townhouse unit that is proposed to be located along the public street edges (Sandalwood Parkway and Sunny Meadow Boulevard) will assist in ensuring the new development will complement the existing residential uses. In particular, the proposed units will be 'dual frontage', having pedestrian entrances facing the public roads, and a secondary entrance (including a garage and amenity area) facing the proposed internal private road. No direct individual driveway access from the townhouse units are proposed along Sandalwood Parkway and Sunny Meadow Boulevard. The proposed residential townhouse units that are proposed for the easterly portion of the subject site will create a suitable transition between the existing low density residential dwellings that front onto the east side of Sunny Meadow Boulevard and the soon to be constructed 'District Retail' uses. The proposed townhouses here will have benefits over the otherwise commercial uses that are currently permitted next to Sunny Meadow Boulevard. In this regard, the townhouses will not have the potential noise that would be associated with commercial loading areas. The townhouses will also have a better general appearance than a commercial development and will avoid lines of sight through to loading and informal outdoor storage areas. Interface Between Proposed Townhouses and District Commercial Uses This application proposes major differences in the type of land use interface that would be provided along the northerly and easterly boundaries of the planned future district commercial development. Along the easterly limit of the commercial site will be a masonry wall that will be a minimum of 2 metres in height. This wall will be designed so that it will contain all the intensive activity that will be associated with the commercial centre (i.e. truck loading, vehicle and truck trips, commercial lighting, noise, inappropriate lines of sight). With the masonry wall, the proposed townhouse development on the east side of the property should not incur nuisances from the commercial site. There will be no openings in the wall to facilitate vehicular access from the commercial property. All vehicle access to this part of the site will be from Sunny Meadow Boulevard. In contrast, the northerly townhouse units, if approved, would not be independent and visually separated from the planned commercial site. No masonry wall could be used to separate the northerly townhouses from the commercial centre because a shared private access driveway is proposed instead (see Figure 5). An independent vehicle access to the proposed townhouses from Bramalea Road is not achievable due to the minimal amount of road frontage that is available to this portion of the site. The interface that the applicant proposes between the residential and commercial uses is not appropriate. Residential uses are inherently sensitive and substantial buffers (i.e. masonry walls) should be used to buffer residential uses from abutting commercial land 20

33 VHZ uses. The proposed shared private access drive that is proposed to serve as an interface between the residential and commercial uses is insufficient to adequately mitigate the commercial centre (i.e. truck and car activity, loading areas, general large scale commercial character). Further, this type of private access arrangement could result in maintenance and access problems between two private groups (residential condominium corporation and the commercial centre owner). The shared private access drive interface is considered to be appropriate if used in conjunction with the staff recommended public park and community library facility. In this regard, the institutional uses will be as sensitive from a land use compatibility perspective, and the City has the expertise necessary to properly manage and maintain the access/interface through mutual access agreements. This report recommends that the proposal to develop townhouses on the northerly portion of the subject property be refused. Shared Access Proposed Between Northerly Townhouses and Commercial Centre (Figure 5).: - ' Community Facilities - Service Levels Parks The subject site is located approximately 600 metres away from existing public park facilities to the northeast and northwest. This distance exceeds a typical service radius that is considered when planning park facilities. Although the residential townhouse proposal does include planned private open-space amenity areas, these areas are not adequate to satisfy the demand for both active and passive recreation. This report recommends that the northerly portion of the subject property that is proposed for residential townhouse development be replaced with a City-owned public park with play facilities and water features (splash pad), which will be determined through an operational review. This new park will help to ensure that service levels at existing 21

34 T>l-#f parks are not compromised from the demands of the residents of the new townhouse units. Libraries There is a demonstrated need for a new library facility for this community. In fact, a library designation exists in the Secondary Plan on this site. At present, library services are provided to the community through an interim facility (Northeast Interim Branch) located within a unit of a commercial plaza at 5 Mountainash Road (Mountainash Road and Bovaird Drive). Other library facilities within this general area of the City, but outside of the intended service area for this site, include: Cyril Clark Site- 20 Loafer's Lake Lane (Conestoga Drive and Sandalwood Parkway) Chinguacousy Site Central Park Drive (Bramalea City Centre) A new library that is currently under construction at The Gore Road and Castlemore Road is located outside of the intended service area for this residential community. This report recommends that the northerly portion of the subject site be conveyed to the City for parkland purposes and for the development of a new library facility. To this end, the report recommends that arrangements be made to have a library established for this community. Given the community impact concerns expressed by the residents at the public meeting, this library will also be reviewed in the context of providing accessory daycare, a seniors meeting centre and other retail uses. These services would further address community needs, and will offset operating costs. This library will result in the closing of the interim library facility at 5 Mountainash Road, which will free up some operating costs that can be allocated to the recommended library. Concept diagrams of how a park and library could be designed for this site are shown below. It is noted that these diagrams were created for initial visioning purposes and should not be construed as being a final representation of what will be established on the site. 22

35 "D1-3S" Library and Park Concept (Figure 6) Valley North Library and Park Concept (Figure 7) Commercial development Valley 23

36 PI-3U Schools The Public and Catholic School Boards have informed that they do not have any objections related to the applicant's proposal. To help ensure that school service levels are appropriate the Public School Board has confirmed that an additional school will be constructed within this area of the City by 2014, specifically south of Countryside Drive and west of Dixie Road. Public School Board staff have informed that they anticipate the delivery of this new school will improve service levels throughout this community. Further, School Board staff are currently reviewing the need to expand schools in this area of the City, and assessing the programming and the catchment areas for the schools. Please refer to Appendix 12 which shows the Proposed 10 year Capital Improvements Map for the Peel District School Board. In general, a school capacity problem is not identified by the Public or Catholic School Board in relation to the applicant's proposal for 432 new townhouse units (446 units originally proposed). Urban Design The proposed townhouses are 3 storeys in height (see Figures 8, 9 and 10), which will result in a similar height to the existing 2 and 3 storey buildings that are adjacent to the site. To help ensure the proposed townhouse development is complementary to the established residential character of the area, this report recommends that the development be designed and constructed with upscale design elements on prominent portions of the site, including: high level of architectural detail, upscale building materials (i.e. masonry, stone), upscale landscaped treatment (i.e. significant amount of vegetation, decorative metal fencing, masonry columns, upgraded hardscape/surface materials). Prominent portions of the site would include the site's frontage along Sandalwood Parkway and Sunny Meadow Boulevard, the adjacent valleyland, and particularly the main entrances. 24

37 PI-^J- Example of 'Stacked' Townhouse Proposed (Figure 8) An Urban Design Brief is prepared in support of this proposal and provides details of the proposed townhouse units, including building width, height, facade articulation and landscape elements. This report will be revised as required by staff and will identify that the 'stacked' townhouse units will be a maximum width of approximately 5.6 metres. The proposed development will be subject to a future site plan approval process and condominium process. These processes will ensure that the details of the site are acceptable to the City and in keeping with the requirements outlined in this report. Through the site plan process, the following additional details will be addressed: that garbage locations associated with the development will be screened from public roads and be complementary to principal buildings. surface parking areas will be located away from public roads and the adjacent valley. Adequate on-site amenity and play space will be provided. Superior architectural design elements will be used. 25

38 T*3S Example of 'Stacked' Townhouse Proposed (Figure Example of 'Back to Back' Townhouse Proposed (Figure 10) 26

39 PI-31 Transportation/Traffic Traffic Generation ATraffic Impact Study prepared by traffic experts concludes that service levels on roads within this community will not be impacted significantly by the introduction of the applicant's proposed 432 townhouse units (446 units originally proposed). In particular, according to the traffic modelling completed, it is anticipated that the number of vehicle' trips, during the peak periods ofafternoon travel, would be less with townhouse development proposal than if the entirety of the site was developed with commercial uses. Traffic levels within the community would continue to be acceptable. Site Access With respect to the vehicle accesses that are proposed for the portion of the subject site that is to develop with a district commercial centre (see Map 1), the City's Transportation Planning Division concludes that the easterly full-moves access that is proposed for Sandalwood Parkway will need to be monitored to ensure that it does not significantly reduce levels of service on the road. Further, securities will be received through the site plan approval process associated with the district retail centre to ensure that, if necessary, improvements to the access and/or Sandalwood Parkway will be completed to resolve any issues created by the access, which may include restricting turning movements from this access location. Other accesses as shown on the concept plan and identified within the Traffic Impact Study are adequate. Recommendations - Impact on Traffic Despite the findings of the Traffic Study, this report recommends that the proposed townhouses on the northerly portion of the subject property be refused and that a park and library facility be developed instead. This recommended change will reduce the number of townhouses to be constructed by 99 units (113 units originally proposed). The recommended reduction to townhouse units will decrease the number of vehicle trips generated from the overall development. Servicing The Functional Servicing Report submitted in support of this application demonstrates that the site can be properly serviced. The subject site will receive municipal services as follows: Municipal Water - from an existing 300 mm diameter watermain located on Sandalwood Parkway and an existing 300mm diameter watermain located on Sunny Meadow Boulevard. 27

40 v\^ * Sunny qnnllw MSTf;fT Meadow Boulevard *" 6XiSting and an 250 existing mm 250mm diameter diameter sanitarv sanitary ^wer located sewer on located on Sandalwood Parkway. ""aiy «wer Financial Implications There is at present no approved budget for an additional library facility, but the City's 10 Sin ean starting in IT* 2015, funded < T?} from includ9s future P0tential development fundin9for charge one revenue. more diswct The results library of branch the Request for Expression of Interest (RFEI) as recommended by this report will help staff to confirm afinancial est.mate and timing of the project so that budget requirements, both capital and operating, can be brought to Council for approval before proceeding 28

41 -P!-H! APPENDIX '8' PUBLIC MEETING Members Present: Members Absent: Staff Present: Regional Councillor P. Palleschi - Wards 2 and 6 (Chair) City Councillor V. Dhillon - Wards 9 and 10 (Vice-Chair) Regional Councillor E. Moore - Wards 1 and 5 Regional Councillor G. Miles - Wards 7 and 8 Regional Councillor J. Sprovieri - Wards 9 and 10 City Councillor G. Gibson - Wards 1 and 5 City Councillor B. Callahan - Wards 3 and 4 Regional Councillor S. Hames - Wards 7 and 8 (vacation) City Councillor J. Hutton -Wards 2 and 6 (personal) Regional Councillor J. Sanderson - Wards 3 and 4 (other municipal business) Planning, Design and Development Department J. Corbett, Commissioner D. Kraszewski, Director, Planning and Land Development Services H. Zbogar, Acting Director, Planning Policy and Growth Management M. Won, Director, Engineering and Development Services A. Parsons, Manager, Development Services S. DeMaria, Development Planner Corporate Services Department D. Squires, Deputy City Solicitor P. Fay, City Clerk E. Evans, Deputy Clerk C. Urquhart, Legislative Coordinator S. Pacheco, Legislative Coordinator T. Brenton, Legislative Coordinator Members of the Public: 1. Brasun Developments Inc., C/O Metrus Developments Inc., 30 Floral Pkwy.,Suite 300, Concord, L4K 4R1 The Daniel Corporation, Jeff Robinson, 2885 Argentina Rd.,Streetsville, L5N 8G Rockrose Dr., Brampton, L6R 2Z Canarygrass Dr., Brampton, L6R 3G Pinecone Way, Brampton, L6R 1N5 6. Parm Gill, M.P. 22 Odeon St., Brampton, L6P 1V3 7., 5 Moss Way, Brampton, L6R 0P5 8., 48 Royal Springs Crescent, Brampton, L6R 3B7, 83 Larspur Road, Brampton, L6R 1X2 29

42 PI-HZ 1 "i *c r, ' 320 Sunny Meadow Boulevard, Brampton, L6R 3C Wildberry Crescent Brampton, L6R 1J Mint Leaf Boulevard, Brampton, L6R ]8> 10 Coolwater Drive, Brampton, L6R 0X Sugarcane Avenue, Brampton, L6R 3C7 Jjj 4Autumn Ridge Drive, Brampton, L6R 0X4 ]6-54 Dewside Drive, Brampton, L6R 3B9 17\.8 Hadfield Circle, Brampton, L6R 0M7 18- al, 9 Oak Gardens Court, Brampton, L6R 2Y Nelly Court, Brampton, L6P 2G Jewel Crescent, Brampton L6R 2R Chapparal Drive, Brampton, L6R 3C5 22> Cedarbrook Road, Brampton, L6R 0W Bottlebrush Drive, Brampton, L6R 2Z5 24-, 21 Dimarino Drive, Brampton, L6P 1X Blackcherry Lane, Brampton, L6R 2Y Father Tobin Road, Brampton, L6R 0M Sunny Meadow Boulevard, Brampton, L6R 0P Dewridge Court, Brampton, L6R 3C Maldives Crescent, Brampton, L6P 1L5 30-, 90 Fairwood Circle, Brampton, L6R 0X Edenfield Street, Brampton, L6R 0N1 32-; 2 Peach Drive, Brampton, L6R 0W Oak Gardens Court, Brampton, L6R 2Y Chapparal Drive, Brampton, L6R 0Y Silver Willow Trail, Brampton, L6R 0P Berryfield Way, Brampton, L6R 0Y2 37-,2 Smooth Rock Trail, Brampton, L6R 0S Ryecroft Crescent, Brampton, L6R 0M8 39. ', 9 Oak Gardens Court, Brampton, L6R 2Y6 40-,5 Serences Way, Brampton, L6R 0E7 30

43 PM? Results of the Public Meeting: Aspecial meeting of the Planning Design and Development Committee was held on January 18, 2012 at the Brampton Soccer Centre, 1495 Sandalwood Parkway East, Field 'D', Brampton, Ontario, commencing at 7:00 p.m. with respect to the subject application. Notices of this meeting were sent to property owners within 800 metres of the subject lands in accordance with the Planning Act and City Council procedures. Approximately 800 individuals were in attendance atthe meeting and 33 residents made presentations. Two pieces of formal correspondence were received at the meeting, including a letter and a petition (see Appendix 8- Correspondence Received). Public comment sheets were also provided by staff and many were completed by attendees of the meeting. Provided below is a summary of the issues that were identified at the public meeting through the resident presentations, correspondence and comment forms, followed by a response from Planning staff. Citv-Owned Services - service levels Issue: There are insufficient community recreation facilities available within this part of the City. Existing facilities are located too far away and are overcrowded. Response: Community impact was a recurring comment from the residents who spoke. This was a key factor in the decision to remove 99 townhouse units (113 units originally proposed) and provide a 4 acre park and library facility on this site. Staff recommends that a new park and community library facility be constructed on the northerly portion of the subject property to help to satisfy the recreation needs of area residents. The park is intended to include both active and passive recreation uses, such as a playground, splash pad, trail head, and separate seating areas. The library is planned to have an accessory daycare, seniors meeting centre and retail uses. The park and library would have convenient access to Bramalea Road to maximize accessibility, and would also have a picturesque location adjacent to the valleyland area. Further, open space recreational amenity areas are to be provided throughout the proposed townhouse development, as identified on Map 1. These amenity areas will help to reduce the demand that the new residents would otherwise have on the areas public parks. Compatibility/Appropriateness Issue: The proposed townhouses are not compatible with the existing housing forms in the neighbourhoods surrounding the site. The site should develop with less density. Response: The proposed townhouses are comparable in appearance to the single and semi detached and townhouse dwellings within this area of the City (see Map 5). The 3 storey height of the units is in keeping with the 2 and 3-storey tall dwellings on adjacent 31

44 lands. An Urban Design Brief will be required to be approved in support of this application which will ensure that the appearance of the development will be appropriate and will complement the residential neighbourhood. The residential density that is proposed (65 units per hectare/23 units per acre) is consistent with Official Plan policies, considering the growth plan conformity policy provisions. The proposed density, and resulting number of units, is not anticipated to cause any technical problems (i.e. servicing or traffic problems). Schools - capacity issues Issue: Schools are overcrowded and there are too many portables located on school sites. Schools are located too far away from homes which requires that students be bussed significant distances. Response: The Public School Board has confirmed that an additional school will be constructed within this area of the City, specifically south of Countryside Drive and west of Dixie Road, by Public School Board staff has informed that they anticipate the delivery of this new school to improve service levels through other areas of this community. School Board staff have informed that they are also currently reviewing the need to expand schools in this area of the City, the programming of these schools, and the catchment areas for the schools. Please refer to Appendix 12 which shows the proposed 10 year capital projects for the Peel District School Board. Health Care/Hosoitals - service levels Issue: Wait times at hospitals are too long, better hospital services are needed. The delivery of new residential development within the City will worsen these problems. Response: Issues related to hospitals are a under the authority of the Provincial Government. The City of Brampton does not have any direct involvement with hospital medical delivery matters. City staff can inform however that the Province has engaged the City on planning related matters for a new hospital to be constructed on the previous Brampton Memorial Hospital site. An open house meeting to discuss the City's portion of funding for the Peel Memorial Hospital site construction was held on February 20, Construction of the new hospital is scheduled for the end of 2014, with the completion of the first phase in Traffic Congestion Issue: There is too much traffic and congestion on roads surrounding the subject site. Residents do not want an automobile dependant society, for social and environmental reasons. 32

45 P(-MS~ Response: ATraffic Impact Study was completed in support of the development proposal and concludes that the development of townhouses on a portion of the subject lands will not be significantly different from traffic that would otherwise be generated by developing he subject property for entirely commercial purposes. In particular, the study identifies that less traffic would be generated during the afternoon peak period if part of the site is developed with townhouse uses. The traffic study is reviewed and accepted by the City s Transportation Planning staff. Area residents will not have to drive to another commercial site to obtain the majority of their products and services because the functionality of the commercial centre will not be changed. The portion of the property that will be developed for commercial purposes will still be sufficiently sized to maintain its "District Retail" classification as per the City's Official Plan. Afull range of commercial uses can be made available on the subject site in order to satisfy the shopping needs of the community. Tenants that are confirmed for this site include: supermarket (Sobeys), pharmacy (Shoppers Drug Mart), banks (Scotia Bank, TD, Royal Bank, BMO), restaurants (McDonald's), office, medical office, clothing stores, and service establishments (i.e. hairdressers, dry cleaning establishment), The applicant has informed that they anticipate being able to confirm a fitness centre tenant in the near future. Further park and library uses that are recommended through this report would provide key community services, including an accessory daycare, seniors meeting centre and retail uses. Parking problems in the community Issue: The senior's centre located on the north-east corner of Sunny Meadow Boulevard and Sandalwood Parkway generates a significant amount of parking that overflows onto the street. The townhouse proposal will result in even more cars parked on the street. Response: The townhouse proposal will be required to provide the number of parking spaces that are required by the Zoning By-law. The concept plans that are submitted in support of the application show that the required number of parking spaces will be provided, and that some additional spaces will be available as well. There will be no need for 33 "

46 Di-qi* SihpnnnlwoVLSit0rS f the townnouse un»s to Park their vehicles on the street There sletpa^ srreet parking on Sunny Meadow Boulevard will be maintained. Insufficient retail usrs Issue: nf,9lr0hcery Sl rel T needed' as wel1 as agymnasium/fitness centre There is a general desire for the full extent of commercial uses as was origina.ly intended for this Response: This proposal will maintain 9hectares (22 acres) of commercial lands on the subject floor a ea. Although the amount of commercial land area will be reduced from what was ongmailly contemplated for this site, the size of the proposed retail centre S be consistent with the Official Plan's "District Retail" designation. Afull range o SHEe.E I ac essory office uses can be delivered on this property in order to foora^a AIhZhth appr0xima!e,y 20'630 W &W0 sq.ft.) of commesgross satisfy the shopping needs of the community. Tenants that are confirmed for this site include: supermarket (Sobeys), pharmacy (Shoppers Drug Mart), banks (Scotia Bank, TD, Royal Bank, BMO), restaurants (McDonald's), office, medical office, clothing stores, and service establishments (i.e. hairdressers, dry cleaning establishment), The applicant has informed that they anticipate being able to confirm afitness centre tenant in the near future. Loss of jobs Issue: The reduction of commercial land area on this site will result in fewer jobs that will be created in the community. ue Response: Areview of the commercial development potential for this site was completed bv the applicant and they have informed that insufficient market demand exists to develop more than the proposed 20,630 sq.m. (222,100 sq.ft.) of commercial gross floor area Reduced market demand for commercial uses on this site has resulted from the 34

47 DI-4T Two of the buildings that are planned this site (total GFA of 8600sa m/q? en»i Financial Impacts regarding Tax Basp Issue: 2%rs^sr*wi"resu"in areduced amoun' f,axes bein9 Response: The applicant has arranged for an analysis of this matter by Altus Group an econnmir consulting firrn^ The analysis (see Appendix 11) has mvlj«^r^d^sss scenarios for the s.te, in particular if the site was developed entirely for^comms S2ES2T Per CUrrent 'f"" USe desj9nations). and if it was ckx^lclal and townhouse purposes (including 446 townhouse units as per the origina mmerc,al devetopmen proposal). It has also provided details with respect to how property taxes devlnmfn development CU'ated scenario ^ would ^ provide f these higher develop t property scenario's tax revenues and to azk^tet^ the City The amount of tax revenue generated by particular land uses is not a matter that is typically considered through staff's planning analysis. Notwithstanding ths as per the analysis provided by Altus Group, there is no significant difference between Sfe amounts of property tax revenue that would be generated by each of the referenced development scenario's (noted below). The study's estimated property tafwenue generated for each of these two development scenario's are as follows: All commercial development: $ Mix of commercial and residential development (as per applicant's proposal): $2,382,842 Note that the tax revenue estimates noted herein do not apply to the staff recommendations regarding a revised development configuration that includes the development of a portion of the site for apublic park and community library. At the time 35

48 ZS^S^ZSXT**what,he,ax r~would be -,h Rental / subsidized hnnginrj Issue: 5SSEKra7Crd'-h USin9 ^ren'al "* Response: «sras^^ re9istered c -d has an acceptable appearance, and they are required to pay condoi^^nium fees fo required exterior maintenance (i.e. landscaping, snow clearing). FoXTeason condominium developments are often kept in better appearance and VelakTan privately owned units, including single and semi-detached houses Property values and negative impacts on vehicle insurant rates Issue: Concerns that the development of the proposed townhouses would result in adecrease to property values in the area, and an increase to vehicle insurance rates Response: There is no documented or quantified evidence to show that property values will decrease and vehicle insurance rates will increase. 36

49 1)1-4*? APPENDIX '9' RESULTS OF APPLICATION CIRCULATION 34

50 ^S~**JORONTO /WD REGION ~V~ Conservation for The Living City PI-5D February 21, CFN: BY MAIL AND Allan Parsons Manager, Development Services and Site Plan Approvals Planning, Design and Development City of Brampton 2 Wellington Street West Brampton, ON L6Y 4R2 Dear Mr. Parsons, RE: Application to Amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-Law KLM Planning Partners Inc. - Brasun Developments Inc. c/o Metrus Development Inc. North of Sandalwood Pky &West of Sunny Meadow Blvd City File: C05E On May 5, 2012, TRCA staff provided comments on the Functional Servicing Report (FSR) for the proposed development, prepared by Johnson Sustronk Weinstein and Associates revised July On June 6, 2012, TRCA received from the applicant, a comment response letter prepared by Johnson Sustronk Weinstein and Associates, dated May 31, and a revised FSR dated May TRCA staff have reviewed the revised FSR and provide the following comments as part of TRCA's commenting role under the Planning Act, the Authority's delegated responsibility of representing the provincial interest on natural hazards encompassed by Section 3.1 of the Provincial Policy Statement, 2005; TRCA's Regulatory Authority under O. Reg. 166/06, Development, Interference with Wetlands, and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses; and our Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Region of Peel, wherein we provide technical environmental advice. Purpose of the Application The subject lands comprise two separate parcels. One parcel (the easteriy parcel) is located east of Bramalea Rd., on the north side of Sandalwood Pkwy., with frontage on Sunny Meadow Blvd. The other parcel (the northerly parcel) is located on the east side of Bramalea Rd., opposite Dewside Dr. The two parcels have a total area of 6.74 ha (16.6 ac). The easterly parcel is 5.07 ha (12.53 ac) and the northerly parcel is 1.67 ha (4.13 ac). The application is to amend the Official Plan and Zoning designations from Commercial to Residential to permit the development of residential townhouses. It is proposed that both parcels will be developed as condominiums in "stacked" and "back to back" townhouse configurations with approximately 333 units on the easterly parcel and 113 units on the northerly parcel. I":M ItimcvPublicVDcvclopmcnt SciviccsUVcl Uogi()n\nriimp(on\CIN_-»50AJ.(l6_l)r;isimJ) Ldocx Vfem/fiv til ( \tn-ici\.it\itn ( int.uin :> Shonli.mi Drive. I>.>'.wv>vi<\v, Ontario Ml,\ IVI lh(,)w>l M.llll l\,\(,i, (, J')fi w.wv.lr..i.nn.r.1 (k\

51 t>l-5l Mr. Parsons 0 r-. UH. February 21, 2013 Atributary of the West Humber River Watershed (i.e. Tributary H2), runs along the north and east side of the subject lands. As such, both parcels are partially regular!bthtrca under vatvl^^rj0- Re9) 16^"iS Ur underetanding that the' adjacent VaHeylandsand val eyland buffers were conveyed and appropriately rezoned through the previous Hermosa Development Inc. plan of subdivision, which was associated with the previous Official Plan and Zoning amendment apphcation for the entire Brasun Developments Inc. site. Furthermore it is Xi^f t3n^ ofthe vjal,ey,ands and I** associated buffers are designated Open Space in the City s Official Plan and are not subject to the current development application Applicable TRCA Policies and Regulation As mentioned, a portion of the subject lands are regulated by the TRCA under O Req 166/06?\^rMpf f?pr f6 po,i.?e^i,hin TRCA'S Va»ey and Stream Corridor Management Program (V5CMP). ATRCA permit will be required prior to any works commencing within the Regulated Area of the Humber River Watershed. Should the project advance to the permit staqe TRCA will notify the proponent of the appropriate permit fee(s). Comments 1. Previous concerns regarding floodplain and stormwater management have been reasonably addressed, and TRCA staff has no further comments on the FSR for the purposes ofthe Official Plan Amendment and Re-zoning Applications. 2. It is staff's understanding that Site Plan approval will be required for both the Commercial and Residential blocks within the full Brasun Developments Inc. site. A Draft Plan ofcondominium would also be required for the Residential blocks. The following studies will be required in support of the Site Plan applications, and some of the studies may also be required for the Draft Plan ofcondominium for the Residential Blocks, depending on the type of condominium application. Further discussion between staff from TRCA, the City, the proponent and their consultants is needed to determine which studies are required for the subsequent planning applications: a. Aformal Stormwater Management (SWM) report is required that provides full details on existing and proposed conditions, Regional floodlines, limits of development, SWM control measures, and a site water balance assessment; b. At a minimum, runoff from thefirst 5 mm ofrainfall is required to be retained on site trough infiltration, evapotranspiration and/or water reuse. The proponent is required to investigate opportunities to reduce runoff volumes from the site by implementing innovative Low Impact Development (LID) measures, (i.e. permeable paving, filter strips, bioretention areas, infiltration galleries, parking lots islands etc). Please refer to the TRCA's LID manual which is available for download at The inclusion of a treatment train approach is also necessary to provide for improved water quality treatment prior to stormwater being discharged to the H2 Tributary of the West Humber River; f':,ll(imc\l>ublii:,r)c\cliipinciilservicc.s\ >cel KcguiiiM)Rinipion'CI< N_45<)ri.l.06_Hrasiin O2.2l.l3.doo;

52 PI-SZ- Mr. Parsons -,ji February 21, 2013 c. Please contact the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) to screen the subject lands under the Endangered Species Act. Basectun TRSA's experience, past development along the H2 Tributary has required management measures for Redside Dace habitat; d. An Erosion and Sediment Control (ESC) report and plans are required to illustrate the ESC measures proposed for the stages of construction. Details, location and supporting calculations for each ESC measuremust be included with the plans. The ESC plans must be consistent with the Greater Golden Horseshoe Area Conservation Authorities' document Erosion andsediment Control Guidelines for Urban Construction, December 2006; and e. Grading and Landscaping Plans. TRCA Planning Services Fees Please note, as per the TRCA 2012 Administrative Fee Schedule for Planning Services, a clearance fee of $2,600 for the Official Plan and Re-zoning Application is due at this time. Recommendations It is the understanding oftrca staff that the Official Plan andzoning By-law Amendment applications have been appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) by the applicant, because Council has not enacted the proposed amendments. While TRCA staff is generally satisfied with the FSR and has no objections to the approval of the Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment applications, the above comments must be addressed as part of the subsequent planning applications for both the Commercial and Residential blocks. Staff looks forward to working with the City and the proponent to ensure that provincial and TRCA policies and Regulatory requirements are met. I trust that these comments will be of assistance. Should you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Sincerely, Leilani Lee-Yates, MCIP, RPP * Senior Planner Planning and Development Tel: (416) , Ext llee-vates(a)trca.on. ca cc: Juli Laudadio, Metrus Development Inc. Darren Steedman, Metrus Development Inc. George Poulias, Metrus Development Inc. Keith MacKinnon, KLM Brent Schuknecht, JSW+ Associates C:^Usors\iRC/VDocinncnts\Hrainp(oi^KLM llrasun - Sunny Meadow & SikhIuIwockKT'N lirxsim O2.2l.lj.docx

53 Vl-53 Mr. Parsons Matt Rae, City of Brampton Andrea Warren; City, ofbramptoir Quentin Hanchard, TRCA Jairo Morelli, TRCA Maggie Liu, TRCA February 21,2013 l':\lfonicm'ublicndcvclnpmcik ServiecsU'eel Uegion\Brampton\CI>J_-l J3ra$imJ) docx

54 if Kegion cf Pe6l,... "«i? «/«* '»"" /»««/ '..,,.,,,/,,,, N,aimM, Qmlu,,,, (hjir, ' "W "'"'"'>' u«"*/rf««: <»"<«-«Iftia/Jf/o/Hf PrrWrr.SW7,.r iem/m/i//. &1/W March 26, 2012 Ms. Sandra DeMaria Planning, Design and Development Department City of Brampton 2 Wellington Street West Brampton, ON L6Y 4R2 RE: Brasun Developments Northwest corner of Sunny Meadow Bivd and Sandalwood Parkway city of Brampton City File: C05E Region File: OZ-11-SE13.7B ' Dear Ms. DeMaria, Regional staff has reviewed the above noted application and provide the following comments. Functional Servicing Rppntt Regional staff have received the FSR dated July 2011 and prepared by Johnson Sustronk Wemstem and Associates. We will require the following in a revised in order for us to complete our review of the FSR: o Sanitary sewer effluent calculation o Calculations for domestic water demand o Calculations for fire flow demand o Hydrant flow tests Here is thelink to ourstandards for further information: 1ulv2009.pdf Regional staff request that the consultant complete the table attached to assist in the modelling requirements. Please submit 3 copies ofthe revised report for our review. Municipal Water and Sapitarv Sewer Spiwpc; An existing 300mm diameter water main is located on Sandalwood Pkwy and an existing 300mm diameter watermain is located on Sunny Meadow Boulevard. An existing 250mm diameter sanitary sewer is located on Sunny Meadow Boulevard and an existing 250mm diameter sanitary sewer is located on Sandalwood Pkwv with a service to the property line. There is an existing 7.5m sanitary sewer easement on the subject site. Regional easements must be protected from any encroachments or obstructions. The owner shall maintain the land for the easements free and clear of any trees, building structures or hard concrete pavement surfaces. The owner is permitted to utilize the land for no other purpose than lawns, gardens, flower beds, roadways, driveways, and parking areas As well, the owner shall nofdeposft or remove any fill from the easement. For applications where Regional easements are present, landscaping drawings will be required for review Public Works 10Peel Centre Dr., Suite A, Brampton. ON L6T 4B9 Tel:

55 V\~SS * nkn^rnf«?s?pin9 ** Pr P Sed gradin9 p,ans wi» be «**»! for review prior to site J^ffiS An^ 'mp ements proposed within the regional easement wtll require a % 5 ^^may indude an encroachment circu,ation to *%». Condominium Water Servicing Agreement will be required at the Draft Plan condominium 2sets of site servicing drawings are required for review by Development Services Call connections must conform to Regional standards and specwsnt^desfssa) Regiona. S,te Servicing review and approvals will be required p^t!!ssss^g '?w/^.lsth^f' P'eaSe dar,ify the 0Wnership and if tne Pr Pen*s will be merged. Th.s will affect the site serv.c.ng. In compliance with the Ontario Building Code the SSfJVrequire additional installati n of sen/ices and/ r th«53 $Imb water / sanitary sewer servicing easements. Waste Manaoemenfr; The subject land is not within the vicinity of a landfill. Curb side collection will be provided by the Region of Peel For collection of garbage, recyclable materials, household organics and yard waste from rses^t^ Collection Services and an Application for Private Property Waste ESSE Se ces,must be "mptated prior to the commencement of collection S^? be responsible ki f6 for collection f!ims are and provided disposal in Appendix of waste until 6and 90 APPendix per cent 7. occupancy The developer of the will tzf XlntMhaS teen reached- The developer wi"te "*** * «** the Reg! of 22^^Sa5ment collection Waste Management D'ViSi0n staff at will g9 visit the site to to authorize confirm commencement* that the development os^?er«*«* Upon confirmation of 90 per centoajs^s 52E5 * re!t? acc6ss f0r the waste co,lection vehide' w**e Management staff will recommend that waste collection service commence ^78oZTS?nnS 'conce V'6** intact me at your earliest convenience at ext. 4710, or by at: christjna.mar7napeeireainn.ra Yours truly, Christina Marzo, MCIP, RPP Planner Development Services, Public Works Public Works 10 Peel Centre Or.. Suite A, Brampton, ON L6T <JB9 Tel:

56 17I-5U Connection point WATER CONNECTION Pressure zone of connection point Total equivalent population to be serviced 1> Trtfal lan^le *«* U** «. _.t^ Total lands to be serviced Hydrant flow test Hydrant flow test location Minimum water pressure Maximum water pressure Pressure Time Water demands Demand type Average day flow Demand Units Maximum day flow Peak hour flow Fire flow 2> Analysis Maximum day plus fire flow Peak hour flow Maximum demand flow WASTEWATER CONNECTION Connection point3) Total equivalent population to be serviced 1) Total lands to be serviced B [Wastewater sewer effluent 11 Please refer to design criteria for population equivencies 2) Please reference the Fire Underwriters Survey Document 31 Please specify the connection point (wastewater line or manhole ID) Also, the "total equivalent popopulation to be serviced" and the "total lands to be serviced" should reference the connection point. (The FSR should contain one copy of Site Servicing Plan)

57 Vl-51- f$*~ ) f*)p J^3 District J^^^j School I Board 5650 Hufontario Street Mississauga. ON. Canada LSR JC6 December t M46 ' Mr. Daniel Kraszcwski Acting! Commissioner, Planning, DeS ign and Development <->iy or Brampton 2Wellington Street West Brampton, ON L6Y 4R2 \ m "EC 1I20G ' Dear Mr. Kraszewski: RE: Development Inc. ~BraSUn Deve' Pments c/o Metrus Pt;Lotsl3&i4,Conc.SE.H.S.. City ofbrampton On November 4, 2011 the Peel rv acre., for aschool sile ^.hin mis Station T"""f"S in,cres' in a«l"i g 7-8 was primarily aresult of,he pjss^^?z V"'* addili l «* l site year old students. Since that time?**kmde^ten for 4and 5 Educatton and Board staff has alsozted a. olr n, d,scussi "s»«>> ««Ministry of 'his area. The Board will be undertawnfa Imh?T' "^"""odate students in expand the accommodation a, nesou?h0«u& T""* 1Xh 'S in Ihe «'» Board no longer has an interest inw^sis^sorf"" " * "" f you reouireany futther information please contact me a, ,0,0. ex, 220, c. en C. Hare, Manager anning and Enrolment P. Mountford. Peel District School Board KKoops Dufferin-Peel Catholic District School Board J. Laudadio. Melius Development Inc. nwc school a-lcilscdoc ru3lccs wot McDougald. Ch.iir Cl ««inne Nurse, Vico-Choir *, Kavan<19h Director of Education and Secretary Tony Thill/ Poiltos Prwilno """X AssociateDirector, :.i» Cameron fuo U,w, " Instructional Support Services "Vl Ford ad MacDonald ivid Green Harindor Miillij Pam Tomasevic wodiih Johnson Jeff While Associate Director. Rick Williams i e.«. custcou. a^,5 w,, w-c( 5(>wi! Operational Support Services Carla Kisho C'tdlauicii

58 lif Sufifejin^PeelCatholic DistrW ^umi n j October 12, 2011 lei. (905) Fax: (905) Dana Jenkins Development Planner C^rirampt9;3^08"8'015 "' 2 Wellington Street West Brampton, ON L6Y4R2 Dear Ms. Jenkins: Re: Initial Review Qo^bi3.cx?7 ^-VSftlKCdJ-" Bra8un d ' p "<«c/o Met. Prop.rttes LM. '^^^^X^^S^^^th. a^ve noted appfcalton tesm 0 ^ 25 Junior Kindergarten to Grade 8Students; and 11 Grade 9to Grade 12 Students *^S S2 ^ S ***"9 «" «. ~«% operate under Catchment Area Elementary School Secondary School Host School Venerable Michael J. McGivney St. Marguerite d'youviiie S.S # of Portables/, Temporary Classrooms 2 ^ly^m^^s^^^'^"z^j<> th. phasing or residential development.ach. es hev. heen made hejeenvhe ZSXZlttZUS&tlsh The Board reouests thatthe ro wi gto d, ons he Incorporated In the co d,o s ofdraf,,ppr,a,." ^"X^^s^^ A~< - *» and maintain advised that students may'be accsodas SZhlre o^et.^ M"LSin9,he """"""^ "Pte^ * «eu eisewnere on a temporary basis until suitable permanent

59 File: C05E "Df-^f l sss s ^ s s a ^sab,e; ihese signs sha"** < * ^priorto registration. specifications, at locations determined by the Board and erected area has been completed * f res,dent,al lots until the permanent school for the (3) 2S,SS^ Board, sufficient (b) notified that students mavbe^mmzl^?^ Stude_nts from the area- V0" are hereby outside of the nebhboumood and fsslr SL^TT? "^ a"d/or bussed to a scho0' neighbourhood schoor '' that Students "^ later be transferred to the 21!^ transportation to school, the residents of the place deafana 5^S,3?^ "" bus n f0ads presently in existence or at an ther 2X^5 5^^ in 6aCh EduCation Se^ Area on aregular basis Yours sincerely, Krystina Koops, MCIP, RPP Planner Dufferin-Peel Catholic District School Board (905) , ext krystina.koops@dpcdsb.org c: P. Mountford, Peel District School Board (via ).. > «<*,'

60 V\-UD APPENDIX '10' CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED 35

61 Dl-4f i'^b -IdiLikLfv, if 2oli From: R Saini Sent: 2012/01/iu ll:iz AM To: Fay, Peter Cc: DeMaria, Sandra Subject: Feedback for Public Meeting (Jan 18, 2012) regarding residential development Hi Peter, Happy New Year! I As we will not be able to attend the Public meeting on Wednesday, January 18, Please find below our input to the planning applications received by the city. We do not want any residential development and there should be no amendment to the official plan and Zoning By law. The application made by KLM planning Partners Inc-BRASUN DEVELOPMENTS C/O METRUS DEVELOPMENT INC. (File: C0SE13..7) WARD 9should be REJECTED. Regards Rajeev Saini & Kawalpreet Kaur Saini

62 -zra Rhf Bi'C 5)<V6\H CSk>inyx Mayor Susan Fennell City of Brampton. "Pl-tl 2 Wellington Street west Brampton. Subject: Change of Land use from Commercial to residential PuttSING, DESIGN &DEVELOP!^ COMilllTE DAT&lfrVUA/U I^MV Respected Madam, This refers to a proposal filed with the city for change of land use from commercial to residential. The subject land is situated North of Sandalwood Pkwy and between Bramalea and Sunny Meadows Blvd. We the residents ofward nine wish to register our concerns against this proposed change. First the residents want this total land to be used as commercial area only, as builders in the area have sold their houses with the promise that a big commercial plaza was coming here. Second all the schools in the area are over flowing with students (in fact nearly all schools are accommodating students in portables. Third with the change over there will loss of potential Jobs on permanent basis. We are not against 446 new homes coming to the area, all we want is there should be proper planning done to ensure that all aspects are taken care ofincluding schooling. We would also like to point one major aspect and also register ourprotest to it i.e. Whereas above mentioned land is being proposed to be converted to residential from commercial and we are being told that there are directions from Ontario Govt. Increase density of homes per hectare. Even if there is problem of schooling etc. Why is the city then considering change of use of land from Residential to commercial for land located South of Mayfield and east of Bramalea? There is hardly any development in this are at present. It would be easier for the Peel School Board to plan schools here and it would also comply with the directive of more homes per hectere. What it seems is that the and owners want to encash housing boom in the area and shift the part of commercial to Mayfield. If you take a little deeper look if this shift is allowed then in ward 9density of houses per hectare will drop as proposed 446 town homes will take 20 acres of land and near Mayfield 29 acres of residential land is being sought to be converted from residential to commercial.

63 We are attaching herewith partial list of signatures taken in this regard as the signatures are still being collected. Also note we have taken only one signature per family. We are positive that you will look into the matter and oppose the proposed change at both the locations. We are giving copies of these signatures to our councillors and School board trustee. Thanking you and awaiting a positive response from you. Yours sincerely Residents ofward 9 r... Brampton O Sep 26,2011

64 ' V ' CSL Proposed changes -the use of land from commercial to residential Name *A Ai^/a^ t-t^?j^ 4L M. M.?* Terrify* f^,/^ JUL -^3 ft f>i/)wj. AF _ t7. tor -ait > v JadLjSL Af Xib

65 PI-US" Proposed changes in the use of land from commercial to residential. Name Address Signature A fiz- Q±toP*i4j^..erf ~ e car 2f2 '/^TkVvfc^T 3^u.ia.vi^f^ Dgaj<upo>&- ^/2-t Cg-T~ pgulrtdifc /^.gt,m% X>*,fl*.i: ^<r*^ ^ ;,. i 7 "**. ^VMrt^f/yA I-,i it i-i-t" 1^0 o-f^ is: 36 ^cortu xt

66 " - Co L Vfrt&- l) ]Vg ^P^hanges in the use of land fr^imercia, to residential. Signature 1 4-gf -^Qiur^Ptr r>r ~ -t,.ron,<"fltf-/t n(2.

67 flu J* -oposed changes in the use of land from^ija, to residential. SignatuTe I 3_ ' - 3 A^trmn P/hW_Ji^ >c //- til/fc^ jmv E^qjt ftp I 9 rtuftf.^ (?lrj ^ I^I^M,fvt ^is^^- t^p_

68 -op-d changes in the useofla^ilmmerciauo residential. ^2^x22 i uz. LL ro.1 )(t.»f> J1& fklilticccy^ ~-^ r'.mn,,,,,l _ W< TT-Tf Wfrwj/r*/V ^

69 y> Proposed changes in the use of land from commercial to residential s. Name Address Signature No It? )cft. FAifiu*** r',a \ f«f\ \(\l-^ i ii("t./i Cv (.1. /7/f -t/uirl^f^l rj/l_ \TO P*7<8jxJ,5 Oli r//2_ So- l*<??&l(los»y^ a/ * _ -1

70 Phio Proposed changes in the use of land from commercial to residential

71 Proposed changes in the use of land from commercial to residential Signature q_'a. ; rr s : -Jo Spruces* #,*_ fr'-73i&2u t

72 J Proposed changes in the use of land from commercial to residential. Signature WlflKT^, f j' ' S"Vr,j ^^^s ^^r^.i 59 xzrur,» Ct. A*f.ft*~

73 tf Signature g^i^^i SXdoU/gfccggfs:^,-^fc y, ^y Aj V- '.rr* ^ ny t^ W*hAM*e]&3tte^?J& 17 <ya*0,jj.9&in /y^ f p/ j/la<ui,t<>t *^~-<J A Cg>;0 r f. l^^xtf^r-nby^t- i 9fl Mcy

74 Proposed changes in the use of land from commercial to residential. <*^=z Sa=Z3S.*--j3J

75 Proposed changes in the use of land from commercial to residential. Name -ft-1 ill CAs^S. Ju. -A >m l c tpy-i«i

76 CD f\ V\-Ha. Proposed changes in th< "se of land from commercial to residential. Address

77 d > V\-^lr ^P-^nges in the use of iand from commercial to residential. Name Signature - u. d^ X VAft /J _ X 8 ^fktka^ajs^i u t'arivr1 (Or..^r L/lf * ^",1,-r1 - Tf ^7,, r r'.. -rf i-f ft Fm*<<*.rri{,f»" "^Lor77rr- l

78 (D> ^changes in the useofiand from commercial residential.

79 Proposed changes in the use of land from commercial to residential.

80 (P) T) -S> Status of Land allocated for Park s. No f J 3 Name Address Signature 1 14 Jl 44 it LLL JLL ^ 1 >LH Y eu*rrt- u*r+ P r.*{<{ y. fa atarrsritff r^.9-; ALA^,^^^ -*' * < 2-fe. iiho. CAt» cl^s>^^. -4Z I 22 4/M: ^/frgs> *fl C/<-7 rvmr L-^rUt.^ (y+l*i\-i fertjfb&frr <T)%_ 6U^ J^gfrrfrfXpr?T Jo 3T H5 3<>8 ^uwvi ^.fl^^ T>M/p' "L.\ ^ - run 1 2 X^ 3*0 ^L AVO^^DoO' {ZJ^.J~ n " > dl±t ill H 3\ A}j\u*K2ai*L

81 r> O Pf-^l Proposed changes in the use of,and from commercial to resident,, S I M " No Name Address r-_j w. /. c- l- I ' I. ; c \e 7 1/ U. I//-! /3;... I.4 f/ «- i/fcflfc J i/1 I ^i> I ~M~^t^Z >ji**/stu\s c

82 :9 PI -S2. Dear Mr. Peter Fay, Wednesday, October 26,2011 This is written submission to notify the city of Bramnto'n th>, r. application to amend the Official Plan,J, 7 Ham* KLM Plan"in8 p«ners Inc/s DEVELOPMENTAL CM^^^^^ B^M^ ME1WIS on November ' "" 9'' '"" ""* * atte"<1* P"*fc meeting being held r«:~^^^ ' Thank you kindly for your consideration. Khin Vinh Lee Cc: Mr. John B. Corbett and Mr. Dan Kraszewski ii

83 Dear Mr. Peter Fay, "D -*3 Wednesday, October 26,2011 Iam against the change of two parcels from Commercial to Residential to permit the development of esidenha townhouses Ibeiievethatthechangewil,slgniflcantlyincreasLff" *^^act Please notify me of the adoption of an official P n amendment, the enactment of aproposed Zoning By-law or the decision of Council with respect to draft approval of aproposed P,an of Subdivlsio" Thank you kindly for your consideration. Khin Vinh Lee Cc: Mr. John B. Corbett and Mr. Dan Kraszewski

84 Case #C05E Honorable City Counsellors, -p,/ nff i^ ^> H January 18,2012 Bramptonians have presented, Iwould likotoehs^ ^ """'y "'"" reasons "* fe"» Travel T,W<!,v.v and ^ EeotaLoLee W^^ <: second slowest nighway in -hel^i^ extreme traffic, many are forced to take side s *s whs, h oftheir way,0 avoid the busy commute ^T VT>US ""* includins * M2 *?", ^'"^ du g msn houre- T a i" Veh'ClM p0se risks,0 Parians, or go far out travelled by (hose making fheir wattothe Bran^ ^0.. PT ^'"P-ent, is already heavily proposal. S ay',he Bramalea 00 s,a" "- ^ current infrastructure cannot support this S^5 1^^2%rtt"""^J" """ «*--a-*» of negative aggravate asthma, heart Ind lung c d1 ns ^1,^?, t"tha' """,raffic <x"'"<io" ca" daycare or purchasing ahome "There '1^1"*'*T"5 Whe" choosin8 asch '. could alleviate. Therefore, ^JnZtZm^^J,KJT f^"""8 *^ COmmercial ""elopmen. compounding the ill effect; ofthe polzon we as^ftce " """""*" " *" roa4 raser^:"z;ht:*stssl? be sir* " *,he ta,«h f * «*-* - Brampton and is listed ata-^rv HuTv^' ^?"?Hea"h Cen,re is ""= onl>' ^P^ «"ing websie. Wait!tt^ &Z Z2?^Hospital" the Ontario Ministry of Heal* conditions, well above 1,3L^nttof8hZr, M k *' V '"",''S """ f r """P1 ^ for an initial consultation oulzhltt fac!!,. ^ ^ ft'y have had,0 il over «m "'l" VaUey Hospital in M^J^T^Jy^J. '"" Wa"Cd Ver 8m0n,hs-««* """'"«' «- C-edi, P d^^^^^ e^tedrepresen^of^r^brpl^s^^^ -ihave great impact on,he Regards, Jason and Dishni Jagessar

85 """* ~e~ss-''"n*iz ^23"^1 *J3^ir^lii.'^i3 J.3 CITY FILE: C05E "]) \ - TS~ Balvinder Dhaliwal iwould like to oppose the proposal made re: above mentioned file. IZ'T'the 'Ub,iC SCh0 IS especia"y the e'ementarv Sch00,s are alr^dy overcrowded and have ^^^TlT n,y ^ imp'emented in *""«*- Public School which is already dealing with the huge need,n the area. Staniey Mil.s Public School does not have the building space to Xrast,TTTfT? WitH ^ 0Umber f StUd6ntS "PreS6nt,y h3s- ^ Sch00,s in ^e area will dually be affected by adding more residential units in the area as this would obviousiy mean more students going to these schools. The schools are adding more classes due to the demands in the immediate area where this proposal is being made. Due to more classes, the funding per student is far less than in other areas. Building res,dential units will further add to the existing problems in the neighbouring schools. Ihope you take the importance of agood education from the beginning into account before making a decision. Iattend the school council meetings in the area and am aware of the issues affecting the schools. Acommercial project instead of any residential one would benefit the residents of the area and the residents of Brampton. an (87/cP.

86 FILE: COSE w-su JESSIE GILL Ioppose this proposal because if houses are built there will be no ioh* rr^m «m- ^ Units on all that vacant land will create full timp Zi n!,t V< L Bu,ld,ng Commercial will give students opporztt^^,^!^t *"* ^ l T «* resldents of **"»*>". s when Iwas astudent' U^J^ ^^^?*«h» Schoo's as' Acommercial project would benefit the residents of Brampton and Ihope you take this into consideration when adecision is being made in regards to'he best use oftvatn, land ^/0(<37O

87 From: Edgar Lagdamen Sent: Sunday, November 06,201110:02 AM Cc-FaTptl1' H"?UnC"'0r; Dhi"0n' VickV" Councillor Development 8 NE Brama'ea/Sandalwood Property Townhouse Gentlemen: Bramalea <J^ ^% %ZT> of land located in the NE corner of always on the top three amone: the hint? ' "**' munidpalitv * STA. Brampton is this is because we have lesustriaxt "T"7 'a* '*" in GTA'You men«0"«' *tt logic, Iurged you. our etc^ ZSrC!IShment I" "* ^ N W "* ' U' and disapprove this re-2onin7adotcaz w - VC0U"C"' "* "" V ur power to st0p bring down this resiz^z^z,. T" m re 'ndustrial and «""n«rdal area to Brampton. *** " "*«a"eviate the suffe 8 of hard working families of Thank you for working tirelessly in our behalf. Very truly yours, EDGAR LAGDAMEN

88 November 09, 2011 Planning Zone Re:(File: C05E13.007) Ward 9 Attention: Mr. John B. Corbett Regarding the letter about the proposal located east of Bramalea Road, on the north side of Sandalwood Parkway with the frontage onsunny Meadow Boulevard. Also the east side of Bramalea Road opposite Dewside Drive. In my honest opinion, this area has enough housing. What is really needed in this area is the original plan of having commercial planning built in this area. This area doesn't have any retail close enough in walking distance for those who don't drive; it would be convenient for them. Also with our Unemployment rate high right now, it will help open jobs for those people who are out of work. Please consider this; it would be much more beneficial for residents in this area to have a Commercial planning zone close to them. Other retail stores are of driving distances from this area which is inconvenient. Please let me know the result of this decision by Thank you, Mrs. Sandra Toste

89 Hello Sandra, Dl-Tl Iwould like to forward my comments on this zoning change: 1) As we all know thorp ic nr. fi.n» ortriruty commons one^rtss?pto W^'h?T' "^ * ^Bram<>' "<*Centre s going Green now? Why CUvTnd PelT1f Y- ^Vheard *" "" dties "^8"^ «'» go green. Where Region can no. take cj^z^ Z* *envir0'une»'a11)' T cars when CITY or my house Iusually go to TrMtv m» SMd su! und»8s *> *<" with. For example if Ineed anail for ahead with his plafond ch ge SSuTTirT". *" f? *" " *«' be ""»me if b"«** S«NEED BETTER VIEW FOR OTO cr^ A? AIL " What CVer n IS F R WE usually DONE BY aj^s^s^s^?t Sl"*"d "' ManCed Wilh "" M» whi* "^AKTMENT but ironically get changed by counselors izzf^j^^ ^ 5"-d Abi" * When he started he had 26 in kinder garden class. Can ^IThow 'h. «f T f f Ws C,ass "^ has ciose to ^udents the neighborhood. PleaseTeave the J^ZonTn, ^m'" * r ^ *accommodate re students in will leave (I will be the 1st one) f * 8 ing t0 be disastr0us "* mostly Pe Pk 3) We all know townhouses problems «k j more congestion. Bramlea is only2kne mad ft^*!?' ** «is going to be more traffic small portion is ainvitation to^s2ass ^l^^-*tfm re ^ T many PeoPle»** numerous problems. Is city going to have more cops, more services.!. person ^mme^t' ^ ^ ""* ****»>m m0ne* *«wol be fulfilled only if this 5) If builder has no funds to develop ask him to sell it..joginderdhaliwal

90 V\-1o Gentiemen: "K55^^ TF ^-***«*«* to re ^nnf^3'- My reason is: first< I«** merehas atotof hn,sd a"d Sandflw d Parkway from CommeSal Sdc'hther! otabbshimnt 'Sr will lower P'aza the within residential me 5KM property radkis Sx ^msu S^^ZttV rate ** We ran nei?hbourhood shop; *** commercial/industrial * more are being built; ^P^r^^^^^^ property tax rates in GTA. You tmssssss^l h«f warding my dispieasure about Brampton, high T0" is a,ways on me top «w among the highest in City. Mow using your logic, IurgeC as ^SSmSZS^^S ^^««W establishment intu" disapprove this rezoning application We need ^1^.^'" the Qty council to use *«Y ur power to stoo and rate in order to aileviate^uffe^g S^^ t0 «"* d Wn this SoS l5"" Thank you for working tirelessly in our behalf. Very truly yours, FnGAR LAGDAMEN

91 Kv-ja "DI-11 Hi Peter, Happy New Year!! ^ntpx^r^i^t^mee""9 " Wedn6Sdav'Janu^ 18' 2 * Piease And below our Input to the DEVaOPMHNT INC. (F1,«M^^Zt^ C' M > Regards Rajeev Saini & Kawalpreet Kaur Saini

92 1-12 APPENDIX '11' ANNUAL PROPERTY TAX REVENUE ESTIMATES FOR DEVELOPMENT SCENARIOS 36

93 pr-12 flk!o".,(lrjon» \(.:.)l fv,: i;.i> ',, K" fr'i -.')>, AltusGrouu Economic Cull sill t I ilij -40 A Anniversary July 27, 2012 Memorandum to: Lyn Townsend Townsend and Associates From: Daryl Keleher, Consultant Altus Group Economic Consulting Subject: Sandalwood/Bramalea Annual Property Tax Revenue Estimates Our File: P-4636 Th.s memo presents our estimates of the annual property tax revenues that various development scenarios for the subject lands, which are located at the northeast corner of Sandalwood Parkway and Bramalea Road in the City of Brampton, would generate for the City of Brampton and Peel Region. Residential Assessment Assumptions In estimating the amount of assessment that would be generated by residential development on the subject lands, we have looked to the townhouse development that is located across Bramalea Road from the subject site. The nearby townhouse development consists of amix of back-to-back and stacked townhouse units similar to those proposed on the subject site. Figure 1shows the assessment values for aselected sample of townhouse units in the nearby development. Overall, the townhouse units have an average assessed value of $246,600 per unit. Stacked townhouse units have an average assessed value of approximately $257,800 per unit, while back-to-back units have an average assessed value of approximately $229,800 per unit. The sample incorporates avariety of unit types, models, bedroom counts and includes both end and middle units. Research. Va.uat.on &Advisory Cost Consull.ru, &Project Management Realty Tax Consult.no Geomat.cs I Economics 33 Yonge Street. Suite 500. Toronto, ON M5E 1G4 Canada T f ailllvjr';ll > 'lit!

94 Bramalea &Sandalwood, Brampton July 27, 2012 Page 2 Vl-^ Figure 1 ^Brampton Va'UeS' C mparab,e St3Cked and Bac^o-8ack Townhouse Units Number of Building Type Assessed Value Model Bedrooms (2012) Dollars 60 Faiiwood Circle Stacked E 1-Bedroom 215, Faiiwood Circle Stacked F 2-Bedroom Faiiwood Circle. Stacked G 3-Bedroom 270, Fairwood Circle Stacked EEnd 1-Bedroom Faiiwood Circle Stacked G2End 3-Bedroom Faiiwood Circle Stacked GEnd 3-Bedroom Fairwood Circle Back to Back A 1-Bedroom 194, Fairwood Circle Back to Back B 2-Bedroom 209, Faiiwood Circle Back to Back D 3-Bedroom 265, Fairwood Circle Stacked G2End 2-Bedroom Faiiwood Circle Back to Back C 2-Bedroom Faiiwood Circle Back to Back O 3-Bedroom Faiiwood Circle Back to Back B 2-Bedroom Fairwood Circle Stacked G2 3-Bedroom Fairwood Circle Stacked F 2-Bedroom Stacked Back to Back Total Units 1-Bedroom Bedroom Bedroom Total Dollars /Unit 1-Bedroom 215, , Bedroom 270, , ,167 3-Bedroom 270, Average Source: Altus Group Economic Consulting based on data from Municipal Property Assessment Corporation In applying an estimated assessment value to the proposed units, we have rounded the estimates of average assessment value shown in Figure 1to be $260,000 for stacked townhouse units and $230,000 for back-to-back townhouse units. Commercial Development Assessment Assumptions In estimating the assessment value per square foot of commercial development on the subject lands, we reviewed the assessment values of other big box/power centre retail developments in Brampton.' The retail comparables are summarized in Figure 2below.

95 Bramalea &Sandalwood, Brampton July 27,2012 Page 3 V\'^~ Figure 2 Assessment Values Per Square Foot for Power Centres and Big Box Retail Sites in Brampton Square Dollars/ Assessed Value Name Square Foot Address / Location Dollars Square Feet Trinity Common Brampton $/Sq. Ft Great Lakes Drive Bramptons Comer Quarry Edge - Highway 10&Bovaird Orion Gate , Steeles , Smart Centre Brampton Highway 7 &Airport Road (NW Comer) ,000 SmartCentre Brampton II 258, Highway 7 &Airport Road (SE Comer) Woodhili Centre 69,771, Highway 7 &Airport Road (NE Comer) 38,961, Kingspoint Plaza 370 Main Street North Power Centre 150 West Drive Total / Average Source: Altus Group Economic Consulting based on Centre for the Study of Commercial Activity Toronto Area Big Box & Power Centre Summary Tables Although the average assessed value of the retail comparables is $ per square foot, we have rounded up the assessment values to $200 per square foot for use in our calculation of the annual tax revenues generated by retail development on the subject site. Commercial Vacant Land Assessment Assumptions In determining the assessment value per acre for lands on the subject site that may remain vacant, we looked the 2012 tax bill for the subject property and the assessment value per acre for lands that are designated commercial but vacant. The assessment value for the vacant commercial lands amounted toapproximately $566,700 peracre. THREE DEVELOPMENT SCENARIOS Figure 3summarizes the three development scenarios for the subject lands, shows the type of development for each parcel of land, and the amount of residential and commercial development assumed for each scenario.

96 pi-^u Bramalea &Sandalwood, Brampton July 27, 2012 Page 4 Figure 3 Development Parcels within Subject Site Aa\?-&s rfl-tjws Tm^-^ ^i5sca S5: -'J m?=* '~" "3-r Nolo:Boundariesare approximate IQsBalBS Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Some Commercial Development, No All Commercial Mix of Commercial Residential Development and Residential Parcel A Parcel B Parcel C Vacant Commercial Residential Commercial Commercial Commercial Vacant Commercial Residential Residential Un;ts Stacked Towns Back-to-Back Towns - Total Residential Units Square Foot Commercial Development 223, , ,552 Source: Altus Group Economic Consulting

97 Dl-^ Bramalea &Sandalwood, Brampton July 27, 2012 Page 5 Scenarto 1would see commercial development on "Parcel B", with the other two parcels ("Parcel A" and "Parcel C") remaining vacant. Scenario 2would see the entire 39-acre site developed as commercial. Scenario 3would see 446 residential units developed on Parcels Aand C, with Parcel B being developed as commercial, in the same manner as in Scenario 1. Estimated Assessment Values for Each Scenario Figure 4shows the calculation of estimated assessment value for each scenario. These eshmates are based on the residential and commercial assessment assumptions discussed earlier in this memo. Figure 4 Scenarios Residential Units Stacked Towns Back-to-Back Towns Total Residential Scenario 1 Scenario2 Scnnarin.i Some Commercial Mix of Development, No All Commercial Commercial and Residential Development Residential Units Assessmentper Unit Dollars/Unit Stacked Towns n.a. n.a Back-to-Back Towns n.a. n.a. 230,000 Total Residential Assessment. S l Commercial Development Square Feet Square Footage Dollars/ Square Foot Assessment / Sq. F Total Commercial Assessment $44,710,400 S S l Commercial Vacant Land Acres Acres Dollars/Acre Assessment / Acre n.a. n.a. Total Vacant Land Assessment. S ITotal Assessment Value S54, ,151,000 S152( Source: Alius Group Economic Consulting, based on MPAC data

98 Bramalea &Sandalwood, Brampton July 27, 2012 Page 6 V\-^ csk^k. Figure 5 Estimated Annual Property Tax Revenues Figure 5shows the estimate of annual property tax revenues that each scenario would generate. Scenano 3would generate the most revenues, at $2.3 million, including $789,600 for the City of Brampton, $784,600 for Peel Region, and $808,700 for education purposes. Estimated Property Tax Revenue Generated, Brasun Developments Inc. Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Some Commercial Mix of Development, No All Commercial Commercial and Residential Development Residential Total ResidentialAssessment Dollars $107,560,000 Total Commercial Assessment $44,710,400 S S44,710,400 TotalVacant LandAssessment $9,439,055 Residential Tax Rates Brampton Peel Region Education Total % % % % Percent % % % % % % % % Commercial Tax Rates Brampton Peel Region Education Total % % % % % % % % % % % % Commercial (Vacant) Rates Brampton Peel Region Education Total Tax Revenues Brampton Peel Region Education Total % % % % 317, , % % % % Dollars 563, , Source: Altus Group Economic Consulting. City of Brampton 2011 Tax Rates % % % % 789, , ,700 2,382,842

99 Dl-<tt Bramalea &Sandalwood, Brampton July 27,2012 Page 7 While the total revenues for Scenarios 2and 3are similar ($2.26 million vs. $2.38 million respectively), the revenues the City and the Region would each receive are approximately 40% higher in Scenario 3(mix of commercial and residential development) than in Scenario 2(all commercial development).

100 DHcc APPENDIX '12' PROPOSED 10-YEAR CAPITAL PROJECTS -PEEL DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD 38

101 Dl'ioi "7" '_-~»* / X * - ~ 1! J^~-' - r'tvsn -. \ r..i-^h-ttt' to. _,... tr ; 8,-»f 'i C-. rr I f» lit 23 ;^~f:ril» t tf v 1W I «^T ~~ i it.iwi w-i r^iigji gwamatea ro i ij ujfr) -) '_; i l_r ^i^rt^--t;i>b rain* i-jt r J -<* i ^ -v y. i-l i! ' ' I 1 I I I i 1! t I it..i V-»" 1 \\ rrr! I > (/«: *S _ - I15HS YA L! ;;:I1K CO. *, (0