initial final proposal report - london.ca · initial proposal report: york developments inc. , 55...

Initial Proposal Report: York Developments Inc. , 55 lot subdivision -- Emily Carr Lane 1

INITIAL FINAL PROPOSAL REPORT

For lands at: 3425 Emily Carr Lane by 2552772 Ontario Inc.

–York Developments Inc.

For a 55 single detached unit residential plan of subdivision and

rezoning .

July

October 2018

Prepared by:

Kirkness Consulting Inc., Urban and Rural Planning

Subject

lands


AGM Engineers and Surveyors

Table of Contents

1.0 Introduction/Proposal

2.0 Provincial Policy Statement

3.0 Official Plan

4.0 Southwest Area Plan

5.0 London Plan

6.0 Zoning Bylaw

7.0 Existing Conditions

7.1 Environmental Conditions

7.2 Site Contamination

7.3 Archaeological/Built Heritage Concerns

7.4 Existing Services

8.0 Draft Plan of Subdivision Design

9.0 Sanitary Servicing

9.1 Proposed Sanitary Sewer-shed

9.2 Sanitary Servicing Strategy

9.3 Sanitary Outlets

10.0 Water Servicing

10.1 Water Servicing Strategy

10.2 Sanitary Servicing Strategy

11.0 Storm Drainage and Stormwater Management

11.1 Stormwater Assumptions

11.2 Proposed Strategy for Stormwater

12.0 Transportation Requirements

13.0 Schools and Parks Planning

14.0 Financial Considerations and Miscellaneous

15.0 Appendices

Appendix 1 – Draft Plan of Condominium Concept

Appendix 2 –Archaeology Ministry Clearance letter

Appendix 3 – Cost Sharable Works and DC Revenue Estimate Worksheet

.

List of Figures

Figure 1 – Location Plan

Figure 2 – Draft Plan of Subdivision Concept

Figure 3 – 7 – Photos of Site and Area

Figure 8 – Zoning Map (excerpt)


1.0 Introduction/Proposal

The subject lands are located in south west London, south of Wharncliffe Road South

and west of Legendary Drive. The lands would be the extension of a local street in the

North Longwoods community, known as Emily Carr Lane . The total land area is 3.1100

ha (7.41ac) with 60.1 m of frontage width along and at 3425 Emily Carr Lane and 255.4

m depth. It is vacant and undeveloped but was previously used as a golf driving range.

York Developments Inc. is the owner of the subject lands and proposes a 55 lot single

detached residential subdivision along a public road which would be the westerly

extension of the existing Emily Carr Lane (an existing public street) . It is a continuation

of the existing lotting fabric along Emily Carr Lane, Paul Peel Lane and Casson Way, all

located to the east.

The subject York site is located in southwest area of London and would be on the

westerly extremity of the North Longwoods Community which has been built over the

last 20 years. The North Longwoods Community is bounded by Wharncliffe Road South,

Southdale Road East, White Oaks Road and the future Bradley Avenue to the south.

There are vacant and undeveloped lands to the immediate south that are designated for

medium density housing forms.

The York proposal comprises 55 single detached residential lots averaging 11.0 m x 32.0

m depth for an average lot area of 352 m2. Emily Carr Lane extension would continue

the 20 m wide public right-of-way with an 8.0 m roadway. It The Draft Plan comprises 2

public streets ( Emily Carr Lane and Street A).

Density would be 56 lots on 3 ha yielding 18.7 units per hectare. The existing zoning is

Urban Reserve UR4 which does not permit the proposal and therefore a rezoning is

required.

Other features would include:

Interior side yard of 1.2 meters minimum

Rear yards of 6 meters minimum

Lot coverages of 40 % maximum

Building height of 9 m maximum


The routing of the proposed Emily Carr Lane extension provides for access to the

southerly lands which propose medium density residential development.

Figure 1: Location Map of Subject Lands outlined in red (Source; City of London, 2017)

Figure 2 (left) illustrates the 55 unit

single detached residential

subdivision plan.

Larger view in Appendix 1

Figures 3 thru 7 provide Photo

descriptions of site.

Subject site

Tepprman’s Furniture and Appliances


Figure 3 – viewing westerly showing subject lands from west end of existing Emily Carr

Lane.

Figure 4 – viewing southwesterly showing the subject lands from Tepperman’s showing

landscaped buffer and fencing along rear (right) and last residence on Emily Carr Lane.


Figure 5 – viewing easterly across the subject lands from the west boundary showing

the cleared and vacant lands.

Figure 6 – viewing northwesterly showing the subject lands and Tepperman’s building in

the background and the DLN Group lands in foreground with Paul Peel Avenue just off

to the right of photo..

Figure 7 – viewing easterly from end of existing Emily Carr Lane showing existing

residences on 11 m frontage lots.

2.0 Provincial Policy Statement.

The proposed residential development is consistent with the PPS, and more specifically,

supports the following policies:


Section 1.1.1: Healthy, livable and safe communities are sustained by:

promoting efficient development and land use patterns;

accommodating an appropriate range and mix of residential, employment (including industrial, commercial and institutional uses), recreational and open space uses to meet long-term needs;

avoiding development and land use patterns which may cause environmental or public health and safety concerns;

promoting cost-effective development standards to minimize land consumption and servicing costs;

ensuring that necessary infrastructure and public service facilities are or will be available to meet current and projected needs.

Section 1.1.3: Settlement Areas:

1.1.3.1 Settlement areas shall be the focus of growth and their vitality and regeneration shall be promoted.

1.1.3.2 Land use patterns within settlement areas shall be based on: a. densities

and a mix of land uses which efficiently use land and resources… are appropriate

for, and efficiently use, the infrastructure and public service facilities which are

planned or available, and avoid the need for their unjustified and/or

uneconomical expansion, and minimize negative impacts to air quality and

climate change, and promote energy efficiency in accordance with policy 1.8;

Section 1.4. Housing:

1.4.3 Planning authorities shall provide for an appropriate range of housing types and

densities to meet projected requirements of current and future residents of the regional

market area by … establishing and implementing minimum targets for the provision of

housing which is affordable to low and moderate income households ……… permitting

and facilitating all forms of housing required to meet the social, health and well-being

requirements of current and future residents, directing the development of new

housing towards locations where appropriate levels of infrastructure and public service

facilities are or will be available to support current and projected needs ……

Section 1.5 Public Spaces, Parks and Open Space:

1.5.1 Healthy, active communities should be promoted by planning public streets, spaces and facilities to be safe, meet the needs of pedestrians, and facilitate pedestrian and non-motorized movement, including but not limited to, walking and cycling, and providing for a full range and equitable distribution of publicly-accessible built and natural settings for recreation, including facilities, parklands, open space areas, trails and, where practical, water-based resources.


Section 1.6 Infrastructure and Public Service Facilities:

1.6.1 Infrastructure and public service facilities shall be provided in a coordinated,

efficient and cost-effective manner to accommodate projected needs. Planning for

infrastructure and public service facilities shall be integrated with planning for growth so

that these are available to meet current and projected needs.

1.6.2 The use of existing infrastructure and public service facilities should be optimized,

wherever feasible, before consideration is given to developing new infrastructure and

public service facilities.

1.6.6.2 Municipal sewage services and municipal water services are the preferred form

of servicing for settlement areas. Intensification and redevelopment within settlement

areas on existing municipal sewage services and municipal water services should be

promoted, wherever feasible.

RESPONSE: The York 56-unit residential subdivision proposal would be consistent with

the PPS.

3.0 Official Plan

The proposed residential development is in conformity with the City of London Official

Plan. The lands are designated Multi-Family Medium Density Residential (MDR) in the

Official Plan – Schedule A - Land Use. Accordingly, the proposed development

comprises single detached residential dwellings on the lands designated LDR. The

proposed plan of subdivision is able to satisfy Official Plan general objectives

Section 3.3.1. sets out the Permitted Uses in the Multi-Family, Medium Density

Residential designation shall include multiple-attached dwellings, such as row houses or

cluster houses; low-rise apartment buildings; ………….These areas may also be developed

for single-detached, semi-detached and duplex dwellings..

Schedule D of the OP designates Legendary Drive as a SECONDARY COLLECTOR roadway.

There is no designation on other Schedules of the Official Plan such as:

Schedule B1 – Natural Heritage Features shows that there are no natural

heritage features on the subject lands.

Schedule B2 – Natural Resources and Hazards shows that there are no hazards

on the subject lands.


RESPONSE: The York 56-unit residential subdivision proposal would conform to the

Official Plan.

4.0 South West Area Plan (SWAP)

Section 20.5.11 of SWAP sets out policies for the defined North Longwoods Area Plan.

the subject lands are designated MEDIUM DENSTIY RESIDENTIAL. The primary

permitted uses are those permitted in the Low Density and Multi- family, Medium

Density Residential designations of the Official Plan.

Section 20.5.11 sets out policies for the …….. North Longwoods Neighbourhood.

The Land Use Designations for these neighbourhoods are shown on Schedule 13, and

shows a Mediium Density Residential designation for the subject lands. This section

makes the following points:

i) Function and Purpose - The North Talbot and North Longwoods Neighbourhoods are

areas which have already experienced a significant number of planning approvals and

are currently under development. The Low, Medium and High Density Residential

designations are subject to special provisions regarding land use. The policies of Parts 1,

2, 3 and 16 of this Plan shall also apply.

ii) Character - It is expected that redevelopment and new development in these

neighbourhoods will reflect the existing character of the neighbourhood and will provide

a walkable environment with a pedestrian scale. The built form will be primarily street

oriented on all public rights-of-way. While most of the built form within established

neighbourhoods is already in place, there is an ongoing opportunity to enhance the

neighbourhood’s valuable characteristics. In the future, opportunities should be

provided for and sought to strengthen public transit and the use of alternative

transportation methods and increase housing choices, while maintaining existing

neighbourhood character and enhancing the design of the public realm

Permitted Uses - The primary permitted uses in the Low Density and Multi- family,

Medium Density Residential designations of the Official Plan, shall be permitted.

Built Form and Intensity- a) New development shall be consistent with the density

requirements of the Low Density and Multi-family, Medium Density Residential

designations, respectively, of the Official Plan, …….

b) As part of a complete application, the applicant shall submit an adequately detailed

statement of streetscape compatibility, that has been reviewed and accepted by the


City, where it is clearly demonstrated that the proposedproject is sensitive to,

compatible with, and a good fit within, the existing surrounding neighbourhood based

on, but not limited to, a review of both the existing and proposed built form, building

height, massing and architectural treatments.

The Urban Design Policies of Section 20.5.3.9 of this Plan shall apply.

RESPONSE: The York 55-unit residential subdivision proposal would and has the

capability of conforming to the SWAP. The small scale nature of this site and its yield

isproposed to be basically a continuation of the build torm and spatial context that

currently exists along the Emily Carr Lane. The consistency has merit in that the street

will appear a sa comprehensive planned unit rather that a disjointed contrasting

physical neighbourhood residential street if different standrds were applied to the

proposed new segment. The CITY SUMMARY responding the the IPR has made

comments that reinforce the policies cited herein.

5.0 London Plan

The lands are have a NEIGHBOURHOOD PLACE TYPE in the London Plan – Map 1 - Land

Use. Map 3 – Street Classifications designate Legendary Drive and Paul Peel Avenue as

a NEIGHBOURHOOD COLLECTORS .

Key elements of the NEIGHBOURHOOD place type VISION are:

1. A strong neighbourhood character, sense of place and identity.

2. Attractive streetscapes, buildings, and public spaces.

3. A diversity of housing choices allowing for affordability and giving people the

opportunity to remain in their neighbourhoods as they age if they choose to do so.

4. Well-connected neighbourhoods, from place to place within the neighbourhood and to

other locations in the city such as the downtown.

5. Lots of safe, comfortable, convenient, and attractive alternatives for mobility.

6. Easy access to daily goods and services within walking distance.

7. Employment opportunities close to where we live.

8. Parks, pathways, and recreational opportunities that strengthen community identity

and serve as connectors and gathering places.

RESPONSE: Upon review of the 8 items above, the York 56 55 unit residential

subdivision proposal would conform to the London Plan.


From Table 10, this place type permits abroad range of housing types from Single

detached to Townhouses.

From Table 11, building heights of 1 to 2.5 storeys are permitted.

RESPONSE: the York 55-unit residential subdivision proposal would be compliant.

6.0 Zoning By-Law:

The City of London zones the subject lands as URBAN RESERVE-- UR4. This zone permits

a) Existing dwellings;

b) Agricultural uses except for mushroom farms, commercial greenhouses

livestock facilities and manure storage facilities;

c) Conservation lands;

d) Managed woodlot;

e) Wayside pit;

f) Passive recreation use.

g) Kennels;

h Private outdoor recreation clubs;

i) Riding stables

RESPONSE: A rezoning is required by way of an application for an amendment to the

Zoning Bylaw to permit the subdivision and the R1-3(7) zone is proposed which would

be a continuation of the zoning to the east. The R1-3 (7) zone is built up on the R1-2

zone as follows:

The R1-3 regulations are as follows:

LOT AREA – 300 m2 min,

LOT FRONTAGE – 10 m min,

BUILDING HEIGHT – 9.0 max.

LOT COVERAGE – 40% max.

FRONT YARD SETBACK – 4.5 m main building and 6.0 m for the garage min.

SIDE YARD SETBACK - 1.2 metres (3.9 feet); except that, where no private garage is

attached to the dwelling, one side yard shall be 3.0 metres (9.8 feet), min.

REAR YARD SETBACK – 6.0 m min.

PARKING AREA COVERAGE – 25% max.

It is noted that some of the existing neighbourhood to the east is zoned R1-3(7)

denoting an increased minimum LOT FRONTAGE of 11.0 m which better matches the


proposed Plan of Subdivision. It also includes a MINIMUM INTERIOR SIDE YARD of 1.2

metres (3.94 feet) to the property line.

These standard regulations of the R1-3 (7) zone would be adequate and no changes or

exceptions are proposed. This is the zone that is requested.

Figure 8: Zoning Map of Subject Lands -- Note the subject lands are zoned Urban

Reserve - UR4 area and neighbourhood is zoned Residential R1-3. (Source; City of

London, 2015)

7.0 Existing Conditions:

The Site is a 3.0 ha vacant field measuring 60.1 m of frontage and 255.4 m depth. It is

legally described as “WESTMINISTER CON 2 PT LOT 33, RP 33R16380 PARTS 1 AND 2

IRREG.” and the Assessment Roll # is 080050141100000.

Surrounding land uses:

Subject lands


The surrounding land use is:

To the north – Tepperman’s Furniture and Appliance large format retail store of

approximately 10,000 m2 gfa, and zoned RESTRICTED SERVICE COMMERCIAL.

To the east – Emily Carr Lane and 11 m wide lots with built out single detached

dwellings and zoned RESIDENTIAL R1-23 and R1-3(7).

To the south – vacant and undeveloped land and zoned URBN RESERVE – UR4. and

further to the south is the future Bradley Avenue Extension. Currently under application

is file #39T-16508 by the DLN Group for the lands adjacently to the south.

To the west – vacant and undeveloped land and zoned URBN RESERVE – UR4. and

further to the south is the future Bradley Avenue Extension.

6.1 Environmental Conditions – There are no natural heritage features or hazards on the

Site or adjacent lands.

6.2 Site Contamination – There is no evidence of site contamination.

6.3 Archaeology and Built Heritage – The Site and Area are void of these resources. A

clearance letter from the Ministry of Culture, Sport and Tourism is appended.

8.0 Draft Plan Design

The Draft Plan layout design for the 55 single detached dwelling lots is simplistic and a

logical extension of Emily Carr Lane and another public street to join eventually with

Paul Peel Avenue to the southeast. The proposed plan matches with the existing lot

fabric of the neighbourhood to the east and of which the proposed subject site would

be an integral part.

9.0 Sanitary Servicing


As with storm servicing, sanitary servicing for the site was provided from

the existing subdivision at the west end of emily carr lane,which is a

200mm diameter sewer.

Sanitary servicing for the site is proposed to parallel the minor system

storm servicing, with the sanitary sewer on Emily Carr Lane directed to the

existing sanitary sewer on Emily Carr Lane to the east, and the sewer on

street a directed southerly through the DLN subdivision to Lismer Lane.

the existing sewers on Emily Carr Lane and at Lismer Lane have sufficient

capacity to service the proposed subdivision.

Sanitary servicing for the development will be directed to Emily Carr Lane based on

preliminary grading and development flows. The existing sewer on Emily Carr was

designed to include the proposed subdivision within its’ service area. The final service

area and design of the proposed subdivision and the future DLN subdivision to the south

will be determined through detailed design with the drainage split intended to be near

the property line between the two subdivisions. the DLN subdivision drains to Lismer

Way directly to the east.

The existing North Longwoods Legends Neighbourhood drains by gravity to the trunk

sewer and ultimately outlets for treatment at the Greenway Pollution Control Plant.

10.0 Water Servicing

Watermains in this area are entirely within the low pressure zone that also serves the

existing Legends White Oaks Subdivision adjacent and with the finished road elevation

on Emily Carr Lane in the order of 272 271.5 m on the west proximitysubdivision limit.,

service Service and fire flow pressures are adequate and well below the service pressure


limit of 275m for the low pressure system. A watermain brief servicing report will be

provided to address domestic and fire flows along with water quality with the Draft Plan

Application to confirm adequacy.

The system would be looped from the 200mm existing watermain on Emily Carr Lane

and to the DLN Group Inc. subdivision (#39T16508) to the south. It is not anticipated

that there will any need to service lands to the west of this property. Those blocks

between Tepperman’s and the future Bradley Avenue extension will be serviced directly

from Wharncliffe Road South.

11.0 Stormwater Management

Other services are fairly straight forward with the task being to confirm capacity is

available for the proposed subdivision. Stormwater is less straight forward as the

current proposals of the two subdivisions are different than the original layout when the

EA was undertaken

11.1 Current stormwater servicing

The existing site topography inidcatses a movement of surface water is generally in a

south east direction towards the existing residential subdivision to the east. The existing

overland flow route (Major System) for the site is therefore through the existing lots for

the subdivision to Casson Way. Minor servicing for the site is provided at the west end

of Emily Carr with a 1350mmm stormwater pipe. The land generally drops from

northwest to southeast. The topography is generally of a nature that minor flows can

be directed to Emily Carr Lane while the major system flows will flow southward.

A review of the model used for the development of the White Oaks SWMf2 illustrates

that some lands in the model had a higher imperviousness than actual construction and

the City has qualified that development of the two draft plans can proceed providing

that an update to the model confirms that both minor and major flows can be

accommodated.


Further, the City has noted that the ongoing Dingman Sub-watershed EA identify any

changes in catchment areas.

Geotechnical work was undertaken in 2017 and this included the establishment of

monitoring wells for hydro-geotechnical and water balance evaluation.

11.2 Stormwater Management Strategy

Major System flows for the majority of the site are to be redirected to the south down

St reet A through the proposed DLN subdivision to the south, then along Lismer

Lane and ultimately to White Oak SWMF2. Lots within the subdivision on the east

side of Street A will have split drainage. As such, a portion of these lots will continue

to have an overland flow route through the existing lots to the east,to Casson Way.

... -

Minor System flows for Emily Carr Lane will be serviced by the existing 1350mm

storm sewer as described above.

Due to the proposed Overland Flow Route to the south down Street A, the elevation of

Street A will be too low to accommodate a storm sewer (Minor system) that outlets

to the existing 1350mm storm sewer on Emily Carr Lane. The storm sewer on Street A

will service a 0.94ha area of the subdivision and will be directed southerly, through the

DLN subdivision, to Lismer Lane. Servicing Works for the existing subdivision to the

east included the installation of a 675mm diameter storm sewer and a 200mm


diameter sanitary sewer to the east limit of the DLN subdivision. The 675mm storm

sewer has sufficient

capacity to service the additional 0.94ha from the proposed site.

It is understood that a review of the modeling for SWMF2 is required to confirm that

minor and major system flows from the subdivision can be accommodated. Also, the

City has noted that the ongoing Dingman Creek EA would identify changes in

catchment areas. Should it be found that SWMF2 cannot accommodate flows from

the subdivision, it is acknowledged that theses lands are to be tributary to White Oak

SWM Facility #3 and serviced in accordance with the final accepted Dingman

Creek Stormwater Servicing Strategy Schedule C Municipal EA and final accepted

Functional Report for SWM Facility #3.

The geotechnical Investigation has been undertaken for the site, which shows the site

soils to be predominantly Clayey Silt Till. The Hydrogeological Investigation is also

underway at this time and includes the establishment of groundwater monitoring

wells and water balance comments.

The inclusion of a 3rd pipe system (perforated storm sewer) for exfiltration was

discussed at the Proposal Review Meeting as a possible Low Impact Development

(LID) feature for the site. This will not be practical given the existing site soils.

The SWM Servicing Functional Report will be provided to address the final SWM

Strategy for the site, which will also include the feasibility of incorporating other LID


features into the right-of way and water balance evaluation, along with an

erosion/sediment control plan.

It is planned that minor system flows will be collected and flow through the 1350mm

dimeter pipe on Emily Carr Lane. This will be confirmed in a stormwater management

brief to be submitted with the Draft Plan Application.

Major system flows will be evaluated to be able to be accommodated through the

proposed plan, through 39t-16508, along Lismer Way and within the SWMF2. This

proposed to be undertaken through a model update with the results being provided

with the Draft Plan Application. if the modelling requires any onsite controls to stay

within the operating capacities of the SWMF, these parameters will also be identified at

the time of the draft plan submission.

Groundwater monitoring wells were established in October, 2017. These wells have

data loggers that enable long range multipoint monitoring. Along with other

geotechnical information, this data will be used in evaluating and recommending water

balance measures for this development.

12.0 Transportation

It is not proposed to provide an updated transportation impact study (TIS). Emily Carr

Lane and Lismer Way are local streets, they are constructed and sole outlets for both

39T-06502 and 39T-16508 at build-out do not generate significant traffic to approach

limits with the small number of existing units. Legendary Drive immediately west of

Emily Carr lane transitions to a Primary Collector Road with a continuous turning lane.

In the London Plan is is a Neighbourhood Connector Road. Wharncliffe Road carries

about 20,000 vehicles per day according to City records.

As illustrated, the subdivision plan consists of 2 local streets. The first being the noted

extension of Emily Carr Lane from White Oaks Subdivision (Legend Developments),

which has a 20.0m wide right-of-way, an 8.0m pavement width and a l.Sm wide


concrete sidewalk on one (1) side. Emily Carr Lane is proposed to extend through

the subdivision and terminate within the DLN Group Inc. Subdivision (#39T16508),

at Lismer Lane to the south, which is to be extended westerly from Paulpeel Avenue.

Street A has a proposed right-of-way width of 18.0m with a 6.0m pavement width,

which will run from

Emily Carr Lane to Lismer Lane.

As noted within the Southwest Area Plan, sidewalks shall generally be required on

both sides of all streets. It is proposed to have sidewalk on one side of Emily Carr Lane

from White Oaks Subdivision to Street A, and on both sides of Emily Carr Lane from

Street A to Lismer Lane and Street A from Emily Carr Lane to Lismer Lane.

As noted at the Proposal Review Meeting, going forward starting in 2019,roads in all

subdivisions are to be constructed with barrier curb (OPSD 600.04).

13.0 Parks and Schools Planning

Cash in lieu of parkland is expected to be provided for this subdivision as there are no park land

requirements. There are existing parks in the Community, namely Paul Haggis Park to the east

which includes several sports fields and play equipment.

The Schools in the area are: 1. Sir Isaac Brock Public School at 80 St Lawrence Blvd

2. Ashley Oaks Public School at 121 Ashley Crescent.

3. St. Anthony’s French Immersion Catholic School at 1380 Ernest Avenue.

4. White Oaks Public School at 585 Bradley Avenue.


14.0 Financial Implications and Miscellaneous

In Appendix 3 is the Cost Sharable Works and DC Revenue Estimate Worksheet Form

completed that shows the 55 lots to generate $1,673,925 of revenue with no costs.

Estimated UWRF Revenues Estimated CSRF Revenues

$137,995 $1,535,930

Bibliography

1. Official Plan – city of London 1989

2. Southwest Area Plan – City of London 2016

3. London Plan – city City fo of London, 2016

4. Provincial Policy Statement

5. Zoning Bylaw – City of London

APPENDIX

Appendix 1 – – Draft Plan of Subdivision

Appendix 2 – Archaeology Ministry letter

Appendix 3 – Cost Sharable Works and DC Revenue Estimate Worksheet

Appendix 4 – City Summary of Pre-consultation

Nov 29, 2016 Matthew Beaudoin (P324) Timmins Martelle Heritage Consultants Inc. 1600 Attawandaron London ON N6G 3M6

Dear Dr. Beaudoin: This office has reviewed the above-mentioned report, which has been submitted to this ministry as acondition of licensing in accordance with Part VI of the Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O. 1990, c 0.18.1 Thisreview has been carried out in order to determine whether the licensed professional consultantarchaeologist has met the terms and conditions of their licence, that the licensee assessed the propertyand documented archaeological resources using a process that accords with the 2011 Standards andGuidelines for Consultant Archaeologists set by the ministry, and that the archaeological fieldwork andreport recommendations are consistent with the conservation, protection and preservation of the culturalheritage of Ontario. The report documents the Stage 1-2 assessment of the study area as depicted in Map 16 of the abovetitled report and recommends the following: 3.4 Recommendations A Stage 1 and 2 archaeological assessment was conducted for a proposed residential subdivision thatcomprises roughly 14.26 hectares (35.2 acres), located within part of Lot 33, Concession 2 in theGeographic Township of Westminster, Middlesex County, now in the in the City of London, Ontario.Archaeological material was reported in four locations. Our recommendations with respect to each of theselocations and the overall property are presented below. 1) Location 1 (AfHh-915) is an isolated find of a single projectile point dating to the Late Archaic Period. Thesite does not meet provincial criteria for Stage 3 testing and therefore no further work is recommended asthe site is considered sufficiently documented. 2) Location 2 (AfHh-916) is a scatter of 31 native artifacts with no confirmed cultural or temporal affiliation.The site has further cultural heritage value and Stage 3 testing is recommended. The Stage 3 strategyshould follow that established for sites where it is not yet evident that the level of cultural heritage value or

Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport

Archaeology Programs UnitPrograms and Services BranchCulture Division401 Bay Street, Suite 1700Toronto ON M7A 0A7Tel.: (519) 675-6898Email: [email protected]

Ministère du Tourisme, de la Culture et du Sport

Unité des programmes d'archéologieDirection des programmes et des servicesDivision de culture401, rue Bay, bureau 1700Toronto ON M7A 0A7Tél. : (519) 675-6898Email: [email protected]

RE: Review and Entry into the Ontario Public Register of Archaeological Reports:Archaeological Assessment Report Entitled, "Stage 1 & 2 ArchaeologicalAssessment Proposed Residential Subdivision Part of Lot 33, Concession 2Geographic Township of Westminster Now the City of London, Ontario ", DatedNov 21, 2016, Filed with MTCS Toronto Office on Nov 22, 2016, MTCS ProjectInformation Form Number P324-0175-2016, MTCS File Number 0003892

Page 1 of 2

interest will result in a recommendation to proceed to Stage 4 (MTC 2011:51, Table 3.1). This will involvethe excavation of one metre units across a 5 metre grid throughout the site, with an additional 20% of infillunits placed in areas of interest. As the site is located within active agricultural fields, a controlled surfacecollection (CSC) should be completed prior to the unit excavation. 3) Location 3 is an isolated find of a single undiagnostic native artifact (one celt fragment). The site doesnot meet provincial criteria for Stage 3 testing and therefore no further work is recommended as the site isconsidered sufficiently documented. 4) Location 4 is an isolated find of a single undiagnostic native artifact (one retouched flake). The site doesnot meet provincial criteria for Stage 3 testing and therefore no further work is recommended as the site isconsidered sufficiently documented. The areas within the subject property that were not found to contain archaeological resources areconsidered free of archaeological concern and no further work is recommended for these. Based on the information contained in the report, the ministry is satisfied that the fieldwork and reporting forthe archaeological assessment are consistent with the ministry's 2011 Standards and Guidelines forConsultant Archaeologists and the terms and conditions for archaeological licences. This report has beenentered into the Ontario Public Register of Archaeological Reports. Please note that the ministry makes norepresentation or warranty as to the completeness, accuracy or quality of reports in the register. Should you require any further information regarding this matter, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Shari Prowse Archaeology Review Officer

1In no way will the ministry be liable for any harm, damages, costs, expenses, losses, claims or actions that may result: (a) if the Report(s) or itsrecommendations are discovered to be inaccurate, incomplete, misleading or fraudulent; or (b) from the issuance of this letter. Further measuresmay need to be taken in the event that additional artifacts or archaeological sites are identified or the Report(s) is otherwise found to be inaccurate,incomplete, misleading or fraudulent.

cc. Archaeology Licensing OfficerDavid Nuttal,DLN GroupAlanna Riley,Corporation of the City of London

Page 2 of 2

1

PROPOSAL REVIEW MEETING SUMMARY & RECORD OF CONSULTATION

Date:

Subject:

Meeting Date:

October 9, 2018

Proposal Review Meeting 3425 Emilycarr Lane

September 12, 2018

Meeting Participants:

R. Carnegie (Coordinator) Development Services – Planning L. Pompilii (Chair) Development Services – Planning I. Abushehada Development Services – Engineering M. Harrison Development Services – Engineering M. Salama Development Services – Engineering G. LaForge Development Finance A. Sones E.E.S. – Stormwater Management R. Armstrong E.E.S. – Waterworks Engineering

Owner/Applicant: York Developments Inc. Authorized Agent: Kirkness Consulting – c/o Laverne Kirkness File Reference: File #TS2018-008 Type of Application: Proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision Location: 3425 Emilycarr Lane File Manager: Lou Pompilii Planner: Craig Smith

DEPARTMENT & AGENCY COMMENTS

The following is a summary of the comments as reported by the respective service areas/agencies in response to the proposal. It is noted that these comments do not necessarily reflect the final planning recommendation on the proposal.

DEVELOPMENT PLANNING: Lou Pompilii Manager, Development Services Planning Craig Smith Senior Planner

- Part Southwest Area Plan- Need to submit new application and new Planning Justification Report.- Regard to the London Plan and Southwest Area Plan must be included in the required

Planning Justification Report.- Zoning By-law amendment application is required to be submitted with the application for

Draft Plan of Subdivision application.

Recommendation for Processing: Reports required by Development Planning as part of a Complete Application

o Zoning By-law Amendment application.o Draft Plan of Subdivision applicationo Planning Justification report.

URBAN DESIGN/PLANNING POLICY: James Scott Urban Design Technician

- Consistent with the SWASP, ensure all development are oriented towards the public streets.Corner lots (Lot 34 & 49) should be treated with enhanced side facades (20.5.3.9 i)

- Consistent with the SWASP, limited fencing along the right-of-way along the following lots(Lot 34, 35, 49, 50) to no more than 50% of any given right-of-way (20.5.3.9 i)).

- Consistent with the SWASP, ensure garages occupy no more than 50% of the lot widths andare set back behind the main building facades (20.5.3.9 iii) e)).

2

HERITAGE PLANNING: Kyle Gonyou Planning - Heritage Planner Archaeology

- The correspondence from the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport (MTCS) included in the circulation package for TS2018-008 refers to the Stage 1-2 Archaeological Assessment Proposed Residential Subdivision Part of Lot 33, Concession 2, Geographic Township of Westminster now the City of London (Matthew Beaudoin, Timmins Martelle Heritage Consultants, November 21, 2016, P324-0175-2016). Upon examination of this Stage 1-2 Archaeological Assessment report, the study area does not match the area subject to this Proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision. The study area covered in Stage 1-2 Archaeological Assessment report (P324-0175-2016) is south of the future Bradley Avenue extension, whereas the subject site at 3425 Emilycarr Lane is north of the future Bradley Avenue extension.

- A Stage 1-2 Archaeological Assessment (of the same title as noted above and by the same consultant archaeologist, but dated January 19, 2016, P324-0087-2015) has been previously received by the Heritage Planner. This Stage 1-2 Archaeological Assessment report (P324-0087-2015) includes the subject site, located north of the future Bradley Avenue extension. Further Stage 3 archaeological assessment is required for Locations 1-2 (AfHh-905) before development or site alteration can be permitted.

- Note: An exception was made related to the standard archaeological condition for consent for the application B.031/17 as the area subject to the consent had been assessed and no further work was required for that area. Further Stage 3 archaeological assessment is required for Locations 1-2 (AfHh-905) before development or site alteration can be permitted.

Built Heritage

- The subject site at 3425 Emilycarr Lane is not listed or designated under the Ontario Heritage Act. The subject site at 3425 Emilycarr Lane is not adjacent to a property listed or designated under the Ontario Heritage Act.

PARKS PLANNING: Bruce Page Planning - Environmental and Parks Planning Natural Heritage

- No natural heritage issues. Parks Planning and Open Space

- Parkland dedication will be calculated at 5% of the total site area or 1ha per 300 residential units, whichever is greater. It is anticipated CIL of parkland will be used to satisfy the requirement.

WASTEWATER & DRAINAGE ENGINEERING: Marcus Schaum Senior Technologist

- The site is within the Greenway WTP sanitary sewershed. - As specified in the IPR these lands are tributary to the existing 200mm diameter sanitary

sewer to the east of these lands on existing Emilycarr Lane all in accordance with the accepted sanitary area plans as set out in Plan 33M582. Sanitary outlet may need to be extended to the limit of this proposed draft plan. Permission from adjacent developer is required prior to connecting into unassumed services.

- The drainage area plan is to include external areas from north being Tepperman (1150 Wharncliffe Rd) and is to identify the existing service connection to Emilycarr Lane including easement.

WATER ENGINEERING: Ryan Armstrong Technologist II The following is offered for consideration at detailed design:

- Extend the existing 200mm watermain on Emilycarr Lane throughout and to the limits of the Plan and connect to the Draft Plan of Subdivision immediately to the south (39T-16508). In the event this Plan develops in advance of the lands to the south, as there are fewer than 80 units watermain looping wouldn’t be required, however interim water quality would be required to be maintained until the future looped watermain connection to Lismer Way is made.

3

STORMWATER MANAGEMENT: Paul Titus Senior Engineering Technologist Adrienne Sones Environmental Services Engineer General Comments – Stormwater Management

- The subject lands are located within the Dingman Creek Subwatershed. The City is undertaking the Dingman Creek Stormwater Servicing Strategy Schedule C Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (EA) and anticipates a draft stormwater management (SWM) strategy for the subject lands will be available by the end of 2018.

- A portion of this site was previously identified to be serviced by the White Oaks 2 SWM Facility. Detailed verification will be required to demonstrate the proposed SWM strategy for this development will be in accordance with the following document:

a) Addendum to the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment “Schedule B: for Storm/Drainage and Stormwater Management Servicing Works for the White Oak Area – Dated September 23, 2014 by AECOM Canada Ltd.;

b) Design of adjacent subdivisions within the same catchment area proposed to outlet to White Oaks 2 SWM Facility.

- An overall drainage area plan is provided which identifies external flows as well as major and minor flow routes.

- Clearly demonstrate how the 100 and 250 year major overland flow events will be conveyed to the ultimate outlet.

- Review feasible LID measures to achieve predevelopment water balance conditions including BMP practices.

- If Low Impact Development (LIDs) stormwater controls are included as part of the subdivision design, the following may be required as part of the complete submission package in support of the proposed storm drainage and SWM design:

a) Hydrogeological Report to support LID design. b) Geotechnical Report including detailed soil characteristics and ground water levels to

support any Low Impact Development (LID) solutions.

TRANSPORTATION PLANNING & DESIGN: Andrew Giesen Senior Transportation Technologist

- Provide a road layout and concept plan showing all bends tapers and centre line radii comply with City standards, ensure all through streets align opposite each other if minimum City standards are not met changes to the draft plan will be required

- All street connections to the south to align opposite and perpendicular to the streets as identified in draft plan 39T-16508

- Provide 6.0m straight tangents between horizontal curves on Street “A” - Barrier curb will be required throughout the subdivision - Council recently approved the Complete Streets Design Manual found at the below web link,

the complete streets design manual contains information and design guidance for the construction of a complete street. https://www.london.ca/residents/Roads-Transportation/Transportation-Planning/Pages/Complete-Streets-.aspx

DEVELOPMENT FINANCE Greg LaForge Manager I, Development Finance General

- It is noted that current DC policies are under review as part of the 2019 Development Charges Background Study and are subject to review and Council approval.

Water

- There are no anticipated claims from the CSRF for subsidy on oversized watermains (watermains exceeding 250mm). All local watermains and connections will be installed at the Owner’s cost.

SWM

- There are no anticipated claims from the CSRF for stormwater management related infrastructure. The existing White Oaks SWMF 2 is identified to service the proposed development.

- If LID’s are required, these works are currently considered an Owner cost. As part of the 2019 Development Charges Study, the City is reviewing the eligibility of LID’s as a DC recoverable item.

4

Storm - If required, the proposed 1,350mm internal storm sewer would be eligible for oversizing

subsidy from the CSRF. All local (1050mm & less) storm sewers and connections will be installed at the Owner’s cost.

Sanitary

- There are no anticipated claims from the CSRF for subsidy on oversized sanitary sewers (sewers exceeding 250mm). All local sewers and connections will be installed at the Owner’s cost.

Roads

- There are no anticipated claims from the CSRF for road improvements. All internal roadworks are to be constructed at the Owner’s cost.

Parks

- There are no Owner anticipated claims for parks related infrastructure.

DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING: Ismail Abushehada Manager, Development Engineering Michael Harrison Senior Engineering Technologist Moe Salama Technologist II STANDARD COMMENTS:

- All the usual standard conditions of draft plan will be imposed; - External land needs are to be addressed as necessary (e.g. utility corridors, drainage corridors,

public roads, construction roads, emergency access, servicing, etc.). - Drawings are to be completed to scale and an accurate scale is to be included on each drawing.

INITIAL PROPOSAL REPORT COMMENTS: The following are comments on the Initial Proposal Report:

- The report must be signed DRAFT PLAN OF SUBDIVISION DRAWING COMMENTS: The draft plan of subdivision drawing is to comply with all City standards with regard to the above comments and the following:

Draft plan of subdivision is to include various existing features: • Topographical information (e.g. contours, elevations, vegetation areas, water courses,

wells, utility corridors, and flood plain limits) • Legal info of this plan and adjoined lands (e.g. easements, lot and plan numbers,

addresses, and adjacent streets) • Proposed road curvature and radii to comply with City standards • Tapers / transitions • Road widening’s • Dimension all right of way’s including window streets • Daylighting triangles where applicable • 0.3m reserves and road dedications as necessary • Lot Frontages • Block Areas • Drawing to scale • North arrow, etc.

REQUIREMENTS FOR A COMPLETE DRAFT PLAN OF SUBDIVISION SUBMISSION: For a complete Draft Plan of Subdivision Application, the Owner is to provide the following:

- The Final Proposal Report addressing all Development Services comments with respect to the IPR.

- Revised proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision drawing as per Development Services comments. - Provide a Geotechnical report. - Opinion letter for Class EA

EXTERNAL COMMENTING AGENCIES Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF) Karina Černiavskaja District Planner – Aylmer District

(No comments Rec’d)

5

UNION GAS LTD. Justin Cook Senior Pipeline Engineer (No comments Rec’d) LONDON TRANSIT COMMISSION (L.T.C.) Daniel Hall Transportation Planning Technician


THAMES VALLEY DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD Danielle Kettle Planning Analyst


LONDON DISTRICT CATHOLIC SCHOOL BOARD Rebecca McLean Planning Specialist


LONDON-MIDDLESEX HEALTH UNIT Bernadette McCall Public Health Nurse


UPPER THAMES RIVER CONSERVATION AUTHORITY (U.T.R.C.A.) Christine Creighton Land Use Planner

(Comments rec’d via email & attached)

The Upper Thames River Conservation Authority (UTRCA) has reviewed the initial proposal report (IPR) with regard for the policies in the Environmental Planning Policy Manual for the Upper Thames River Conservation Authority (June 2006). These policies include regulations made pursuant to Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act, and are consistent with the natural hazard and natural heritage policies contained in the Provincial Policy Statement (2014). The Upper Thames River Source Protection Area Assessment Report has also been reviewed in order to confirm whether the subject lands are located in a vulnerable area. The Drinking Water Source Protection information is being disclosed to the Municipality to assist them in fulfilling their decision making responsibilities under the Planning Act. CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT The subject lands are not affected by any regulations (Ontario Regulation 157/06) made pursuant to Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act. DRINKING WATER SOURCE PROTECTION Clean Water Act The Clean Water Act (CWA), 2006 is intended to protect existing and future sources of drinking water. The Act is part of the Ontario government's commitment to implement the recommendations of the Walkerton Inquiry as well as protecting and enhancing human health and the environment. The CWA sets out a framework for source protection planning on a watershed basis with Source Protection Areas established based on the watershed boundaries of Ontario’s 36 Conservation Authorities. The Upper Thames River, Lower Thames Valley and St. Clair Region Conservation Authorities have entered into a partnership for The Thames-Sydenham Source Protection Region. The Assessment Report for the Upper Thames watershed delineates three types of vulnerable areas: Wellhead Protection Areas, Highly Vulnerable Aquifers and Significant Groundwater

6

Recharge Areas. We wish to advise that the subject lands are identified as being within a vulnerable area. Mapping which shows these areas is available at: http://maps.thamesriver.on.ca/GVH_252/?viewer=tsrassessmentreport Provincial Policy Statement (PPS, 2014) Section 2.2.1 requires that “Planning authorities shall protect, improve or restore the quality and quantity of water by: e) implementing necessary restrictions on development and site alteration to:

1. protect all municipal drinking water supplies and designated vulnerable areas; and 2. protect, improve or restore vulnerable surface and ground water features, and their

hydrological functions.” Section 2.2.2 requires that “Development and site alteration shall be restricted in or near sensitive surface water features and sensitive ground water features such that these features and their related hydrologic functions will be protected, improved or restored.” Municipalities must be consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement when making decisions on land use planning and development. Policies in the Approved Source Protection Plan may prohibit or restrict activities identified as posing a significant threat to drinking water. Municipalities may also have or be developing policies that apply to vulnerable areas when reviewing development applications. Proponents considering land use changes, site alteration or construction in these areas need to be aware of this possibility. The Approved Source Protection Plan is available at: http://www.sourcewaterprotection.on.ca/source-protection-plan/approved-source-protection-plan/ RECOMMENDATION Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the IPR. The UTRCA has no concerns regarding this proposed development application. REQUIREMENTS TO PROCEED WITH CURRENT APPLICATION

New City of London Complete Application Requirements for Planning Act Applications All new applications submitted on or after January 22, 2018 will be required to meet the new requirements for the relevant application type. These applications must be submitted using the updated application forms dated January 2018 which will appear on the City’s website in early January. The new requirements are in addition to any technical submission requirements you are currently required to meet, and are as follows: Draft Plan of Subdivision A simplified draft plan of subdivision is required for the production of the on-site sign. The graphic must be sized to the dimensions of 46”(W) x 46(H), provided in PDF and JPEG format at a DPI of 300. The subdivision must be centred and scaled within the 46” bounding box to allow for maximum readability. The area outside of the draft plan of subdivision must be populated with Ontario Base Map data to provide context for the surrounding land. This additional contextual information should be displayed at a lighter transparency and contain information such as, but not limited to: streets, parcel fabric, building outlines, and watercourses. The images should be full bleed with no borders. The image must not be distorted or skewed in any way and is subject to cropping. The simplified image of the proposed subdivision must include the following elements:

- Outline the extent of the subdivision boundary - Road, lot, and block fabric and descriptions - Proposed street name labels - Proposed block numbers & area calculations - Colour application to all lots and blocks per The London Plan colours (see Map I for relevant

place types and colour standards) - Light grey colour application to all street and walkway blocks - Basic map elements: (north arrow, scale, etc.)

http://maps.thamesriver.on.ca/GVH_252/?viewer=tsrassessmentreport

http://www.sourcewaterprotection.on.ca/source-protection-plan/approved-source-protection-plan/

http://www.sourcewaterprotection.on.ca/source-protection-plan/approved-source-protection-plan/

7

Official Plan and/or Zoning By-Law Amendment (applicable only where Renderings are required as part of a complete application) Proposed Development best represented using a landscape image format Graphic renderings are required which represent the conceptual design of the proposal for the production of the on-site sign. A minimum of 2 renderings must be provided, oriented in landscape format and sized to the dimensions of 48”(W) x 26”(H), provided in PDF and JPEG format at a DPI of 300. These renderings should be an accurate visual representation of the proposal and highlight features of the conceptual design. The images should be full bleed with no borders. The image must not be distorted or skewed in any way and is subject to cropping. OR Proposed Development best represented using a portrait image format Graphic renderings are required which represent the conceptual design of the proposal for the production of the on-site sign. A minimum of 2 renderings must be provided, oriented in portrait format and sized to the dimensions of 14”(W) x 26”(H), provided in PDF and JPEG format at a DPI of 300. AND A minimum of 3 renderings must be provided, oriented in landscape format and sized to the dimensions of 34”(W) x I 3”(H), provided in PDF and JPEG format at a DPI of 300. The landscape images are typically, but not always, of the pedestrian level of a tall building. These renderings should be an accurate visual representation of the proposal and highlight features of the conceptual design. The images should be full bleed with no borders. The image must not be distorted or skewed in any way and is subject to cropping. The following documentation is required for a complete application submission: NOTE: The draft recommendations from the Dingman Creek EA will be required prior to acceptance of the complete application

• Draft Plan of Subdivision Application: - 1 copy of the City of London Subdivision Application Form. - 24 rolled copies of the Draft Plan, completed as required under Section 51(17) of the

Planning Act (the Draft Plan must include the Approval Authority signature block) - A digital file of the Draft Plan tied to the City’s geographic horizontal control network (NAD

1983 UTM Zone 17N) must be submitted as well (refer to the City’s Plans Submission Standards available on-line).

- 1 legal sized copy of the Draft Plan. - Associated application fees Draft plan of Subdivision is to include various features listed on the Draft Plan of Subdivision Application Form

• Zoning By-law Amendment Application:

- 2 copies of completed City of London Zoning By-law Amendment application form and supporting documentation

- Hard copy and digital file of proposed zoning map - Associated application fees

• Final Proposal Report (FPR) & Reports/Studies Required:

- Update the Initial Proposal Report to reflect the comments that have been identified in this Record of Consultation, in accordance with the requirements prescribed in the File Manager Reference Manual.

- FPR is to include updated water, sanitary, stormwater, transportation and development finance components, parks and open space, and addressing all comments identified in the Record of Consultation (Note: applicant/consultant should undertake off-line discussions with contacts prior to completing the FPR, to ensure all servicing requirements are suitably addressed)

- Final Proposal Report which fully addresses the polices of the Official Plan, the Southwest Area Secondary Plan, and the London Plan (and specifically addresses the intensification policies mentioned above)

- Provide a road layout and concept plan showing all bends tapers and centre line radiicomply with City standards, ensure all through streets align opposite each other ifminimum City standards are not met changes to the draft plan will be required.

- Further Stage 3 archaeological assessment is requited for Locations 1-2 (AfHh-905)Geotechnical Report

- Planning Justification Report- Hydrogeological Report- Opinion letter for Class EA

11-oic- ct--Prepared By:Rob Carnegie Proposal Review Meeting Coordinator, Development Planning(519) 661-CITY (2489) ext. 2787 [email protected]

Senior Planner, Development Planning(249) ext. 4586 [email protected]

Lou Pompilil Manager, Development Planning(519) 661- CITY (2489) ext. 5488 [email protected]

8

initial final proposal report - london.ca · initial proposal report: york developments inc. , 55...

Documents