COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AGENDA

Transcription

1 THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF KING COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AGENDA MONDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 2014 TO FOLLOW COUNCIL MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS 2075 KING ROAD, KING CITY, ON Page Chair: Mayor Pellegrini 1. INTRODUCTION OF ADDENDUM REPORTS Any additional items not listed on the agenda would be identified for approval. Motion to add the items to the Agenda. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Motion to approve the agenda, if any Addendum Items - as amended. 3. DECLARATIONS OF PECUNIARY INTEREST 4. DETERMINATION OF COMMITTEE ITEMS REQUIRING SEPARATE DISCUSSION 5. APPROVAL OF COMMITTEE ITEMS NOT REQUIRING SEPARATE DISCUSSION Motion to approve those items which were not requested to be separated. All of these are adopted with one Motion CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS REQUIRING SEPARATE DISCUSSION 7. NEW BUSINESS 8. AGENDA ITEMS 8.1 CM PG LP BC DS AE SP Clerks Department Report Number CL Re: Resolution - Town of Newmarket re Accessibility Advisory Committee Meeting Participation (a) Report CL be received as information; and (b) THAT Committee support the Town of Newmarket s Resolution, attached as Appendix A, on behalf of the Township of King s Accessibility Advisory Committee who received and supported the Resolution at their meeting on November 4th, 2014 and as such; (c) THE Township of King requests: Page 1 of 53

2 C.O.W. Agenda - Mon.November 17, 2014 Page 8. AGENDA ITEMS THAT the Ontario Government consider the appropriate legislative amendments to the Municipal Act, 2001 to permit telephone or video conference participation by appointed members of municipal accessibility advisory committees required by the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005; AND THAT this Resolution by circulated to the Hon. Kathleen Wynne, Premier of Ontario; Hon. Brad Duguid, Minister of Economic Development, Employment and Infrastructure; Hon. Ted McMeekin, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing; Julia Munro, MPP, York Simcoe; Helena Jaczek,MPP, Oak Ridges/Markham/King; municipalities in York Region, Durham Region, Halton Region, City of Toronto; and the Association of Municipalities of Ontario CM PG LP BC DS AE SP Report Number P Re: Site Plan Control By-law and Site Plan Agreements a) That Planning Report Number P be received; b) That By-law , being a Site Plan Control By-law under the Planning Act, be enacted; and c) That the updated standard form site plan agreements to align with the Site Plan Control By-law noted above, be brought forward to Council on December 15, (By-law has been prepared for Council s consideration this evening) CM PG LP BC DS AE SP Report Number P Re: Application for Model Homes Approval, File No. SPD Part of Lots 6 & 7, Concession 5: King City Lots 5, 50, 52, 55, 56, 61, Draft Plan of Subdivision 19T-08K02 (Kingsview Manors) Owner/Applicant: Ontario Inc. (Royal Vintage Homes) See report for recommendations. Page 2 of 53

3 C.O.W. Agenda - Mon.November 17, 2014 Page AGENDA ITEMS 8.4 CM PG LP BC DS AE SP Engineering and Public Works Department Report Number EPW Re: Traffic Calming Petition Kettleby Road, Kettleby 1. That Engineering and Public Works Department Report No. EPW be received for information. 2. That Staff install traffic calming measures on Kettleby Road, as per the Township Traffic Calming Policy, in 2015 as part of the Township s Capital Budget for traffic calming CM PG LP BC DS AE SP Engineering and Public Works Department Report Number EPW Re: Assumption Agreement Regarding Mary Lake Estates and Monarch Corporation File No. 19T-10K01, Part Lot 10, Concession 4 a) Report No. EPW be received as information; b) That By-law , being a by-law to authorize the Mayor and Clerk to execute an Assumption Agreement with Monarch Corporation, be approved; c) That all costs to the Township associated with the preparation and registration of the Assumption Agreement shall be the responsibility of Monarch Corporation. (By-law has been prepared for Council s consideration this evening) CM PG LP BC DS AE SP Finance Department Report Number FR Re: Update to Procurement By-law a) Finance Report FR being a report to update Procurement Bylaw # , be received for information purposes. Page 3 of 53

4 C.O.W. Agenda - Mon.November 17, 2014 Page 8. AGENDA ITEMS b) Council consider enactment of By-Law # being a By-Law to define the Procurement Policies and Procedures for the Corporation of the Township of King. (By-law has been prepared for Council s consideration this evening) 9. ADJOURNMENT NOTICES 10.1 Notices Page 4 of 53

5 ING THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF KING REPORT TO COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE Monday, November 17, 2014 Clerks Department CL RE: Clerks Department Report Number CL Accessibility Advisory Committee Town of Newmarket Resolution - Accessibility Advisory Committee Meeting Participation 1. RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that: (a) Report CL be received as information; and (b) THAT Committee support the Town of Newmarket's Resolution, attached as Appendix 'A', on behalf of the Township of King's Accessibility Advisory Committee who received and supported the Resolution at their meeting on November 4lh, 2014 and as such; (c) THE Township of King requests: THAT the Ontario Government consider the appropriate legislative amendments to the Municipal Act, 2001 to permit telephone or video conference participation by appointed members of municipal accessibility advisory committees required by the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005; AND THAT this Resolution by circulated to the Hon. Kathleen Wynne, Premier of Ontario; Hon. Brad Duguid, Minister of Economic Development, Employment and Infrastructure; Hon. Ted McMeekin, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing; Julia Munro, MPP, York Simcoe; Helena Jaczek, MPP, Oak Ridges/Markham/King; municipalities in York Region, Durham Region, Halton Region, City of Toronto; and the Association of Municipalities of Ontario." 2. PURPOSE: The purpose of this report is to update Committee on the Accessibility Advisory Committees' response to a request of support regarding the Town of Newmarket's proposed changes to the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005 (AODA), pertaining to conference participation by appointed members of municipal accessibility advisory committees. Clerks Department Report Page 5 of 53

6 Clerks Department Report CL Page 2 3. BACKGROUND: Ontario currently has two (2) accessibility laws in place: the Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2001 (ODA) and the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005 (AODA). The ODA requires the Township to have an Accessibility Advisory Committee (AAC). This Committee is to play a key advisory role on advising the Township on AODA implementation and compliance activities, as is detailed and reflected within the Multi-Year Accessibility Plan. The AODA became law in It sets the accessibility standards that an organization must meet in the areas of customer service, information and communications, employment, transportation and the built environment. The Information and Communications, Employment, Transportation and the Design of Public Spaces Standards were combined to form the Integrated Accessibility Standards, Ontario Regulation 191/11 (IASR). These standards apply to both public and private sectors and are now law. Effective January 1, 2014, under Regulation 191/11 of the AODA, specialized transportation service providers must provide an eligibility appeal process which requires that the appeal decision be rendered within thirty (30) days after receiving the appeal application. The transportation system for King Township is currently being overseen by the Region of York. Therefore the Region must ensure it is compliant and include input from its regional municipalities. At the Town of Newmarket's Committee of the Whole Meeting of September 22, 2014, Committee considered and adopted the Resolution to permit telephone or video conference participation by appointed members of municipal accessibility advisory committees required by the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005 (AODA) in order to better serve the community and meet the legislative requirements of the AODA. 4. DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS: The Township of King Accessibility Advisory Committee (AAC) received the information from the Town of Newmarket at their meeting of November 4lh, 2014 and commented it can be very difficult to get volunteers to sit on the Accessibility Advisory Committees, especially in rural communities. They noted there might be situations whereby someone really wants to dedicate their time to the committee but on occasion transportation may be an issue or the persons' disability may physically hinder them leaving their residence on occasion to attend a meeting. The AAC concluded that it can be a challenge to get persons with disabilities involved in their communities and that the Township should be making every attempt to ensure all persons can actively participate within their communities. 5. INTEGRATED SUSTAIN ABILITY PLAN LINKAGE: The Township of King's Integrated Community Sustainability Plan was formally adopted by Council on April 2nd, The Plan is an overarching guiding document that is based upon common values, priorities and community aspirations with the following vision: Clerks Department Report Page 6 of 53

7 Clerks Department Report CL Page 3 "King Township is an idyllic countryside community of communities, proud of its rural, cultural and agricultural heritage. We are respected for treasuring nature, encouraging a responsible local economy and celebrating our vibrant quality of life." This report supports the SOCIO-CULTURAL PILLAR THEME 1: Sense of Community element of the Integrated Community Sustainability Plan. It also meets the Plan's transportation goal of improving public transportation services to meet the needs of ail age groups, income levels and mobility needs. 6. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: There are no direct financial implications to the Township of King. 7. CONCLUSION: With the ongoing implementation of the AODA, the Township continues to integrate accessibility planning into business practices, policies and processes across all departments. The Accessibility Advisory Committee (AAC) will continue to play a critical role in making the Township accessible by providing direct input into the implementation, compliance and monitoring of all accessibility standards under the AODA. 8. ATTACHMENTS: Appendix A: Resolution - Town of Newmarket, dated September 30, 2014 Prepared by: Submitted by; Diane M. Moratto Kathryn Srny^h ^ Administrative Clerk - Council/Committee Township Clerk Clerks Department Report Page 7 of 53

8 Newmarket Andrew Brouwer Director, Legislative Services and Town Clerk Town of Newmarket 395 Mulock Drive P.O. Box 328 Station Main tel.: , Ext Newmarket. ON L3Y47 fax: September Ms. Kathryn Smyth, Clerk Township of King 2075 King Road King City, ON L7B 1A1 Council CAO Other Z Dear Ms. Smyth: RE: Motion - Meeting Participation I am writing to advise that the following motion was considered at the Committee of the Whole meeting held on September 22, Council, at the regular meeting held on September 29, 2014 adopted the following recommendations: THAT the Ontario Government consider the appropriate legislative amendments to the Municipal Act, 2001 to permit telephone or video conference participation by appointed members of municipal accessibility advisory committees required by the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005; AND THAT this resolution be circulated to the Hon. Kathleen Wynne, Premier of Ontario; Hon. Brad Duguid, Minister of Economic Development, Employment and Infrastructure, Hon. Ted McMeekin, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing; Mr. Chris Ballard, MPP; municipalities in York Region, Durham Region, Halton Region, City of Toronto and the Association of Municipalities of Ontario. Yours sincerely, Lisa Lyons Deputy Clerk LLIm cooo H Clerks Department Report Page 8 of 53

9 KING THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF KING REPORT TO COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE Monday, November 17, 2014 Report P RE: Site Plan Control By-law and Site Plan Agreements 1. RECOMMENDATIONS: The respectfully submits the following recommendations: a) That Planning Report Number P be received; b) That By-law , being a Site Plan Control By-law under the Planning Act, be enacted; and c) That the updated standard form site plan agreements to align with the Site Plan Control By-law noted above, be brought forward to Council on December 15, PURPOSE: The purpose of the report is to (i) bring forward a new Site Plan Control By-law to implement the updated site plan control policies, adopted by Council under Official Plan Amendment Numbers 82 through 86; and (ii) advise Council on the status of the updated standard form site plan agreements to align with the new Official Plan policies, and Site Plan Control By-law. 3. BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION Official Plan Amendment Numbers 82 through 86, adopted by Council in July 2013, and subsequently approved, without modifications, by York Region: (i) update the site plan control policies in each of the Township's Official Plan documents to make the policies uniform and consistent, introducing permissions to regulate the exterior design of buildings, and sustainable design elements within or adjacent to adjoining municipal rights-of-way (such as trees, ground cover, permeable paving materials, bicycle parking facilities) through site plan control; and (ii) introduce pre-consuitation, and submission requirements for a complete planning application. In accordance with the new pre-consultation and information requirements policies, Planning staff developed and implemented a formal pre-consultation process. Preconsultation By-law was enacted by Council in June Subsequent to the approval of the new site plan control policies, Planning staff undertook review processes to update both the existing Site Plan Control By-law No. 90- Page 9 of 53

10 PLANNING REPORT P PAGE 2 20, and the standard form of the site plan agreement to bring these documents into alignment with the new policies. A brief overview of the review processes is outlined below. Site Plan Control By-law The draft Site Plan Control By-law (Appendix A) was the subject of review and comment during the official plan amendment process through which the updated site plan control policies were developed, and has been reviewed by the Township's solicitor to ensure consistency with the forthcoming updated standard form site plan agreements, discussed below. The draft Site Plan Control By-law incorporates such components as: clarification that the definition of development includes certain forms such as the establishment of outdoor recreational facilities, and outdoor patios associated with restaurants; matters relating to exterior design, such as scale, character, appearance and design features; sustainable design of buildings, and sustainable design elements within or adjacent to an adjoining municipal right-of-way, such as vegetation, ground cover, street furniture, waste/recycling containers, and bicycle parking facilities; special provisions for lands within the Oak Ridges Moraine, Schomberg Special Policy Area, and lands subject to the Ontario Heritage Act; clarification that site plan approval is required for public agencies, with the exception of any class of development undertaken by the Township of King; a change in the administrative process, whereby Council will no longer pass by-laws authorizing the execution of agreements associated with site plan applications that are approved by the Director of Planning under the Delegated Process; requirement to engage in the Township's pre-consultation process prior to submitting a site plan application; and updated supporting information and materials requirements to align with the supporting document policies in the Official Plan. Site Plan Agreement A site plan agreement is an agreement between the landowner and the Township that is entered into at the completion of the site plan approval process to ensure the subject lands are developed in accordance with the approved plans/drawings and specifications. Staff has undertaken a review of the current standard form site plan agreement to align the document with the updated draft Site Plan Control By-law, and to ensure it remains a workable and practical document that meets the needs of the Township. The review process has included circulation to, and comments from Township departments and the Township's solicitor, and has resulted in changes to recognize and address the following: the increasing complexity of site plan applications the is receiving, and the need to include additional conditions to address certain aspects of the more complex applications; Page 10 of 53

11 PLANNING REPORT P PAGE 3 improvement to the structure of the agreement to better enable its administration and enforcement once the site plan review process has been completed; the opportunity to differentiate "Council Process" site plan agreements such as those that would apply to a multi-residential or commercial development, and "Delegated Process" site plan agreements that would apply to a new single detached dwelling in the Oak Ridges Moraine, for example. Simplifying the "Delegated Process" agreement to include only those conditions which are applicable to such small-scale developments will also help to streamline the site plan application approval process, enable better understanding of landowner obligations, and improve overall processing efficiencies. Drafts of the updated standard form site plan agreements will be distributed to relevant Township Departments for final comment, prior to bringing the documents forward to Council on December 15, INTEGRATED SUSTAINABILITY PLAN LINKAGE: The updated Site Plan Control By-law supports King's Integrated Community Sustainability Plan priority to strengthen the Township's planning policy and by-laws to reinforce environmental protection and public health and safety. The updated By-law will help to better position King to realize the goals for development identified in the ICSP. 5. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: There are no financial implications arising from the consideration of this report. 8. CONCLUSION: Official Plan Amendments 82 through 86, updating King's site plan control policies have been approved by York Region and are now in force. The has undertaken a review of the existing Site Plan Control By-law 90-20, and Site Plan Agreement to update these documents to align with, and implement the newly approved policies. It is now appropriate to enact the attached updated Site Plan Control By-law The updated standard form agreements will be brought forward to Council upon finalization on December 15lh. Planning staff respectfully recommends that Council adopt the Recommendations in Section 1.0 of this report. 9. ATTACHMENTS: Appendix 'A' - Draft Site Plan Control By-law Prepared By: Submitted By: Sarah Allin, MCIP, RPP Stephen Kitchen, MCIP, RPP Policy Planner Director of Planning Page 11 of 53

12 KING THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF KING BY-LAW NUMBER BEING A BY-LAW TO ESTABLISH SITE PLAN CONTROL AREAS WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE TOWNSHIP OF KING AND TO ADOPT RULES FOR THE PROCESSING OF SITE PLAN DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS WHEREAS subsection 41(2} of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.p.13, as amended (the "Planning Act") provides that where in an official plan an area is shown or described as a proposed site plan control area council of the local municipality may, by by-law, designate the whole or any part of such area as a site plan control area; AND WHEREAS Official Plan Amendment Nos. 82 to 86, inclusive, to the Township of King Official Plan designates all lands within the Township as a site plan control area; AND WHEREAS subsection 41(13) of the Planning Act authorizes the council of a municipality to delegate to either a committee of council or an appointed officer of the municipality any of the council's power or authority under Section 41, except the authority to define any class or classes of development that may be undertaken without the approval of plans and drawings otherwise required; AND WHEREAS the Township requires the approval of certain plans and drawings as a condition of development in the Township, and requires that an owner enter into a site plan agreement with the Township, in accordance with Section 41 of the Planning Act; NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Corporation of the Township of King HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. Existing Site Plan Control By-law By-law Number is hereby repealed. 2. TJtle This By-law shall be known as the "Township of King Site Plan Control By-law" also further referred to herein as the "Site Plan Control By-law" or "this By-law". Page 12 of 53

13 - 2 - By-law Number Site Plan Control Area All land within the corporate limits of the Corporation of the Township of King is hereby designated as a site plan control area. 4. Definition of Development In this By-law, for the purposes of administration of site plan control only, "development" shall mean: a) the construction, erection or placing of one or more buildings or structures on land; or b) the making of an interior or exterior addition or alteration to a building or structure that has the effect of increasing the usability thereof; or c) the laying out and establishment of a commercial parking lot of any size, or the expansion of a commercial parking lot resulting in an additional five (5) or more spaces; or d) the laying out and establishment of sites for: i. the location of three (3) or more trailers as defined in clause (a) of subsection 164(4) of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c.25; or ii. the location of three (3) or more mobile homes as defined in subsection 46(1) of the Planning Act; or iii. the construction, erection or location of three (3) or more land lease community homes as defined in subsection 46(1) of the Planning Act; or e) the laying put and establishment of commercial outdoor recreational facilities including golf courses' driving ranges, sports fields and other similar facilities; or, f) the laying out and establishment of outdoor patios associated with restaurants. 5. Site Plan Approval No person shall undertake any development in the site plan control area unless and until: a) the Council of the Corporation of the Township of King, or the person or persons to whom authority has been delegated by Council, has approved the plans and drawings required pursuant to subsection 41(4) and 41(5), and the Township's Official Plan policies, including but not limited to: Page 13 of 53

14 - 3 - By-law Number i. matters relating to exterior design, including without limitation the character, scale, appearance and design features of buildings, and their sustainable design; ii. the sustainable design elements within, or adjacent to, an adjoining municipal right-of-way, including without limitation trees, shrubs, hedges, plantings or other ground cover, permeable paving materials, street furniture, curb ramps, waste and recycling containers and bicycle parking facilities; and b) a site plan agreement or agreements entered into with the Township pursuant to subsection 41(7) of the Planning Act. 6. Classes of Development and Exemptions All classes of development are subject to site plan control and shall be processed through the Council Process, unless otherwise specified in Schedule "A" to this By-law, or expressly exempt by this By-law. The Council Process requires that an application for site plan approval be considered by Council, that the plans and drawings required pursuant to subsections 41(4) and (5) be approved by Council and that any agreements associated with such approval are authorized by Council by by-law. The Delegated Process permits the Director of Planning to consider an application for site plan approval and approve the plans and drawings required pursuant to subsections 41(4) and (5) of the Planning Act in accordance with Section 12 of this By-law. 7. Notwithstanding Section 6 of this By-law, it is generally intended that the following classes of development may be undertaken without the approval of plans and drawings otherwise required under Section 41 of the Planning Act: a) single-detached, semi-detached, and duplex residential buildings and structures, and accessory buildings and structures thereto except as specified in Schedule "A" to this By-law and sections 8, and 9 and 10 herein; b) Townhouse units that (i) are within a registered plan of subdivision; (ii) are subject to a subdivision agreement which is in full force and effect; (iii) front onto and obtain access onto a public street, and; (iv) are not subject to municipallyapproved architectural guidelines and/or an architectural control program; c) agricultural buildings and structures containing agricultural operations, except as Page 14 of 53

15 - 4 - By-law Number specified in Schedule "A" to this By-law and sections 8, 9 and 10 herein; and d) any structures erected for the purpose of flood or erosion control. However, if, in the opinion of the Director of Planning, acting reasonably, there are circumstances which make the Council Process or the Delegated Process necessary or desirable, the Director of Planning may require that a site plan application be made for any of the classes of development described in subsections 7(a) through (d) inclusive. 8. Oak Ridges Moraine Area Notwithstanding any other provision of this By-law, in the Oak Ridges Moraine Area, the approval of plans and drawings is required in accordance with the Section 41 of the Planning Act for the following: a) any agricultural building or structure and accessory buildings and structures thereto, subject to and in accordance with By-law ; and b) any residential building or structure, and any accessory buildings and structures thereto, subject to and in accordance with By-law ! I; For the purpose of this By-law, the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan boundary shall mean the portion of the Township of King within the Oak Ridges Moraine Boundary established by Ontario Regulation 01/02 or its successor. 9. Schomberg Special Policy Area Notwithstanding any other provision of this By-law, the approval of plans and drawings is required in accordance with Section 41 of the Planning Act for the all development on lands within the Schomberg Special Policy Area, as identified on Schedule "B" of the SchombWg Community Plan (OPA 47), as amended. 10. Heritage Act Notwithstanding any other provisions of this By-law, Council shall consider for approval all plans and drawings prior to development which involves properties designated under Part IV or Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act, as amended. 11. Site Plan Approval Required for Public Agencies This By-law applies to development undertaken by any public agency except as follows: Page 15 of 53

16 - 5 - By-law Number a) any class of development undertaken by the Township of King; b) the installation of school portable classrooms on a school site of a district school board if such school site was in existence on January 1, 2007, pursuant to subsection 41(1.1) of the Planning Act. 12. Delegation of Site Plan Approval Pursuant to subsection 41(13) of Planning Act, the powers and authority of the Council of the Corporation of the Township of King, with respect to applications required to undergo the Delegated Process in accordance with Schedule "A" to this By-law, are hereby delegated to the Director of Planning, including the authority to execute any agreement associated with such approval. 13. Pre-Application Consultation Requirements No person shall submit a site plan application prior to engaging in a pre-consultation process with Township staff and staff from any other external agency as deemed appropriate by the Director of Planning. The Director of Planning may refuse to accept or may return any site plan application submitted prior to the owner/applicant engaging in a pre-consultation process with Township staff, in accordance with By-law , as amended from time to time. 14. Site Plan Application Requirements Following the completion of the pre-consultation process as set out in this By-law and By-law , the following shall be submitted in support of a site plan application: a) a completed application form; b) any information or materials prescribed by statute; c) a pre-consultation letter outlining the details of the pre-consultation meeting(s); d) any supporting information and materials to be provided within the initial submission, as determined through the pre-consultation meeting(s); and e) the prescribed, current application fee(s). 15. Amendments to Existing Site Plan Development Agreements Amendments made to an existing site plan development agreement, including to any of its associated plans and drawings, after the date of enactment of this By-law, are subject Page 16 of 53

17 - 6 - By-law Number to the provisions of this By-law. 16. Administration and Enforcement Administration, enforcement, and associated processes, procedures, and penalties shall be established, determined, and carried out in accordance with relevant legislation and law. 17. Revoking of Approval The power to revoke any approval of plans and drawings is hereby delegated by Council to the Director of Planning, who may revoke such approval where: a) the approval has been granted on mistaken or false or incorrect information; b) the approval has been granted in error; c) the applicant for the approval has requested in writing that it be revoked; d) two (2) years after the approval has been granted, the development in respect of which the approval has been granted has not been substantially commenced in the opinion of the Director of Planning, acting reasonably, unless otherwise specified in the associated site plan agreement; or e) there is justification, in the reasonable opinion of the Director of Planning. 18. Severabilitv In the event that a particular provision or part of a provision of this By-law is found to be invalid or unenforceable for any reason, then the particular provision or provisions or part of the provision shall be deemed to be severed from the remainder of this By-law and all other provisions shall remain in full force and shall be valid and enforceable to this fullest extent permitted by law. 19. Schedule "A" attached hereto forms an integral part of this By-law. 20. This By-law shall come into full force and effect on the date of the passing hereof. Page 17 of 53

18 - 7 - By-law Number READ a FIRST and SECOND time this 17th day of November, READ a THIRD time and FINALLY PASSED this 17th day of November, Steve Pellegrini, Mayor Kathryn Smyth, Clerk...ml! Page 18 of 53

19 Schedule 'A' to By-law AGRICULTURAL Mushroom Growing Houses SCHEDULE "A" to BY-LAW SITE PLAN APPROVAL PROCESS FOR CLASSES OF DEVELOPMENT (SEE NOTE #1) Commercial Riding Arenas and/or Barns and Stables associated with the equine industry Commercial Greenhouses Agricultural Greenhouses with an area greater than 500 m' Specialized Farm Uses as defined by Zoning By-law 74-53, as amended Agricultural Buildings or Structures including accessory structures subject to By-law located within the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan boundary Marihuana for Medicinal Purposes Production Operation, licensed under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, as amended from time to time Delegated Process Council Process COMMERCIAL All Commercial Development, unless otherwise stated in this By-law Commercial Parking Lots Expansion of Commercial Parking Lots resulting in 5 or more spaces Installation of a Drive-through Outdoor Patios associated with Restaurants Accessory Buildings or Structures INDUSTRIAL All Industrial Development, unless otherwise stated in this By-law Industrial Parking Lots Expansion of Industrial Parking Lots resulting in 5 or more spaces Accessory Buildings or Structures : INSTITUTIONAL All Institutional Development, unless otherwise stated in this By-law Schools School Portables - Includes all Public and Private Schools (see note #2) Institutional Parking Lots Expansion of Institutional Parking Lots resulting in 5 or more spaces Accessory Buildings or Structures RECREATIONAL Privately Operated Facilities Outdoor Recreational Facilities including golf courses, driving ranges, sports fields, private parks, campgrounds, etc. Recreational Parking Lots Expansion of Recreational Parking Lots resulting in 5 or more spaces Accessory Buildings or Structures RESIDENTIAL Residential Dwellings subject to By-law located within the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan boundary Residential Accessory Structures subject to By-law located within the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan boundary including decks, swimming pools, sheds, cabanas, detached garages, etc. Replacement Dwellings Additional Dwelling Units (Farm Help/Apartments in Houses) Temporary Dwellings Page 19 of 53

20 Schedule 'A' to By-law SITE PLAN APPROVAL PROCESS FOR CLASSES OF DEVELOPMENT (SEE NOTE #1) Enlargement of an existing dwelling which obtains its access via a private road or right-of-way Residential Buildings containing more than 3 residential units Delegated Process Council Process LEGAL NON-CONFORMING USES As may be required in an Official Plan Amendment or Subdivision Agreement Enlargement or Extension or Conversion of a Legal Non-Conforming Use TRANSPORTATION and COMMUNICATION Airstrips, Aerodromes, Airports ADDITIONS and ALTERATIONS Minor Additions or Alterations (meaning a maximum of 10% of gross floor area of the building(s) or to a maximum of 100 m2 whichever is the lesser of the two) Minor Additions or Alterations to Buildings or Structures subject to By-law located within the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan boundary Notes: 1) Any class of Development requiring site plan approval which is not specifically listed in the categories above or expressly exempt in this By-law, shall be required to be processed through the Council Process. 2) Notwithstanding Section 41(1.1) of the Planning Act, school portable classrooms on a school site of a district school board where the school site was in existence on January 1,2007, are not exempt from the Site Plan Control By-law and its requirements if the school site is subject to the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan policies. Page 20 of 53

21 ING THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF KING REPORT TO COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE Monday, November 17, 2014 Planning Report No. P RE: Application for Model Homes Approval, File No. SPD Part of Lots 6 &7, Concession 5; King City Lots 5, 50, 52, 55, 56, 61, Draft Plan of Subdivision 19T-08K02 (Kingsview Manors) Owner/Applicant: Ontario Inc. (Royal Vintage Homes) 1. RECOMMENDATIONS The respectfully submits the following recommendations: A. That Planning Report No. P be received; B. That the application for model homes approval, File no. SPD submitted by Ontario Inc. (Royal Vintage Homes) be revised and the supporting plans/documents be resubmitted in order to conform with the Township's Model Home Approval Policy, Criteria & Procedures including, but not limited to, the following revisions: i. The model homes shall be clustered together in a single area/compound; ii. The model homes shall be located within 90 metres of an existing public road (King Road) or a location with acceptable access and other facilities to the satisfaction of the Fire Chief and Director of Engineering & Public Works; or, the construction of the subdivision hard services (roads, sewers, water, etc.) shall be completed prior to the approval of the model homes; iii. The application will follow the Township's standard site plan circulation and review process through which site planning considerations will be addressed including, but not limited to, the submission and review of the following additional information: i. access design (location, width, surface treatment, etc.); pedestrian considerations; Accessibility Advisory Committee recommendations; ii. services or facilities to be provided (eg. temporary hydro service, facilities for emergency services to the satisfaction of the Fire Department, i.e. access and on-site water, if required, etc.) iii. landscaping of the overall sales area/centre and parking areas; iv. amount, location, lighting, and design of parking; v. site lighting and signage; vi. confirmation that there are no outstanding fees, invoices, payments required by the Township; C. That subject to the submission of the revised application and additional information requirements as noted in Recommendation 'B' above, a circulation of the application Page 21 of 53

22 Planning Report P Page 2 for review by Township departments and/or external agencies, as required, shall be completed; D. That subject to the submission, review and approval of the revised application and additional information requirements as noted in Recommendation 'B' above, the applicant enter into a Model Home Development Agreement with the Township which shall address matters such as, but not limited to, the collection of securities, payment of development charges and/or other payments, residential occupancy restrictions, risk/liability, insurance, indeminifcation, site restoration, and other special provisions; E. That prior to any approval of model homes, the applicant shall advise the Township in writing with respect to the status of the subdivision registration process and any requests for an extension to the lapsing provisions for draft plan of subdivision approval and servicing allocation reservation and submit any related fees, all for the consideration of Council at the December 15, 2014 Council meeting. 2. PURPOSE. PROPOSAL AND BACKGROUND The purpose of this report is to advise Committee with respect to the application for model homes approval submitted by Ontario Inc. (Royal Vintage Homes). The proposed model homes are located within the eastern portion of the draft plan. Lots 50, 52, 55, 56, and 61 are located within the R1-3(H) zone, which requires a minimum lot frontage of 18 m, and Lot 5 is located within the R1-2(H) zone which requires a minimum lot frontage of 20m. Draft Plan of Subdivision 19T-08K02 was draft approved by the Township in June 2010, and subsequently a revised draft plan approval and related zoning by-law was approved in The draft plan provides for a total of 65 single detached homes, together with other blocks for storm water management and pumping station purposes. The owner has entered into a subdivision agreement with the Township and site servicing and construction is underway. Although the draft plan has been in a position to allow for final approval and registration since late 2012, these final stages of the subdivision process have not yet been completed by the owner. 3. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION The subject lands are located north of King Road, east of Jane Street in the village of King City. Site servicing construction is currently being carried out on the subject lands. The subject lots are located within the eastern portion of the draft plan of subdivision and front onto Peter Glass Road and James Stokes Court. 4. DISCUSSION The Township's "Model Home Approval Policy, Criteria & Procedures" (Appendix 2) was established and approved by Council in 2008 and involved the input and collaboration between the Engineering & Public Works Department,, and the Fire & Emergency Services Department. The policy establishes a process and criteria to allow for the issuance of the building permits and the construction of model homes prior to final approval of the subdivision and registration of the lots, blocks, or units, with Page 22 of 53

23 Planning Report P Page 3 consideration to emergency services matters such as water availability and access; and planning matters such as zoning compliance and architectural control; and engineering matters such as servicing availability, grading, and drainage. The subject application is inconsistent with several elements of the Township's model Home Policy. Specifically, since the model homes are proposed to proceed in advance of the completion of the hard services (roads, water, sewer) the model homes are required to be located within 90 m of an existing public road, which in this case would be King Road. The main intent of this requirement is to allow for unserviced model homes while still taking into account fire & emergency services needs with respect to fire protection and access. Three of the proposed model homes are located further than 90 m from King Road. Township staff has significant concerns with respect to the subject application in this regard. In addition, the Township's Model Home policy also requires the proposed model homes to be clustered in a single area. This requirement, together with the policy's maximum allowance of six model homes, seeks to ensure the intent of the model homes is to provide for the temporary sales/marketing purposes rather than circumvent and/or delay the final approval/registration process, as well as to enable the efficient use of the model homes and appropriate site planning with respect to shared parking, signage, lighting, walkways, etc.. Although the proposed model homes are generally located within the eastern portion of the draft plan, Planning staff is not satisfied that the homes have been adequately clustered as required by the Township's policy. Based on the material submitted, there is no indication that the homes are intended to be used as a sales/marketing compound. The Model Home policy requires that the application follow the Township's standard site plan circulation and review process through which site planning considerations will be addressed including, but not limited to, the submission and review of the following additional information: i. access design (location, width, surface treatment, etc.); pedestrian considerations; Accessibility Advisory Committee recommendations; ii. services or facilities to be provided (eg. temporary hydro service, facilities for emergency services to the satisfaction of the Fire Department, i.e. access and on-site water, if required, etc.) iii. landscaping of the overall sales area/centre and parking areas; iv. amount, location, lighting, and design of parking; v. site lighting and signage; vi. confirmation that there are no outstanding fees, invoices, payments required by the Township; The above requirements are largely intended to reflect the information required for the review of the typical elements associated with a model home/sales/marketing compound (eg. parking, pedestrian considerations, accessibility, landscaping, lighting, signage, etc). No information with respect to these elements has been provided by the applicant. In this regard, as noted above, the application is not clear with respect to its intent, i.e. to provide for model homes for temporary sales/marketing purposes or to provide for construction of homes which are normally provided for through the final approval and registration process. Page 23 of 53

24 Planning Report P Page 4 Planning staff does note that the proposed model homes do comply with several other aspects of the Township's Policy. Specifically, the following requirements have been complied with: i. the subdivision has received draft plan approval and zoning by-law amendment approval; ii. the subdivision agreement and detailed engineering has been completed; iii. the proposed number of model homes does not exceed the permitted maximum of 6; iv. architectural control review, engineering, and zoning compliance approvals have been granted for the proposed model homes. However, given the concerns noted above with respect to compliance with fundamental elements of the Township's Model Home policy, staff has significant concerns with the subject application. As a result, the application was recently reviewed and discussed at a preliminary level at the Township's Development Application Review Team (DART) meeting, which includes representatives from all Township departments, and it was determined that the application requires revisions to conform with the Township policy and that the circulation and further review of the application should only take place upon receipt of the revised application. Subject to the submission, review and approval of a revised application and the additional information requirements as noted above, the applicant will be required to enter into a Model Home Development Agreement with the Township which shall address matters such as, but not limited to, the collection of securities, payment of development charges and/or other payments, residential occupancy restrictions, risk/liability, insurance, indeminifcation, site restoration, and other special provisions. Planning staff also notes that the Township has worked very closely with the owner over the last several years to assist and expedite the final approval and registration process. As a result, the draft plan of subdivision has significantly advanced towards final approval and registration and has been in a position to complete this process since late 2012, with some final requirements to be completed by the owner. However, the owner/applicant has not completed the registration process since that time. Staff has maintained our willingness to assist in this regard and have encouraged the owner to complete this process. If the plan registration process is completed, model home approval would not be required since the plan would be eligible for typical home construction. In addition to the Township's Model Home policy, the draft plan of subdivision is also subject to the "lapsing" provisions of its draft plan approval and servicing capacity reservation. These lapsing provisions provide a period of three years from the date which draft plan approval is granted for the owner/developer to fulfill the conditions of draft plan approval and complete the final approval and registration process. Council has previously granted extensions in this regard for the Kingsview draft plan. The current lapsing provisions were extended to October If the registration process is not completed within this time period, the Township may, at its discretion, withdraw its approval of the proposed plan of subdivision. However, these lapsing provisions also provide for an opportunity for the Township to provide extensions if deemed appropriate. The lapsing provisions seek to ensure that the draft plan advances in an expeditious Page 24 of 53

25 Planning Report P Page 5 manner, and that the approval and related conditions of approval remain current and up to date with the present standards and requirements of the Township and/or other agencies, and to provide an opportunity to evaluate the need for any revisions to the conditions. In addition, the lapsing provisions and/or conditions of draft plan approval also include provisions which provide that the Township may reconsider the sanitary and water servicing capacity reservation/allocation to the draft plan and assign it to another project in the event that the draft approved plan is not registered within three years from the date which draft approval is granted. The intent of these provisions is to require the draft plans to "use it, or lose it" in regard to the servicing capacity assigned to the project. As noted above, the lapsing provisions were extended to October 2014 and, as such, require further action by the owner and/or consideration by the Township. The owner has not made a request to the with respect to seeking a further extension. Given the Council recess during the municipal elections, Planning staff anticipates reporting to Council with respect to the status of this and other draft plans of subdivision in December 2014 and make recommendations to Council with respect to any further extensions and/or expiration of the lapsing provisions. Planning staff will contact the the owner/applicant for the Kingsview Manors draft plan to advise with respect to the requirements to be submitted to the Township if they intend to pursue a further extension. Although some flexibility is being provided with respect to the October 2014 deadline in recognition of the Council recess and allowing until December 2014 for further action, Planning staff strongly recommends that this draft plan status matter requires resolution prior to any consideration of the approval of model homes. 5. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS None at this time. The required application fees have been paid. Development charges, security deposits and other fees will be payable at a later stage (i.e. model home agreement, final approval/registration, building permit, etc.). Any external costs (peerreview, legal, engineering, etc.) incurred by the Township through the processing and review of this application will be recovered from the applicant in accordance with the Township's standard practice and owner's acknowledgement through the application form. 6. SUSTAINABILITY PLAN LINKAGE The recommendations of this report support the land use planning objectives of the Environmental Pillar of the Township's Sustainability Plan. 7. CONCLUSION The purpose of this report is to advise Committee with respect to the application for model homes approval submitted by Ontario Inc. (Royal Vintage Homes). The Township's "Model Home Approval Policy, Criteria & Procedures" (Appendix 2) establishes a process and criteria to allow for the approval and construction of model homes prior to final approval and registration of the subdivision with consideration to emergency services matters such as water availability and access; and planning matters such as zoning compliance and architectural control; and engineering matters such as servicing availability, grading, and drainage. The subject application is inconsistent with several elements of the Township's Model Home Policy. As such, staff recommends Page 25 of 53

26 Planning Report P Page 6 that the application be revised to conform with the Township policy and resubmitted for circulation, review, and approval. In addition, the lapsing provisions related to the draft plan of subdivision and servicing capacity reservation must be addressed. 8. ATTACHMENTS Appendix 1 - Draft Plan of Subdivision & Location of Model Homes Appendix 2 - Township Model Home Policy, Criteria & Procedures Appendix 3A & 3B - Model Home Plans, Lot 5 Appendix 4A & 4B - Model Home Plans, Lot 50 Appendix 5 - Model Home Plans, Lot 52 Appendix 6A & 6B - Model Home Plans, Lot 55 Appendix 7A & 7B - Model Home Plans, Lot 56 Appendix 8A & 8B - Model Home Plans, Lot 61 Prepared and Recommended by: Reviewed and Recommended by: Gaspare Ritacca, MCIP, RPP Manager of Planning and Development Stephen Kitchen, B.E.S. Director of Planning Page 26 of 53

27 ;. a-svw t\\ W"- T^Mi-tA- 4 PROPOSED MODEL HOME Page 27 of 53

28 TOWNSHIP OF KING MODEL HOME APPROVAL POLICY. CRITERIA & PROCEDURES SUBJECT: DEPARTMENT: DATE: Model Homes Approval Policy, Criteria, & Procedures Joint-Planning, Engineering & Public Works, Building Services, Fire & Emergency Services November 17, 2008 PURPOSE: This policy establishes a process and criteria to allow for the issuance of building permits and the construction of model homes prior to the Final Approval of the subdivision/registration of lots, blocks or units. POLICY, CRITERIA & PROCEDURES: The following must be addressed prior to the issuance of building permits and the construction of model homes: 1. The subdivision shall have received draft plan approval, including the approval of any related zoning by-law and/or official plan amendments which have come into full force and effect. The model home(s) shall comply with the Township's zoning by-law and any amendments as applicable. Where applicable, the "H" Holding zone symbol shall remain in place for any lots or blocks upon which the model home(s) are to be constructed. 2. A subdivision agreement between the owner and the Township has been executed and the detail engineering drawings (overall grading plan, drainage plan, servicing, utilities, landscaping, etc.) for the subdivision have been approved, to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering & Public Works. 3. If the construction of the model home(s) proceeds prior to the construction and/or completion of the subdivision hard services (roads, sewers, water, etc.), the model home(s) must be located a maximum of 90 metres from an existing public road, or a location with acceptable access and ground surface, and/or other requirements and facilities, to the satisfaction of the Fire Chief and Director of Engineering & Public Works. 4. The maximum number of model homes permitted will be subject to the approval of the Director of Planning, Director of Engineering & Public Works, Director of Building Services, and the Fire Chief, but shall not exceed 10% of the number of units within the applicable phase of the subdivision, to a maximum of six model homes within the subdivision as a whole. If more than one model home is constructed, their location shall be clustered in a single area, where possible. nm Township of King Model Home Approval Policy. Criteria, & Procedures Page 1 of 2 APPENDI 2 Page 28 of 53

29 5. Where applicable, Architectural Design Control Guidelines, Energy Efficiency Housing Guidelines, and other similar requirements which have been imposed as conditions of draft plan approval and may affect the design and/or construction of the homes, must be approved and the model home(s) must comply with their requirements (certification from the control architect will be required). 6. Residential occupancy of the model home(s) will not be permitted prior to the subdivision as a whole and/or the applicable phase/lots have received final approval/registration and, where applicable, the "H" Holding zone symbol has been lifted, and all other requirements for occupancy have been satisfied, in accordance with the related Model Home and/or Subdivision agreement, and to the satisfaction of the Director of Building Services. 7. An application for Model Home/Site Plan approval is required to be submitted for the approval of Council, together with supporting plans and information as required by the Director of Planning, Director of Engineering & Public Works, Director of Building Services and the Fire Chief and other agencies/departments where applicable. The application will follow the Township's standard site plan circulation and review process (eg. circulation to Fire and Emergency Services, Engineering & Public Works, Building Services, external agencies as applicable, etc.) through which site planning considerations will be addressed, such as, but not limited to, the following (specific submission requirements shall be addressed at a pre-submission consultation meeting): access design (location, width, surface treatment, etc.); pedestrian considerations; Accessibility Advisory Committee recommendations; services or facilities to be provided (eg. temporary hydro service, facilities for emergency services to the satisfaction of the Fire Department, i.e. access and onsite water, if required, etc.) conformity with the approved detail engineering drawings for the subdivision, i.e. grading, drainage, service connections, etc.. Certification by the subdivision engineering consultant in this regard shall be required, to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering & Public Works; location(s) of model home(s): relative to the overall subdivision/site, existing and/or proposed roads, fire breaks, clustering of homes, and with respect to the future lot lines and conformity with zoning development standards (setbacks, etc.) as if the plan was registered, etc.; landscaping of the overall sales area/centre and parking areas; amount, location, lighting, and design of parking; site lighting 8. Subsequent to the approval of the Model Home/Site Plan application and plans, the owner shall enter into a Model Home/Site Plan Agreement with the Township. The provisions of the Model Home/Site Plan Agreement shall address the above matters as well as other matters including, but not limited to: collection of securities, payment of development charges or other necessary payments, residential occupancy restrictions, risk/liability, insurance, indemnification, site restoration, etc.. 9. The Township Finance Department must confirm that there are no outstanding invoices, fees, etc. owing to the Township in relation to the subject application and/or subdivision review and approval. Township of King Model Home Approval Policy, Criteria, & Procedures Page 2 of 2 Page 29 of 53

30 NOTES l.fk* OATIM KEUJHTTO8E 2Sim ROHMI LOTSUNLESS OTKEA WSE OCRECTED Bf GUUlEa Mi. LOTS TO BE checked pop. eecrai basement hboht prjoa to pour AW OSCREPANCES TO 8 REPORTED TO 6UUER PRIOR TOPOLB. SITE PLAN REVIEW The review ol this drawing does not in any way relieve the contiactor of responsibility (or its accuracy 01 lor compliance with the contract documents lhe piopoitd Iwt yi ci'k I'l-.t drai'i'ja "> jppio.r. ai bmut "> contwiiiuiy with rhe... irtl., i/iiiuvw; -iuiin'o oian» iu me sub- Lot No.(s) JSW+ Consulting Sngin&ers Toronto 3URNSIDE fh.* A%n liu tiw1 '9v4Hrl4 I""*1 tun.il a i!«>» > DKW03SS" OCT 2 * 20tt NOTES 1.CUUP. TO VETCFV LOCATION OF UTUTIES «NOOTHER SERVCeS. * MN. OVENSONS ABE NOT MJUMTAKSO. eiaoer S TO RELOCATE AT HSKSP. OWN EPiiSE. 1BU1SSI TO VEKW EtfVATION Of STM. AND SAH UTEPALS W RfLA1»TOBASE>OITUSOFFTa EtCVS. PODCOUnilNCe WITH HAK07A1. STANOAflDS PROS TO ECAVATION. ISSUES FOB RN«i. APWWAL TOWNSHIP OF K BLAMNIMG-PT IMuCKl M M0WC3 nn HUMTLILJ DESIGN ASSOCIATES INC. GENVIEW COURT GENVIEW DEV KINGSVIEW MANORS APPENDI B»«ilj CMMilr Ion luitart* m/pijilwtf JL JL 1:250 SP01 5 MWWaMKAw.Sliaa0O.MBWMiH.ON L3H0JT~T8O5.raT.sm PaO M 3A Page 30 of 53

31 > "0 "0 m D W 00 Page 31 of 53

32 TKUfaZVUOMSPM I ICV>ROJECT8%llM1007<G MSTB21M7<Srl<)1.DW0 NOTES t (Mr OAUM K86HT TO BE l»tm WH AU LOTS Ut* SS OTHB1WISE CfCCTEO B» BU1DER Aa UJTS TO K CKEOE) FOB PROSRBASEKWT K86HT HOB TO FOUR. any ascr<e>anms to be reported to guueh prior TO POUR. SITE PLAN REVIEW The review of this drawing does nor in any way relieve the contractor ot responsibility lo( its accuracy or ior compliance with the contract documents. 7>ie proposed lot grsdmg and drainage is approvea as beiny in conform.lv "'in Ihe cveiali appioved gudmg pians 101 the sub- R.K No. l-ot Nc.( JSW+ Consulting EngiivsEfr-Toron URNSiDE siwwfriaitwjjtci. reviiweo u W)ifD 111 atr.». J 8»r» t» intrant toras -O I N\j\BN COURT 201* ^.nsi-hfof \;:sc RECEIVED oct 2 k im TOWNSHIPOgWNQ NOTES 1. BUlOen TO VEKPflOCATIOM OF imutles AND OTHER SERVICES. IF MN DIMENSIONS ARE NOT MAINTAINED, SU1DER S TO RaOCATE AT USHER OWN BKBSE. j. 8UUSR TO VSBV aevatw OF STM. AND SAN UTERILS M HEUTMNTOBASEVB<TU«0FFTa EUVS (OBCOWUWCt MIIM UUHCALSTANOAKOS morto ECAVATQN. 0 OWWWTS J3 0J**J*eOt*/>a " "»«»«tf MUMtROOl -MU4 -UULM ~ttu.c*ttjh HUMTULI OEStGN ASSOCIATES INC. 0 GENVtEWCO GENVIEW DEV KINGSVIEW MANORS JL 1:250 SP01 50 vwvw.huntdealqn.co BSe6WOoaanoAva,SuiaaW,Mafitfmm.ON L3ROI7' r j133~f a6 APPENDI 4A Page 32 of 53

33 APPENDI 4B Page 33 of 53

34 BURNSiDE rt»s prt Ml tw '«*" «Win ' ' I 1 wft W " " Ijl S*«W *' «* "* Wt irtrei» msimn is-"» KttMo «* mm* RECEI TOWNSHIP O> PLANNING DEPT NOTfc BUWCA TO WttFt LOCATION C* M. KV9MMTS. STKtIT LIGHTS. T«AKSrORUIfUM<OOTMCR«ERlttC» 'UN 0MCN5KMS AH KOT MMNTNM10 tjucr 4 TO RILOeAfi AT CLIENT CRYSTAL GLEN HOMES PROJECT/LOCATION KING & JANE STREET KING CITY, ONTARIO DRAWING SITE GRADING PLAN BUILOING STATISTICS lass road RE&PlANKo. ZOfcC IOTKUUEER R1-3(H) 52 NO. OF STOREYS MEANHEKSHTM N/A FFE TFW TBS FINISHED FLOOR ELEVAT ON TOP Of founoafion WAU TOPWfc USFR USFG TEF WOO LOS woe REV STO A O s R D D CD * -* - 9 I CS SI e * V 7 s UNCCfl MSt FOOTWO O WW UNOCH *««FOOTWC O CAAAGE top o* CNONECReo rtx NUU8CR C» IfcMRS TO OUC6 WALKOUT OtCK LOOKOUT OASCMCMT WAUC OUT aaflcus«t ftcvcrscplam STAKWOPLAM OOOR CUPEOTSTAL CABLE POBSTAL CATCH MlM DSL. CATCH 8ASM EMOKEEREOnu FRCHVSHAWT STREET UOKT MAM. BO WATCAVALVC WATER CC*MECTlON SEWfR C AIR CONCITlOKNG 0OWN SPOUT TO SPLASH PAD SWALE CKRGCTlON CHMNUN PEtiGt PRIVACY FENCE SOUNOBAftmtR rodtwoto K ETCNOCO T01 (Um> BCLOrVOaAOC ISSUED OR REVISION COMMENTS ISSl DfORREV«W tssu60#0rfmal The review oi this[ = -. way relieve the contractor of responsibility (or its accuracy or lor compliance with the contract documents. The proposed lot grading and drainage is approved as be:n<y in conformity with the overali approved grading plans tor the sub division. R.P. No Lot No.(s) e? 2&1? Project ^^^U. (-Signature + Consulting Engin No. C Jtt'.C ir --i APPENDI I. BRVANSCKLUNC OECIARE TMATI HAVE REVIEWED AND TAKE DCSUiN RC9P0NSEB0JTY FOR THE DESIGN WORK ON BEHALF OP RN DCSKtN UWITEO lb ERSU3SECT10NZtt.4C<CTHE6UUNGC00E I AM GUAUFteO. ANO THE FKU ts REDI3TERCO. «TMC APPROPRIATE CLASSESfCATECCRlES DESKWEa BCW FIRWBCW. Page 34 of 53

35 SITE PLAN REVIEW The review oi this drawing does not in any way relieve the contractor ol responsibility for its accuracy or for compliance with the contract documents. The proposed lot grading and drainage is approved as being in conformity with the overall approved grading plans for the sub division. P. No. tof Nojj) ate 7\/oTffif Project No. ame K-trf Ml r Signature SW* Consulting Engineers -T BUKNSiDE hi cntrtl <»f vu in thi pm ( f»r 04 otfttf G WntWfDWTKOUTCHAMGES sfouatm fi. A Bmsfif ft tauntn Inted and m tha MMMBon «0r«amafll.. Aremlect la net mponast* m any way for eaamowg or approving wa pexftfl) punt or mtuiq drawnes wtn rctpta to **r lamng v bunding cod* or cermi mantt et mat any ftouw can ba prootriy hot erioeaud on tt td Tht» it to certify thai owso plant ccmpiy vnth 014 appiicablo Architectural Ooalfin Guidelinei epprovod Dy tha Townahlp of KINO. NOTES 1. EUUJE1 TO UBOY L0C4HON Of UTUJTItS AKO OTtP SSMCES. If M». BMB3ICNS AK NOT UlfffTAKtO, Biai»( s to RaocAiE at mjwh own cxpcnsc. 2. BU1EB1 TO VBtFY aevatcn Of STM. *NO SMI. IATEBAIS «BBAT10N 70 MSEUOT US Of fto. ELEVS. (OB C0WUANCS WITH UUKSPM. STANOWCS POOR TO ECAVATKM PETER GLASS ROAD O RECEIVED OCT 2 * 20W TOWNSHIP OF KING q rawl *w" Q»»» «COJLM tj SuT^lSt ** ^»«rr."*^ ^*{ SITING AND GRADING pu*n 55 PETER GLASS RO nn HI IMTULJ DESIGN ASSOCIATES INC ONT INC KINGSVIEW MANORS APPENDI JL 1:250 SPOT 55 flsm Womanna *va., SUM 200. MarWam. ON U0J7 T f9cs e 6A Page 35 of 53

36 APPENDI 6B Page 36 of 53

37 ' RECEIVED NO-I; tiam D TO VfltfT t OCATON QF Ml. MVOEVMTt. STRUT n3 0T8tSSWCe* #W I* TO RtLOCATS AT CLIENT CRYSTAL GLEN HOMES PROJECT7LOCATION KING & JANE STREET KING CITY, ONTARIO DRAWING SITE GRADING PLAN QUILDINQ STATISTICS REO. PIAM Na ZONE LOT NUUBgR I.OT»REA(n)2 R1-3(H) 56 Na. OF STOREYS UEAN HEICHTCn) PEAK K DECK U LEOBND FFE IFW TBS USF usn USfO TEF R VVOD ioa woa REV STO FM3H1O FLOOH EUVA'IO* TCP OF F OUNOATION WAU TOP Of OAHMEKT SLAO UNOIR SOS FOOTING UMOCR SOC FOOTING g RCAA UNOtR SSt FOOTING Q Q TOP OF ENG3«E RC& r KUMOM OF RISEAS T WALKOUT DECK IO0OUT OASCWCNT WALK OUT OASt WENT REYtRSSPU* STANOARO PtAM OOOA WIKO0W SEU FtMTAL a CD CAEUOHTAL CATCH OASM 001. CATCH DASW CKGMURE0 FOi. HTCftO COMNCCTKM I MAI1.BG TIUM3FORUER e «V 7 s WATEH VM.Vt WATER OOMtfCTION Alft CONCITIONMO 00WN SPOUT TO SPIASH PAO CHANLHt FENCE CYFChCe BARRIER ISSUED OR RSVI3.ON COMMGNT3 The review o! tins iv:...iic J JtrS not :t» 2n>' v/ay relieve the co.ili-fo.-. ; '.:..pmiso:i'ty for ill i':cu:;-'.y 01 isr '.: "jl^r.ce.v;;h l!ie ccr.ti2cr cocv.".1.. The.f'jo'.-.--o '::.-...'.. < appro-.-, :.; »«- ;. -..';»'iii Ths ovj;-.--.>pp-; -.:....-: -. ^ i :c," tha sud- C'lViJ-t.u. R.P..N'o. Date \j 0- Name ^flwp."t..j Cra'ii^a ts ) <S6>.;rs - Toronto ^2 It is lh«bumer-* oofnp^w r*tpor«!b Ay la enuir* tfwt an ptisn ftubnvitao for «pp>ewaj fully eonvy «>Oi tho ArchCsccunl GuU«anes and ifl opp csu< r«giamftl tod nqurcfncntt m6utfi>a sonlna prtvitiom and any pnnhuom in tti«cummftltwi ogra«m4nt. T>9 Conlral ArcN(*d! not nnpontlblo in any way for i w (lotcng^ plans or. cofla of porrtw matter cr rwt «r»y muti can tx pnpc**r 6w <" to=«*d w a lot. Thit ct to eoriify that thoto plant oompty with tha oppticablo A/chlioctural Dosion Guids&nai approved by ma Township of KING. // a w I, BRVAN SCHUWO CCCLARC THAT I HAVe REVIEWED AND TAKE DESIGN RESPONSIBILITY FOR ThC DESIGN WOftK ON BtHAU1 Of RN CeJICN LOOTED UMOCR OWWCCTON 2.17J O' THC OURj&MO COCC I AM OUAl.ftCO. AMI THE F1HM 15 RCOiSTERtO. M THE APPROPRIATE OA5SCSJCATCCCH1E3. OUALinCD DESICNER BCW FIRM SON DRAWN BV RK LOT NUMOGR 56 APPENDI Cfttts 7A Page 37 of 53

38 o m D x N 00 FRONT ELEVATION 'A' RECE»V RN design Create OCT 2*i 29 TOWNSHIP PLANNIN OF dhum) uu«d FEB SMH 2 MARCH-4.11 SMM 2 AFH NP 4 AUG2V13 JR i SEPTfina MTV 1 i s I I Co* 1/8" = r-v CM 3 3 CRYSTAL GLEN HOMES f_ Prapa KINGSVIEW MANORS KING CITY, ONT LMSBa M ItaW Gws»Foaaga E]ev.-«> 1 4 OF 5 1 Page 38 of 53

39 SITE PLAN REVIEW The review of this drawing does not in any way relieve the contractor ol responsibility lor its accuracy or for compliance with the contract documents. ' Tie proposed lot grading and drainage is spprovbc as Be:r>y in conformity with the cv-jrai! spproveo grading pians ior the sub- P..?. Na Lot Nc.(s) Of i>*ta//>i/. //^a.o/8 Nan&Ss^t J S W+ Consulting Engineers - Toronto URNSiDE Ihi Bin <m tan nvtxti «M ccihrava mil m imnt Ml I* ila unm of Miami a* NOTf. IULUR TO VOW LOCATI0H CT VOHTt. TIUMSPOmxnS MOOTM CUHIKI414 Ml NOT «MMTM«ttD CLIENT I. # MM. TO KtLOCATt AT CRYSTAL GLEN HOMES PROJECT7LOCATION KING & JANE STREET KING CITY, ONTARIO DRAWING SITE GRADING PLAN 8UILOINO STATISTICS REO.P1ANN& ZONfl LOTNUMOGR RT-3{H) LOT COVC fuc (%) NfrQF STQRCV3 MEAN H LEOEND f F r smsmso noon elevat om TFW TCP OF FCUNOUlO*! WAU TBS USfR USfO TEF R WOO LOB W08 REV STD UWMR SOEFOOTKiO «AH UNDER NUWCCROFRaERSTOOAACC WALKOUT DECK IOOKCUT DASCWCMT WALK OUT DA9GUEHT AEVERMPLAN 0TANOAR0 PLW DOOR WINDOW CATCH ASM OCL-CATCHBASM. STREETLIGHT f/jfc^l UAR.0O (J] TRAKSFCRMEfl e watca vmvt 4 WATER COI*«CTICh T61 REV. A icisreanc FFE TF(» TBS USF OOWN SPOUT TO SPLASH PAD SWALE DRECTtON CMAMLMKFENCi PfUVACV FENCE SOUND BARKER FOOTINaT TO ID1U NOEO GRAM ISSUED OR REVISION COMMENTS ISSUtO FOR RtVCW FHECETVEiU OCT2U0tt TOWNSHIP OF KIN PI TUNING Dc.PT PETER GLASS ROAD I. 0RYAN SCHUKS DECLARE THAT I HAV 1CWCO AtO TAKE DESIGN RESPGNS4UTV 'CB TKE K3ICM WOR ON BtMAU'V (9. CtSCN ICUTU R3UOft6CnON OF THSaUHONOCOoe I AM OUALimO. AKI THE FIRU IS RC03TERC0. M Tfl APPflOfMtlATG CUaSCSJCATEGOIOES. QUALI»lf0 OtaiOKtR BON FIRM BON :.Cr.r. =O':Url -.ijl-arrnov/t "cwnshp op 1:250 PROJECT N APPENDI 8A,OT NUMOBR 61 aragma mspin * l/dsio TCL.(0OS)73a-3 «77 PA (BG3) WOQRNO Page 39 of 53

40 > o m D 00 FRONT ELEVATION 'A1 - PRECAST PA«l FW MAMflOOB! OCT Z^ 2IM township " RN design Imagine Inspire Create Pioiect Nun* 1009S Issued APR.2J-1] NP 3 MAY-0>13 nr 4 AUG-m-13 so S KAY-OS-«MB 6 JUNE-W-14 SM JUMC-14.U SM Sea» 1/8" = V-O" OtK CRYSTAL GLEN HOMES KINGSVIEW MANORS KING CITY, ONT Lot Size M Mood LOT 61 Sausie Fmuae t&tn, 'A1) MOTMCU»*«gTBM WUWIMT Page 4 OF 5 1 T Page 40 of 53

41 KING THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF KING REPORT TO COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE Monday, November 17, 2014 Engineering and Public Works EPW RE: Engineering and Public Works Department Report No. EPW Traffic Calming Petition, Kettleby Road, Kettleby RECOMMENDATION The Engineering and Public Works Department respectfully submits the following recommendation: 1. That Engineering and Public Works Department Report No. EPW be received for information. 2. That Staff install traffic calming measures on Kettleby Road, as per the Township Traffic Calming Policy, in 2015 as part of the Townships capital budget for traffic calming. PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to advise Council that staff have received a petition from the residents of Kettleby Road for traffic calming measures west of Keele Street on Kettleby Road, and the subsequent findings of the traffic analysis as a result of the petition request. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS Staff received a petition for traffic calming measures from the residents on Kettleby Road. The petition is the first warrant and the first step of the Traffic Calming Policy of the Township of King. The second warrant is Safety Requirements and the third is Technical Requirements. Staff has reviewed the petition and have found that it meets the 70% requirement of the first warrant of the Traffic Calming Policy. A summary of the additional warrants is shown in the following Table (Application of Traffic Calming Policy and Analysis of Warrants) It should be noted that enforcement of speed limits is the responsibility of York Region Police and that they should be the primary contact when speeding is an issue for residents. There is also the opportunity for residents to use the Road Watch system which is a community-based initiative that gives residents an opportunity to report dangerous and aggressive drivers to York Regional Police. It is accessible through the website yrp.ca; at traffictajvrp.ca; and by phone at the York Regional Police Traffic Bureau at , ext Engineering and Public Page 41 of 53

42 Application of Traffic Calming Policy and Analysis of Warrants TRAFFIC CALMING WARRANT CRITERIA WARRANT Warrant 1 Petition CRITERIA 1.1 Petition Requirement Yes- Meets Warrant A sufficient petition requesting implementation of traffic calming measures must be signed by at least 70% of households on the street was received Impacts to Adjacent Streets Warrant 2 Safety Requirements 2.1 Sidewalks Should the Public Works Department anticipate that the proposed traffic calming measures will have significant traffic impacts on adjacent streets, the review of the traffic calming proposal shall be modified to include the proposed street as well as adjacent streets where traffic is expected to divert. No. Does Not Meets Warrant On streets where traffic calming is proposed there must be a continuous sidewalk on at least one side of the street. (All three criteria must be fulfilled to satisfy this Warrant) Warrant 3 Technical Requirements (All four criteria must be fulfilled to satisfy this Warrant) 2.2 Road Grade 2.3 Emergency Response 3.1 Minimum Speed Yes - Meets Warrant For safety purposes, traffic calming measures should not be installed on streets with road grades of more than five percent. Setting this limit serves to maintain reasonably safe driving conditions in adverse weather for motorists negotiating the calming measures. Yes - Meets Warrant That there not be any significant impacts to emergency services as a result of the traffic calming measures being implemented. This determination will be made by consulting with emergency services staff early in the review period. Should the traffic calming plans change after they have been reviewed, emergency services staff will be given an opportunity to again review the new plan and to submit further comments Yes - Meets Warrant Evaluates whether the traffic conditions on a street being considered for traffic calming meet thresholds that require remediation. Warrant 3.1 requires that the street's 85th percentile speed be a minimum of 10 km/hr to 15 km/hr above the posted speed limit in combination with the traffic volume on a local residential street between 500 and 8000 vehicles per day or on a residential collector street between 1500 and 8000 vehicles per day. However, if the 85th percentile speed is 15 km/hr or more above the speed limit on the street, then there is no minimum volume requirement. This is because the degree of the traffic problem and the potential safety risks can be severe. 3.2 Minimum and Maximum Traffic Volume Local Roads Yes - Meets Warrant Usually there should be a minimum of 500 vehicles per day on local roads and 1500 vehicles per day on collector roads for this warrant N/A Collector Roads Usually 1500 and 8000 vehicles per day. However, if the 85th percentile speed is 15 km/hr or more above the speed limit on the Engineering and Public Page 42 of 53

43 3.3 Minimum Block Length 3.4 Transit Services to be satisfied street, then there is no minimum Yes - Meets Warrant volume requirement. On streets where mid-block traffic calming measures are proposed, the block length must exceed 120 metres. However, consideration would be given to those streets where the block length is less than 120 metres if, in the opinion of Township's Public Works staff, traffic calming measures can be safely implemented. Yes - Meets Warrant No Impacts on regular scheduled (YTR) service ANALYSIS The majority of the concerns expressed by the residents are focussed on traffic speed as the road Right-of-way is not urbanized (narrow gravel shoulders, ditch drainage). Traffic counters were deployed the week of October 20th to October 24th 2014 in response to the petition request. The data collected indicated that the 85th percentile speed for east bound traffic was 76 km/hr. and that the 85th percentile speed for west bound traffic was 73 km/hr. Warrant 3.1 of the Traffic Calming Policy requires that the street's 85th percentile speed be a minimum of 10 km/hr. to 15 km/hr. above the posted speed limit in combination with the traffic volume on a local residential street between 500 and 8000 vehicles per day in order to implement traffic calming measures. However, if the 85th percentile speed is 15 km/hr. or more above the speed limit on the street, then there is no minimum volume requirement. In this particular case the posted speed limit is 50 km/hr. with a total Annual Average Daily Traffic volume (AADT) of 737 vehicles. The summery of the tube counter data collected is appended as (Attachment 1). Warrants Met for Speed Humps Review of the data indicated that minimum Warrants for speed (Warrant 3.1) have been met. As the current 2014 Budget for traffic calming measures for 2014 has been exhausted. The costs for installation of permanent speed humps on Kettleby Road can be considered in the 2015 Budget deliberations. INTEGRATED SUSTAINABILITY PLAN LINKAGE: The recommendations of this report support the following elements of the Integrated Community Sustainability Plan. Traffic calming measures are linked to the Goals and Strategies of the Sustainability Plan within the Environment Pillar under the Theme of Transportation (Theme 4) and within the Social-Cultural Pillar under the Theme of Health, Safety and Wellness (Theme 5). FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Any further work with respect to implementation of permanent speed humps on Kettleby Road would be subject to the 2015 budget deliberations and approval. The estimated cost for each Engineering and Public Page 43 of 53

44 permanent speed hump would be approximately 52, with a minimum requirement of four units totalling 510, to be placed between Keele Street and the new residential lots currently under construction on Kettleby Road. The final locations of the speed humps would be subject to field review once the location of the first new driveway for the new home west of Keele Street on Kettleby Road has been finalized, which staff expects to be completed in the spring of Attachment #1 - Summary of tube counters data. Submitted by: Reviewed by: avid Van Veen, C.Tech. oject Manager Midhael Cole C.E.T., B.A.S. Manager of Engineering Engineering and Public Page 44 of 53

45 TOWNSHIP OF KING TRAFFIC REPORT Date: October 20th - October 24lh 2014 Road: Road Section No.: Location: Kettleby Method: Kettleby Road Approx. 500m West of Keele Tube Counter Purpose: Volume Speed a Volume & Speed Traffic Calming Other: Reauested By: Council Resident n Internal Yearly Count Other: Results: Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT): 737 Peak Volume Traffic on East Bound S A.M. Peak: 9am to 10am Volume: 22 S P.M. Peak: 6pm to 7pm Volume: 58 Peak Volume Traffic on West Bound A.M. Peak: 9am to 10am P.M. Peak: 6pm to 7pm Volume: 23 Volume: 26 The posted speed limit is 50 km/h Mean/Average speed on East Bound was 62 km/hr Mean/Average speed on West Bound was 61 km/hr 85th percentile speed on East Bound was 76 km/hr 85th percentile speed on West Bound was 73 km/hr Engineering and Public Page 45 of 53

46 KING THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF KING REPORT TO COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE Monday, November 17, 2014 Engineering and Public Works EPW RE: Assumption Agreement Regarding Mary Lake Estates and Monarch Corporation File No. 19T-10K01, Part Lot 10, Concession 4 1. RECOMMENDATIONS: The Engineering and Public Works Department respectfully submits the following recommendation: a) Report No. EPW be received as information; b) That By-law , being a by-law to authorize the Mayor and Clerk to execute an Assumption Agreement with Monarch Corporation, be approved; c) That all costs to the Township associated with the preparation and registration of the Assumption Agreement shall be the responsibility of Monarch Corporation. 2. PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND: The purpose of this report is to update and advise Committee/Council with respect to the pending sale of the lands owned by Mary Lake Estates in King City (the "Lands") to Monarch Corporation and the provisions of the Municipal Capital Facilities Agreement (the "MCFA") associated with the Lands, which require that an assumption agreement, as described below, be executed by the purchaser, Monarch Corporation. The MCFA between the Township and Victor Joseph Culotta and Ontario Limited (Mary Lake Estates) was entered into on October 10, The MCFA includes various commitments by both parties in relation to the future development of the subject lands (Part of Lot 10, Concession 4) for residential purposes, including the assignment of servicing allocation to the Lands and the provision municipal capital facilities by Culotta and Mary Lake Estates to the Township. Section 104 of the MCFA permits the owner to assign the MCFA to any purchaser of the Lands, subject to an assumption agreement being executed by the new owner. The Mary Lake Estates proposed plan of subdivision (File No. 19T-10K01) received draft plan approval through the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) on May 31, Engineering and Public Works Department Report Page 46 of 53

47 3. DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS: The Mary Lake Estates proposed plan of subdivision (19T-10K01) received draft plan approval through the Ontario Municipal Board on May 31, As is usual, a series of conditions were imposed on the draft approval, to be fulfilled either prior to final approval of the plan of subdivision (i.e. registration of the plan) or to be included in the subdivision agreement. Condition 4 requires compliance with the provisions of the MCFA and requires that certain of its terms be included in a subdivision agreement. In addition, Condition 4 requires that the owner enter into any further agreements that may be required by the Township to implement the terms of the MCFA prior to the entering into of a subdivision agreement. The Township entered into the MCFA with Mary Lake Estates the owner for the provision of municipal capital facilities pursuant to the Municipal Act, 2001, the Planning Act and the Development Charges Act, In particular, the Municipal Act, 2001 permits the Township to enter into agreements for the provision by other persons of municipal capital facilities. In this case these facilities include funds or services to assist in defraying the costs of the sanitary sewers to the existing community, supplementation of the recreational component of the development charge, conveyance of lands for and construction of trails within the development without credit or reimbursement by the Township and the conveyance of environmental lands at no cost to the Township and Mary Lake Estates has recently advised Township staff it has entered into an agreement of purchase and sale for the Lands with Monarch Corporation. Section 104 of the MCFA permits assignment to a purchaser as follow: The Township agrees that the Landowner shall have the right to assign this Agreement to any purchaser of the Lands provided that the Landowner shall require, as a condition of the sale and conveyance of such Lands, that the purchaser (other than a purchaser of a home or individual lot or lots for personal use and not for inventory of a business) shall execute an agreement with the Township on the same terms and conditions as this Agreement and provided further that any such transaction for the sale or other disposition of the Lands shall not be finally concluded until such agreement has been executed by the purchaser and the Township. Mary Lake Estates has required Monarch Corporation to comply with the terms of Section 104 and the Township Solicitor is preparing the agreement to implement this provision. This type of agreement is normally referred to as an assumption agreement whereby a purchaser, in this case Monarch Corporation, agrees to accept, assume and to carry out all the duties, liabilities, obligations and responsibilities of the owners under the MCFA and in all respects to be bound under the MCFA as if it had been the original signatory to the MCFA. Because certain obligations in the MCFA have already been fulfilled by Mary Lake Estates the assumption agreement will also recognize which provisions of the agreement have already been satisfied. Once fully executed, the assumption agreement will be registered on title to the Lands. Once assumption agreement is finalized in a form satisfactory to the CAO and Township's Solicitor it will be executed by Monarch Corporation and by the Mayor and Clerk pursuant to the attached by-law. As staff have only been recently advised of the pending closing of the sale transaction, there has not been time to complete the draft assumption agreement and finalize it with Monarch Construction prior to this Council meeting. It is in the best interests of the Township that the assumption agreement be finalized and executed prior to closing, while at the same time not causing any delay in the closing of the transaction if at all possible. With enactment of the By-law, Staff and the Township's solicitor can Engineering and Public Works Department Report Page 47 of 53

48 complete the agreement and have it executed within such time frame. Therefore, Staff recommend that By-law no be enacted, authorizing execution of the assumption agreement. 4. INTEGRATED SUSTAINABILITY PLAN LINKAGE: King Township's Integrated Community Sustainability Plan was formally adopted by Council on April 2, The sustainability plan is the Township's overreaching guiding document and is based upon common values, priorities, and aspirations of the community. The recommendations of this report support the following elements of the Integrated Community Sustainability Plan; they are linked to the Goals and Strategies of the Sustainability Plan within the Financial Pillar under Theme of Financial Sustainability supporting the strategy of improving the management of Township finances, assets, and infrastructure. 5. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: None at this time. The costs associated with the preparation and registration of the assumption agreement will be recovered from the owner. 8. CONCLUSION: Mary Lake Estates, the current owner of the Lands, has entered into an agreement of purchase and sale with Monarch Corporation. In accordance with the terms of the MCFA, the purchaser is required to enter into an assumption agreement with the Township as described above. The assumption agreement requires Monarch Corporation to agree to accept, assume and to carry out all the outstanding duties, liabilities, obligations and responsibilities of the owners under the MCFA and in all respects to be bound under the MCFA as if Monarch Corporation had been the original signatory to the MCFA. 9. ATTACHMENTS: None Prepared and Submitted By: Michael Cole, C.E.T.. BAS Manager of Engineering Engineering and Public Works Department Report Page 48 of 53

49 \f MR THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF KING REPORT TO COUNCIL Monday, November 17, 2014 Finance Department FR RE : Update to Procurement By-law 1. RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that: a) Finance Report FR being a report to update Procurement By-law # , be received for information purposes b) Council consider enactment of By-Law # being a By-Law to define the Procurement Policies and Procedures for the Corporation of the Township of King PURPOSE: The purpose of this report is to recommend the adoption of revised procurement policies and procedures in compliance with the Municiapl Act, 2001, and pass the requisite implementing by-law. BACKGROUND: The Township's current procurement by-law ( ) was enacted in December 2004 setting forth policies and procedures to govern procurement activities for the Township of King. In accordance with the provisions of by-law , an update to the Township's procurement policies and procedures is to occur at least every five years or sooner if deemed appropriate. Primary changes incorporated into this update of the Township's procurement policies and procedures are as follows: Schedule C - Segregation of Duties and Approval Authority o Establishing duty of responsibility and approval authority Schedule D - Procurement Thresholds o Defines Method of Procurement linked to $$$ Thresholds Schedule E - Supply Chain Code of Ethics ("NEW") o Establishes standards of conduct that are consistent with best practices Schedule F - P-Card Policy ("NEW") o Creates an efficient method of procuring low $$$ value goods / services Finance Department Page 49 of 53

50 Finance Report FR Page 2 The supplementary schedules (D-F) incorporated into this update of the procurement by law are intended to extend enhanced accountability to management through delegation of higher $$$ approval thresholds, with the goal of improving overall efficiency and effectiveness of procurement processes. Other enhancements to the procurement by-law include: Paragraph 18 - Introduction of formal contractor evaluation criteria that will be completed for all projects valued at or above $100,000. Paragraph 27 - the provisions of Local Preference have been revised to clarify intent of optimal selection so not to imply that award decisions will be unduly influenced by geographic representation of vendors/proponents ANALYSIS: On the basis of feedback from Council and through evaluation of procurement procedures contained within by-law management discussed and identified areas of potential improvement that can streamline procurement procedures for the Township. The revised by-law will support transparency of decision making processes related to Township procurement responsibilities, while enhancing accountability of both Council and management. 5. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: There are no direct financial implications relating to consideration, adoption and implementation of the proposed procurement by-law. 6. SUSTAINABILITY PLAN LINKAGE: King Township's Integrated Community Sustainability Plan was formally adopted by Council on April 2, The Sustainability Plan is the Township's overarching guiding document and is based upon common values, priorities, and aspirations of the community. This report links to the theme "Annual Budget & Business Plan" and more specifically the goal of "maintaining a fiscally responsible budget that strengthens our reserves and respects the priorities of the community and meets long term financial sustainability goals". Prepared & Submitted by: Allan Evelyn,>TFAc, CPA, CGA Director of Finance & Treasurer Finance Department Page 50 of 53

51 ING THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF KING SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING A Special Council, Closed Session Meeting will be held on: WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 19th, 2014 AT 9:00 A.M. In the Meeting Room At the King City Fire Hall 2045 King Road, King City, ON 1. The purpose of this special meeting is to accommodate a necessary Council Meeting regarding the following: (i) Administration Department Council Orientation / Strategic Initiatives / Education Session 2. Motion to move into Closed Session pursuant to Section 2.7{d) of the Procedural By-law Number to consider the items as set out in the Agenda. (i) Section 2,7(d). Subsections 1 and 2: Purpose of Education or Training the Members Administration Department Council Orientation / Strategic Initiatives / Education Session Kathryn Smyth Clerk Notices Page 51 of 53

52 KING Cordially Invites all to attend our COUNCIL INAUGURAL CEREMONY.S" Monday, December 1st, 2014 The Country Day School 13415DufferinSt, King City at 7:00 p.m. RSVP by Monday, November 24, win o tt M a ^ -w/gvavaygs Notices Page 52 of 53