The Corporation of the City of St. Catharines GENERAL COMMITTEE AGENDA Regular, Monday, April 10, 2017 Council Chambers, City Hall

Transcription

1 The Corporation of the City of St. Catharines GENERAL COMMITTEE AGENDA Regular, Monday, April 10, 2017 Council Chambers, City Hall Page His Worship Mayor Walter Sendzik takes the Chair and opens the meeting following Item Number 9 on the Council Agenda 1. Call for Reports to be Brought Forward from Consent 2. Motion to Move Reports on Consent 3. Discussion Reports Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Applications for Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision, 4 Berkley Drive; Owner: Ontario Inc.; Agent: Upper Canada Consultants (At Public Meeting held March 20, 2017, Council deferred decision for Draft Plan of Subdivision for the consideration of General Committee on April 10, 2017) Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Supplemental Report - Proposed Amendment to Zoning By-law , 115 Martindale Road, 117 Martindale Road, and 14 Grapeview Drive; Sante Aceti, Owner; Chris Millar, Agent (SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT) Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Proposed Amendment to Zoning By-law , 115 Martindale Rd, 117 Martindale Road, and 14 Grapeview Drive; Sante Aceti, Owner; Chris Millar, Agent (ORIGINAL REPORT) (At meeting of March 20, 2017, City Council deferred to April 10, 2017, to allow time for meeting with developer, residents, and Planning staff. The Public Meeting was closed. Council will consider the Supplemental Report, Item 3.2) Financial Management Services, Property Management 101 South Drive Property Task Force Report and Recommendations Page 1 of 91

2 Page General Agenda April 10, Legal and Clerks Services, Legal Services Prohibition of Nuisance Parties (At meeting of March 27, 2017, Council set public meeting for April 10, 2017) 4. Consent Reports Transportation and Environmental Services, Operations Manchester Avenue - Parking Reinstatement Transportation and Environmental Services, Operations Special Event Parking Request: Grantham Optimist Club Legal and Clerks Services, Office of the City Clerk Council Correspondence 5. Report Requests and Directions for Staff 5.1 Graffiti Removal - 15 Day By-law At the meeting of March 27, 2017, Councillor Britton provided notice of the following direction for staff: That Council request staff prepare a memorandum to Council explaining the "15 Day" by-law regarding graffiti removal requests. 5.2 Traffic Calming Measures - Henrietta Street and Area At the meeting of March 27, 2017, Councillor Harris provided notice that he would request the following report: That Council direct staff to look at traffic calming measures on and around Henrietta Street, due to speeding issues in the area. 5.3 Waterline Serving Residents - Decew Road At the meeting of March 27, 2017, Councillor Harris provided notice that he would request the following report: That Council direct staff to report on the existing waterline that serves the residents to the west of the Regional Water Plant located on Decew Road; and That the report include the history of the installation, the ownership of the water line, who is responsible for maintenance and repair of the line, the agreement with the residents of Thorold that access the existing water line, and what the users are responsible for. 6. In-Camera Session (General Committee) Council will meet In-Camera for the following purposes: personal matters about an identifiable individual, including municipal or local board employees 7. Adjournment Page 2 of 91

3 AGENDA ITEM 3.1 At the Council Meeting of March 20, 2017, Council approved the Recommendation for the Zoning By-law Amendment, and Deferral of the Decision on the Draft Plan of Subdivision to the meeting of April 10, At the meeting of April 10, 2017, Council will consider the Recommendation for Draft Plan of Subdivision. Corporate Report Report from Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Date of Report: February 24, 2017 Date of Meeting: March 20, 2017 Report Number: PBS File: , Subject: Applications for Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision, 4 Berkley Drive; Owner: Ontario Inc.; Agent: Upper Canada Consultants Recommendation Zoning By-law Amendment That Council approve an amendment to Zoning By-law for the lands described as Plan 626 Part of Block D, municipally known as 4 Berkley Drive, as follows: a) That Section 15.1, Schedule A (A10), Zoning Maps, be amended by changing the zoning of the subject lands from Low Density Residential Suburban Neighbourhood (), to Low Density Residential Traditional Neighbourhood (R2-139), as outlined in Appendix 1 of this report. b) That Section 13.1, List of Special Provisions, be amended by adding a special provision, as follows: Special Zone Schedule Schedule Location By-law Provision A B 139 R Berkley Drive The following provisions shall apply for a detached dwelling: 1. Maximum lot area for a corner lot 595 m 2 2. Minimum lot frontage 12 m 3. Minimum front yard 4.5 m to dwelling / 6 m to garage 4. Minimum interior side yard 1.2 m to one side of dwelling / 1.0 m to the other side of dwelling That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the necessary By-law to give effect to Council s decision; and Report Page 1 of 12 Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Applicatio... Page 3 of 91

4 AGENDA ITEM 3.1 That the Notice of Decision required by the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.p. 13, as amended, be processed by staff; and That upon expiration of the appeal period, staff be directed to forward any appeals to the Ontario Municipal Board for consideration and final approval; and Further, that the Clerk be directed to make all necessary notifications. FORTHWITH Draft Plan of Subdivision That Council refer the report for Draft Plan of Subdivision to a meeting of Council on April 10, 2017, at least 14 days after the Public Meeting of March 20, 2017, pursuant to Section 51(20) of the Planning Act. FORTHWITH Recommendation for Draft Plan of Subdivision for Consideration April 10, 2017 That Council approve a Draft Plan of Subdivision for the lands described as Plan 626 Part of Block D, municipally known as 4 Berkley Drive, prepared by Upper Canada Consultants, revised January 24, 2017, showing Lots 1 to 30 (detached dwellings), Block 1 (0.3 m reserve) and a new public street (Street A ), as outlined in Appendix 2, subject to the conditions outlined in Appendix 3; and That Draft Plan of Subdivision approval shall lapse after 3 years from the date of Council approval, unless a request for extension has been submitted, reviewed and approved prior to the lapsing date; and That the Notice of Decision required by the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.p. 13, as amended, be processed by staff; and That upon expiration of the appeal period, staff be directed to forward any appeals to the Ontario Municipal Board for consideration and final approval; and Further, that the Clerk be directed to make all necessary notifications. FORTHWITH Summary Approval of the subject applications would facilitate a plan of subdivision development consisting of 30 detached dwellings fronting on a new public road. The subject property, which is 1.6 ha (4.0 ac) in size, is located on the south side of Berkley Drive, east of Bunting Road and directly west of E.I. McCulley Public School. The proposed development has a net density of units/ha. The gross density (including the municipal road allowance and 0.3m reserve) is units/ha. Staff are recommending approval of the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment (illustrated in Appendix 1) as well as the Draft Plan of Subdivision (Appendix 2), subject to conditions (Appendix 3). Report Page 2 of 12 Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Applicatio... Page 4 of 91

5 AGENDA ITEM 3.1 Report Proposed Development The Draft Plan of Subdivision application proposes 30 lots for detached dwellings on a new public road, having a net density of units/ha. The public road allowance abuts City-owned Berkley Park lands to the south as well as District School Board of Niagara (DSBN) lands to the east. The public road allowance is 20.0 m wide and will accommodate sidewalks and large trees on both sides of the street. Staff is recommending approval of the proposed Draft Plan Subdivision (attached as Appendix 2) subject to the conditions contained in Appendix 3. A concurrent application to amend the City s Zoning By-law is also being considered. The application proposes to change the zoning on the subject property from Low Density Residential Suburban Neighbourhood () to Low Density Residential Traditional Neighbourhood (R2) (as illustrated in Appendix 1) with Special Provisions. The applicant proposes to increase the minimum lot frontage in this R2 Zone from 9.0 m to 12.2 m, increase the minimum front yard from 3.0 m to 4.5 m, increase the maximum lot area for a corner lot from 465 m 2 to 595 m 2, and decrease the minimum interior side yard from 1.2 m to 1.0 m (for one side of a dwelling only). Staff is recommending approval of the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment subject to provisions included in the recommendations of this report. Location and Site Description The subject lands are located in the City s North Planning District, on the south side of Berkley Drive, west of Bunting Road. The site is approximately 1.6 ha in size and is relatively flat. The site was formerly owned by the Niagara Catholic District School board, containing soccer fields used in conjunction with Berkley Park to the south. The neighbourhood consists of a mix of low density (detached and semi-detached dwellings) and medium density (townhouse dwellings) residential developments, as well as a commercial plaza. A Location Map and Aerial Photograph are attached as Appendices 4 and 5, respectively. Surrounding land uses include: North: Medium Density Residential (townhouse dwellings) Community Commercial (Bunting/Carlton plaza) South: Parkland (Berkley Park) East: Institutional (E.I. McCulley Public School) Medium Density Residential (townhouse dwellings) Low Density Residential (detached and semi-detached dwellings) West: Low Density Residential (detached dwellings) Circulation of Application The applications were circulated to all relevant departments and agencies in accordance with the Planning Act. Overall, there were no objections received. Report Page 3 of 12 Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Applicatio... Page 5 of 91

6 AGENDA ITEM 3.1 Recommended conditions of Draft Plan of Subdivision approval address City and agency comments. Further detail regarding circulation comments is provided in the Planning Analysis section of this report. Planning Analysis Provincial and Regional Policy Context The subject lands are within a settlement area under the 2014 Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) and within the Built-Up Area for St. Catharines as delineated by the Provincial Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (Growth Plan), The PPS and Growth Plan contain policies that direct growth and development to settlement areas, encourage the development of complete communities, support intensification, and require the provision of an appropriate range of housing types and densities to meet the social, health and well-being requirements of current and future residents. Land use patterns shall be based on densities and a mix of land uses that efficiently use land, resources, infrastructure, and public service facilities which are planned or available to settlement areas. Similarly to the Growth Plan, the Regional Official Plan (ROP) directs development to take place in urban areas and supports intensification where appropriate servicing and infrastructure exists. The ROP establishes a residential intensification target of 95% for the St. Catharines Built-Up Area. The subject Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision applications are consistent with Provincial and Regional policy and plans. Official Plan (Garden City Plan) The City s Official Plan, The Garden City Plan (GCP) designates the lands as Neighbourhood Residential (see Appendix 6), providing for a range of housing opportunities, types, forms and densities. Schedule E3 of the GCP (see Appendix 7) provides additional direction for the East Planning District and designates the lands as Low Density Residential. The Low Density Residential designation permits a variety of residential uses, including detached, semi-detached, duplex, quadruplex, fourplex and townhouse dwellings generally at a density range between 20 and 32 units/ha. The proposed development has a gross density of units/ha. The density policies of the Official Plan provide flexibility in calculating density, in that consideration may be given to excluding certain lands from the total area of the site (e.g., public roads, parkland dedication, natural areas). The proposed development has a density of units/ha with the public road allowance and 0.3 m reserve excluded from the calculation. Generally, the proposed development meets the density policies of the Official Plan, which calls for a density range between 20 and 32 units/ha on the lands. The proposal meets the Growth and Housing policies of the Official Plan as the development will provide new housing stock into the area on currently vacant lands. The proposed detached dwellings contribute to the well-balanced stock of dwelling types in this neighbourhood (i.e., detached, semi-detached and townhouse dwellings) and will Report Page 4 of 12 Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Applicatio... Page 6 of 91

7 AGENDA ITEM 3.1 serve to help sustain this stock. The proposed dwellings will enhance the character of Berkley Drive and the neighbourhood as a whole. The proposed development conforms to the residential land use permissions of the Garden City Plan. An official plan amendment is not required in order to permit the residential development. Zoning By-law Zoning By-law zones the lands as Low Density Residential Suburban Neighbourhood () (see Appendix 8). Uses permitted in the Zone include detached, semi-detached, quadruplex and townhouse dwellings, as well as private road developments. The applicant has requested an amendment to the Zoning By-law to change the zoning to Low Density Residential Traditional Neighbourhood (R2). The R2 Zone allows a wider range of uses than the Zone (i.e., duplex, triplex and fourplex are permitted). The R2 Zone allows smaller lots than the Zone with lesser building setbacks. However, the applicant is proposing to add Special Provisions to this site-specific R2 Zone, which increases the minimum required lot frontage as well as some yard setbacks. The applicant s Zoning provisions are somewhat of a hybrid between the City s standard and R2 Zones. The table below outlines the zoning requirements for the standard Zone, the standard R2 Zone and the proposed R2 Zone. Provision Zone Requirement R2 Zone Requirement Proposed R2 Requirement Detached Dwelling Min. lot area 400 m m m 2 Max. lot area 490 m m m m 2 for corner lots Min. lot frontage 15 m 9 m 12 m Min. front yard 6 m to dwelling 3 m to dwelling 4.5 m to dwelling 7 m to garage 6 m to garage 6 m to garage Min. rear yard 7.5 m 6 m 6 m Min. interior side 1.2 m 1.2 m 1.2 m to one side yard Min. exterior side yard Max. building height Min. landscaped open space 4 m to dwelling 6 m to garage 3 m to dwelling 6 m to garage 1.0 m to other side 3 m to dwelling 6 m to garage 11 m 11 m 11 m 25 % 25% 25 % In general, the proposed zone change from to R2 is supported by the City s Official Plan policies. The property is surrounded by low and medium density residential land uses. The proposed changes to lot areas, frontages and setbacks will achieve development that is compatible with the surrounding land uses. Report Page 5 of 12 Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Applicatio... Page 7 of 91

8 AGENDA ITEM 3.1 Proposed Lot Area & Frontage The proposed minimum lot area of 300 m 2 is consistent with existing requirements of the R2 Zone. The requested minimum lot frontage of 12 m is greater than the existing requirements of the R2 Zone and will be compatible with residential developments in the area. There are a number of R2 properties in the vicinity of the development (e.g., Dorchester Boulevard, Jennifer Crescent, Meredith Drive) with the standard R2 requirements. While the proposed zoning would permit lots that are smaller than existing lots to the west along Bunting Road, this does not present issues with regard to compatibility. The resulting building form, scale, massing, height, setbacks, spacing, siting and orientation will integrate well with the existing properties in the surrounding neighbourhood. The proposal is in keeping with the low density residential character of neighbourhood. The proposed lot area and frontage are appropriate for the proposed detached dwellings. Proposed Minimum Yards The proposed Zoning By-law Amendment increases the minimum front yard setback in the R2 Zone from 3 m to 4.5 m to the dwelling. For comparative purposes, the dwellings along Jennifer Crescent (to the northwest of the subject property) have a front yard setback of approximately 4.5 m to the dwelling. The garage setback will be maintained at 6 m. The applicant initially proposed an interior side yard setback of 1.0 m for 25% of the dwelling, and 1.2 m for the remainder. The intention of this provision was to allow the attached garage to be located 1.0 m from the interior lot line, which would provide for additional space on the interior of the dwelling and add flexibility with regard to potential building footprint. Staff was supportive of this provision, but noted that 25% of the length of the dwelling would not equate to a dimension that is long enough for a garage (i.e., the garage is greater in length than 25% of the length of the dwelling). Through the circulation period, the applicant made a revision to the proposed Special Provisions to allow a 1.0 m interior side yard setback for the entire length of one side of the dwelling, and 1.2 m for the other side. This provision would better achieve the developer s intended design. Staff does not oppose this provision, however it is noted that the Building Code would not allow unprotected openings (i.e., standard windows) where the building is located 1.0 m from the property line. A builder may choose to step the dwelling to a 1.2 m side yard setback for the portion of the dwelling behind the garage, to allow for standard windows to be built on this wall. A builder may also choose to place the entire length of the dwelling 1.2 m or greater from the property line. Building setbacks of 1.0 m are not uncommon in the north end of the City. There are several subdivisions in the area that were built with a 1.0 m minimum setback requirement in place (e.g., Carlton Street, Dunkeld Avenue, Dunblane Avenue, Woodelm Drive, Patricia Drive). There are no practical issues with this size interior side yard. Report Page 6 of 12 Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Applicatio... Page 8 of 91

9 AGENDA ITEM 3.1 Interim Control By-law On December 5, 2016 Council passed an Interim Control By-law (ICB) to prohibit new development in the Zone, while a review of residential infill and intensification policies, standards and process occurs. The subject applications were filed with the City and considered to be complete on November 23, 2016, prior to the passage of the ICB. As such, the ICB does not apply to the subject applications. Draft Plan of Subdivision Section 51(24) of the Planning Act directs the matters to be considered in recommending approval for a draft plan of subdivision: The development does not have a detrimental effect on matters of provincial interest, it is not premature and is in the public interest. The proposal complies with the Official Plan, and the lands are suitable for development as proposed. The proposed lots are of appropriate size and shape, and adequate for the development of detached dwellings in accordance with the Zoning By-law and proposed amendment. The proposed development is compatible with the surrounding residential neighbourhood. The existing utilities and services are adequate to support the development. The size, elevation, grading and adequacy of the proposed road has been reviewed by staff and is acceptable. Appropriate conditions of Draft Plan of Subdivision approval, addressing various agency and departmental comments, have been included in Appendix 3. Staff recommends approval of the Draft Plan of Subdivision, subject to these conditions. Parkland Dedication The subject lands are part of a block on a previous Plan of Subdivision, for which parkland dedication was collected in the form of the Berkley Park lands to the south. As such, this proposed development is not eligible for further parkland dedication under the Planning Act. The applicant s initial proposal did include a block for parkland purposes, however, it was removed from the plan when it was determined that parkland dedication had already occurred for the original Plan of Subdivision. Temporary Easement The proposed Plan of Subdivision includes a new public road allowance which runs perpendicular from Berkley Drive to the southerly boundary of the site, abutting Berkley Park. The road allowance turns to the east and abuts the E.I. McCulley Public School lands to the east (with a 0.3 m reserve to prohibit access). The design of the road allowance in this manner allows an option for the road to extend to the south or east, if needed. There is currently no planned extension of this road, however, it is good planning to leave this available as an option in the future. In the meantime, the road will terminate in a turning circle which abuts Berkley Park to the south and the school lands to the east. To accommodate the turning circle, an Report Page 7 of 12 Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Applicatio... Page 9 of 91

10 AGENDA ITEM 3.1 easement is proposed over the front yard of Lot 17. The turning circle and easement would be removed from the lot if the road were to be extended. Appendix 9 illustrates the placement of the turning circle on Lot 17. The lot is larger than others in the Plan, allowing for a dwelling to be built even with the easement in place. The front of the dwelling on Lot 17 would be a minimum of 2.0 m from the back of curb. There are no special zoning provisions associated with this Lot, other than the allowance for an increased maximum lot area for corner lots. Fencing Conditions of approval are being recommended relating to fencing along the south and east property lines. The south property line, shared with Berkley Park, is required to have a 1.8 m (6 ft) high chain link fence, except for the area behind the existing soccer goal posts, which is required to have a height of 5.5 m (18 ft). There will be an opening in the fence to allow the new sidewalk from the subdivision to extend into the park. The developer will also be required to install a 1.8 m (6 ft) high chain link fence along the entire easterly property line adjacent to the E.I. McCulley Public School property. There is no requirement for fencing along the westerly property line of the development, however the developer may choose to install a fence in this location. It is not common for the City to require a developer to install a new fence along a property line where the same residential land uses abut each other (e.g., detached dwellings backing onto detached dwellings). However, the developer may choose to install a new fence along the entire length of this property line. The developer has informed Staff that this option is currently being considered. There are a number of fences that currently exist along this property line and several of them encroach onto the subject lands. A property owner may choose to remove a fence that has been built on their property. This is a civil matter that would not involve the City. The owner of the subject lands has recently gone through the process to enter the lands into the Ontario Land Titles System. Through this process the owner must provide a 40 year title search and a current survey of the property to the local Land Registry Office, who reviews the application. Notices are served to adjoining owners of land. There were no title disputes or adverse claims received through this process and the owner has been confirmed as having absolute title of the subject lands. Grading & Stormwater Management The original subdivision design accounted for this site in the drainage area plan. Stormwater from the property will be conveyed into a new storm sewer under the new street, then to the existing sewer under Berkley Drive. Site grading will follow the existing topography and there will not be any significant change in grade on the subject lands. Grading and stormwater management will be subject to the review and approval of the City. Public Open House Planning and Building Services hosted a public open house on Tuesday, January 10, 2017 at City Hall. The purpose of the meeting was to present the applicant s proposal Report Page 8 of 12 Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Applicatio... Page 10 of 91

11 AGENDA ITEM 3.1 and provide an opportunity for questions to be asked and comments to be received by City staff before formulating a recommendation. There were six members of the public in attendance. Public comments received at the Open House and subsequent to the Open House are summarized below, with corresponding Staff responses. Traffic Study Comment: Has a traffic study been completed? Response: The additional traffic generated by a 30 unit development would be 30 trips in the peak hour, which wouldn t warrant a formal traffic study. Typically a minimum of 100 units is required before a formal traffic study would be undertaken. Pedestrian Safety Comment: Concern regarding safety of children walk to school. Response: The City could undertake a crossing guard study as it is based on gaps in the traffic. However, a crossing guard wouldn t be warranted for pedestrians who are on Berkley Drive crossing the new Street A, because traffic on Street A would be required to stop. Traffic at intersection of Bunting Road & Berkley Drive Comment: How will traffic be managed at the Berkley/Bunting intersection? Response: The traffic generated by this development wouldn t trigger improvements to the intersection of Bunting Road/Berkley Drive (i.e., signalization). At this time there is no consideration being given to signalizing the intersection. A crossing guard is currently location at this intersection and outside of school times, there are no significant pedestrian generators on the west side of the street in the immediate vicinity of the intersection that would justify the need for a pedestrian signal. On-street parking Comment: Concern with potential increase of on-street parking on surrounding streets. Response: On-street parking would be accommodated on the new street within the development. The City has not determined at this time whether parking would be permitted on one or both sides of the new street. While the City would endeavor to have parking on one side of any street, an 8.5 m wide street (as proposed) is of sufficient width to allow parking on both sides of the street. Any prohibition of parking on one side of the street would be a decision of Council. Each lot could accommodate two to four on-site parking spaces. Report Page 9 of 12 Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Applicatio... Page 11 of 91

12 AGENDA ITEM 3.1 Property Values Comment: Has a study been completed assessing impact on surrounding property values? Response: Noise Comment: Response: A study of this nature is not required as part of a development application as Planning Staff do not evaluate monetary impacts. The new properties will be evaluated by the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) to determine assessment values. The developer has informed Staff that the approximate starting price for a dwelling will be $400,000. Has a noise study been completed to understand the noise generated by the construction process as well as the ongoing additional traffic? A noise study was not requested as part of the submission of these applications. Construction noise is a temporary component of any development. City staff can work with the developer and builder to attempt to minimize any disruptions. The City of St. Catharines Noise By-law restricts construction noise between the hours of 11:00 PM and 7:00 AM. Existing Overhead Services Comment: How will existing overhead service lines along the westerly property boundary be impacted? Response: Trees Comment: Response: A title search has been completed for the subject lands and there are no utility easements present. The survey of the property indicates that the poles are directly on the property line, and in one instance, 0.19 m onto the subject property. The poles and overhead lines will not be impacted by this development. If easements are required on the subject lands, they can be registered through the subdivision agreement process. Will existing trees be removed? Some trees provide privacy for the rear yards of the dwellings to the west. The property survey indicates that there are two existing trees on the subject property near the westerly property line. One hedge exists wholly on the subject property, near the westerly boundary. The two trees and one hedge on the subject lands will likely be removed as grading will be occurring in these areas. One other hedge exists at the rear of an adjacent property to the west, directly on the property line. Any tree or hedge along a shared property line must have the consent of each land owner before removal. Report Page 10 of 12 Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Applicatio... Page 12 of 91

13 AGENDA ITEM 3.1 Fences Comment: Response: A number of fences encroach onto the subject property, over the westerly property line. How will the development impact this situation? A property owner may choose to remove a fence that has been built on their property. This is a civil matter that would not involve the City. It is not common for the City to require a developer to install a new fence along a property line where the same residential land uses abut each other (e.g., detached dwellings adjacent to detached dwellings). However, the developer may choose to install a new fence along the entire length of this property line. The developer has informed Staff that this option is currently being considered. Existing Residential Character Comment: How will the development fit with the character of the existing area? Response: While the proposed lots will be smaller than existing lots to the west of the subject lands, along Bunting Road and beyond, the proposed detached dwellings will be in keeping with the low density character of this neighbourhood. The proposed residential development will also be compatible with the character of residential development to the east, along Berkley Drive and Dorchester Boulevard. Conditions of approval are being recommended relating to architectural control of dwellings on corner lots, to ensure that building design appropriately addresses both street frontages. The proposed Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision will achieve building and streetscape context sensitive design, and ensure that building form, scale, massing, height, setbacks, spacing, orientation, facades and architectural materials will be compatible with adjacent buildings. Public Notice In accordance with established procedures, notices for the public meeting have been circulated. Second Planning Opinion Advisory Should Council consider not supporting the Staff Recommendation provided in this report, Council is advised to defer its decision until such time as a second planning opinion from an outside consultant can be obtained. In the event the second planning opinion is supported by Council, and Council makes a decision based on that second planning opinion, and if and when the matter should be heard before the Ontario Municipal Board, then the planner who has provided the second opinion shall be retained for the purpose of a hearing before the Ontario Municipal Board. Report Page 11 of 12 Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Applicatio... Page 13 of 91

14 AGENDA ITEM 3.1 Financial Implications There are no direct costs to the City by approving these applications. Any costs incurred by this development are the responsibility of the developer. Relationship to Strategic Plan Economic Sustainability The approval of this Zoning By-law amendment will serve to support the goals for economic sustainability by: Facilitating private investment through development in the City (Goal 1). Conclusion In summary, staff is supportive of the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision applications. The subject applications would facilitate a plan of subdivision development consisting of 30 detached dwellings fronting on a new public road. The proposal makes efficient use of vacant lands and will be compatible with the surrounding uses. The proposed housing will serve to enhance the character of Berkley Drive and the neighbourhood as a whole. The applications are consistent with provincial, regional and municipal planning policies. Notification It is in order to advise Upper Canada Consultants, 261 Martindale Road, Unit 1, St. Catharines, ON, L2W 1A1, the owner s agent. Prepared by: Aaron Butler, MCIP, RPP Planner I Submitted by: Judy Pihach, MCIP, RPP Manager of Planning Services Approved by: James N. Riddell, M.PL., MCIP, RPP Director of Planning and Building Services Report Page 12 of 12 Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Applicatio... Page 14 of 91

15 AGENDA ITEM Proposed Amendment to Zoning By-Law C2 R2 R2 R3 R2 I1 R3 G2 R2 4 Berkley Drive G3 R3 N Subject lands to be re-zoned from Low Density Residential - Suburban Neighbourhood () to Low Density Residential - Suburban Neighbourhood (R2-139) Zones R2 R3 Low Density Residential - Suburban Neighbourhood Low Density Residential - Traditional Neighbourhood Medium Density Residential C2 G3 I1 Community Commercial Major Green Space Local Neighbourhood Institutional Files: Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Applicatio... Page 15 of 91

16 Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Applicatio... Page 16 of _ PM lfflniiiiim DRAFT PLAN OF SUBDIVISION - 4 BERKLEY DRIVE ST. CATHARINES 14.1m 12.35m 12.Jom f i, 1., i: ii: 14.lm 12.JSm,2.35m --- ll<-ldt "'-"" 12.Jm 12.3m E al gl 27 E ii g: 12.3"' Jm! gl fll IEIClE'I DfWE ll<_,._t 12.Jm! 25 gl 12.3m STREET'A' EJ 12.3m 12.Jm E 2" ::? 23 Ill 12.Jm 12.Jm m 12.35m 12.35m 11.35m 12.JSm 12.35m E E E :! " 5 :.'! 8 1 B 9 gl!<: i1i i1i g: 12.35m 12.35m 12.J5m 12.35m 12.J5m 12.J5m 199,12m N03"19'-40-W #J44 I i m NOJ'21'00"'W 12.3m 12.Jm 22 ; 21 EXISTING SCHOOL,..,... _, alllllg AMO, , f,miiuffll3iiioid 12..3m m 12.Jm.I, ; 12.JSm d 10 J..., 11 ii: ii: 12.35m 12.JSm EXISTl GRESID NTIAL BUNTING ROAD 12.3m 12.Jm E 20 :ii 19 ; 18 ii: 12.Jm 12.3m 12.Jom 12.J5m 1Z.35m.I, 12.I, ,..,..,!: re!<: 12.J.Sm 12.35m 12.JSm 17...,..,_., 13.0m EXISTING OPEN SPACE 12.JSm 18.Jm.!,.., g: 12.J!im i: 12.Jm,......,.. aniin DD KEY PLAN N.T.S. DRAFT PLAN OF SUBDIVISON LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARTOFBLOCKD REGISTERED PLAN 1211 CITY OF ST. CATHARJNES REQIONAL IIUNICIPAJ.JTY OF NIAQARA OWNER'S CERTIFICATE BEING THE REGISTERED OWNER, I HEREBY AUTHORIZE UPPER CIINADII CONSULTANTS TO PREPARE AND SUBMIT THIS DRAFT PLAN OF SUBDIVISION TO THE CITY OF ST. CATHARINES FOR APPROVAL 11 lllitilillll NOVEMBER ONTARIO INC. 9, 2016 DATE SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE BOUNDARIES OF THE LANDS TO BE SUBDIVIDED ARE CORRECTLY SHOWN. NOVEMBER 10, 2016 DATE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 51(17) OF THE PLANNING ACT a) SEE PLAN b) SEE PLAN c) SEE PLAN e) SEE PLAN f) SEE PLAN g) SEE PLAN d) SEE PLAN h) MUNICIPAL WATER 1) SILTY SAND J) SEE PLAN <) FULL SERVICE I) SEE PLAN LAND USE SCHEDULE LANO USE LOT/BLOCK # OF UNITS AREA(ha) AREA(,C) SIMQ.E FAMLY RESIDENlW... LDr 1-30 o.;,,n, RESEMYE 11..0CI< 1 TOTAL GROSS DENSITY =1 B.54 un s/ha NET DENSITY w/o R.O.W unlt./ha DRAWING TITLE SSSUErl PER..INII, 20 COMMENTS ISSUED FDR N>PRDYAL RE.'VISION UPPER CANADA CONSULTANTS ENGINEERS/ PLANNERS DRAFT PLAN 4 BERKLEY DRIVE SI D.OOQl!i 0.01 D DRAFTING DIIS DATE WH TA INIT TA/W.H. DATE JANUARY 24, 2016 PRINTED J.'.NUARY 26, 2017 SCALE 1:500 OWG No DP 2 REV O AGENDA ITEM 3.1

17 AGENDA ITEM Berkley Drive Conditions of Draft Approval File No General Approval 1. That this approval applies to the Draft Plan of Subdivision of the lands described as Plan 626 Pt Blk D, municipally known as 4 Berkley Drive, prepared by Upper Canada Consultants, revised January 24, 2017, showing Lots 1 to 30 (detached dwellings), Block 1 (0.3 m reserve) and a new public street (Street A ), as outlined in Appendix 2. Zoning 2. That prior to approval of the final plan, any necessary Zoning By-law Amendments be approved and finalized by the Council. Trees (City of St. Catharines) 3. That the owner pay for the City to supply, plant and warranty the trees identified in the approved Streetscape Plan in accordance with the Schedule of Rates and Fees at the time the Subdivision Agreement is registered. Fencing (City of St. Catharines) 4. That the owner agrees to install a chain link fence along the southerly boundary of the subject lands, abutting Berkley Park. This fence will be 5.5 m (18.0 ft) high from the south-east corner of the subject lands, to a point 39.5 m westerly along the lot line. The remaining portion of the fence will be 1.8 m (6.0 ft) high, with an opening allowing for pedestrian access. (City of St. Catharines) 5. That the owner agrees to install a 1.8 m (6.0 ft) high chain link fence along the entire length of the easterly boundary of the subject lands that directly abuts District School Board of Niagara lands. The fence shall be located entirely on the subdivision lands and not along the lot line or on School Board property. (District School Board of Niagara) Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Applicatio... Page 17 of 91

18 AGENDA ITEM That a clause be included within the subdivision agreement advising the future property owner that, provided the District School Board of Niagara owns the school property to the east, the owner is responsible for ensuring the 6-foot high chain link fence is maintained, and shall not remove the fence or any part of the fence, nor add any gates or opening that would allow access to the school property. Nuisance (District School Board of Niagara) 7. That the owner agrees to include the following warning clause in the subdivision agreement as well as all offers of purchase and sale or lease: A number of City operations and events occur in and around Berkley Park that may be viewed as a disturbance or nuisance. These include, but are not limited to, general park maintenance and soccer games, practices and tournaments. These actipvities occur throughout the day and on weekends, including during the early morning and evening hours, and often require the use of lights and utilize on-street parking. Geotechnical Report (City of St. Catharines) 8. That the owner submit a Geotechnical Report prepared by a qualified Soils Consultant to the City for review and approval. Servicing, Grading, and Stormwater Management (City of St. Catharines) 9. The water distribution system designed by a Professional Engineer in compliance with Municipal standards and the City of St. Catharines Engineering Standards Manual, as amended, for review and acceptance by the City Engineer. (City of St. Catharines) 10. The sanitary sewer system shall be designed by a Professional Engineer in compliance with the Ministry of Environment s Design Guidelines for Sewage Works and in accordance with the City of St. Catharines Engineering Manual, as amended. (City of St. Catharines) 11. A Stormwater Management Report shall be prepared for this development by a Professional Engineer in compliance with the Ministry of Environment s Stormwater Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Applicatio... Page 18 of 91

19 AGENDA ITEM 3.1 Management Planning & Design Manual March 2003, and be submitted for review and approval by the City of St. Catharines. (City of St. Catharines) 12. The storm system servicing the development shall be designed by a Professional Engineer constructed in accordance with the City of St. Catharines Engineering Manual, as amended. (City of St. Catharines) 13. An overland flow route shall be incorporated into the design of the stormwater management of the site and constructed to Municipal standards. (City of St. Catharines) 14. The owner agrees that all dwelling units proposed in this subdivision will be installed with sump pumps designed and constructed to discharge dwelling weeping tile flows to the proposed storm sewer via storm lateral. (City of St. Catharines) 15. A Master Grading Control Plan shall be prepared by a Professional Engineer to Municipal Standards and in accordance with the City of St. Catharines Engineering Manual, as amended, and submitted for review and approval. Roads (City of St. Catharines) 16. That the design for the road within the development be prepared by a Professional Engineer to Municipal Standards and be submitted for review and approval by the City of St. Catharines. (City of St. Catharines) 17. That the proposed Street A be dedicated as a public road and named to the satisfaction of the City of St. Catharines. (City of St. Catharines) Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Applicatio... Page 19 of 91

20 AGENDA ITEM 3.1 Street Cleaning 18. That the owner agrees in the subdivision agreement to make a cash deposit to the City for road cleaning. Subdivision Design (City of St. Catharines) 19. That the final design of the internal public rights-of-way, including on street parking, lighting, road width, parking restrictions, among other matters, be to the satisfaction of the City of St. Catharines. (City of St. Catharines) Architectural Design 20. The owner agrees that prior to the issuance of a building permit, elevation plans for corner lots be submitted for approval by the Director of Planning and Building Services. The elevation plans for dwellings on corner lots will demonstrate implementation of the following design matters: a. Both street-facing elevations will feature the same exterior materials and detailing. b. Both street-facing elevations will include appropriately proportioned windows on each floor of the dwelling. c. A large bay window or appropriate alternative feature will be incorporated into the street-facing façade that does not include the principle entrance. d. The principle building entrance or a covered front porch shall be provided in a location that is visible from both street frontages. e. Attached garages shall not be located on the portion of the dwelling closest to the exterior lot line and shall be accessed from the front lot line. Detached garages may be accessed from the exterior side lot line. Streetscape Plan (City of St. Catharines) 21. That the owner prepare, to the satisfaction of the City of St. Catharines, a streetscape plan, which identifies the location of all roadways, driveways, sidewalks, pedestrian connections, curbs, boulevard trees, street trees, fencing, hydrants, on street parking, street lights, utility boxes, community mailboxes, hydro transformers, telephone pedestals and cable television pedestals. Sidewalks and boulevard trees are required on both sides of the street. (City of St. Catharines) Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Applicatio... Page 20 of 91

21 AGENDA ITEM That the subdivision agreement include a clause requiring the owner to communicate the approved streetscape plan to the prospective purchasers by both including the plan on the subdivision sign to be posted on site and by attaching a copy of the plan to each agreement of purchase and sale. Sidewalks (City of St. Catharines) 23. That the owner installs concrete sidewalks along the both sides of Street A constructed in accordance with the City of St. Catharines Engineering Manual. A sidewalk shall extend into Berkley Park to the south. (City of St. Catharines) Street Lighting 24. That the owner submit to the City a street lighting design in accordance with the City s Engineering Manual, as amended, for review and approval. (City of St. Catharines) 25. The owner shall construct the proposed street lighting in accordance with the City s Engineering Manual, as amended. Land Dedication and Easements (City of St. Catharines) 26. The Owner shall grant to the appropriate authority all easements as required for Municipal and Utility needs. 27. The Owner shall dedicate Block 1 as a 0.3 m reserve. Utilities (City of St. Catharines) (City of St. Catharines) 28. That the owner satisfy all utility companies with respect to the feasibility of and design for providing wire-line communication/telecommunication service, natural gas and electrical distribution services, street lighting, etc., and that the owner enter into any necessary agreements with those private utility companies for the provision of their respective services. Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Applicatio... Page 21 of 91

22 AGENDA ITEM 3.1 (Bell Canada or comparable utility, Enbridge Gas Distribution, Horizon Utilities) 29. That the owner grants any easements necessary for the provision of services to the development by private utility companies. (Bell Canada or comparable utility, Enbridge Gas Distribution, Horizon Utilities) 30. That the owner confirm that sufficient wire-line communication/telecommunication infrastructure is currently or will be available within the development to provide, at a minimum, communication/telecommunication service for emergency management services (ie: 911 emergency services). Canada Post (Bell Canada or comparable utility) 31. That the owner agrees to install a single, two-module Community Mailbox in the Berkley Drive boulevard, at the rear of Lot 1, facing the sidewalk. The Community Mailbox location must be identified on all required servicing plans. Administration (Canada Post and the City of St. Catharines) 32. That the owner enter into one or more agreements with the City of St. Catharines agreeing to satisfy all requirements, financial or otherwise, as the City of St. Catharines may consider necessary, including the provision of municipal services, roads, sidewalks, landscaping, grading, drainage, fencing, and all other matters pertaining to the development of the site. (City of St. Catharines) 33. That the subdivision agreement between the owner and the City of St. Catharines be registered by the municipality against the lands to which it applies as provided for under the Planning Act. (City of St. Catharines) 34. If final approval is not given within three years of the approval date, and no extension has been granted, draft approval shall lapse. If the owner wishes to request an extension to the draft approval period, a written explanation with reasons why the extension is required must be received by the City prior to the lapsing date. An updated review and revisions to the conditions of approval may be necessary at that time. (City of St. Catharines) Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Applicatio... Page 22 of 91

23 AGENDA 4 ITEM 3.1 Location Map 4 Berkley Drive Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Applicatio... Page 23 of 91

24 Aerial Photo of Subject Lands AGENDA ITEM Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Applicatio... Page 24 of 91

25 AGENDA ITEM Existing Land Use Designation (General Land Use Plan D1 - Garden City Plan) N 4 Berkley Drive Land Use Designations Neighbourhood Residential Commercial Parkland & Open Space File: Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Applicatio... Page 25 of 91

26 Existing Land Use Designation (North Planning District E3 - Garden City Plan) AGENDA ITEM N 4 Berkley Drive Zones Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential Community Commercial Parkland & Open Space File: Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Applicatio... Page 26 of 91

27 AGENDA ITEM 3.1 Existing Zoning (Schedule A - Zoning By-law ) C2 R2 R2 8 R3 R2 I1 R3 G2 R2 4 Berkley Drive G3 R3 N Zones R2 R3 Low Density Residential - Suburban Neighbourhood Low Density Residential - Traditional Neighbourhood Medium Density Residential C2 G3 I1 Community Commercial Major Green Space Local Neighbourhood Institutional Files: Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Applicatio... Page 27 of 91

28 AGENDA ITEM m 4.5m 7.0m Temporary Turning Circle 0.5m Setack from Easment 1.5m Setback from B.O.C. Easement over Lot 17 for Temporary Turning Circle 7 Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Applicatio... Page 28 of 91

29 AGENDA ITEM 3.2 Corporate Report Report from Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Date of Report: March 29, 2017 Date of Meeting: April 10, 2017 Report Number: PBS File: Subject: Supplemental Report - Proposed Amendment to Zoning By-law , 115 Martindale Road, 117 Martindale Road, and 14 Grapeview Drive; Sante Aceti, Owner; Chris Millar, Agent Recommendation Zoning Amendment That Council approve an amendment to Zoning By-law for the lands municipally known as 115 Martindale Road, 117 Martindale Road, and 14 Grapeview Drive, as follows: a) That Section 15.1, Schedule A13, Zone Maps, be amended by changing the zoning of the subject lands from Low Density Residential () to Local Convenience Commercial (C1), as identified in Appendix 2 of this report. b) That Section 13.1, List of Special Provisions, be amended to add an additional special provision, as follows: Special Zone Schedule Location By-law Provision A 140 C and 117 Martindale Road, 14 Grapeview Drive Drive-through restaurants and motor vehicle gas stations shall not be permitted. 1. Maximum building height 2 storeys up to a maximum of 11 metres That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the necessary By-law to give effect to Council s decision; and That the Notice of Decision required by the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, C.P. 13, as amended, be processed by staff; and That upon expiration of the appeal period, staff be directed to forward any appeals to the Ontario Municipal Board for consideration and final decision; and That the Clerk be directed to make all necessary notifications; and Report Page 1 of 5 Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Supplement... Page 29 of 91

30 AGENDA ITEM 3.2 That further public notice under subsection 34(17) of the Planning Act is not required since the recommended revisions to the proposed amendment to the zoning by-law are minor; and further Site Plan That staff be directed to address the following matters as part of the site plan approval process, and as outlined in this report: i) Additional and enhanced landscaping shall be provided along the westerly lot line. ii) Waste collection be internal to the building or, alternatively, Molok units (or similar in ground waste collection unit) be provided instead of a standard garbage enclosure. iii) The 7 parking spaces along the westerly lot line, aligned with the dwelling to the west, not be deleted, but additional landscaping be provided at this location to mitigate impacts on the abutting residential use. iv) That the residents be notified and invited to provide input on the site plan. FORTHWITH Summary Staff continue to recommend approval of the application, rezoning the lands from Low Density Residential () to Local Convenience Commercial (C1) however, additional zone provisions are recommended for Council s consideration to address some of the concerns by the neighbouring residents. Council needs to be aware that, despite concessions from the applicant, residents continue to oppose the rezoning of the lands to Local Convenience Commercial (C1), and wish to have the lands remain within the existing Low Density Residential () zone. Background At its March 20, 2017 meeting, Council approved the following motion with respect to the application for Zoning By-law Amendment for lands at 115 Martindale Road: That the decision be deferred to April 10th to allow for Planning & Building Services staff to meet with the developer and residents to resolve issues raised by residents and to review the possibility of converting the building on Grapeview Drive to 4 residential units. Since March , staff have met with both the developer and concerned residents from the neighbourhood to discuss a number of alternatives and options for the development of the lands. This report details those discussions and offers some additional recommendations for Council s consideration. A link to the original report to Council is provided for reference purposes. Report Page 2 of 5 Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Supplement... Page 30 of 91

31 AGENDA ITEM 3.2 Report Staff have met with both the developer and concerned residents in the neighbourhood, who addressed Council at the Public Meeting on March 20, There were five main items of discussion between the two parties: 1. Maximum height of the proposed buildings. 2. The removal of drive through restaurants and motor vehicle gas stations as permitted uses in the proposed Local Convenience Commercial (C1) zone. 3. Increasing the width of the required 3.0 metre landscape strip adjacent to the west property line. 4. The removal of a standard garbage enclosure on the property in favour of waste collection within the building. 5. The removal of 7 parking spaces along the west property line where they directly align with the dwelling on the adjacent residential lot. 6. Introducing residential apartment uses only for the proposed building on Grapeview Drive and removing commercial uses from that building altogether. The building closest to Martindale Road to remain a mixed use building with commercial on the ground floor and residential apartments on the second floor. 7. Public involvement in the site plan approval process. Unfortunately the two parties were not able to agree on a full compromise. The residents continue to object, in principle, to the rezoning of the lands from Low Density Residential () to Local Convenience Commercial (C1). However, there are some additional site development details that may be addressed as additional zoning provisions and as items for inclusion as part of the site plan approval. These measures would serve to improve the site function and design and result in a more compatible design abutting the residential use to the west of this site. 1. Maximum Height The permitted height in the Local Convenience Commercial (C1) zone is 14 metres. While opposed to the rezoning, the neighbour requested that, should the amendment be approved, the height of the buildings be limited to two storeys, up to a maximum of 11 metres. The applicant has agreed to a maximum height limit of 11 metres, the same height limit as the Low Density Residential Suburban Neighbourhood () zone surrounding this site. Staff recommend that the zoning amendment include an additional special provision to limit the building height to two storeys, up to a maximum of 11 metres. 2. Permitted Uses in the Local Convenience Commercial (C1) Zone The neighbours and the applicant request that the permitted uses exclude drive through restaurants and motor vehicle gas stations, standard permitted uses in the C1 zone. The applicant does not propose these uses and accordingly agrees to delete them as permitted uses on this site. Staff is supportive of this proposed revision. Report Page 3 of 5 Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Supplement... Page 31 of 91

32 AGENDA ITEM Width of the Landscape Strip Adjacent to a Residential Uses The neighbours request that, should Council approve the application, the required minimum landscape strip of 3.0 metres, required along the west and north boundaries of this site, not be reduced through future application for a minor variance to the Committee of Adjustment. The applicant agrees with this request and is willing to go a step further in designing the site to provide increased width for the minimum landscape strip, particularly where it abuts the residential dwelling to the west. For example, a slight redesign of the parking at this juncture could create a wider landscape strip than originally proposed, as illustrated in Appendix 2. Staff recommends Council direct that this be addressed as part of the site plan process to ensure every effort is made to that end. In addition, the neighbour to the west requests that, in addition to a fence along the common property line, a licensed landscape architect provide a landscape design that offers a full year round vegetative cover along the west property line, comprised of plant material that is fast growing and provides as much height as possible in as short a time span as possible, to mitigate the impacts of a parking lot in close proximity to residential land use. The applicant is prepared to provide dense plantings within the landscape strip required along the westerly lot line, abutting the neighbor to the west, but only to approximately 6.0 metres beyond the back face of the dwelling, not the full extent of the lot line. Staff suggest this is a reasonable compromise given that standard landscaping will still be required along the full length of the lot, but may not be as densely planted as the strip closer to the front of the lot, closer to the dwelling on the abutting lot. This matter is also recommended to be addressed as part of the site plan approval process. 4. The Location of a Garbage Enclosure on the Property The neighbours have requested that standard garbage enclosures not be permitted anywhere on the site but waste collection be located internal to the buildings proposed on the lot. The applicant will consider this option as part of the site plan approval process, and also requests the option of using Molok units or similar in-ground waste collection units as an alternative to a standard garbage enclosure and as an alternative to inside waste collection. Molok units are routinely used since they are odourless and a clean waste collection system. Staff recommend this be addressed as part of the site plan process. 5. The Location of Parking Spaces Adjacent to a Residential Dwelling The neighbour requested that the seven parking spaces located along their property line closest to their residence, be replaced with landscaping. The applicant has prepared a revised parking layout that results in a widened landscaped area and the loss of one parking space (Appendix 1). The neighbour is not satisfied that this area will be sufficient, and remains opposed to locating parking along their property line closest to their dwelling. Staff is not supportive of this reduction since it will likely trigger a noncompliance situation with the required parking for the site. In addition, this reduction of parking may trigger increased incidence of overflow parking from the site to on-street parking on Grapeview Drive, which does not positively impact the overall neighbourhood. Staff consider the expanded landscape strip on this part of the site, Report Page 4 of 5 Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Supplement... Page 32 of 91

33 AGENDA ITEM 3.2 together with dense plant material and a board on board fence to be sufficient to mitigate the impact of the parking in this area. 6. Exclusive Residential Use of the Building Fronting Grapeview Drive The neighbours prefer that any building proposed along the Grapeview Drive frontage be exclusively residential. The applicant is opposed to this suggestion as a requirement since it is a significant departure from the redevelopment envisioned for this site. The applicant is willing to design the site to mitigate many residents concerns but not prepared to change the use of the site to that extent. Staff is not recommending the building closest to Grapeview be limited to residential uses only. 7. Public Involvement in the Site Plan Approval Process The residents request, and the applicant agrees to, a direction that would involve the residents in the site plan process. Staff have included that recommendation with specific reference to the items above that are appropriately addressed within the site plan approval process. Financial Implications There are no financial implications to the City with the revisions recommended in this report. All mitigation measures that trigger a cost are solely the responsibility of the developer. Conclusion Staff continue to recommend approval of this application subject to revised provisions recommended in this report that are designed to address resident concerns and to achieve a development that provides a greater degree of land use compatibility. Unfortunately, the discussions with the applicant and residents did not achieve a mutually agreed to outcome, however, the discussions did conclude with some mitigation measures that the applicant is willing to provide. The staff recommendation includes additional zoning provisions and provides further direction as part of the required site plan process. Notification It is in order to advise Mr. Chris Millar, InSite Land Use Planning, 1 Renforth Square, St. Catharines ON, L2M 6X3 and Ms. Elizabeth Thiessen, and Ms. Gisela Stoberman of Council s decision. Prepared by: Charlotte McEwan Planner I Submitted by: Judy Pihach, MCIP, RPP Manager, Planning Services Approved by: James N. Riddell, M.PL., MCIP, RPP Director, Planning and Building Services Report Page 5 of 5 Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Supplement... Page 33 of 91

34 AGENDA 1 ITEM 3.2 Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Supplement... Page 34 of 91

35 AGENDA 2 ITEM Proposed Amendment to Zoning By-Law A R3 G B 22A (Schedule A - Zoning By-law ) 21 18A G A G R2 C C A 2 10 R2 R2 C A R R A 90 1 C1 G1 N 115 & 117 Martindale Road & 14 Grapeview Drive 1A Subject lands to be re-zoned from Low Density Residential - Suburban Neighbourhood () to Local Convenience Commercial (C1-140) Zones R2 R3 Low Density Residential - Suburban Neighbourhood Low Density Residential - Traditional Neighbourhood Medium Density Residential C1 G1 G2 Local Convenience Commercial Conservation / Natural Area Minor Green Space Files: Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Supplement... Page 35 of 91

36 At the meeting of March 20, 2017, Council closed the public meeting AGENDA and ITEM 3.3 deferred this item to the meeting of April 10, 2017, to allow time for a meeting with the developer, residents, and Planning staff, at which time, General Committee will receive this report for information purposes and consider the recommendations in Supplemental Report No. PBS Corporate Report Report from Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Date of Report: March 2, 2017 Date of Meeting: March 20, 2017 Report Number: PBS File: Subject: Proposed Amendment to Zoning By-law , 115 Martindale Rd, 117 Martindale Road, and 14 Grapeview Drive; Sante Aceti, Owner; Chris Millar, Agent Recommendation That Council approve an amendment to Zoning By-law for the lands municipally known as 115 Martindale Road, 117 Martindale Road, and 14 Grapeview Drive, as follows: a) That Section 15.1, Schedule A13, Zone Maps, be amended by changing the zoning of the subject lands from Low Density Residential () to Local Convenience Commercial (C1), as identified in Appendix 6 of this report. That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the necessary By-law to give effect to Council s decision; and That the Notice of Decision required by the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, C.P. 13, as amended, be processed by staff; and That upon expiration of the appeal period, staff be directed to forward any appeals to the Ontario Municipal Board for consideration and final decision; and Further, that the Clerk be directed to make all necessary notifications. FORTHWITH Summary The purpose of the application is to change the zoning of the subject properties from Low Density Residential () to Local Convenience Commercial (C1). Approval of the application would permit the construction of a mixed use commercial/residential development. Staff is recommending approval of this Zoning By-law amendment. The proposal conforms to Provincial, Regional and local Official Plan policies. Report Proposed Development The applicant proposes to construct a commercial/residential development consisting of two buildings with a total of about 700 square metres of ground floor commercial space, Report Page 1 of 8 Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Proposed A... Page 36 of 91

37 AGENDA ITEM 3.3 and 700 square metres of second floor residential space. There are seven (7) commercial units and seven (7) residential apartment units proposed. The applicant has requested to change the Zoning By-law designation from Low Density Residential Suburban Neighbourhood () to Local Convenience Commercial (C1) to permit the mix of commercial and residential uses on the site. The C1 designation permits a variety of commercial uses, animal care establishments, cultural facilities, day cares, gas stations, service commercial uses, restaurants, retail stores, social service facilities, indoor recreation facilities, offices, places of worship, and apartment dwelling units. A conceptual site plan for the development is included in Appendix 7. Location and Site Description The subject lands are located in the West Planning District on the northwest corner of Martindale Road and Grapeview Drive (Appendix 1). The subject lands have a frontage of metres along Martindale Road, and metres along Grapeview Drive. The size of the site is approximately 3422 m 2. The lands are currently vacant (Appendix 2). Surrounding land uses include: North: Residential (detached dwellings) South: Commercial/Office (dental and retail) East: Commercial/Indoor Recreation (salon, karate gym) West: Residential (detached dwellings) Circulation of Application The application was circulated to all relevant departments and agencies in accordance with the Planning Act. There were no objections to the development. No concerns were raised, except for the matters addressed in the Planning Analysis section of this report. Planning Analysis The Provincial Policy Statement (2014) The subject lands are located within a settlement area under the Provincial Policy Statement (2014) and within the Built-up Area as identified by the Province s Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (Growth Plan, 2006). These documents contain policies that support all forms of residential intensification and urban area regeneration, directing growth to Built-up Areas. The Provincial Policy Statement requires that land use patterns within settlement areas be based on densities and a mix of land uses which support active transportation, are transit-supportive, and which efficiently use land, resources, infrastructure and public service facilities which may be planned or are already available. The approval of this application conforms to Provincial land use policy. Regional Official Plan The subject lands are within the Urban Area Boundary for the City of St. Catharines and within a Built-up Area according to the Regional Official Plan. The Regional Sustainable Community Policies establish a residential intensification target of 95% for the St. Report Page 2 of 8 Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Proposed A... Page 37 of 91

38 AGENDA ITEM 3.3 Catharines built-up area. The subject lands are located in the City s built-up area and within an established neighbourhood where infrastructure and services are available. Municipalities are encouraged to develop a diverse mix of land uses within urban areas to support the complete community concept. The proposed zoning amendment will facilitate the use of these lands for mixed use residential/commercial development, and support the complete community concept Therefore, these applications are consistent with the Regional Official Plan. Local Official Plan (Garden City Plan) The lands are designated Neighbourhood Residential on the General Land Use Plan (Appendix 3), and further designated Low Density Residential in the West Planning District (Appendix 4). The Low Density Residential designation permits detached, semidetached, duplex, triplex, quadruplex, fourplex, and townhouse dwellings at a density range generally between 20 and 32 units per hectare. Local Neighbourhood Convenience Commercial Centres cater to the day to day convenience needs of nearby local residents and may include small scale retail and service commercial, office, institutional and indoor recreation uses, and residential dwelling units. Part D Section of the Garden City Plan permits the creation and expansion of Local Convenience Commercial Centres within the Neighbourhood Residential designation by way of a Zoning By-law Amendment, and will be evaluated based on the following criteria as outlined in section a): i) Compatible with the surrounding residential environment; Compatible is defined by the Official Plan as development or redevelopment of uses which may not necessarily be the same as, or similar to, existing development, but can coexist with the surrounding area without adverse impact. The concept site plan (Appendix 7) shows that the site provides adequate buffering to surrounding residential properties; strategic placement of the buildings closer to the intersection than to neighbouring dwellings; and that every provision of the C1 zone is met. Having reviewed this concept plan, staff is satisfied that the lands are able to support a development that is compatible with the surrounding residential environment. Additionally, the proposal will be required to go through the site plan control process before any new buildings are constructed. Through this process, staff will ensure that adequate setbacks, buffers, and any necessary mitigation measures are in place to maximize the compatibility of any new development with both the residential and commercial uses in the surrounding area. Report Page 3 of 8 Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Proposed A... Page 38 of 91

39 AGENDA ITEM 3.3 ii) Total size of the centre should not exceed 0.4 hectares of land The subject lands represent an increase to the existing centre on the northwest corner of the intersection of Martindale Road and Grapeview Drive. The centre is currently comprised of one property with an area of approximately 0.07 hectares. The lands to be added have an area of 0.34 hectares. Combined, the site would be 0.41 hectares. Part D Section b) states that any application to increase the size of a centre beyond 0.4 hectares of land will only be considered where such application includes the development of residential units. The conceptual proposal includes seven (7) second floor residential apartment units. The proposal also includes 700 square metres of commercial gross leasable floor area (GLFA). The provisions of the proposed C1 zone state that where the GLFA exceeds 370 square metres, the C1 zone requires residential units to be provided at a density between 20 and 32 units per hectare. The proposed 7 residential units satisfy the density requirements with a density of 20.4 units per hectare. iii) iv) Total gross leasable floor area (GLFA) for commercial uses should not exceed 930 square metres; The proposal includes about 700 square metres of commercial GLFA. The existing C1 property has approximately 140 square metres of commercial GLFA. Altogether, this Local Neighbourhood Convenience Commercial Centre would have approximately 840 square metres of commercial GLFA, which meets the above requirement. Furthermore, the provisions for the C1 zone do not permit development which exceeds 930 square metres of commercial GLFA. Total gross leasable floor area per individual commercial use should not exceed 370 square metres. The provisions for the proposed C1 zone do not permit the development of commercial units on the site which exceed 370 square metres of GLFA. The concept plan does not indicate individual commercial unit sizes, but states that commercial units will not exceed the maximum GLFA of 370 square metres. v) The centre shall be located at the intersection of arterial or arterial and collector roads, central to its intended service area, have an intended service radius of not more than 0.8 kilometres and should not be located within this distance from a Commercial land use designation. The centre is located at the intersection of Martindale Road, a Regional arterial road, and Grapeview Drive, a City collector road. Within a 0.8 kilometre radius (excluding lands east of Twelve Mile Creek), there is one commercial property. The property is located approximately 0.64 kilometres north of the subject lands, and is municipally known as 211 Report Page 4 of 8 Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Proposed A... Page 39 of 91

40 AGENDA ITEM 3.3 Martindale Road. The property is designated Community Commercial and contains a plaza with a number of commercial uses intended to serve the local surrounding community. Staff recognizes the proximity of this property to the subject lands, and does not anticipate that the proposed development will significantly detract from, nor compete with, the existing commercial land use. Since the Local Neighbourhood Convenience Commercial Centre already exists, staff is not concerned that commercial uses in this particular location will negatively impact existing commercial uses in the broader community. vi) vii) Residential units should be provided where gross leasable commercial floor area exceeds 370 square metres, and in a manner not to detract from the primary convenience commercial function of the centre. Where the GLFA exceeds 370 square metres, the C1 zone requires residential units to be provided at a density between 20 and 32 units per hectare. The proposed gross leasable floor area of 700 square metres exceeds the 370 square metre maximum. Therefore, seven (7) residential units are proposed, resulting in a density of 20.4 units per hectare. Auto related uses, excluding a gas bar, are not permitted. The proposal does not include any auto-related uses. The provisions of the C1 zone do not permit the construction of any such use, except for gas bars. Based on the evaluation against these criteria, staff are satisfied that the proposal is in keeping with the intent and purpose of the Official Plan. No Official Plan Amendment is required. Zoning By-law Amendment to By-law By law zones the lands as Low Density Residential Suburban Neighbourhood () (Appendix 5). The zone does not permit a mixed use development. A rezoning to the C1 zone is required. The C1 designation permits a variety of commercial uses, animal care establishments, cultural facilities, day cares, gas stations, service commercial uses, restaurants, retail stores, social service facilities, indoor recreation facilities, offices, places of worship, and apartment dwelling units. The C1 zone is intended to serve the day-to-day convenience needs of nearby local residents. The existing centre on the northeast corner of the intersection is well below the maximum area of 0.4 ha, and contains a dental office. The proposed amendment will increase the area of the centre, providing the opportunity and space for a greater variety of uses to serve the surrounding neighbourhood. The C1 zone also requires that residential units be provided at density of 20 to 32 units per hectare in developments with greater than 370 square metres of commercial GLFA. As a result, the residential density of the subject lands is not reduced by the proposed amendment. Appendix 6 Report Page 5 of 8 Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Proposed A... Page 40 of 91

41 AGENDA ITEM 3.3 outlines the requested map change to the zoning by-law. As proposed on the conceptual site plan, no special provisions or variances to the Zoning By-law are required to facilitate the proposed development. Site Plan Approval The City s site plan control by-law, as amended, requires that all commercial development, and all residential development of four or more units be subject to site plan control. Site plan control is the City s principal tool through which staff can implement design considerations to maximize compatibility with the surrounding neighbourhood and ensure the long-term maintenance and functionality of the site. Site plan control also ensures that developments are designed to meet minimum municipal development standards. The site plan approval process addresses building elevations, landscaping, tree preservation, access, parking, lighting, site servicing, grading and drainage, stormwater management, waste collection, and similar site details. Once these designs are found to be acceptable, the applicant will be required to enter into a site plan agreement with the City and post securities to ensure the required works are satisfactorily completed. Circulation Comments The application was circulated to various city departments and external agencies. No concerns or objections to the proposal were received. Comments were offered as follows: Niagara Region Planning and Development Services Regional concerns include noise from the adjacent roadways, and waste collection. Both of these matters will be addressed through the site plan process. Development Engineering Division A 0.9 metre road widening is requested across the Grapeview Drive frontage. The widening will be addressed through the site plan process. Public Open House Planning and Building Services hosted a public open house on December 14, The purpose of the meeting was to present the applicant s proposal and provide an opportunity for questions to be asked and comments to be received by City staff before formulating a recommendation. The owner, two consultants and five (5) members of the public were in attendance. The residents did not object to the proposed change to the Zoning By-law. They did have questions about the site plan and expressed concerns relating to the development. Below is a list of concerns expressed by the attendees: Compatibility Comment: The primary concern was compatibility of the proposed zone and proposed development with surrounding land uses. Compatibility concerns included the interface of the subject lands with the adjacent residential lot to the west and the north in terms of landscaping, and waste storage and collection. Report Page 6 of 8 Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Proposed A... Page 41 of 91

42 AGENDA ITEM 3.3 Response: As seen on the conceptual site plan (Appendix 7) the interface with the adjacent residential uses will primarily be landscaped buffer. The proposed buildings and potential garbage enclosure are all located at a distance from existing dwellings, mitigating any potential nuisance on surrounding properties. The mixed-use buildings are situated closer to the intersection and existing commercial properties than the residential lands to avoid physical impacts on existing detached dwellings. A proposed private walkway with landscaping provides a buffer between the proposed development and the existing commercial use on the corner. A board fence is proposed along all lot lines shared with abutting properties. Future Uses Comment: The proposal will go through the site plan approval process before any new buildings are constructed. Through this process, staff will ensure that adequate setbacks, buffers, and any necessary mitigation measures are in place to maximize the compatibility of any new development with both the residential and commercial uses in the surrounding area. Residents questioned what could be constructed if the land was zoned C1, and the potential for loud uses on the site. Response: The chart of permitted uses in the C1 zone was distributed and includes the following uses, as listed earlier in this report: a variety of commercial uses, animal care establishments, cultural facilities, day cares, gas stations, service commercial uses, restaurants, retail stores, social service facilities, indoor recreation facilities, offices, places of worship, and apartment dwelling units. Excessive noise is not anticipated with any of the permitted uses, particularly since commercial units are capped at 370 square metres, limiting the potential for large scale commercial tenants. Additionally, St. Catharines By-law prohibits and regulates noise. The by-law outlines certain types of noise that are likely to disturb inhabitants of the city, particularly between 11:00PM and 7:00AM. Any person who causes or a noise listed in the by-law is guilty of an offence, and subject to a penalty. Public Notice In accordance with established procedures, notices for the public meeting have been circulated. Second Planning Opinion Advisory Should Council consider not supporting the Staff Recommendation, Council is advised to defer its decision until such time as a second planning opinion from an outside consultant can be obtained. In the event the second planning opinion is supported by Council, and Council makes a decision based on that second planning opinion, and if and when the matter should be heard before the Ontario Municipal Board, then the Report Page 7 of 8 Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Proposed A... Page 42 of 91

43 AGENDA ITEM 3.3 planner who has provided the second opinion shall be retained for the purpose of a hearing. Financial Implications Any improvements triggered by the proposed development will be at the cost of the developer. Relationship to Strategic Plan Economic Sustainability The approval of this residential development proposal will serve to support the goals for environmental sustainability by: Prioritizing redevelopment initiatives consistent with provincial planning legislation and the City s Official Plan to intensify mixed-use residential developments and ultimately enhance the property tax base and support job creation. Conclusion In summary, the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment conforms to Provincial and Regional planning policies, and meets the criteria and intent of the Official Plan to permit the expansion of existing Local Neighbourhood Convenience Commercial Centres. The proposed amendment will allow a reasonable and desirable expansion of the existing commercial area without negatively impacting abutting residential uses. The proposed amendment represents good planning and is supported by staff. Notification It is in order to advise Mr. Chris Millar, InSite Land Use Planning, of Council s decision. Prepared by: Charlotte McEwan Planner I Submitted by: Judy Pihach, MCIP, RPP Manager of Planning Services Approved by: James N. Riddell, M.PL., MCIP, RPP Director Report Page 8 of 8 Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Proposed A... Page 43 of 91

44 AGENDA 1 ITEM 3.3 Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Proposed A... Page 44 of 91

45 AGENDA 2 ITEM 3.3 Context Map A B 22A A N 101 Niagara Regional Air Photo (April, 2015) Subject Lands 115 & 117 Martindale Road; 14 Grapeview Drive File: Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Proposed A... Page 45 of 91

46 AGENDA 3 ITEM 3.3 Existing Land Use Designation (General Land Use Plan D1 - Garden City Plan) N 115 & 117 Martindale Road & 14 Grapeview Drive Land Use Designations Neighbourhood Residential Natural Areas File: Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Proposed A... Page 46 of 91

47 AGENDA 4 ITEM 3.3 Existing Land Use Designation (West Planning District - Garden City Plan) N 115 & 117 Martindale Road & 14 Grapeview Drive Land Use Designations Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential Natural Areas Natural Area Extent Line Files: Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Proposed A... Page 47 of 91

48 AGENDA 5 ITEM 3.3 R3 G2 Existing Zoning (Schedule A - Zoning By-law ) G2 G2 R2 R2 R2 C1 R2 G1 C1 C1 C1 R3 N 115 & 117 Martindale Road & 14 Grapeview Drive Zones R2 R3 Low Density Residential - Suburban Neighbourhood Low Density Residential - Traditional Neighbourhood Medium Density Residential C1 G1 G2 Local Convenience Commercial Conservation / Natural Area Minor Green Space Files: Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Proposed A... Page 48 of 91

49 AGENDA 6 ITEM Proposed Amendment to Zoning By-Law A R3 G B 22A (Schedule A - Zoning By-law ) 21 18A G A G R2 C C A 2 10 R2 R2 C A R R A 90 1 C1 G1 N 115 & 117 Martindale Road & 14 Grapeview Drive 1A Subject lands to be re-zoned from Low Density Residential - Suburban Neighbourhood () to Local Convenience Commercial (C1) Zones R2 R3 Low Density Residential - Suburban Neighbourhood Low Density Residential - Traditional Neighbourhood Medium Density Residential C1 G1 G2 Local Convenience Commercial Conservation / Natural Area Minor Green Space Files: Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Proposed A... Page 49 of 91

50 Planning and Building Services, Planning Services Proposed A... 1 Renforth Square St.Catharines, Ontario L2M 6X3 Tel: InSite Land Use Planning _ZI-CDP1 ILLUSTRATION FOR ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT APPLICATION CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN Prepared for: The Aceti Family CITY FILE No & 117 MARTINDALE ROAD and 14 GRAPEVIEW DRIVE Proposal to Rezone from Residential Zone to Convenience Commercial C1 Zone CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN KEY PLAN 1 : 4000 AGENDA ITEM Page 50 of 91

51 AGENDA ITEM 3.4 Corporate Report Report from Financial Management Services, Property Management Date of Report: March 20, 2017 Date of Meeting: April 10, 2017 Report Number: FMS File: Subject: 101 South Drive Property Task Force Report and Recommendations Recommendation That this report be received for information purposes. FORTHWITH Summary This report has been prepared to provide a response to the recommendations of the 101 South Drive Property Task Force and to provide Council with options should they resolve to establish a neighbourhood park for the Glenridge community as a parkland acquisition priority. Background On April 18, 2016, Council approved the terms of reference for the 101 South Drive Property Task Force. The terms of reference that were adopted by Council are as follows: This task force will work with all community stakeholders, including the City of St. Catharines, residents, the District School Board of Niagara and the Old Glenridge Community Association to explore all options for the site and then to make recommendations to City Council for the future use of 101 South Drive (the old Glen Ridge School Property). The task force be disbanded once a report is prepared and presented to Council on possible uses/considerations for the property 101 South Drive (the old Glen Ridge School Property). On September 26, 2016 Council received the recommendations of the 101 South Drive Property Task Force as follows: 1. That Council recognize the historical role that the Glen Ridge School playground has played in the providing neighbourhood park space to the community and that Report Page 1 of 10 Financial Management Services, Property Management 101 South... Page 51 of 91

52 AGENDA ITEM 3.4 without the playground the community is deficient in terms of practical access to a neighbourhood park within a walkable proximity. 2. That the establishment of a neighbourhood park for the Glenridge neighbourhood be a parkland acquisition priority. 3. That Council approve the staff recommendation with respect to 101 South Drive to designate under part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. 4. That staff be directed to prepare a request for proposals to solicit interest in the purchase of the balance of the Glen Ridge School lands that will not be required by the City for use as a neighbourhood park, including the former school building. 5. That staff be directed to pursue the purchase of the Glen Ridge School property from the District School Board of Niagara (DSBN) at such time as the school board declares the property as surplus. 6. That staff be directed to prepare urban design standards for the lands, which will seek to ensure that new development is compatible and reflective of the design and character of the neighbourhood. These design standards are to be included in the request for proposals. 7. That staff be directed to work with the task force to consult with and make recommendations on the development of the severed parcel. At the same meeting, Council referred the Task Force Progress Report to staff for further information. Staff was directed to extend the term of the 101 South Drive Task Force until such time as decisions are made on the development and consult with the Task Force to make recommendations on the development of the severed parcel. Council approved the designation, on September 26, 2016, of the building located at 101 South Drive (Glen Ridge School), save and except the addition constructed in 1987, to be of cultural heritage value or interest pursuant to Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. Council approved the necessary by-law, , on November 21, The DSBN has now formally declared 101 South Drive surplus. Official Plan and Zoning The site area is approximately 0.9 hectares (2.22 acres) and the former school building is approximately 2,100 square metres (22,600 square feet) in size. The lands are designated as Neighbourhood Residential in the Garden City Plan General Land Use Plan and Low Density Residential on the South Planning District Schedule. This designation permits detached, semi-detached, duplex, triplex, quadruplex and townhouse dwellings at a density range generally between 20 and 32 units per hectare of land. Height of buildings will generally not exceed 11 metres. The City s Zoning Bylaw zones all of the lands Local Neighbourhood Institutional (I1-122). I1 uses that are permitted include: cultural facility, daycare, emergency service facility, longterm care facility, place of worship, indoor or outdoor recreational facility, elementary and secondary schools and social service facility. Under Special Provision 122, permitted residential uses include: detached dwellings, semi-detached dwellings, duplex, triplex, fourplex, quadruplex, townhouse and private road development. Report Page 2 of 10 Financial Management Services, Property Management 101 South... Page 52 of 91

53 AGENDA ITEM 3.4 Report Staff have considered all of the recommendations of the 101 South Drive Property Task Force and responded to each of the recommendations below. Recommendation 1: That Council recognize the historical role that the Glen Ridge School playground has played in the providing neighbourhood park space to the community and that without the playground the community is deficient in terms of practical access to a neighbourhood park within a walkable proximity. Staff recognize that the school yard associated with the former Glen Ridge School is a valued community asset that has provided recreational opportunities to the neighbourhood for many years. Staff also acknowledge the value of these open space amenities in promoting active, healthy, livable and prosperous communities. The Garden City Plan (effective July 31, 2012), the Parks Policy Plan (dated June, 2005) and the Recreation Facility and Programming Master Plan (dated July, 2015) are the City s key policy documents that identify and prioritize park needs and are used to guide acquisition and operational decisions. The Parks Policy Plan, specifically, sets out neighbourhood-level parkland supply objectives and continues to serve as a blueprint for St. Catharines parks system. The Parks Policy Plan addresses five key types of park facilities: neighbourhood parks, district parks, city-wide parks, linear parks, and special urban parks, with recommended service levels for each park type. The recommended service radius for a neighbourhood park is 800 metres, uninterrupted by major thoroughfares and/or other major physical barriers. The 800m service distance is measured as a straight-line radius and doesn t reflect actual travel distance that may be required to access a park. Appendix 1 attached hereto provides an aerial view of the school property in relation to Burgoyne Woods Park. The Parks Policy Plan assessed each district of the City for gaps in this 800m neighbourhood park service radius. School yards were not included in the service analysis as the City cannot depend on school space availability. Where school yards are available, they provide additional open space amenities above and beyond the recommendations of the plan. Much of the Old Glenridge neighbourhood is located within one of these gap areas, meaning that most of the homes are located more than 800 metres from a neighbourhood park. Much of the neighbourhood is, however, located close to Burgoyne Woods which is classified as a city-wide park. The Parks Policy Plan specifically addresses the neighbourhood park service radius gap in Old Glenridge, stating that Burgoyne Woods contains a wide range of park amenities which serve the neighbourhood, including a playground and playing field. The plan goes on to state that acquisition of parkland to address this gap is not warranted and should not be a priority in the south district. Report Page 3 of 10 Financial Management Services, Property Management 101 South... Page 53 of 91

54 AGENDA ITEM 3.4 The Parks Policy Plan also addresses possible school closures, stating: while school closures and the resulting loss of open space significantly impacts adjacent residents, there is sufficient municipally-owned open space to meet the needs of the community. The Parks Policy Plan and the Garden City Plan also identify parkland acquisition priorities, which generically include: Lands to connect and extend the City s green space and cultural heritage landscapes and routes, and connect together with other government s or agency s parkland and corridors; Lands to complete the waterfront trail, to increase access to the waterfront, an improve waterfront parkland; Lands for playing fields to accommodate recreation facility demands; Lands to extend and complete the trail system and active transportation networks; and Lands to create urban plazas and parkettes in the core area, gateways, and to support streetscape improvement. According to the City s established policy criteria, the creation of a neighbourhood park in the Glenridge area has not been identified as an acquisition priority. Acquisition of land to create a new park in an area already adequately served by parks facilities would create inconsistency with other City neighbourhoods with similar circumstances. Notwithstanding the foregoing, should Council wish to address the task force s concern for practical access to local park facilities, it may wish to consider an alternative to the task force recommendation by way of creating a special urban park (SUP) (per Parks Policy Plan classifications) providing junior level playground facilities servicing children up to five years of age accommodating play equipment for younger children and socialization space, a SUP would address concerns that neighbourhood access to similar facilities within Burgoyne Woods Park may be inconvenient or challenging for some residents. The SUP approach also provides for the efficient use of land in providing local park facilities while minimizing land purchase costs and enhancing the redevelopment opportunities for the remainder of the site. The SUP requires an area of hectares (37m x 40m). Although not contained in the final task force recommendations, the task force did envision a larger park, comprising approximately one-third of the property, specifically an approximate hectares (36.5 m x 74m) park site. Appendix 2 provides a sketch showing the approximate area of a SUP, as well as the approximate area of a park that would comprise approximately one-third of the property. The SUP would require redevelopment of the site including the installation of age appropriate play equipment and park amenities at an approximate cost of $120,000 with annual operations and maintenance costs ranging from $5,000 to $7,500. Council alternative consideration for this recommendation is addressed in the conclusion section of this report. Report Page 4 of 10 Financial Management Services, Property Management 101 South... Page 54 of 91

55 AGENDA ITEM 3.4 Recommendation 2: That the establishment of a neighbourhood park for the Glenridge neighbourhood be a parkland acquisition priority. If Council chooses to identify the acquisition of all or a part of the Glen Ridge school property as a priority it should be with the understanding that this is contrary to the recommendations of the Parks Policy Plan which specifically states that park acquisition should not be a priority in this district. Utilizing the parkland dedication fund to purchase the property for this neighbourhood park is not recommended as it would limit the availability of the fund to address the approved acquisition priorities, current deficiencies, leased parkland, redevelopment areas, and the City s Recreation Master Plan and Strategic Plan priorities. With limited cash in lieu of parkland funds available, acquisition of the Glen Ridge School would negatively impact the City s ability to respond to these future opportunities and needs. Accordingly, a pending staff report will provide recommendations for an expenditure policy for the cash in lieu of parkland reserve fund. Should Council decide to establish a neighbourhood park as a parkland acquisition priority, the benefit to the Glenridge neighbourhood would be access to additional open space, over and above the recommendations of the Parks Policy Plan. Such a decision also has long term financial implications. Assuming no changes to the current amenities, the annual operating costs are estimated to be between $5,000 and $10,000 and the amenity replacement costs are estimated to be $200,000 every 20 years (in 2016 dollars). These costs would need to be added to existing operating and capital budgets and forecasts. Council alternative consideration for this recommendation is addressed in the conclusion section of this report. Recommendation 3: That Council approve the staff recommendation with respect to 101 South Drive to designate under part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. Council approved the recommendations contained in Report PBS September 26, 2016 to designate the building at 101 South Drive, save and except the addition built in 1987, to be of cultural heritage value or interest pursuant to Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. There was no objection to those recommendations and Council approved the necessary By-law, , on November 21, Recommendation 4: That staff be directed to prepare a request for proposals to solicit interest in the purchase of the balance of the Glen Ridge School lands that will not be required by the City for use as a neighbourhood park, including the former school building. Report Page 5 of 10 Financial Management Services, Property Management 101 South... Page 55 of 91

56 AGENDA ITEM 3.4 The City has the option to express an interest in acquiring the entire property. If Council establishes a neighbourhood park for the Glenridge neighbourhood as a parkland acquisition priority the City would pursue the following steps: Step 1 City to offer the DSBN to purchase a portion of the property to retain as parkland. Step 2 In the event that the DSBN is uninterested in the sale of a portion of the land, the City would express an interest in the purchase of the entire property, subject to an acceptable response to a third party Request for Offer (RFO). An RFO process would solicit interest from third parties to purchase the lands on an as is basis, for a set price with the provision that a portion of parkland would be retained by the City. The execution of the RFO would also be contingent on the successful negotiations between the City and the DSBN. Should this process result in a financially feasible offer, the sale and disposition of lands ultimately deemed surplus by the City must adhere to the provisions of By-law , as amended, being a by-law to establish procedures for the sale and disposition of land for the City. Council alternative consideration for this recommendation is addressed in the conclusion section of this report. Recommendation 5: That staff be directed to pursue the purchase of the Glen Ridge School property from the District School Board of Niagara (DSBN) at such time as the school board declares the property as surplus. The DSBN formally declared Glen Ridge School surplus as its meeting of February 28, The City received formal notice of this declaration on March 21, In accordance with Ontario Regulation 444/98 under the Education Act, the City has 90 days to either submit an offer or express an interest in acquiring the property. Any offer or expression of interest must be received by the DSBN no later than June 19. If an expression of interest is submitted within the 90 day period, a formal offer must be received by the DSBN no later than September 18, In accordance with the regulation, the City is one of a number of parties that have been included in this initial offering of surplus property. Other bodies include Niagara Region, Niagara College, Brock University, the local Catholic and French-language School Boards and the province. The regulation also states that any disposition of land must be at fair market value. Market value can be defined as the most probable sales price which a property should bring in a competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, both buyer and seller acting prudently and knowledgeably and assuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus. To determine the market value an appraiser will conduct a Report Page 6 of 10 Financial Management Services, Property Management 101 South... Page 56 of 91

57 AGENDA ITEM 3.4 highest and best use analysis. The highest and best use of the property can be defined as the reasonably probable and legal use of vacant land or an improved property, which is physically possible, appropriately supported and financially feasible and that results in the highest value. Staff have not obtained an appraisal of the property at this time. Should Council direct staff to pursue the purchase, an appraisal would have to be obtained to form the basis of an offer. Council alternative consideration for this recommendation is addressed in the conclusion section of this report. Recommendation 6: That staff be directed to prepare urban design standards for the lands, which will seek to ensure that new development is compatible and reflective of the design and character of the neighbourhood. These design standards are to be included in the request for proposals. There are some key variables that will influence how the surplus lands may ultimately be developed, the most significant of which is how the existing school building will be used. Different uses for the existing building may or may not have need for the existing gymnasium or private outdoor amenity areas, will have varying parking requirements and may require additions to the existing building. Each of these factors will influence how much of the site will ultimately be required by the new user of the former school building and therefore how much remnant land is available for new construction. Council should be aware that apartment dwellings are not currently a permitted use so any proposal to convert the school building to a multi-residential use would require approval of a zoning by-law amendment and an Official Plan amendment. Given the uncertain nature of potential future uses of the existing school building, it is difficult to prescribe detailed design standards for new construction at this time. Should the future development plans for the lands require planning approval that would be the appropriate time to address urban design standards. Staff also recommend not being too prescriptive at this stage in the process as it may limit the response to the RFO. Recommendation 7: That staff be directed to work with the task force to consult with and make recommendations on the development of the severed parcel. As described above, the nature of future development on any surplus lands will be partly informed by how the school building will be used. Any future development proposals for the lands will require planning approvals, which may include land division, site plan approval, zoning by-law amendment or Official Plan amendment. Many of these required approvals are a public process and it is through this public process that task force consultation would be appropriate. Report Page 7 of 10 Financial Management Services, Property Management 101 South... Page 57 of 91

58 AGENDA ITEM 3.4 Financial Implications The financial implications are not known at this time and will be the subject of future negotiations. A further report dealing with financial implications will be brought forward at the appropriate time. Conclusion The 101 South Drive Task Force recommendation to establish a neighbourhood park for the Glenridge neighbourhood as a parkland acquisition priority is not supported as it does not align with City policies. If Council chooses to address the task force s concern for practical access to local park facilities and establishes this neighbourhood as a parkland acquisition priority the following approvals would be necessary: That staff pursue the steps to create a special urban park to provide junior level playground facilities on a portion of the lands; That staff be directed to express the City s interest to the DSBN in acquiring only the lands required for the SUP; That if the DSBN will only dispose of the entire property, staff be directed to advise the DSBN it intends to acquire the entire property, subject to a satisfactory issuance of an RFO for third parties to offer to acquire the lands on an as is basis subject to the City retaining sufficient land for the SUP; and That if the results of an RFO are unsatisfactory due to financial feasibility and risk to the City, that staff should not pursue this matter any further. Notification It is in order to notify the members of the 101 South Drive Property Task Force and the DSBN. Prepared by: Stephanie Tripp Manager Realty Services Submitted by: Kristine Douglas, CPA, CMA Director of Financial Management Services Approved by: Shelley Chemnitz, CPA, CA Commissioner of Corporate Services Report Page 8 of 10 Financial Management Services, Property Management 101 South... Page 58 of 91

59 AGENDA ITEM Report Page 9 of 10 Financial Management Services, Property Management 101 South... Page 59 of 91

60 AGENDA ITEM 3.4 Task Force Recommended Park (0.27 HA) 2 Special Urban Park (0.148 HA) Report Page 10 of 10 Financial Management Services, Property Management 101 South... Page 60 of 91

61 At the meeting of March 20, 2017, Council deferred this report to the meeting of March 27, At the meeting of March 27, 2017, Council set the public meeting for April 10, 2017, at which time, Council will consider the recommendations within the staff report. Corporate Report AGENDA ITEM 3.5 Report from Legal and Clerks Services, Legal Services Date of Report: March 8, 2017 Date of Meeting: March 20, 2017 Report Number: LCS File: , Subject: Prohibition of Nuisance Parties Recommendation That a public meeting be held on April 10, 2017, pursuant to the Public Notice By-law to consider an amendment to the City s Public Nuisance By-law (By-law ) to add a prohibition to prohibit nuisance parties and specifically the use of rooftops for such purposes. FORTHWITH Background At the regular meeting of Council on March 6, 2017, Council passed the following motion: That Council direct staff to review the recent amendment to London s public nuisance by-law which prohibits rooftop drinking (aka brewfing) and report back to Council with suggestions to amend the by-law, including who would be responsible for enforcement. The proposed amendment is identical to provisions adopted by the City of London to control nuisance parties in that municipality. Report Currently the City of St. Catharine s Public Nuisance By-law does not contain any specific offence to prohibit a nuisance party, or specifically to prohibit the practice of using a roof on a residential property for social gatherings which due to noise and or public intoxication cause a public nuisance to neighbouring properties. The purpose of this report is to provide notice that the City will consider a by-law amendment at the regular meeting of Council on April 10, 2017 to prohibit such conduct. The proposed amendment is to add the following definitions and operative provisions to By-law : Report Page 1 of 3 Legal and Clerks Services, Legal Services Prohibition of Nui... Page 61 of 91

62 AGENDA ITEM 3.5 Definitions: Nuisance Party means a social gathering on Premises within the Municipality and which, by reason of the conduct of the persons in attendance, results in any one or more of the following activities occurring so as to constitute a public nuisance whether occurring on neighbouring public or private property: (a) disorderly conduct; (b) public drunkenness or public intoxication; (c) the unlawful sale, furnishing, or distribution of alcoholic beverages or controlled substances; (d) the deposit of refuse on public or private property; (e) damage to or destruction of public or private property; (f) pedestrian traffic, vehicular traffic, or illegal parking that obstructs the free flow of traffic or could interfere with the ability to provide emergency services; (g) unreasonable noise, including loud music or shouting; (h) unlawful open burning or fireworks; (i) public disturbances, including public brawls or public fights; (j) outdoor public urination or defecation; (k) use of or entry upon a roof not intended for such occupancy; Premises means any public or private place in the Municipality, including but not limited to Highways, parks, parking lots, yards appurtenant to a Building or Dwelling or vacant lands, but does not mean a Building or Dwelling. Operative Provisions: No person shall sponsor, conduct, continue, host, create, attend, allow, cause or permit a Nuisance Party. No person who, individually or jointly with others, is an owner, occupant, tenant, or who otherwise has rightful possession of or possessory control of any Premises, shall allow, cause or permit a Nuisance Party on said Premises under their possession or control. The Public Nuisance By-law is enforced by the Niagara Regional Police when they respond to citizen complaints concerning inappropriate conduct in a public place. If the by-law amendment is passed an application will be made to the Regional Senior Justice to establish a set fine for the offence. This will permit officers to issue Part 1 tickets pursuant to the Provincial Offences Act to property owners or tenants that permit or host nuisance parties. The set fine for other offences under this by-law is $300 and it is recommended that this be the set fine applied for this new offence. Financial Implications There are no financial implications. Report Page 2 of 3 Legal and Clerks Services, Legal Services Prohibition of Nui... Page 62 of 91

63 AGENDA ITEM 3.5 Relationship to Strategic Plan Social Sustainability GOAL: 1. Strive for the highest quality of life for all citizens. Notification That notice be provided inaccordance with the Public Notice By-law and that notice be sent to the Chair of the Town and Gown Advisory Committee and to the Brock University Student Union. Prepared, Submitted & Approved by: Heather A. Salter, Director of Legal and Clerks Services / City Solicitor Report Page 3 of 3 Legal and Clerks Services, Legal Services Prohibition of Nui... Page 63 of 91

64 AGENDA ITEM 4.1 Corporate Report Report from Transportation and Environmental Services, Operations Date of Report: March 20, 2017 Date of Meeting: April 10, 2017 Report Number: TES File: Subject: Manchester Avenue Parking Reinstatement Recommendation That Council approve the removal of the parking prohibition on the north side of Manchester Avenue from Ontario Street to a point 100 metres easterly; and That the City Solicitor be directed to prepare the necessary by-law. FORTHWITH Background Staff received a request from the commercial property at the northeast corner of Ontario Street and Manchester Avenue to allow on-street parking across their site frontage on Manchester Avenue. Report Manchester Avenue is a local residential street located on the east side of Ontario Street, one block north of Carlton Street. On the north side of the street, there are two prohibited parking zones. One zone spans from Ontario Street to Hampstead Place. The other zone is an extended corner prohibition from Whitmore Street to a point 64 metres to the west. Parking is prohibited on the entire south side of the street. A representative for the commercial plaza at 318 Ontario Street, located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Ontario Street and Manchester Avenue, requested that staff investigate the potential to allow parking on the north side of Manchester Avenue across the frontage of their property. As such, staff undertook the requested review. Staff checked the files to determine if there was history as to why parking was prohibited on the both sides of Manchester Avenue from Ontario Street to Hampstead Place but could not find any documentation regarding this. The roadway is approximately 8 metres wide, and there are no curbs. Given this, it was determined that the road is of sufficient width to allow parking on one side of the street. Since parking is prohibited on the south side of the street, staff did not identify any issues with allowing parking across the frontage of the commercial property. Allowing parking in this area will provide approximately seven on-street parking spaces. Report Page 1 of 2 Transportation and Environmental Services, Operations Manche... Page 64 of 91

65 AGENDA ITEM 4.1 As part of the review, letters were sent to the two residential properties immediately across from the commercial plaza that could be impacted by the reinstatement of parking. In the letter, staff indicated that a recommendation was being brought to Council supporting the reinstatement of parking on the north side of the street across the frontage of the commercial property. In the letter, it was noted that this is to be public parking available for anyone to use and not for the exclusive use of the commercial property. Staff received no responses to the letters. A diagram showing the location of the parking prohibition can be found in Appendix 1. Financial Implications The proposed parking prohibitions will require the realignment of the existing No Parking signs at a cost of approximately $200 which will be covered by the Annual Operating Budget (Traffic Safety Devices). Relationship to Strategic Plan Social Sustainability The recommendations in this report support the Social Sustainability goals of: Striving for the highest quality of life for all citizens. Connecting people, places and neighbourhoods. Prepared by: Steve Bittner Transportation Technologist Submitted by: Brian Applebee, C.E.T., TOPS Manager of Transportation Services Approved by: Dan Dillon, P. Eng. Director of Transportation and Environmental Services Report Page 2 of 2 Transportation and Environmental Services, Operations Manche... Page 65 of 91

66 AGENDA ITEM Transportation and Environmental Services, Operations Manche... Page 66 of 91

67 AGENDA ITEM 4.2 Corporate Report Report from Transportation and Environmental Services, Operations Date of Report: March 20, 2017 Date of Meeting: April 10, 2017 Report Number: TES File: Subject: Special Event Parking Request: Grantham Optimist Club Recommendation That Council deny the request to waive the parking restrictions on Linwell Road between Geneva Street and Lake Street on May 27 and 28, 2017, and August 26 and 27, 2017; and That the Clerk be directed to make the necessary notifications. FORTHWITH Background Staff and Council received a request from the Grantham Optimist Club to consider the temporary waiving of parking restrictions on both sides of Linwell Road between Lake Street and Geneva Street during the opening and closing weekends of their youth baseball seasons. At its meeting of February 27, 2012, Council approved a similar request that was contingent on a review of the request after five years (refer to Appendix 1). This current request has asked for a continuation of a similar no parking exemption on Linwell Road for a minimum of a further five years. Report Linwell Road is two lane, two-way arterial road that carries approximately 11,000 vehicles per day and serves as a transit route. It has a paved width of 10 metres which is apportioned between two vehicle lanes and two bicycle lanes. As is the case with all roads with bicycle lanes, parking is prohibited on both sides of Linwell Road between Lake Street and Geneva Street. In 2011 and 2012, Council approved the temporary waiving of parking restrictions on both sides of Linwell Road between Lake Street and Geneva Street during the opening and closing weekends of the Optimist s youth baseball seasons. This parking arrangement was continued for both opening and closing weekends of the softball season between 2011 and During these years, staff noted occasional but minimal difficulties with the parking arrangement. However, since parking has been restricted through this area for the purposes of implementing a bicycle lane, in harmony with our promotion and support of active Report Page 1 of 2 Transportation and Environmental Services, Operations Specia... Page 67 of 91

68 AGENDA ITEM 4.2 transportation, staff do not support the waiving of parking restrictions through this section of Linwell Road. Therefore, staff recommend the denial of this request by the Grantham Optimist Club. Financial Implications There are none. Relationship to Strategic Plan Not Applicable. Notification It is in order to notify Donald Walker, Grantham Optimist Club, P.O. Box Lakeport Road, 600 Ontario Street, St. Catharines, Ontario, L2N 7P8. Prepared by: Peter Leyser Transportation Technologist Submitted by: Brian Applebee, C.E.T., TOPS Manager of Transportation Services Approved by: Dan Dillon, P. Eng. Director of Transportation and Environmental Services Report Page 2 of 2 Transportation and Environmental Services, Operations Specia... Page 68 of 91

69 Item No. 117 Report from Financial Management Services, Accounting -16- General February 27, 2012 AGENDA ITEM Date of Report: February 22, 2012 File: Subject: Monthly Investment Report Operating Fund as at January 31, 2012 APPROVED ON CONSENT BY RECORDED VOTE (See General Committee Minutes, February 27, 2012, Item Number 109) RECOMMENDATION That Council receive the report for information purposes and no further action be taken. BACKGROUND An Operating Fund investment report is provided to Council each month. Included in this report is a record of each investment, ordered by due date, outstanding as of the last day of the month. The report details the settlement date, the investment term and interest rate. REPORT Financial Management Services has forwarded the Monthly Investment Report Operating Fund as at January 31, 2012, for consideration of the General Committee (see Appendix II attached). FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Not applicable. Item No. 118 Report from Transportation & Environmental Services, Operations Date of Report: February 14, 2012 File: Subject: Request from Grantham Optimist Club for Relief of Parking Restrictions During Special Events - Linwell Road, Lake Street to Geneva Street, South Side, May 26 and 27, 2012, and August 25 and 26, 2012 MOVED BY COUNCILLOR WILLIAMSON That Council approve the request of the Grantham Optimist Club to waive the parking restrictions on the south side of Linwell Road between Lake Street and Geneva Street on May 26 and 27, 2012 and August 25 and 26, 2012, and That Council direct staff to provide appropriate temporary signage for installation along the designated length of Linwell Road; and That Council direct staff to notify the Niagara Regional Police, area residents, Grace Luthern Church, St. Giles Presbyterian Church and other affected agencies; and Transportation and Environmental Services, Operations Specia... Page 69 of 91

70 -17- General February 27, 2012 AGENDA ITEM 4.2 That the temporary parking exemption for the opening and closing weekends be extended for a period of five years; and further That the Clerk be directed to make the necessary notifications. YEAS: NAYS: Councillors Williamson, Dodge, Harris, Kushner, Phillips, Siscoe, Stack, Stevens, Washuta and Deputy Mayor Secord CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDATION That Council deny the request of the Grantham Optimist Club to waive the parking restrictions on the south side of Linwell Road between Lake Street and Geneva Street on May 26 and 27, 2012 and August 25 and 26, 2012, and That the Clerk be directed to make the necessary notifications. BACKGROUND Staff are in receipt of a request from the Grantham Optimist Club (GOC) to consider the temporary waiving of parking restrictions on the south side of Linwell Road between Lake Street and Geneva Street during the opening and closing weekends of their 2012 youth baseball season. The GOC contends that the installation of bike lanes and associated no parking restrictions on Linwell Road in 2009 has resulted in the overflow of parking into the surrounding neighbourhoods during their two busiest weekends. Prior to 2009, parking was permitted on both sides of Linwell Road which accommodated most of the overflow. A similar request was received by Council in As a trial, staff supported and Council approved the temporary waiving of the parking restrictions on the south side of Linwell Road between Linfield Drive and Sherman Drive, during the opening weekend of May 28 and 29, Based on concerns raised during the trial, staff recommended against allowing the exemption during the closing weekend of August 27 and 28, Contrary to staff s recommendation, Council supported the GOC request and allowed the parking to take place during the closing weekend. REPORT Linwell Road is a two lane, two-way arterial road that carries approximately 11,000 vehicles per day and serves as a transit route. It has a paved width of 10 metres which is apportioned between two east/west vehicle lanes and two east/west bike lanes. Parking is currently prohibited on both sides of Linwell Road through the subject section. During the Spring 2011 trial, parking was permitted on the south side of Linwell Road between Linfield Drive and Sherman Drive and was managed and controlled by the GOC. Although the GOC managed the situation relatively well, staff did receive complaints from the public regarding this parking. Complaints were also received during the closing weekend in August. Observational reviews undertaken by staff did reveal operational concerns associated with this parking. In particular, parking on either side of the road does narrow the adjacent travel lane to a point where drivers have to crowd or cross the centerline in order to pass. This situation is more prevalent for larger vehicles such as SUVs, trucks and buses. Parking within the bike lane also forces cyclists to weave around parked vehicles and travel in the vehicle lane. Parking also congests the road and obstructs the visibility of motorists entering from side streets and private driveways (especially those backing on to the road). For these reasons, staff are not supportive of the GOC s request to waive the parking restrictions on Linwell Road during the opening and closing weekends of their 2012 youth baseball season. Transportation and Environmental Services, Operations Specia... Page 70 of 91

71 -18- General February 27, 2012 AGENDA ITEM 4.2 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Not applicable. CONCLUSION Although Council supported the GOC s request to permit parking on Linwell Road during the opening and closing weekends of their 2011 youth baseball season, the operational concerns identified by staff still remain. In light of these concerns, staff do not support the GOC s request and, as such, are recommending denial. NOTIFICATION It is in order that the Grantham Optimist Club, P.O. Box Lakeport Road, 600 Ontario Street, St. Catharines, ON, L2N 7P8 be so advised. Item No. 119 Report from Planning & Development Services, Implementation Date of Report: February 15, 2012 File: Subject: Application to Amend Zoning Area By-law (Zone 2) to Permit Triplex at 26 ½ George Street; Owner: Hans J. Epp MOVED BY COUNCILLOR SISCOE (In Council) That Council refer General Committee, Item Number 119, Application to Amend Zoning Area By-law (Zone 2) to Permit a Triplex at 26 ½ George Street, to City Council for consideration during Council. (See Council Minutes, February 27, 2012, Item Number 82.) MOTION TO REFER CARRIED RECOMMENDATION That Council receive the report regarding the proposal to amend Zoning Area Bylaw (Zone 2) for lands municipally known as 26 ½ George Street for information purposes. BACKGROUND On February 13, 2012, Council deferred consideration of an application to rezone the subject lands to permit an existing building to be used as a triplex in order to allow Fire and Emergency Management Services an opportunity to inspect the premises in relation to the rear yard access. The matter was deferred to February 27, REPORT Further to Council s deferral of February 13, 2012, Fire Services staff has visited and inspected the premises regarding the rear yard with respect to access for firefighting and have no concerns in that regard. Staff supports the proposed use of the subject lands for a triplex. The proposed use is consistent with the City s policies as well as those of the Province and Region. Recommended zone provisions provided in a report from Planning and Development Services dated January 19, 2012, (attached as Excerpt to Council Agenda of February 27, 2012) reflects the existing building location and no new external building construction is proposed. Conditions to be met under staff s Transportation and Environmental Services, Operations Specia... Page 71 of 91

72 AGENDA ITEM 4.3 Corporate Report Report from Legal and Clerks Services, Office of the City Clerk Date of Report: March 31, 2017 Date of Meeting: April 10, 2017 Report Number: LCS File: Subject: Council Correspondence Recommendation That Council receive and file the items listed within the report; and That Council receive and file additional correspondence distributed for the meeting held April 10, 2017, which is available upon request. FORTHWITH Report The Office of the City Clerk is submitting, for the approval of Council, correspondence received during the period of March 17, 2017, to March 31, Resolutions 1. Niagara Region; Re: Niagara Region s transit service delivery and governance strategy (document includes link to Report CAO and By-law No ) (see Council Agenda Item 9.1 for related Motion) 2. Northern Manitoulin & The Islands; Re: Fair Treatment to All Customers respecting Delivery Fee Charged by Ontario Hydro General Correspondence 3. Vance Badawey, MP; Re: Canada-US Inter-Parliamentary Group Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Caucus Niagara Region 4. NRPS Board - Copy of letter sent to OPP regarding Burgoyne Bridge audit Reports Requested by Council 5. Outstanding Reports List updated March 31, 2017 Prepared by: Submitted by: Approved by: Rebecca Alfieri / Deanna Haine Bonnie Nistico-Dunk Heather Salter Council & Committee Coordinator City Clerk Director/City Solicitor Report Page 1 of 1 Legal and Clerks Services, Office of the City Clerk Council... Page 72 of 91

73 Administration Office of the Regional Clerk AGENDA ITEM 4.3 Sub-item Sir Isaac Brock Way, PO Box 1042, Thorold, ON L2V 4T7 Telephone: Toll-free: Fax: March 27, 2017 Area Municipal Clerks Click on this link to view Report CAO and By-law No mentioned below. SENT ELECTRONICALLY RE: Niagara Region s Transit Service Delivery and Governance Strategy Minute Item 6.1, CL , March 23, 2017 Regional Council at its Special Council meeting held on March 23, 2017, passed the following resolution: That Report CAO , dated March 23, 2017, respecting Niagara Region's Transit Service Delivery and Governance Strategy BE RECEIVED and the following recommendations BE APPROVED: 1. That Niagara Regional Council ENDORSE IN PRINCIPLE the creation of a consolidated public transit system in partnership with the City of Niagara Falls, St. Catharines Transit Commission, the City of Welland, and the Region of Niagara in order to develop a regionally integrated transit system; 2. That Regional Council ADOPT a Bill to provide Niagara Council with the nonexclusive authority to establish, operate and maintain an inter-municipal passenger transportation system for the Region, and such Bill, if adopted, to come into force and effect on June 1, 2017, provided that: a. a majority of the councils of the local area municipalities pass resolutions consenting to the Bylaw; and, b. the total number of electors in the local municipalities that have passed resolutions in support of the Bill form a majority of all electors in the Region of Niagara as established in the revised list of electors for the municipal election held in the year That, subject to the adoption of the aforementioned Bill, a copy of the Bill and Report CAO BE FORWARDED to the clerks of the 12 local area municipalities with a request that their councils adopt the following resolution and advise the Regional Clerk of the results of that consideration, no later than May 31, 2017: That the Council of (name of municipality) consents to the passage of By-law No of the Regional Municipality of Niagara, being a by-law to provide Niagara Region with the non-exclusive authority to establish, operate and Legal and Clerks Services, Office of the City Clerk Council... Page 73 of 91

74 maintain an inter-municipal passenger transportation system for the Niagara Region. Page 2 4. That Niagara Regional Council DIRECT staff to develop a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between Niagara Falls, St. Catharines, Welland and Niagara Region in the development of a governance framework and specify how key issues are to be addressed by all parties along with next steps and timelines; 5. That Council SUPPORT the formation of the Transit Working Group, with representatives from the twelve (12) Local Area Municipalities and the Region of Niagara, to work towards the implementation of the operational improvements outlined in the Dillon report; and, 6. That Council SUPPORT the transition of the current Inter Municipal Working group to a Transit Steering Committee until a new governance framework is established in the pending Memorandum of Understanding. In accordance with Council s resolution, I would appreciate receiving your Councils decision by May 31, I am happy to answer any questions Yours truly, AGENDA ITEM 4.3 Sub-item 1 Natasha Devos Acting Regional Clerk :kl Attachments (2) Legal and Clerks Services, Office of the City Clerk Council... Page 74 of 91

75 AGENDA ITEM 4.3 Sub-item 2 Box 608, Little Current, Ontario, P0P 1K March 17, 2017 Premier Wynne Suite Eglinton Avenue East Toronto, Ontario M4G 4E4 Dear Ms. Wynne: Please find below a copy of a recent resolution passed by our Council: Resolution No Moved by: W. Koehler Seconded by: P. Skippen Whereas the Premier has announced that Ontario Hydro will be waiving delivery fees for customers who reside on First Nation reserves and settlements in Ontario; And whereas the many families in the Town of Northeastern Manitoulin and the Islands are having trouble meeting their financial commitments because of the exorbitant delivery fees charged by Ontario Hydro; Now therefore be it resolved that the Council for the Town of Northeastern Manitoulin and the Islands requests that the Province of Ontario treat all of Ontario Hydro s customers equally and eliminate the delivery fees for residents of the Town of Northeastern Manitoulin and the Islands. Be it further resolved that, in the interest of transparency, Ontario Hydro explain to the municipalities which cost costing measures or alternative revenue sources will be put in place to replace the revenue losses it experiences from the elimination of the delivery charge to its customers. And further that a copy of this resolution be sent to Premier Wynne, Minister Thibeault, and the other municipalities in the Province of Ontario. Carried Yours truly, Pam Cress Clerk Legal and Clerks Services, Office of the City Clerk Council... Page 75 of 91

76 AGENDA ITEM 4.3 Date: March 24, 2017 Report Number: Vance Badawey Sub-item 3 Department: Subject: National Caucus Canada-US Inter-Parliamentary Group Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Caucus 1. PURPOSE Vance Badawey Member of Parliament Niagara Centre Constituency Office: 136 East Main Street, Unit 103 Welland, ON L3B 3W6 Tel: Fax: Vance.Badawey.C1@parl.gc.ca Hill Office: House of Commons Ottawa, ON K1A 0A6 Tel: Fax: Vance.Badawey@parl.gc.ca This report is for information purposes only, and focuses on next steps with respect to a bi-national, bi-partisan partnership that will continue to establish priorities to sustain progress and maintain the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence region as an economic, environmental and social asset. 2. HISTORY, BACKGROUND, EXISTING POLICY The Great Lakes-St. Lawrence region is a bi-national, multijurisdictional asset that is dependant upon consistent, disciplined, economic, environmental and social stewardship. While it is governed by two countries, 126 First Nations and Tribes, ten states and provinces, and thousands of municipalities, the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence region is an integrated, interdependent economy and ecosystem. Together, economic stakeholders, environmental and fishery advocates, and municipal leaders encourage Canadian and US federal elected representatives from the region to work together towards a common agenda to promote, protect and restore this unique binational environmental treasure and economic powerhouse. Although there is currently bi-lateral agreements and jurisdictional strategies, additional attention to the basins are critical to integrate and therefore, sustain the economic, environmental and social aspects of the asset. The Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Region contains 20% of the Earth s surface fresh water, providing drinking water to 40 million people, is the 3rd largest regional economy in the world valued at CAD $7.6 /US $5.8 trillion, hosts one-fifth of U.S. and one-half of Canadian manufacturing, supports a CAD $9.4 billion/ US $7 billion fisheries industry. Legal and Clerks Services, Office of the City Clerk Council... Page 76 of 91