Report [ZJ BRAMPTON F2-\ Planning, Design and brampton.ca Flower C1ty Development Committee Committee of the Council of The Corporation of the City of Brampton
Date: November 25, 2013 PLANNING, DESIGN &DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
Files: C01 E18.016 DATE]W:emb<.L q 12ols
Subject: RECOMMENDATION REPORT Application to Amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-Law CALEDON JV PARTNERSHIP- GSP GROUP INCORPORATED (To permit a Neighbourhood Retail Centre.) 12197 Hurontario Street Ward: 2 Contact: Allan Parsons, Manager Development Services Site Plan Approvals, Planning and Building Division, 905-874-2063
Overview:
• The purpose of this report is to provide recommendations related to an application to amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-law submitted by GSP Group Incorporated on behalf of Caledon JV Partnership for lands located partially within the City of Brampton (0.55 ha/1.5 ac) and the Town of Caledon (3.0ha/7.4 ac).
• The applicant is proposing to build a 9,290 m2 (1 00,000 fe) neighbourhood retail centre between the City of Brampton and the Town of Caledon, which includes 2,508 m2 (27,000 fe) of GFA on the parcel located within the City of Brampton. A statutory public meeting was held on September 9, 2013.
• Specifically, the applicant is proposing to redesignate the lands from " Low Density Residential" to "Neighbourhood Commercial" within the Snelgrove Secondary Plan and rezone the property from " Agricultural" to "Commercial Two".
• This report recommends that the application be refused given that the development proposal is not compatible with the host neighbourhood and does not represent good planning.
• More specifically staff have identified the following issues:
~ The proposed development does not have an appropriate road F2--2
network or associated access points to serve this proposal as the primary access to the site is from Highwood Road, which is designed for low to moderate volumes of local residential traffic.
);;> The residential designation for the subject lands represents the most appropriate land use for the site, given the characteristics of the host neighbourhood and the current road network.
);;> The GTA West EA Study may impact the current configuration of the Highway 41 0/Highway 10 interchange and the surrounding road network including the function of Highway 10 within the vicinity of the subject site.
Recommendations:
1. THAT the report from Allan Parsons, Manager Development Services Site Plan Approvals, Planning and Building Division, entitled "RECOMMENDATION REPORT', dated November 25, 2013 to the Planning, Design and Development Committee Meeting of December 9, 2013 re: Application to Amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-Law, CALEDON JV PARTNERSHIP - GSP GROUP INCORPORATED, Ward: 2, File: C01E18.016 be received; and,
2. THAT the application be refused for the reasons noted herein;
3. THAT a copy of this report and Council resolution be sent to the Town of Caledon and serve as the City's official comment on the associated application to amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-law that has been submitted to the Town of Caledon;
4. THAT staff attend at the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) to defend Council's decision and City policies, should Council's decision be appealed.
Origin This application was first submitted by Wood Bull LLP on behalf of Forecast Group Inc. in August of 2008. The current version of the application, with the updated concept plan, was submitted on April25, 2013 by GSP Group Inc. on behalf of Caledon JV Partnership.
Date of Public Meeting The first statutory public meeting, which dealt with the Forecast Group Inc. development concept, was held on February 2, 2009. At that meeting seven people made representation.
A second public meeting, which dealt with an updated development concept prepared by the GSP Group Inc. on behalf of Caledon JV Partnership, was held on September 9. 2013. At that public meeting 10 people made representation.
2 At the two statutory public meetings, and through the correspondence received, several residents expressed concerns with the proposal, which included the following:
• Car and truck traffic would increase significantly along Highwood Road and Summer Vaney Drive and would conflict with residential traffic entering and exiting the neighbourhood;
• Increased traffic will impact the safety of pedestrians, including children walking to and from school, and catching the school bus;
• The proposed development will exacerbate the existing problems with dangerous vehicle turning movements, such as U-turns, on Highway 10 that are caused by the confusing interchange with Highway 410;
• The lack of full moves access on Highway 10 will mean that Highwood Road, which has been designed as a residential road, will become the primary access to the commercial development;
• Increase in potential theft and vandalism in the neighbourhood;
• The applicant has not sufficiently demonstrated feasibility and need for the commercial plaza and grocery store that would be permitted as a result of the proposed amendments;
• The additional vehicles and plaza itself would increase noise, air, and light pollution; and,
• The proposal would result in a decrease to property values in the area, and an increase to vehicle insurance rates.
Planning Area The subject application applies to lands with the City of Brampton and the Town of Caledon. The entire site is approximately 3.6 hectares (8.9 acres). Approximately 0.55 hectares (1.5 acres) is located in Brampton within the planning area known as the Snelgrove Secondary Plan (SPA - 1).
Background: In August 2008, an application to amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-Law (File: C01 E18.016) was submitted by Forecast Inc. to permit the development of the lands for commercial uses in concert with lands to the north, located within the Town of Caledon (See Map 1A).
Following the February 2, 2009 public meeting, the application was abandoned by the applicant and the lands were eventually purchased by Sobey's/Villerboit. In April 2013 the new owners under the name Caledon JV Partnership submitted a modified concept plan together with updated studies to the City of Brampton for review.
3 F2-L(
On September 9, 2013 the revised concept plan was presented at a second public meeting for the City of Brampton. The Town of Caledon followed up with their second public meeting on September 25, 2013.
As a result of the modified concept and the amount of time that has passed since the first submission, the following technical studies were updated:
• Planning Justification Report, prepared by GSP Group, dated March 2013. • Traffic Impact Study, prepared by MMM Group Ltd., dated March 2013. • Functional Servicing Report Memorandum, prepared by Cole Engineering, dated March 2013. • Stormwater Management Report, prepared by Cole Engineering, dated March 2013. • Market Demand & Impact Analysis, prepared by Tate Economic Research, dated March 2013. • Noise Impact Study, prepared by MMM Group Ltd., dated March 2013. • Urban Design Brief, prepared by Scoler Lee and Associates Architects Inc., Terraplan Landscape Architects Inc. and GSP Group Inc., dated March 2013.
PROPOSAL The applicant is proposing to build a neighbourhood retail centre up to 9,290 m2 (100,000 ft2) of total gross floor area (GFA). The plaza is proposed to be anchored by a 2 supermarket with a gross floor area of approximately 4,738 m (51 ,000 ft2.~, which is to be located within the Town of Caledon. Approximately 2,508 m2 (27,000 ft ) of commercial gross floor area is to be located within the City of Brampton.
Access to the site is proposed at two locations. A right-in/right-out access is proposed from Highway 10 in Caledon, and a full moves access is proposed at the southerly end of the site at Highwood Road in Brampton. It is noted that traffic signals are currently operating at the intersection of Hurontario Street and Highwood Road.
The updated concept plan generally proposes the same amount of GFA as the previous concept, but the layout is reconfigured. The southerly access point on Highwood Road has been shifted to line up with Hillpath Crescent, creating two separate buildings on the portion of the lands located within the City of Brampton. Within the Town of Caledon the two smaller 465 m2 (5,000 ft2) buildings now align the proposed access at Highway 10. The applicant has increased the size of the supermarket by about 1,208 m2 (13,000 fe) from the previous version.
4 F2-5
MAP 1: UPDATED CONCEPT PLAN
/~/11'1I I 'I I I 1 fl I I 1 I,, I I/ I /I /II IJ /I /,'j I/Itt I I I tf
I I 1I I / If '' /I I l! I/ //1 I II I I I I I I I
,,,,/~II//: ,,II ,,/J ,,/f ,,II ,,,, 1 I I' It II TOWN OF II I I ,,, Jilt CALEDON 1 1 I d I L .J.J~'fr'rr CITY OF /!f/,'JJ /filii[ ''''lit ,,: : ,,,,,I II I I :: /!!!!
HIGHWOOD ROAD
5 Property Description and Surrounding Land Use
The subject property has the following characteristics:
• is municipally known as 12197 Hurontario Street, at the northeast intersection of Hurontario Street and Highwood Road;
• has a site area of 0.55 ha (1.5 ac) in Brampton. The combined site (Brampton and Caledon) is 3.6 ha (8.9 ac);
• has a frontage of 45.5 m (149 ft) along Hurontario Street in Brampton. The combined site (Brampton and Caledon portions) has 203.3 m (667 ft) of frontage on Hurontario Street.
The surrounding land uses are described as follows:
North: Remaining 3.05 hectares of the commercial development proposed by the applicant, which falls within the Town of Caledon. Beyond the proposal is the Highway 410 and Highway 10 interchange.
East: Existing residential subdivision.
South: Highwood Road, beyond which is vacant "Agricultural" zoned lands, and an existing residential subdivision. Note that the vacant "Agricultural" zoned lands west of Hillpath Crescent were approved in principle for single detached homes (File C01 E18.014).
West: Hurontario Street, beyond which are residential uses in Brampton and agricultural uses in Caledon.
6 F2-T
PLANNING ANALVSIS SUMMARY
From an over~ll Planning perspective, the proposal is not consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and the City's Strategic Plan, with respect to promoting development that is safe for people living in the host neighbourhood or for people using the commercial uses.
From a transportation perspective, the current local road network and proposed access points are not appropriate for servicing this proposal given that Highwood Road functions as a local road, which has been planned, designed, and constructed to accommodate low to moderate volumes of local residential traffic. There are currently multiple residential driveways along Highwood Road and Summer Valley Road, and through traffic is discouraged from using these roads as a short cut to Hurontario Street.
It is more appropriate for the subject lands to be developed as low density residential housing, whic~ is consistent with the surrounding neighbourhood and the design of the local road network.
Furthermore, if there is an opportunity to improve the road network and access issues that surround these lands through the implementation of a finalized GTA West EA Study, then the development of these lands should wait for the results of that study, which may recommend an access solution that minimizes the impact of the proposed development on the City of Brampton and the residents of the host neighbourhood.
At this time the development proposed is not compatible with the existing residential neighbourhood and does not represent good planning given the issues noted herein.
Dan Kraszewski, MCIP, RPP Senior Executive Director, Planning and Building
Authored by: Paul Aldunate,Development Planner, M.PL. MCIP RPP
7 APPENDICES
Appendix 1- Official Plan (Schedule "A" General Land Use Designations) Extract
Appendix 2 - Secondary Plan Land Use Map
Appendix 3 - Existing Zoning Plan Extract
Appendix 4 - Existing Land Use Map
Appendix 5 - Detailed Planning Analysis
Appendix 6 - Public Meeting
Appendix 7 - Results of Application Circulation
Appendix 8 - Correspondence Received
8 fZ-1
TOWN OF CALEDON
1 Cf) rr0 I! 2 0 ~ :r:
MAYFIELD RD
EXTRACT FROM SCHEDULE A (GENERAL LAND USE DESIGNATI ONS) OF THE CI TY OF BRAMPTON OFFICIAL PLAN
SUBJECT LAND RESIDENTIAL - OPEN SPACE
~t-~ 1- APPENDIX 1 8BRA~PTON .s- ~ OFFICIAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS brompton.1a Flower C1ty (" GSP GROUP INC. PLANNING, DESIGN & DEVELOPMENT 0 50 100 Caledon JV Partnership Ltd. Drawn By: CJK Metres Dale: 2013 05 02 CITY FILE: C01 E18.016 TOWN OF CALEDON -----~-··· ...... , I = ;,~= ~ = -= ·::- · · H~: 0 :1:TIF m; Yii 1 1: un·wnu fff~ ~9'f~~; ~ ~ JPN iiii'ii'"ii~~~~~ ~ ~iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiliiiiliiilllllllilllllilllllli!illllll"rf!ll~ jjjjjjjjjjjl!l!lllf n1~H:H:H:1HlHllH!U!H:Hn:::::n::n: ::1::~:~ )II ggg; ~::::::;::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::: :5C 0 C C 0 I m:Hnm:nwl t:111111111111111111111111Hmm11111111111lllll. 'j11111 ~ ~ gg g g g: IEg g g g g l:=:~l:l::·~. !:.l:l: .~.l:l; : ~-;_1.~ ~.:·I ~1ln~lmlnnnlnnnlnlnilnn!li:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::i ilnlimni:::::::::: ~lu::::~ \ec c a o o l1 :::::::::::$1, ~ :~::~~~ll~~~~~l~~~jjjll~~~jll ~ ljll~:1lll~\~~g gg gg: :::::::::::1'.,.; ---= ~ ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::. ::::~ ~ 00000• ::::::::::£: ~--.=. ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::;~ \ 00001 ., ,,,. ~ , .s·=;~.!.!!.!!ii!i!ll!l.!llmHJ!!illi,! ~~~ m~
...... ··································.....··. Zt,L~~~L.:>£...""""--":.....X..-"--"-1 " ~·u·~~~ · ·· rvv\X'~ >- · · ·ifA~Fl.Ei::·o k'-b~6~:.~ ·~ ;.~~;.:;,~:;, ;:,- ;
EXTRACT FROM SCHEDULE SP"1"(A) OF THE DOCUMENT KNOWN AS THE SNELGROVE SECONDARY PLAN Low Density Residential- Snelgrove North & West Institutional Seperate Elementary School Site Convenience Commercial Highway Commercial Service Commercial Neighbourhood Park Hazard Land Minor Arterial Road Major Arterial Road Minor Collector Road Provincial Highway Snelgrove Secondary Plan Area Boundary
APPENDIX 2 BRAMPTON SECONDARY PLAN DESIGNATIONS brampton.ta Flower(ity GSP GROUP INC. PLANNING, DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT Caledon JV Partnership Ltd.
Date: 2013 DS D2 Drawn By: CJK CITY FILE: C01 E18.016 2-)1
TOWN OF CALEDON
R1 C 11 a: I SO 1371 w ::E ::E 11 ::> 1/)
MAYFIELD RD
SUBJECT LAND COMMERCIAL AGRICULTURAL L RESIDENTIAL - INSTITUTIONAL - OPEN SPACE APPENDIX 3 BRAMPTON ~X ~ ZONING DESIGNATIONS lxampton.ca Flower City .s> (:' GSP GROUP INC. PLANNING, DESIGN & DEVELOPMENT Caledon JV Partnership Ltd. 0 50 100 Drawn By: CJK Metres Date: 2013 05 02 CITY FILE: C01 E18.016 FZ-rL
AERIAL PHOTO DATE: SPRING 2013
SUBJECT LAND COMMERCIAL AGRICULTURAL • SCHOOL
RESIDENTIAL INSTITUTIONAL OPEN SPACE r:e~ BRAMPTON ~ .,. APPENDIX 4 ~~ . .so x AERIAL & EXISTING LAND USE bromp1on.co flower City (:' GSP GROUP INC. PL~NINGSDJS IG ~~8E VE LOPMEN T Caledon JV Partnership Ltd.
Drawn By: CJK Metres Date: 2013 01 26 CITY FILE: C01 E18.016 t=2-(6
APPENDIX '5' DETAILED PLANNING ANALYSIS City File Number: C01 E18.016
Provincial Policy Statement Section 1.1.1 of the Provincial Policy Statement states that healthy, livable and safe communities are sustained by avoiding development and land use patterns, which may cause environmental or public health and safety concerns.
The subject application is not consistent with this provincial policy statement given that the applicant is proposing that this development will be serviced substantially by Highwood Road, which is a local road that is meant to service the surrounding residential community, which includes the nearby elementary school. The increased traffic generated by the Highwood Road access will conflict with the traffic generated by the surrounding residential community and the physical characteristics of the road network, which is meant to discourage through traffic and accommodate low to moderate volumes of traffic travelling at low speeds.
Strategic Plan Guiding all City's initiatives is a vision that forms the basis of the Strategic Plan, which is to ''form a vibrant, safe and attractive city of opportunity where efficient services make it possible for families, individuals including persons with disabilities and the business community to grow, prosper and enjoy a high quality of life".
In accordance with this vision, development and land use patterns that pose a risk to public health and safety need to be carefully scrutinized and refused if the risk cannot be mitigated appropriately. According to the City's detailed transportation analysis, the subject application will provide an unsafe condition along Highwood Road and the abutting residential subdivision. Highwood Road has been designed to service residential needs with low to moderate volumes of traffic travelling at low speeds. It was not envisioned to service commercial uses or to serve as the major access point to a neighbourhood commercial development. The traffic generated by the proposed commercial will conflict with existing residential vehicular traffic and can cause an unsafe condition for those living in the abutting neighbourhood or for those using the commercial uses.
Official Plan The subject lands are designated as "Residential" according to Schedule A - General Land-Use Designations. This designation permits predominantly residential land-uses including a full range of dwelling types. Complementary uses shall be permitted, subject to specific secondary plan policies or designations. An amendment to Schedule A2 Retail Structure of the Official Plan would be required.
The original development proposal was submitted in August 2008 prior to the completion of the 2006 Official Plan review process, which was approved in October 2008, by the Ontario Municipal Board. The original application was submitted while under the 1993 Official Plan, which was still in force and effect. 9 According to the Official Plan, the City shall permit local retail development within existing or proposed residential areas only in cases where such uses are considered compatible with the existing and proposed development. An Official (Secondary) Plan amendment will be required to permit development of a local retail use in a location not designated for commercial uses in the Secondary Plan. The required amendment to the Snelgrove Secondary Plan (SPA 1) is discussed under the Secondary Plan section of this report.
The lands are designated as Residential Policy Area B in the Town of Caledon's Official Plan. The applicant has applied for an amendment to the Town of Caledon Official Plan to permit commercial uses
According to the Official Plan, Highwood Road and Summer Valley Drive are designated as "Local Roads", which are to be planned, designed, and constructed to accommodate low to moderate volumes of traffic at low speeds between neighbourhoods, between points of origin and the collector road system. Direct vehicle access from abutting properties is permitted. Furthermore, the City will design systems of local and collector streets to discourage through trips from penetrating residential neighbourhood thereby protecting such area from noise and air pollution and physical dangers of excessive vehicular traffic.
As such Highwood Road and Summer Valley Drive were designed to accommodate low to moderate volumes of traffic at low speeds and to service the abutting residential plan of subdivision, which is characterized by low density residential development with direct vehicle access. These are characteristics consistent with the "Local Road" designation of the Official Plan.
Secondary Plan The subject lands are designated as "Low Density 1 Residential" in the Snelgrove Secondary Plan. The applicant is proposing to amend the Secondary Plan to change the land-use designation from "Low Density 1 Residential" to "Neighbourhood Commercial" in order to permit the subject uses.
Given the detailed transportation analysis and the urban design issues noted below, it is not appropriate to amend the designation to accommodate neighbourhood retail uses. The long term intent for the subject property is to develop the lands for residential, as designated by the Secondary Plan, which is consistent with the residential characteristics of the surrounding neighbourhood. There is no reason to change the land-use designation. The residential designation for the subject lands represents the most appropriate land use for the site, given the characteristics of the host neighbourhood and the current road network.
The Secondary Plan designates Highwood Road and Summer Valley Drive as "Minor Collectors". As discussed in greater detail under the Transportationrrraffic section of this report, these roads function as local roads, but were upgraded in classification in the Secondary Plan to accommodate St. Rita Elementary School and because these roads connect two arterial roads (Mayfield Road and Hurontario Street). They were not 10 '1".1" Fl-IS
designed to serve neighbourhood retail uses such as what is proposed by this development.
Zoning The subject lands are zoned "Agricultural" according to By-Law 270-2004, as amended. An amendment to the Zoning By-law is required to accommodate the proposed commercial uses. The applicant is proposing to rezone the lands within the City of Brampton to a Commercial Two (C2) zone, which permits a wide variety of commercial uses, including:
• a supermarket, • a printing or copying establishment , • a retail establishment having no • a commercial school, outside storage, • a garden centre sales establishment, • and a bank, trust company or finance • an amusement arcade, company, • a temporary open air market, • a service shop, • a place of commercial recreation, • a personal service shop, • a community club, • an office, • a health or fitness centre, • a dry cleaning and laundry • a tavern, distribution station, • a taxi or bus station, • a laundromat, • a custom workshop, • a parking lot, • an animal hospital, • a dining room restaurant, • a place of worship; and • a convenience restaurant, • purposes accessory to the other • a take-out restaurant, permitted purposes • a service station or gas,
This report recommends refusal of the application because the uses, with the accesses proposed, are not compatible or appropriate for the site.
Further, staff also have the following concerns with the proposed zoning provisions. The applicant is also proposing that the zone be site specific to permit a reduction in setbacks. For example the applicant is requesting a 2 metre sideyard setback along Highwood Road. Staff consider this setback to be insufficient to provide the proper landscaping and fencing that would be required to meet the City of Brampton standards. A minimum setback of 4.5 metres would be needed in order to provide an appropriate buffer.
The applicant is proposing a 4 metre rear yard setback where the rear yard abuts a residential zone in Brampton and is proposing a setback of 1 .5 metres along Building F within the Town of Caledon zoning by-law, where it abuts the rear lots of homes in Brampton. These setbacks are insufficient. At a minimum, the setbacks should be 7.5 metres, as proposed along the rear of Building E (supermarket) located in the Town of Caledon, which is 7.5 metres according to the draft site plan. Between the two municipalities there should be a consistent treatment of buffer blocks that separate commercial uses from residential.
11 F2-'~ Given the size of the property in Brampton, a number of these uses can only work in conjunction with the abutting lands in Caledon. As'such, if the rezoning application was to be approved in principle, there will need to·be a site specific zone to clarify that many of these uses can only work in conjunction with the abutting lands, prior to enactment of the zoning by-law.
The lands are currently zoned as "High Commercial" and "Agricultural" in the Town of Caledon. The applicant has also applied for an amendment to the Town of Caledon Zoning By-law
Transportation/Traffic The City's Transportation Planning section has reviewed the subject application to amend the official plan and zoning by-law, which included a review of the Traffic Impact Study, prepared by MMM Group Ltd, dated March 2013 that was submitted in support the proposal.
Transportation Planning staff have indicated that providing access to the proposed commercial uses from Highwood Road is not appropriate given that Highwood Road was designed and currently functions as a residential local road. As a residential local road, there is not enough space between Hurontario Street and Hillpath Crescent to accommodate the forecasted volumes from the commercial operation. Essentially, there is insufficient room to accommodate vehicle deceleration and storage that would be required for the commercial/retail establishment and the proposed access would conflict with residents attempting to enter and exit the community from the intersection of Hurontario Street and Highwood Road.
Although Highwood Road is designated as a "Collector Road" in the Secondary Plan, it is designated as a "Local Road" in the Official Plan. Highwood Road is a local road because it is planned, designed, constructed and designated to accommodate low to moderate volumes of traffic travelling at low speeds, between neighbourhoods. Through traffic is to be discouraged from using such local roadways and direct vehicle access from abutting properties is permitted. There are currently multiple residential driveways along Highwood Road and Summer Valley Drive.
Conversely, a collector road system, is planned, designed, constructed and designated to accommodate moderate volumes of short to medium distance traffic travelling at moderate speeds between residential or business and employment areas or to and from the arterial system including transit services. Direct access from abutting residential properties are generally not permitted on collector roads near intersections with arterial roads. These are characteristics that are not associated with Highwood Road or Summer Valley Drive.
Highwood Road and Summer Valley Drive were designated as 'Minor Collectors' in the Secondary Plan because they provide access between two arterial roads (Mayfield Road and Hurontario Road) and serve the needs of the St. Rita Elementary School. Elementary schools are typically served by a collector road, in order to provide for the increased traffic that is generated by parents dropping off and picking up children and to accommodate school bus movements.
12 If the proposed commercial use was to be established, traffic infiltration into the existing residential subdivision would follow. Direct access from abutting residential properties would not have been permitted on this road, if it was going to be operating as a collector road that serviced commercial uses. Direct access would have been appropriately managed away from the Highwood Road and Hurontario Street intersection.
Further to the 'traffic infiltration' mentioned above, the introduction of a commercial plaza will introduce 'cut-through' traffic to the existing residential neighbourhood. As stated above, Highwood Road and Summer Valley Drive were not designed to accommodate moderate traffic volumes travelling moderate distances and at moderate speeds.
In addition, please note that Brampton Transit currently does not operate transit service along Highwood Road and Hurontario Street, which is not typical of a collector road system in Brampton.
Detailed comments on the TIS from the City's Transportation Planning staff can be found in Appendix 7. At this point staff are not satisfied with the findings of the study or the solutions that that have been proposed to mitigate potential conflicts with the existing neighbourhood.
Ministry of Transportation: The Ministry of Transportation (MTO) has reviewed the subject application and the submitted TIS. It is noted that the segment of Highway 10, adjacent to the subject property is under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Transportation. As such, any access to/from the subject property to Highway 1a requires a permit from the MTO.
According to the MTO, as a part of the Highway 41 a/Highway 1a-Valleywood Boulevard interchange project, a single southbound left-turn lane from Highway 1a to eastbound Highwood Road was previously constructed. This left ~urn lane contains a break to preserve full moves access to/from the applicant's property and for the existing school (via the service road) located on the west side of Highway 1a. The MTO is of the opinion that a full moves access on Highway 1a will create an unsafe condition. Specifically, the length of the existing southbound left turn lane to Highwood Road is insufficient to accommodate a southbound left turn lane to both Highwood Road and the applicants' site due to the proximity of Highway 41 a/Highway 1a interchange ramps. The MTO has indicated that the creation of sub-standard left-turn lane will create serious safety and operational concerns for highway traffic.
Furthermore, the MTO recognizes that the property has had historical access to Highway 1a and is therefore prepared to allow continued access to and from the site. However, in earlier comments, MTO has indicated that this access will be restricted to right-in/right-out turning movements and should be constructed in conjunction with a centre median, and in order to protect for future improvements to the Highway 41 a interchange, should be situated further south from the existing access or be located approximately midway between Highwood Road and the service road intersection. Please note that MTO has also stated in their comments that construction access will need to be from Highwood Road.
13 f2-- l Further to City staffs concerns with the proposed access, staff also does not agree with the establishment of a construction access on Highwood Road due to the significant disruption that would result on the community. The MTO also states that from the Hwy 410 and Hwy 10 interchange to the GTA West EA Study area has been identified as an alternate route connection to consider in the Stage 2 portion of the GTA West EA Study. The purpose of the study is to examine long-term transportation problems and opportunities and consider alternative solutions to provide better linkages between Urban Growth Centres in the GTA West Corridor Preliminary Study Area. The focus will be on developing an integrated, multimodal transportation system that offers choices for the efficient movement of people and goods. The future widening of Hwy 410 and ultimate connectivity to the GTA West corridor will be examined as part of the study. The MTO does not support full moves access to Highway 10 due to possible future road improvements to these road segments. According to MTO, stage two of the GTA West EA Study is set to commence in January 2014. More information will be progressively released on alternatives over the course of the study. Full approval of the preferred route is not expected until 2018. Transportation Planning Summary According to Transportation Planning staff, the current Traffic Impact Study does not go far enough to analyze the issues noted above or suggest viable solutions for dealing with the access issues that surround this development. Transportation staff do not support the notion of any vehicular access, including construction access, from Highwood Road. MTO has also deemed it to be problematic and unsafe to provide fu II moves signalized access from Highway 10. Furthermore MTO's earlier comments indicates that right in/right-out access is permitted but should be moved further south, which would bring it closer and perhaps overlap the City of Brampton/Town of Caledon municipal boundary. This in turn means that access to Highwood Road will become further problematic, if the Highway 10 access is moved further south. MTO's most recent comments indicate that the GTA West EA study could have an impact on the Highway 410 interchange and how it connects to Highway 10. Given the uncertainty surrounding the interchange and the configuration of the Highway 10 north of Brampton, it is premature to establish points of access at this time. The GTA West EA study could offer alternatives for access and result in a more positive road network that can benefit, both City of Brampton and the Town of Caledon within the vicinity of this application. Given the current function of Highwood Road and the uncertainty surrounding Highway 10 and its future interface with Highway 410 and the GTA West EA study, from transportation planning perspective, staff are unable to support this application to amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-law. 14 Fl-I~ Urban Design Urban Design staff have been circulated the subject application including the Urban Design Brief, prepared by GSP Group Inc., dated March 2013, submitted in support of the application. Urban Design staff comments outline a number of concerns with the application as noted below, which are related to providing an appropriate interface with the existing residential neighbourhood. With respect to the built form, single storey buildings proposed along Hurontario are inappropriate. Buildings fronting on to Hurontario Street should be at least two storey's and have sufficient glazing. They note that buildings 'A', 'B', 'C' and '0' are four sided buildings and should have higher quality material and detailing on all four sides. Building 'C' would need to be moved further away from the residents in order to provide adequate buffering and to minimize the impact. If the Highwood Road access is to remain, it should be noted in the design brief that this access will be the main entry point to the site and should not be flanked by loading areas and blank screen walls. Significant redesign of the entry is necessary if this proposal was to proceed. From a landscaping perspective it is important to have at a minimum a 4.5 metres unencumbered and enhanced landscape buffer along the entire Hurontario Street frontage. This landscape buffer is in addition to any easements that may be in place, such as the 6.0 metre Bell easement that runs along Hurontario Street. The landscape buffer along Highwood Road would need to be a minimum width of 4.5 metres with landscape treatment to provide year-around interest and adequately screen the site from surrounding residential uses, including upgraded architectural elements such as, masonry columns and decorative metal fencing. The 2.0 metre setback as proposed in the draft zoning by-law is not adequate space to provide the required landscape treatment. Adequate pedestrian connection into the site from the surrounding neighbourhood would also need to be provided. This conceptual plan has also been reviewed from a Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design perspective by the Peel Region Police. They have expressed concerns with the very large ambiguous/unassigned landscape space at the rear of Building F (See Map 1). If this application is approved the treatment of that space will need to be revisited. Land Use The City shall only permit local retail development within existing or proposed residential areas in cases where such uses are considered compatible with the existing and proposed development. The subject proposal is not compatible with the surrounding low density residential land-uses. Specific concerns in this respect stem from land use impacts, associated with the commercial use, site access and the site design that is proposed. The best land-use for the portion of the subject lands contained within the City of Brampton is residential. Continuing with residential along Highwood Road is consistent with the characteristics of the neighbourhood and would have minimal impact on the 15 F2-20 host community. The constraints and limitations expressed by the MTO move the burden of ingress and egress largely to the City of Brampton, when the most substantial portion of the commercial plaza is proposed to be within the Town of Caledon. The impacts that would result from the proposed use, as detailed in the Transportationrrraffic section of this report are not acceptable. From a built form and landscaping perspective the setbacks and buffers proposed do not provide an adequate interface with the existing neighbourhood. Buildings are proposed to be too close to the existing residents. Further, the loading areas proposed adjacent to the main entry do not create an appropriate pedestrian character, considering the context of this residential community. The subject proposal is not compatible with the existing residential neighbourhood and does not represent good planning. Environmental Issues: No environmental issues or features have been identified on the site to date. The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) has been circulated the application and have noted that the subject property is located outside of the TRCA's Regulated Area and is void of any significant natural features and/or hazards on the site. Nevertheless, the TRCA has requested a copy of the FSR for their review. Servicing Municipal Water and Sanitary Sewer Service: The Region of Peel has been circulated the subject application and the Functional Serving Report. Region of Peel staff note that there is an existing 150mm diameter watermain on Donherb Crescent and an existing 300mm diameter watermain located on Highwood Road. With respect to sanitary services there is an existing 250mm diameter sanitary sewermain located on Donherb Crescent and an existing 300mm diameter sanitary sewermain is located on Highwood Road. Stormwater Management: The City's Engineering and Development Section requires the applicant to demonstrate that the subject development will not have a negative impact on the services and property of the City of Brampton. If a minor system connects to existing storm sewer within the City of Brampton, the report should then demonstrate that sufficient spare capacity is available in the existing storm sewers and no surcharge will occur. Similarly, if surface flow has to discharge into an existing stormwater management pond within the City of Brampton, the capacity and the functionality of the pond should be reviewed and analyzed for quantity and quality. The Town of Caledon will need to review the detailed engineering design for the component of the development proposal that is located in Caledon. 16 APPENDIX '6' PUBLIC MEETINGS City File Number: C01 E18.016 February 2, 2009 (First Public Meeting) Members Present: Regional Councillor G. Gibson - Wards 1 and 5 (Chair) Regional Councillor P. Palleschi - Wards 2 and 6 (Vice Chair) Regional Councillor E. Moore - Wards 1 and 5 Regional Councillor J. Sanderson - Wards 3 and 4 (arrived at 7:08 pm and left at 7:35 pm) Regional Councillor G. Miles - Wards 7 and 8 (left at 7:12 pm and returned at 7:21 pm) Regional Councillor J. Sprovieri - Wards 9 and 10 City Councillor J. Hutton - Wards 2 and 6 City Councillor B. Callahan - Wards 3 and 4 City Councillor S. Hames - Wards 7 and 8 City Councilor V. Dhillon - Wards 9 and 10 Members Absent: nil Staff Present: Planning, Design and Development Department J. Corbett, Commissioner of Planning, Design and Development A. Smith, Director of Planning and Land Development Services M. Won, Director of Engineering and Development Services K. Walsh, Director of Community Design, Parks Planning and Development A. Taranu, Manager of Urban Design and Public Buildings P. Aldunate, Development Planner J. Hogan, Development Planner B. Steiger, Central Area Planner Corporate Services M. Kitagawa, Legal Counsel P. Fay, City Clerk C. Urquhart, Legislative Coordinator A. Rawecki, Legislative Coordinator Results Of The Public Meeting: A special meeting of the Planning Design and Development Committee was held on February 2,2009 in the Council Chambers, 4th Floor, 2 Wellington St. West, Brampton, ON commencing at 7:00 p.m. with respect to the subject application. Notices of this meeting were sent to property owners within 800m of the subject lands in accordance with the Planning Act and City Council procedures. Several residents were in attendance and 7 residents made representation. • John MacKay, Highwood Road, Brampton • Clayton Pifko, Highwood Road, Brampton • Tony Jacques, Hillpath Crescent, Brampton • Mark Cianfarani, Highwood Road, Brampton • Cyril John, Highwood Road, Brampton 17 f2'"Z2 • Valerie Moulsdale, Highwood Road, Brampton • Eden Smith, 24 Highwood Road, Brampton September 9, 2013 (Second Public Meeting) Members Present: Regional Councillor P. Palleschi - Wards 2 and 6 (Chair) City Councillor V. Dhillon - Wards 9 and 10 (Vice-Chair) Regional Councillor E. Moore - Wards 1 and 5 Regional Councillor J. Sanderson - Wards 3 and 4 Regional Councillor S. Hames - Wards 7 and 8 Regional Councillor G. Miles - Wards 7 and 8 Regional Councillor J. Sprovieri - Wards 9 and 10 City Councillor G. Gibson - Wards 1 and 5 City Councillor J. Hutton - Wards 2 and 6 City Councillor B. Callahan - Wards 3 and 4 Members Absent: nil Staff Present: Planning, Design and Development Department M. Ball, Commissioner, Planning, Design and Development D. Kraszewski, Senior Executive Director, Planning M. Won, Director, Development Engineering A. Parsons, Manager, Development Services J. Given, Manager, Growth Management and Special Policy J. Spencer, Manager, Parks and Facilities Planning P. Aldunate, Development Planner G. Bailey, Development Planner N. Grady, Development Planner D. Pagratis, Development Planner M. Viveiros, Administrative Assistant Corporate Services Department J. Zingaro, Legal Counsel E. Evans, Deputy Clerk T. Brenton, Legislative Coordinator S. Pacheco, Legislative Coordinator Results Of The Public Meeting: A special meeting of the Planning, Design and Development Committee was held on th September 9 , 2013 in the Council Chambers, 4th Floor, 2 Wellington Street West, Brampton, Ontario, commencing at 7:00 p.m. with respect to the subject application. Notices of this meeting were sent to property owners within 800 metres of the subject 18 F2-23 lands in accordance with the Planning Act and City Council procedures. Many people were in attendance at the public meeting and ten area residents made representations as noted below. • Shirley Fisher, Hillpath Crescent, Brampton • John MacKay, Highwood Road, Brampton • Kevin Lethbridge, on behalf of Adrian Lethbridge and Lanny MacMillan, Donherb Crescent, Caledon • Andrew Gell, Hillpath Crescent, Brampton, • Eden Smith, Highwood Road, Brampton • Norm McDonald, Hillpath Crescent, Brampton • Alana Marques, Summer Valley Drive, Brampton • David Galea, Donherb Crescent, Caledon • Cyril John, Highwood Road, Brampton • Sophie Tyrrel, Highwood Road, Brampton In addition to the two public meetings, several letters were submitted to the City of Brampton as noted below in 2009 and 2013 (See Appendix 8 for Correspondence). In 2009 a petition objecting to the proposal was submitted with over 60 signatures. In 2013 a second petition objecting to the proposal was submitted with over 200 signatures. • Mark Yarranton, KLM Planning Partners Inc., dated September 4,2013 • John M. Alati, Davies Howe Partners LLP, dated September 9,2013 • Liz Lucente, 72 Summer Valley Drive, Brampton, dated September 5, 2013 • Cathy and Jack MacKay, 23 Highwood Road, Brampton, dated September 6, 2013, and February 2, 200. • Shirley, lan, Alexander and Thomas Fisher, Hillpath Crescent, Brampton, dated September 8, 2013 and September 9, 2013, February 2, 2009 • Valerie and Thomas Moulsdale, Highwood Road, Brampton, dated September 6, 2013 • Charles and Brenda Waud, Hillpath Crescent, Brampton, dated September 6, 2013 • Ameet and Isha Pradhan, Highwood Road, Brampton, dated September 6,2013 • Yaudmis Dangali and Gladia Begasouieh, Highwood Road, Brampton, dated September 5, 2013 • Brian and Maxine Phelps, Hillpath Crescent, Brampton, dated September 5, 2013 • Alex and Darlene De Campos, Summer Valley Drive, Brampton • Susan Van Allen, Summer Valley Drive, Brampton, dated September 5, 2013 • Brent and Pam Collins, Sundridge Street, Brampton, dated September 7, 2013 • Andrew and Theresa Gell, Hillpath Crescent, Brampton, dated September 8, 2013 • Tunde and Ayobami Oladele, Summer Valley Drive, Brampton, dated September 7,2013 and February 1,2009 • William Rogan, Hillpath Crescent, Brampton, dated September 6, 2013 19 FZ-2Lf • John Carpenter and Tara Patterson, Woodcreek Drive, Brampton, dated September 8, 2013. • Alan Mason, Nicole Cedrone, Co-chairs St. Ritas's Elementary School Parent Council, October 1 , 2013 and February 4, 2009 • Dave Van Sickle, 74 Summer Valley Drive, dated September 6,2013 • Brain Sutherland, Glen Schnarr & Associates Inc. February 5, 2009 • Katherin Krizsan, Zelinak Priamo Ltd., dated January 16, 2009 • Kenneth Bokor, Co-chair, Northwest Brampton Community Development Association, January 17, 2009 • Carmen Navaleza, 231561 Holdings Limited, dated February 13, 2009 • Florence and Phillip Gutwein, February 2, 2009 Provided below is a summary of the issues that were identified at the public meetings through the resident's presentations and correspondence submitted to the City in association with this application, followed by a response from staff. Traffic Congestion and Safety: Local residents are concerned with the increased amount of traffic, including truck traffic, along Highwood Road and Summer Valley Drive and the potential conflicts with residential vehicular traffic entering and exiting the neighbourhood. They were also concerned with the impact of increased traffic on the safety of pedestrians, which includes children walking to and from school, and children using the school bus. Staff Response: Staff hold similar concerns regarding traffic congestion and safety. Please refer to the detailed comments provided in the TransportationfTraffic section of this report provided in Appendix 5. Staff recommends refusal of this application due in part to traffic related concerns. Highway 10 Access Residents are concerned that added development will only exacerbate a confusing situation with the Highway 10 and Highway 410 interchange, which has caused dangerous traffic movements such as U-turns along Highway 10. Residents are concerned that the lack of full moves access on Highway 10 will mean that Highwood Road, which has been used as a residential road, will be used as the main access to this commercial development. Staff Response: Staff hold similar concerns with the future development of lands in proximity to the Highway 410 and Highway 10 interchange and the access to Highway 10. If there is an opportunity to improve the road network and access issues that surround these lands through the GTA West EA Study, than the development of these lands should wait for the results of that study, which may recommend an access solution that minimizes the 20 F2-2~ impact of the proposed development on the City of Brampton and the residents of the host neighbourhood. Staff are also concerned with the lack of full moves access to Highway 10 and the impact it will have on Highwood Road. Staff are recommending refusal of the application given the traffic related concerns expressed in this report. Theft and Vandalism Residents expressed concern with the potential increase in theft and vandalism in the neighbourhood as a result of this development proposal. Staff Response: This conceptual plan has also been reviewed on preliminary basis from a Crime Prevention through Environmental Design perspective by the Peel Region Police. They have expressed concerns with the very large ambiguous/unassigned landscape space at the rear of Building F (See Map 1). If this application is approved the treatment of that space will need to be revisited. The site plan will need to be revised to provide more sources of natural surveillance from within the site. Commercial Feasibility: The applicant has not sufficiently demonstrated feasibility and need for the commercial plaza and grocery store that would be permitted as a result of the proposed amendments. Staff Response It is not the intention of the Official Plan to safeguard the residential trade areas of local retail uses internal to residential areas by selectively restricting competition from retail centres. Staff have reviewed the application from a land-use planning perspective and have deemed it to be an inappropriate use of the land on that basis. Noise/Pollution Residents note that they currently contend with the noise and pollution from large trucks, high car volumes, emergency vehicle sirens and motorcycles along Hurontario. The additional vehicles and plaza itself would greatly increase noise, air, and light pollution. Staff Response: The City's intent is to design local streets that discourage through trips from penetrating residential neighbourhoods in order to protect such areas from noise and air pollution and physical dangers of excessive vehicular traffic. Staff are recommending that the application be refused given the amount of traffic that this application will generate on the local road network, which includes Highwood Drive, Hillpath Crescent and Summer Valley Drive and the disturbance that it would have on the residents of those streets. 21 F2-2la With respect to the conceptual site plan, a Noise Impact Study has been submitted and reviewed by the City's Environmental Technologists-Noise. Their comments, as noted in Appendix 7, require modifications to the noise study related to the loading areas and proximity of Building F (See Map 1) to the residential dwellings in Brampton. At this time, the noise study is insufficient and will need to be revised if this plan moves forward. Staff are requiring a 1.8 metre masonry wall to separate the commercial from the existing residential to protect residents from noise, lighting and other disturbances from this commercial development. Depending on the final completion of the noise study, and whether this application moves forward, the height of the wall may increase. Property Values and Negative Impacts on Vehicle Insurance Rates Residents are concerned that the development would result in a decrease to property values in the area, and an increase to vehicle insurance rates. Sfaff Response: There is no documented or quantified evidence to show that property values will decrease and vehicle insurance rates will increase. Cost Sharing On behalf of West Mayfield Development Ltd., KLM Planning Partners have requested that the City impose conditions requiring the applicant to pay their proportional share for services that were constructed by West Mayfield Development Ltd. as part of the abutting plan of subdivision (43M-1276). Sfaff Response: Since staff are recommending refusal of the application, this item will not be addressed at this time. 22 P2- 2-=t- APPENDIX '7' RESULTS OF APPLICATION CIRCULATION City File Number: C01 E18.016 24 F2--l<6 Aldunate, Paul From: Mdntyre, Scott Sent: 2013/11/05 8:12 AM To: Aldunate, Paul Cc: Hale, Brad Subject: RE: C01E18.016 - Sobey's Caledon - Highwood & Hurontario Paul, The Transportation Planning section does not support the proposal at this time. Notable areas of concern are summarized herein: Traffic Impact Study (TIS) Review The traffic Impact Study is in our opinion, incomplete. Comments pertaining to the study are: 1. The annual traffic growth rates for the background developments was not broken down. Therefore, we are unable to verify the trip generation rates. The consultant is to provide the trip generation land use codes and equations for the background development sites. Please also include a small map within the pages of the report to identify the locations for the background developments; 2. The intersection traffic Counts from 2010 were used whereas more current counts are available from the City. Counts dating older than 2 years are not be utilized; 3. Breakdown the background traffic growth into separate 'figures'. Currently Figure 7 depicts the background development volumes and figures 8 & 9 depict the combined background volumes. Please provide two additional volume maps for the horizon years 2018 and 2023 depicting only the existing background volumes grown at the 2% per annum rate to provide additional details; 4. The intersection of Summer Valley@ Mayfield Road was not included within the study. Due to the existing cut-through rate of approximately 10%, this key intersection should be included within the study; 5. The Highwood Road lane configuration is misrepresented within the Synchro software files. a. The westbound lane configuration (east leg) on Highwood Rd at Hillpath Crescent depicts a dedicated left turn lane whereas non is provided via relevant pavement markings. If the intersection currently operates in this manner, without the pavement markings, please identify as such with appropriate evidence. b. The Highwood Road leg between Hurontario and Hillpath depicts a future four lane configuration (including one westbound left turn and one eastbound left turn lane) whereas the most recent TIS recommends a shared two-way left-turn lane. 6. The summary of the analysis, such as the levels of service and queuing distances, were based on results of reports run through macro-simulation Synchro software. Our office requests the results reported are to be based on the micro-simulation from the Sim-Traffic reports. We require the reports to be based on a minimum of five simulations comprising of one-hour of seeding the traffic network plus a minimum one-hour per simulation run. The Sim-Traffic simulation encompasses details such as lane spillback, which is not addressed within the Synchro reports. The queuing distance results obtained by City staff when running the Sim-Traffic simulation exceeded queuing distances represented within the TIS by up to 20 metres and exceeded the storage capacity available for some intersections. 7. Verify the link and storage distances. The maximum link distances are measured from centreline to centreline. However, the maximum storage capacity is measured from the stop-bar to stop-bar. It appears that both distances are misrepresented within the Synchro software files. 1 Road Network Providing a commercial access off Highwood Road is not appropriate. The current function of Highwood Road is to provide access to residential lands, not commercial access. As a residential local road, there isn't the spacing necessary between the arterial intersections of Hurontario Street and the local intersection of Hillpath Crescent to provide adequate spacing to accommodate the forecasted volumes from a commercial operation. This means, there is no room to provide the deceleration taper and storage that would be required from the introduction of a commercial/retail establishment. Additionally, a commercial establishment would require the buildings, traffic operations and/or loading activity to be located directly adjacent to an existing low-density residential neighbourhood. Typically, establishments of this nature are located beside higher density residential areas that provide ample green-space between the residential units and the retails units. This would not be possible as the residential units on Highwood Road are already established. Although Highwood Road is identified as a Collector Road in the Secondary Plan, it is deSignated as a local road in the Official Plan. It is more appropriate to call Highwood Road a local road as Highwood Road was not designed to accommodate moderate volumes of short to medium distance traffic travelling at moderate speeds between residential or business and employment areas, or to and from the arterial system, whereas a collector road would accommodate the aforementioned. Through traffic is to be discouraged from using Highwood Road and Summer Valley Drive roadways. Should a commercial operation be introduced, traffic infiltration into the existing residential subdivision would follow. Additionally, direct access from abutting residential properties would not be permitted on collector roads near intersections with arterials, whereas this currently exists on Highwood Road. Direct access would be appropriately managed away from intersections to residential sections. With the existing residential units having direct frontal access to Highwood Road as opposed to reverse frontage, this further strengthens the classification as a Local Road. Existing pedestrian and school children activity is another element not to be mixed with commercial site traffic. One more argument that Highwood Road is not a collector road, is the absence of transit. Further to the 'traffic infiltration' mentioned above, the introduction of a commercial plaza will introduce 'cut through' traffic to the existing residential neighbourhood. As stated above, Highwood Road and Summer Valley Drive were not designed to accommodate moderate traffic volumes travelling moderate distances and at moderate speeds. As a result, due to the nature of the proposed development, the only proposed full-turn access location, the traffic volumes on Hurontario Street, the classification of the adjacent subdivision roads, such as Summer Valley Drive, Highwood Road and Hillpath Crescent as all being designated as local roads, and the location of the existing elementary school on Summer Valley Drive, our office requires a detailed analysis on the amount of cut-through traffic is anticipated from the proposed development towards and through the regional intersection of Summer Valley Drive at Mayfield Road. Finally, an updated TIS is required using more recent traffic counts. The current TIS analysis is based on 2010 counts where 2012 counts are available. Where recent counts are not available, new traffic counts are to be conducted. The intersection of Mayfield Road @ Summer Valley Drive is to be included within an updated TIS. Queuing and capacity analysis is to be based on a micro-simulation as represented within the Sim-Traffic simulation feature available within the Synchro software package. Regards, Scott MCintyre, C.E.T. Transportation Planning Technologist Engineering & Development Services Planning Design & Development 2 . F2-3o )' Theocharidis, Toula From: Tang, Daniel Sent: 2013/06/18 4:48 PM To: Theocharidis, Toula Subject: C01E18.016 OPA Caledon JV Partnership- GSP Group 12197 Hurontario St. Hi Toula, I have reviewed the noise impact study prepared by MMM Group dated March 12, 2013 for the above noted application to amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-Law and have the following comments: 1. The noise model assume trucks are not expected to access/egress via Highwood Road, however the main intersection is currently limited to Right In/ Right out by MTO, revise model accordingly to have all trucks enter from Highwood Road. 2. Define the length of the proposed wing wall for both building C & D. 3. By using the size of building F, list the possible tenant category that can occupy this building; otherwise, the model shall not use administrative mitigation such as deliveries limited to daytime only since it is not practical for the City to enforce, nor the Zoning prohibit such use in evening and night time. 4. The noise report didn't make reference to garbage compactor, just garbage collection, revise noise model accordingly. 5. The reefer units are expected to idle for the during of the delivery from a food safety requirement, 50% duty cycle does not seem to be worst case scenario. Regards, Daniel Tang Environmental Technologist - Noise Development Engineering Services Planning Design & Development (P)905-87 4-2472 (F)905-87 4-3369 daniel.tang@ bram pton.ca 1 :-) ( )·.'·,. Planning, Design and Development l~J BRA~PTON Development Engineering Services brompton.co Flower Ctfy Date: June 12, 2013 File: C01E18.016 To: T. Theocharidis, Development Planner Planning & Land Development Services Division From: C. Heike, Open Space Planner Development Engineering Services Division Subject: Initial Review Comments GSP GROUP INC.- CALEDON JV PARTNERSHIP LTD. Application to Amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-Law. (To permit a commercial development.) 12197 Hurontario Street Northeast corner of Hurontario Street and Highwood Road. Part of Lots 18 & 19, Concession 1, E.H.S. Ward: 2 The Parks and Facility Planning Section would like to provide the following comments on the above noted application dated May 30, 2013. 1. The applicant shall be advised that this location is identified as a major City Gateway for the City of Brampton in the approved Gateways Master Plan. Although the main gateway structure will be located on the west side of Hurontario Street to be seen by those entering Brampton, the architecture and landscaping of this proposed development shall be of higher quality in support of the City's gateway requirements. If you have any questions or require further clarification, please contact the undersigned. er Heike, Hon. BSc, MPI, MCIP. RPP Open Space Planner, Parks & Facility Planning Development Engineering Services Planning Design & Development Department Tel: (905) 874-2422 Fax: (905) 874-3819 [email protected] cc. (via email only): B. Smith, S. Chevalier, S. Bodrug, A. Wong, M. Debnath, A. Walker, A. Minichillo, S. Kassaris (Note: A digital copy has also been uploaded to Plan TRAK.) GSP GROUP INC.- CALEDON JV PARTNERSHIP LTD. C01E18.016 fZ--32 Planning, Design and Development 8BRAMPTON Development Services :Umpran.: Flower City Date: June 10, 2013 File: C01E18.016 To: Toula Theocharidis Development planner From: M. Debnath, Urban Designer Planning &Land Development Services Division Subject: URBAN DESIGN BRIEF COMMENTS- 1sr SUBMISSION Urban Design Brief 12211 and 12231 Hurontario Street, Town of Caledon, 12197 Hurontario Street, City of Brampton Prepared for Caledon JV Limited Partnership PREPARED BY, GSP GROUP INC., TERRAPLAN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS & SCOLER LEE AND ASSOCIATES The Urban Design Section would like to provide the following comments for the above mentioned Urban Design Brief received by us on May 21, 2013. 1. Please provide a large scale concept plan showing the surrounding context. 2. Please indicate the pedestrian circulation pattern in the plan. There should be space for adequate pedestrian connections into the site and also between each of the buildings. 3. On Page 17, section 3.2.1, we'd recommend minimum two storey building height for those fronting on to Hurontario Street (Building 'A' , 'B' & 'D') 4. In Section 3.2.2, please include that the side of the buildings facing Hurontario Street should have sufficient glazing. 5. In section 3.2.2, please include that Buildings 'A' ,'B', 'C' & 'D' are four sided buildings and should have higher quality of materials and detailing on all four sides. 6. We do not recommend the location of Building 'C' as it is too close to the existing residential. 7. The access from Highwood Road into the commercial is close to the intersection, may generate high volume of traffic and cause disturbance to the residential neighbourhood. 8. The loading areas flank one of the main accesses to the site from Highwood Road and present a blank screen wall at the entrance. 2 9. In section 3.2.6, page 19, please include that adequate setback, masonry screening and landscaping should be provided between the commercial development and the adjacent established residential area. 10. Please rename section 3.2.7 as Mechanical Units and Utilities and include that all utility meters should be located away from prominent locations and all utility pipes should run internally. 11. For section 4.0, Community Identity Features, please refer to the attached Terms of Reference and state at least two of the goals from the highlighted section. Thanks, Madhuparna Debnath MUO,MRAIC, MCIP, RPP Urban Designer Urban Design & Special Projects I Planning Design & Development City of Brampton ITel: 905.874.2084 I Fax: 905. 874. 3819 E-mail: [email protected] t •.. ,· ~~ ')'•' .· ~) l~ BRAMPTON Planning, Design and Development :ampton.: Flower City Development Engineering Services Date: June 5, 2013 To: Toula Theocharidis From: Farhad Aziz Subject: Functional Servicing Report Caledon JV Partnership- GSP Group lncorp. 12197 Hurontario St. Northeast corner of Hurontario Street & Highwood Road File: C01 E18.016 and corresponding Site Plan File: SP13-027.000 The Functional Servicing Report dated July 2008 prepared by Cole Engineering has been reviewed and comments provided to Paul Aldunate (copy attached). We have not received any response from Cole Engineering regarding these comments. Once our comments are successfully addressed, we will be able to approve the mentioned FSR and subsequently the SWM Report dated March 2012 will be reviewed accordingly. Regards, Farhad Aziz MSc., P. Eng. Environmental Engineer- Water Resources Tel: (905) 874-2530 Fax: (905) 874-3369 Farhad.aziz@ brampton.ca FA/pm Attach: cc: Hamid Hatami Cole Engineering Group Ltd. rhe Corporation of Tile City of BrQmpton 2 Wellington Street 'Nest, Brampton, ON L6Y 4R2 T: 905.874.2000 TTY: 905.874.2130 . "") ..;.:;1 ''~~t1 BRAMPTON Planning, Design and Development :ompton.:~~ Flower City Development Engineering Services Date: June 17, 2013 To: Toula Theocharidls From: Farhad Aziz Subject: Stormwater Management Report Caledon JV Partnership- GSP Group lncorp. 12197 Hurontario St. Northeast corner of Hurontario Street & Highwood Road File: C01 E18.016 and corresponding Site Plan File: SP13-027.000 Based on the latest information received from Cole Engineering Group Ltd., we confirm that the Stormwater Management Report dated March 2013 is acceptable and approved by our Development Engineering Services. Regards, Farhad Aziz MSc., P. Eng. Environmental Engineer- Water Resources Tel: (905) 874-2530 Fax: (905) 874-3369 Farhad.aziz@ brampton.ca FA/pm cc: Hamid Hatami Cole Engineering Group Ltd. The Corporation of The City of Brampton 2 Wellington Street West, Brampton, ON L6Y 4R2 T: 905.87 4.2000 TTY: 905.87 4.2130 . '). F2~ :.) __ · Flower City ~lanning11 D~sign &, I:Jellelapment •brampton.ca Date: October 31, 2008 To: Paul Aldunate From: Farhad Aziz Subject: Subdivision Application to Amend the Official Plan & Zoning By-Law Wood Bull LLP - Forecast Inc. File No.: C01E18.016 ·.. ul ~ 1~ .JLG 1. Functional Servicing Report: This proposed development is located within the Town of Caledon, which is designed in accordance with Town of Caledon Design Guidelines. Therefore it is the responsibility of the Town of Caledon to review the.detailed design, and as far as the City of Brampton is concerned, we would require the consultants to demonstrate that the subject development will not have negative impact on the services and properties within the City of Brampton. If minor system connects to existing storm sewers within the City of Brampton, the report should then demonstrate that sufficient spare capacity is available in the existing storm sewers and no surcharge will occur. Similarity, if surface flow has to discharge into any existing SWM pond within the City of Brampton, the capacity and the functionality of the pond should be reviewed and analyzed for the quantity and quality purposes. 2. Hydrogeological Assessment: No comments. 3. Geotechnical Investigation The recommendation for excavation, bedding, backfilling and dewatering pertaining to sewer trenches shall be reviewed and confirmed during the construction stage. i"','\ '7 .. )J ") , I 2 ,~-- Farhad Aziz, M.Sc., P. Eng., Environmental Engineer - Water Resources. Tel: (905) 874-2530, Fax: (905) 874-3369 [email protected] FA/pm Attach. cc: Frank Mazzotta Michael Won Aldunate, Paul From: Patel, Parshad (MTO) RE: Proposed Retail Development- Hurontario and Highwood Retail Centre Lot 19, Con 1 EHS 12211 Hurontario Street Hwy 10 at Hwy 410/ Highwood Drive Town of Caledon and City of Brampton Hi Meaghan, Further to the latest submission of August, the ministry has completed the review of all the provided documentation and provides following comments: HWY ENG OFFICE: • Highway Engineering's previous comments still stand with only a right in/right out permitted. GTA West Corridor OFFICE: • The Hwy 410 connection to Hwy 10 and up to the GTA West Study Area has been identified as an alternate route connection to consider in the Stage 2 portion of the GTA West EA study • The future widening of Hwy 410 and ultimate connectivity to the GTAW will be examined as part of the study. • A full-move signalized intersection proposed within such close proximity to a freeway interchange ramp terminal would be operationally problematic, but would be increasingly unacceptable should this become the GTA West connection with Hwy 41 0. • In this situation, the ministry is willing to allow the development (not the signal) to proceed pending an analysis of 'expected' right-of-way requirements, should this become the connecting route to the GTA West. This introduces some risk to the ministry in the EA process, and is complicated in light of the fact there is an interchange at this location. We will look at potential x-sections and impacts including required modifications to the interchange, at a high level of detail, in order to ensure we are comfortable with existing property and setbacks. This will take a short time (-1 month) assuming we can quickly compile the necessary technical drawings from the consultant. • For background, Stage 2 of the GTAW study is set to commence in January 2014. More information will be progressively released on alternatives over the course of the study. Full approval on the preferred route is not expected before 2018. • Please provide an AutoCAD drawing of proposed site plan (not architectural) which should include the existing interchange of the Hwy 41 0 and Hwy 10 with correct coordinates that can be inserted in MTO base plan. Previously provided drawing was an architectural drawing regarding the site property only with no coordinates. TRAFFIC OFFICE: All comments are based on the MMM Group Limited- Updated TIS (March 2013), which only indicates the "Right IN and Right OUT" option • From our observation, the EB left-turn at the unsignalized intersection of Hurontario Street at Highway 41 0 SB ON/Off Ramp Terminal does not appear to have significant delays. Was there any field observation, delay study or gap study done to calibrate the model? • On page 3, "intersection of Hurontario Street at Highway 410 SB on/off ramps will continue to operate with significant delay under future total traffic conditions although there will be sufficient capacity to accommodate the future traffic conditions although there will be sufficient capacity to accommodate the future traffic volumes. However, the traffic volumes are too low to warrant traffic signals." Has a signal warrant been 1 performed (not provided in Appendix C)? At what year is the consultant suggesting that this signal should be constructed? • What is the opening year of the development? MTO requires analysis for opening year then 5 and 10 years after the opening year. • On page 14 of the report, it references the iTrans Valleywood Retail Transportation Study dated September 2010. Has the "Valleywood Retail" been accounted in the background traffic? • In addition, according to the Town of Caledon, part of Mayfield West is under construction and will be completed within 5-10 years. Once again, it has not been accounted for in the background traffic. • For point 3 and 4, MTO suggested the consultant to confirm with the Town of Caledon and the City of Brampton in regards to the background Traffic. • Will a queuing study be completed for the Valleywood and Highway 410 E Ramp since the delay is significant? • Will there be any fast food restaurant with or without drive through? Will there be any type of restaurant? • According to the ITE Trip Generation Handbook 2nd Edition, the Weekday PM pass-by average is 34o/o and the Sat Midday average is 25%. Please use these pass-by percentages in the analysis. • Please provide the digital copy of the Synchro Analysis. DRAINAGE OFFICE: • MTO is concerned that the ditch along Highway 10 just north of the site entrance may be impacted by the development. MTO is requesting that the consultant provide cross sections through the MTO ditch north of the site entrance. Cross sections should be no more than 10 m apart and extend from the entrance approximately 60 m north. Cross sections should show existing and proposed ditch details. The consultant should ensure that the capacity of the ditch is not impacted by the development. ELECTRICAL OFFICE: • MTO has no concerns with any light trespass on to Hurontario Street, however the developer will be required to make any required modifications to the illumination equipment (at their cost), if it is later determined that glare is of a concern to the travelling public. I have included City of Brampton and Town of Caledon in to cc so that they have MTO comments too. If you require some clarification do not hesitate to contact me. Thanks, Parshad Parshad Patel Permits Officer, Ministry of Transportation Corridor Management Section, Central Region ?'h Floor, Building "0", 1201 Wilson Avenue Downsview, Ontario, M3M 1J8 Phone: (416) 235 5560 I Fax: (416) 235 4267 E-mail: parshad.patel @ontarlo.ca 2 f2-YO Theocharldis, Toula From: Polus, Asia (MTO) [[email protected]] Sent: 2013/05/24 2:32PM To: Snape, Paul Cc: 'Mary.Nordstrom @cafedon.ca'; Khanal, Suresh (MTO); Jeganathan, Ayvun (MTO); Boone, Jonathan (MTO); Theocharidis, Toula Subject: FW: SobeysNilfarboit- Hurontario &Highwood OPA?RZ and SP13-027.000 Attachments: OPA-Caledon Letter-POPA 08-06 and RZ 08-13.pdf Importance: High RE: Application for Site Plan Approval GSP Group Incorporated Caledon JV Partnership Limited (C/o Sobeys developments) 12197 Hurontarlo Street SP 13-027.000 Paul, Further to my comments (attached below) regarding the OPA and Zoning By-Law Amendment, please accept this e-mail as a clarification and comments regarding the latest revised Site Plan we have received from City of Brampton on May 15, 2013. Once the re-zoning has been granted the proponent will be required to apply for site plan approval. At that time, as per our previous correspondence, the municipality will circulate the Site Plan drawings and all supporting documents to MTO for review and approval then the ministry will provide formal comments. However, after reviewing the provided single Site Plan for the proposed development the ministry is offering the following comments: • The revised SP dated April 27, 2013 indicates in the "Site Plan Data Chart" that all 78 parking spots within the ministry 14m setback are surplus to the site requirements. However, as you are aware that MTO typically allows parking to be within setback requirements provided these parking spots be in excess of municipal parking requirements and are placed 3m from the ministry ROW. • On the SP drawing, the surplus parking spots are setback only 1.5m from ROW, which is not acceptable. The ministry is willing to exercise the option to accept this 1.5m but only in the length of the north part of the property where parking spots are located along the ministry land owned but not designated. However, we strongly recommended that the currently shown 1.5m setback for parking spots along west part of the site, adjacent to the highway designation ROW, should be revised and 3m setback line applied. • We would suggest that a revised Site Plan submission, and all required documentation specified in my previous correspondence be submitted for our review and approval. • Please note that all proposed above and below grade structures and any facilities vital to the operation of the site have to be outside the ministry's 14m setback limit including the drive through service. Please make sure that the owner is aware of it and the proposed Bldg A drive through is revised as required. • As agreed by all parties, the owner will be required to provide a full engineering submission at the Site Plan stage in order to address the technical requirements of the proposal. The MTO will provide site-specific comments related to the development at the site plan stage. In addition, please note that the ministry's previous comments regarding the development and site plan review process are still applicable. • An MTO Building and Land Use Permit will be required for the site servicing and grading as well as individual Building and Land Use Permits for each proposed building. In addition, an encroachment permit and entrance permit will be required as part of the access development. • Proposed development signs will require and MTO Sign Permit prior to installation. 1 . f2-- Lt\ I'.)· ..J • The detail of the new RIN/ROUT entrance will be determined during the review process. Detail design drawings will be required for new entrances. • Any other access point must be removed, with ROW restored to the satisfaction of MTO. • Constructj9n~c9~s~.must b~vJ~ Highwood Road only (i.e. Construction access to Hwy 10 and Hwy 410 will not be approved) • Since the provided Site Plan drawing is cluttered with so many details, we request that you advise the proponent to provide separate drawings for Site Plan, Site Grading I Servicing I Drainage Plans, and entrance design details. We also require a separate drawing showing the Truck turning paths. Please make sure that the all previously specified Site Plan requirements are addressed. I trust that the above is sufficient in the interim. Further comments will be provided upon receipt of a formal site plan submission. If you require any further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Best Regards W. Asia Polus Corridor Management Technician Ministry of Transportation Engineering Office, Central Region Corridor Management Section 7th Floor, Building "D" 1201 Wilson Avenue Downsvlew, Ont M3M 1J8 Tel. 416 - 235-3991 Fax 416 • 235-4267 From: Polus, Asia {MTO) Sent: May 23, 2013 2:41 PM To: '[email protected]'; 'Snape, Paul' Cc: Khanal, Suresh {MTO); Jeganathan, Ayvun {MTO) Subject: FW: FW: Sobeys/Villarboit- Hurontario & Highwood OPA?RZ and SP13-027.000 Importance: High RE: Notice of Revised application and Request for Comments Application to Amend the OP and Zoning By-Law To permit a commercial development at the northeast corner of Hurontario Street and Highwood Road Caledon JV Partnership - GSP Group Incorporated 12197 Hurontario Street Corresponding Site Plan File SP13-027.000 Toula and Paul Thank you for the above noted submissions, please note that in the principle, the ministry has no objection to the proposed OPA and Rezoning and our previous comments are still applicable. For your references, I have included our previous correspondence (please see below). Since the two municipalities land will be develop by the same proponent, the ministry will prefer to review this submission as one and it will be preferable if one municipality sends in a join submission. Please discuss this option with the Caledon and let us know which Municipality will be the lead organization. Please be aware that Suresh Khanal is the new Permit Officer for this area and all submission regarding this development should be send to his attention. 2 : ) f2'42. .") His e-mail address is: [email protected] and he can be reached at 416- 235-5380. I trust that the above is clear and satisfactory. If you need any further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely w. Asia Polus Corridor Management Technic/an MInistry of TransportaUon Engineering Office, Central Region Corridor Management Section 7th Floor, BuildIng "D· 1201 Wilson Avenue Downsvlew, Ont M3M 1J8 Tel. 416 - 235-3991 Fax 416 - 235-4267 ------From: Polus, Asia (MTO) Sent: August 31, 2012 11:54 AM To: 'Lalita Paray' Cc: Wharton, Lynda (MTO)i Jeganathan, Ayvun (MTO)i Porter, Bryan (MTO) Subject: Declined: FW: Sobeys/Villarboit .. Hurontarfo & Highwood OPA?RZ When: September 19, 2012 9:00 AM ..11:00 AM (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada). Where: MtgRm-Committee Room RE: Meeting: SobeysNillarboit - Hurontario & Highwood OPA/RZ 12211/12231/12233 Hurontario Caledon NlE Corner of Hwy 10 and Highwood Road Hi Lalita. This e-mail is to advise ttiat the ministry has received your request regarding the above noted meeting and has had an opportunity to review it. Since in 2009, the ministry has provided comments to the Town of Caledon, the City of Brampton dated January 16, 2009 pertaining to the OPA and RZ, therefore we do not see a need for MTO to be present at this meeting to discuss the Official Plan Amendment and Rezoning. Please accept this e-mail as a confirmation that in principle the ministry has no objections to the proposed OPA and Rezoning, however the below should be taken under your consideration: • Back in 2009 we informed that access to Highway 10 would be restricted to right-in/right out even though the site has side road (Highwood Road) access. Please be aware that these comments are still applicable (please see the attached file). • The ministry's position did not change regarding access issue, therefore during the redevelopment of the site the proponent will only be granted Right In/Right Out from Highway 10 in place of the current all moves access. This was iterated at our meeting with the new owner that took place on May 31,2012. • Since the subject site is located within the ministry's permit control area a MTO Building and Land Use Permit will be required prior to the start of construction. The applicant is required to submit 3 copies of the full submission to this office for our review and approval. • As part of the review and approval process, the proponent will be required to submit a site plan showing the location of all buildings in relation to the ministry highway. Please ensure that all setbacks are clearly indicated on the site plan. The ministry's min setback requirements for above and below grade structures are 14m from the MTO property limits. Note: Facilities vital to the operation of the site cannot be located within the 14m setback limit. • In addition, applicant will be required to submit: Traffic Impact Study Report, Stormwater Management Report and Site Grading/Site Servicing Drawings, all plans and reports must be stamped and signed by a Professional Engineer of Ontario. 3 (.~J • Site plan, survey plan, lighting plan and site servicing and grading plan should be in scale 1:500. Please be aware that the ministry requires the light measurement to be in LUX. This is the ministry standards for light measurement. We also require that the light levels be shown up to the ministry highways property limit and beyond. • The drainage and electrical consultants must be registered with the MTO RAQS system to ensure that their designs meet the provincial requirements. This avoids numerous iterations/revisions. • The ministry controls all signage within 400m of any provincial highway ROWand all signage within 400m control area shall be placed only under a valid ministry issued sign permit. Please advice the property owner that an MTO Building and Land Use permit will be required prior to the start of construction and all inquires should be forwarded to Lynda Wharton, the new Permits Officer for this area and she can be reached at 416-235-5382. I trust this is sufficient in the interim. Further details comments will be provided upon receipt of a formal site plan submission. If you require any further information, please do not hesitate to contact Ayvun, the CME for this area or me. Best Regards W. Asia Polus Corridor Management Technician Tel. (416) 235-3991 4 Z/4 f2,LtL-{ Ministry of Mlnlstllre des Transportation Transporb r'~ Conklor ManSGement Section Section de Ie geat/on dee couloll'$ routlOI'$ Central R,glon R6glon du Centro rn Floor, Bldg. 0 7& 6tage, 6difice 0 1201 Wilson Avenue 1201 avenue Wilson trOntario Toronto, ON M3M 1J8 Toronto, ON M3M1J8 Tel (416) 235-4284 Tel: 418 235-4284 Fax (418) 23&-4267 Te!t!c: 416 235-4267 Paul Aldunste , M.PL, MCIP, RPP January 16, 2009 Development Planner City of Brampton SENT VIA FAX ONLY Brampton City Hall (906) 874·2099 2 Wellington Street West Brampton. ON L6Y 4R2 RE: Application to Amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-Law Wood Bull LLP - Forec88t Inc. East side of HurontariO Street and North of Highwood Drive Files number: C01E18.016 Ward: 2 Further to your circulation regarding the above noted application. received October 23. 2008, and our meeting at the City of Brampton on December 10. 2008, the ministry has undertaken a detailed review of the submission. Including the Traffic Impact Study (TIS) and the associated conceptual site plan. This level of review is not typical for the ministry as it 1& not an approval agency for rezoning applications. However. as access to/from Highway 10 has been identified ae an Important decision factor by both the City of Brampton and the Town of Caledon. the ministry has conducted Its review as If this were aformal site plan application. Please be advised that these following comments are subject to revision during the formal site plan process. and will not be finalized until necessary permlts are Issued by the ministry under the Public Transportation and Highway improvementAot (PTHIA). Within our regulatory framework. the ministry neither opposes nor endorses the proposed Rezoning and Official Plan Amendment. However. the ministry will require that the appllcant·s site plan fully comply with all provincial technical requirements as a condition of permit issuance under the PTHIA. Access to/from Highway 10 • Highway 10, from Highwood Road northerly. Is a provincial highway under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Transportation. As such. any access to/from the subject property to Highway 10 requires a permit from the ministry. To ensure the continued safe and efficient operatlon of the highway. the ministry controls all direct accesses tolfrom 8 provincial highway. In general, If 8 property has slderoad access, 8 direct access to/from a provincial highway Is not permitted, In this Instance, the property has ..12 J/4 Highwood Road access and therefore Is not entitled to any direct access to/from Highway 10. • As part of the ministry's Highway 4101HIghway 10-Valley Wood Boulevard Interchange project, a single southbound left-turn lane from Highway 10 to eastbound Highwood Road was constructed. This left-tum lane contains a break to preserve full moves access tolfrom the applicant's property and for the school (via the Service Road) located on the west side of Highway 10. This configuration was designed based on the existing land-uses and their associated low traffic volumes. and as any redevelopment of these properties would require additional ministry approvals. The applicant's proposal to utilise this access to service their redevelopment will result In the creation of two substandard left-turn lanes. Specifically. the existing southbound left-tum lane to Highwood Road will be subdivided; and there is Insufficient space to provide a full southbound left-tum lane to the applicant's site due to the proximity of the Highway 410/Highway 10 Interchange ramps. The creation of substandard left-tum lanes will create serious safety and operational concems for highway traffic. As a result, southbound left-turns from Highway 10 direcUy 10 the site will not be permitted. • The TIS indicates that the proposed access to Highway 10 will operate at an extremely low level of Service (lOS) and that the Implementation of traffic signals Is not Irprecluded· In the future. The ministry has assessed the potential for signalisation of this Intersection by both our regional and head office engineering staff. It has been concluded that due to geometric deficienCies, and the approximate 85 m spacing between the proposed slgnallsed site access and the existing Highwood Road signals, that Highway 10 safety and traffic operations would be severely compromised. As a result, this Intersection cannot be slgnallsed. • Since slgnallsatlon Is not viable, the ministry undertook a detailed analysis of the access In an un-slgnalised state. According to the TIS, the level of service for the westbound left-tum Is LOS Eat all times and during all planning horizons. The ministry has therefore concluded that westbound left..turns from the alte to HIghway 10 will be highly problematic and must be physically prohibited. • The traffic volumes Included In the TIS Indicate that traffic destined for the site can be accommodated through the applicant's proposed Highwood Road access. As a result, a full moves access to/from Highway 10 Is not warranted from an operational perspective, especially where It would result in a substandard geometriC design. • Highway access Is subject to review (e.g. modification and/or elimination) whenever a property Is redeveloped and/or when a change of ownership occurs. The ministry recognizes that this site has had historical access to Highway 10 and Is therefore prepared to allow continued access. However, this access will be restricted to right Inlrlght-out turnIng movements and must be constructed In conjunction with a centre median. To protect for future Improvements to the Highway 410 Interchange, this access will need to be situated further south than the existing, or approximately midway between Highwood Road and the Service Road Intersection. • The ministry Is aware of the Town of Caledon's secondary plan study for the landS west of Highway 10. As part of thIs study. the minIstry will be reviewing the continued need and justification for the Service Road intersection. 4/4 Site Plan • Highway 10, from Highwood Drive northerly, is a provincial highway under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Transportation. As such, any access tolfrom an abutting property or the erection of any structure (above or below ground), sewers and stormwater management facUlties, parking lots, fences, signs, etc requires approval and/or permits from the ministry. These permits are In addition to any required municipal approvals, and In the case of local building permits, must be obtain prior to any permit obtained under the Ontario Building Code. • The applicant's property is situated within the pennit control areas of both Highway 10 and Highway 410. Ministry permits are required prior to site servlclngllnternal road construction of the site and for Individual building lots within 45 m of all ministry property limits and withIn a 395 m radius from a ministry Intersection/interchange. • All above and below ground structures (including but not limited to, fire routes, stonnwater management facilities and servicing/utilities) must be setback a minimum of 14.0 mfrom all ministry property limits. • Subsequent requests will require the applicant to submit to the ministry a site plan (1 :500), a survey plan, an illumination report, traffic Impact study, site servicing/grading plan and a stormwater management report. All submitted reports and plans must be signed and stamped by a professional engineer and provided In ooples of four (4). All reports, Including 8 revised traffic Impact study, will require ministry approval before permits will be issued. • Sign permits are required for signing within 400 mof Highway 410 and/or Highway 10. • No direct access to Highway 410 will be permitted. • All permit inquiries should be forwarded to Mr. PhlllannBcito, Permits Officer for this area. He can be reached at 416-235-4592. If you wish to discuss. or require further clarification of the ministry's comments, please do not hesitate to contact me directly. Sincerely, Bruce W. Cans, P.Eng. Corridor Management Engineer (Peel & Simcoe) cc. T. Hewitt. MTO T. Lagakos. MTO P. lannaclto. MTO A. Polus, MTO ) ) Theocharidis, Toula From: Archaeology Reports (MTCS) [[email protected]] Sent: 2013/07/03 2:19 PM To: Theocharidis, Toula Subject: RE: C01 E18.016 12197 Hurontario Street Proposed commerical plaza Good Afternoon Toula, Apologies for the delay in responding to your email. The report you inquired about has been reviewed and in the library. This means that the ministry is satisfied with ~e field work. - V Hope this helps. If you need anything else, please let me know. Regards, Wai Ms. Wai Kok I Archaeology Review Officer Ministry of Tourism, Culture, and Sport Archaeology Program Unit 401 Bay Street, Suite 1700 l Toronto, Ontario M7AOA7 E: [email protected] T: 416-212-5107 ···--·-··------·····------··---·-.. -·---·-··-·-·---···--·-·-··-····-· --·..-···--·---..------·------· .. From: Theocharidis, Toula [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: June 24, 2013 9:26 AM To: Archaeology Reports (MTCS) Subject: RE: C01E18.016 12197 Hurontario Street Proposed commerical plaza Good morning, The Project# is, P058-283-2007 For your reference, the report is entitled, '"Report on the 2007 Stage 1-2 Archaeological Assessment of Proposed Development of 12197 Hurontario Street, City of Brampton and Part of Lot 19, Concession 1 East, Town of Caledon, (Geographic Township of North Chinguacousy), Regionall\tlunicipality of Peel." Thanks 1 &J :etNBRIDGE ENBRJDGE GAS DISTRIBUTION INC. 500 Consumers Road North York ON M2J 1P8 TH JUNE 28 , 2013 Mailing Address P.O. Box 650 Scarborough ON M1K 5E3 TOULA THEOCHARIDIS, MICIP, RPP DEVELOPMENT PLANNER CITY OF BRAMPTON PLANNING, DESIGN & DEVELOPMENT 2 WELLINGTON ST WEST BRAMPTON ON L6Y 4R2 Dear Sirs: RE: NOTICE OF REVISED APPLICATION & COMMENTS APPLICATION TO AMEND THE OFFFICAL PLAN & ZONING BY-LAW TO PERMIT A COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENTAT THE N/E CORNER OF HURONTARIO STREET &HIGHWOOD RD CALEDON JV PARTNERHIP - GSP GROUP INCORPORATED 12197 HURONTARIO STREET CITY FILE NO.: C01E18.016 FILE NO.: SP13-027.000 WARD: 2 CITY OF BRAMPTON Enbridge Gas Distribution has no objections to the application as proposed. At this time this is not a commitment by Enbridge Gas Distribution to service this site, to service this site by a given date or that there will be no costs for servicing this site. The applicant is to contact the Enbridge Customer Connections Department at their earliest convenience to discuss installation and clearance requirements for service and metering facilities. ... :•..,. 1{). The applicant is to arrange for the installation of the gas plant prior to the commencement of the asphalt paving or landscaping. In the event that easements are required to service this development, the applicant will provide easements at no cost to Enbridge Gas Distribution. The requirements identified here within are subject to change. Enbridge Gas Distribution retains the right to add, amend or remove conditions, or obtain easements to service this application, at no cost to Enbridge Gas Distribution. Yours truly, JIM ARNOTT Municipal Coordination Advisor Distribution Asset Management (416) 758-7901 (416) 758-4374 - FAX JA:rv ) Hydro One Brampton Networks Inc. 175 Sandalwood PIcwy West Brompton_ Ontario L7A 1E8 Tel: (905) 4525502 www.HydroOneBrampton.com hydro~ one Brompton .:t:1.2013 City of Brampton 2 Wellington Street West Brampton, Ontario L6Y 4R2 Att'n: Toula Theocheridis Re: Application for Site Plan Approval GSP Group Inc. Commercial Plaza. 12197 Hurontario St. Your File: SP13-027.000 Dear Toula: We are in receipt of your request for comments regarding the above project. We respond as follows. The bulk of this plaza seems to be located within the Town of Caledon. The Developer might opt to be serviced by Hydro One Brampton from the South side or by Hydro One Networks from the West side. Should they opt to be fed from the South, the following shall apply: AI Please include as a condition of approval the following: • Applicant shall grant all necessary easements. as may be required. for guying (pole support) including a 5.0 Metre aerial easement beyond the Official Plan R.O.W. limit for the placement of Hydro One Brampton facilities along Hurontario St. adjacent to the Development. • Should more than one transformer be required, Applicant shall design a loop feed through the property, and provide easements as required. Bllf their application is approved. please advise the applicant to contact Hydro One Brampton regarding permanent electrical supply to the site. I can be reached at 905-452-5541 if there are any questions. Yours Truly, ( James McGill C.Tech. Technical Services Supervisor Hydro One Brampton Networks Inc. '-:\ (,,) I ·;j/ F2-?t ~· ~conservation for The Living City· June 27, 2013 BY FAX AND MAIL: (905) 874-2099 City of B rampton PLANNING, DESIGN &DEVELOPMENT Ms. Toula Theocharidis, Development Planner Planning, Design and Development DATE JUL ·0 ~ 2013 Rec'd The Corporation of The City of Brampton 2 Wellington Street West Brampton, ON File No. C.OI E tt3.otta L6Y 4R2 Dear Ms. Theocharidis: Re: Official Plan & Zoning By-law Amendment Application- C01E18.016 Related Site Plan Application- SP 13-027 12197 Hurontario Street Part Lot 18, Concession 1 City of Brampton Caledon JV Partnership (Agent: GSP Group Incorporated) This letter will acknowledge receipt of the above noted application (received on May 21, 2013). Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff has reviewed the above noted application, including the following documents, and provides the following comments as part of TRCA's commenting role under the Planning Act, the Authority's delegated responsibility of representing the provincial interest on natural hazards encompassed by Section 3.1 of the Provincial Policy Statement, 2005; TRCA's Regulatory Authority under Ontario Regulation 166/06, Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses; and our Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Region of Peel, wherein we provide technical environmental advice. • Site Plan, Drawing No. A 1, dated December 2012, prepared by Scaler Lee & Associates. Purpose of the Application It is our understanding that the purpose of the above noted application is to amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-law in order to permit the development of the lands for retail commercial uses in concert with lands to the north located within the Town of Caledon. Comments Although the subject property is loc~ted outside of TRCA's Regulated Area and is void of any significant natural features and/or hazards, TRCA staff request the opportunity to review the Functional S~rvicing Report (FSR) in support of the proposed development. 1. Please advise the applicant to submit the FSR for TRCA review and comments. Tel. 416.661.6600, 1.888.872.2344 I Fax. 416.661.6898 I [email protected] I 5 Shoreham Drive, Downsview, ON M3N 154 \r~·,,,J!•'' ;,,,-ii,J,,,·:;.;/.•,,t,' i, 1 ;.1 www.trca.on.ca Ms.,Theocharidis - 2- June 27. 2013 Recommendation On the basis of the above, final recommendations are premature until the above noted comments are addressed to the satisfaction of TRCA staff. Fees By copy of this letter, please advise the applicant that the TRCA has implemented a fee schedule for our planning and development review services. Please advise the applicant that this application is subject to a $1 ,600.00 review fee. Please advise the applicant to submit payment as soon as possible. I trust these comments are of assistance. Should you have any further questions or comments, do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. A iller Planner II Planning and Development Extension 5244 lam cc: Hugh Handy, GSP Group Incorporated: (519) 569-8643 F:\Home\Public\Development Services\Peet Reaion\Brampton\12197 Hurontario Street C01E18.016 June 27-13.doc ·].·'; :.) •'· 71re l~egion ofPeel is the prowl recipient oftire Nation ell Quality lmtitute Order of ' Region cf Peel Excellence, Quality; tire Natiomd Quality Institute Ccmadc1 Awarcl ofC.'V:c:cllence GoltlthwJrd, Wollki.tq loll qott Hc.llthy Workplace: 11nd a 2008 /PAC/Deloitte Public Sector Lectclcrshlp Gold Awczrd. June 19,2013 Mary T. Nordstrom Mrs. Toula Theocharidis Senior Development Planner Development Planner Town of Caledon City of Brampton 6311 Old Church Road 2 Wellington Street West Caledon ON L7C 116 Brampton, ON L6Y 4R2 Re: Site Plan Application GSP Group 12197, 12211, 12231 and 12241 Hurontario Part Lot 18, 43R- 33945 Part Lot 19, Concession 1 (EHS) Parts 2 to 6 RP 43R-7911, Parts 6 to 9 RP 43R 27780 . Town of Caledon File# SP-13-032C & OZ-08-006 City of Brampton File# SP-13-0278 & OZ-08-1EI8.168 Regional staff are in receipt of the above noted site plan applications, Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments and offer the following comments: Development Services - Engineering: If the Cityffown requires the applicant to alter water servicing to accommodate fire protection, the ROP will require review of fire flows for modelling and analysis A Section 118 Restriction on Transfer and Charge and a copy of the PINS is required prior to site plan approval. Site Servicing drawings have been provided to the Region of Peel and have been forwarded to a Technician for review. Comments will be provided directly to the consultant. Please submit 1, first submission Application fee of $150 as per fee By-law 110-2012 to Development Engineering for Site servicing review (certified cheque, bank draft or money order). Site servicing approvals are required prior to issuance ofthe building permit. Waste Management: On site waste collection will be required through a private waste hauler. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Sincerely, Jennifer Maestre Ryan Vandenburg Development Services Development Services Public Works 10 Peel Centre Dr.• Suite A. Brampton, ON l6T 489 Tel: 905·791-7800 www.peelregion.ca ,·) PRegion d Peel GH:·lf}\ :tn~tRDSf.VR Wollkiaq loll qott f.:_\ct:UJ::iVCE C.ot.!>R~:~~ 2006 November 13, 2008 Mr. Paul Aldunate Planner Planning, Design & Development Department City of Brampton 2 Wellington Street West, 3rd floor Brampton, ON L6Y 4R2 Re: Application to Amend the Official Plan & Zoning By-law Wood Bull LLP-Forecast Inc. 12197 Hurontario Street City of Brampton Regional File: OZ-08 1E18-16B Regional staff have reviewed the above noted Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment Application to designate the subject lands from Residential Policy Area "B" to Community Shopping Centre Commercial and rezone the subject lands from Highway Commercial (CH) and Agricultural to General Commercial in order to permit the development of a community oriented shopping centre on the subject lands. Please note the following comments for your information: Municipal Water and Sanitary Sewer Service • An existing 150mm diameter watermain is located on Donherb Crescent and an existing 300mm diameter watermain is located on Highwood Road. • An existing 250mm diameter sanitary sewermain is located on Donherb Crescent and an existing 300mm diameter sanitary sewermain is located on Highwood Road. • The applicant is advise that two (2) sets ofsite servicing drawings will be required for review by Connections. Please be advised that additional changes to the drawings may be required prior to issuance of a connections permit. For further information the applicant is advised to contact the Region's Connection Division at 905-791-7800 ext: 7873. • Functional Servicing Report prepared by Cole Engineering dated July 2008 has been by the Regional staff and finds it satisfactory. Waste Collection • On-site waste collection will be required through a private waste hauler. Environment, Transportation and Planning Services 10 Peel Centre Dr., Brampton, ON L6T 489 Tel: 905-791-7800 www.peelregion.ca Page 2 of2 Additional Comments Should the application proceed to site plan stage, the applicant is advised that Region of Peel will require the following prior to the approval of final site plan application: • The applicant will be require to submit copies of all the registered easements affecting the subject lands prior to final site plan approval. The applicant is advised that any Regional easements must be protected from any encroachments or obstructions. The owner shall maintain the land for the easements free and clear of any trees, building structures, or hard concrete pavement surfaces. The owner is pennitted to utilize the land for no other purpose than lawns, gardens, flower beds, roadways, driveways, and parking areas. As well, the owner shall not deposit or remove any fill from the easement. For further clarification, please contact Region's Connection Division at (905) 791-7800 extension 7873. • The applicant is required to submit easement documents for Block 80 as in PR841581. Furthermore, according to the proposed servicing plan as described in the Functional Servicing Report that the properties will be merged. Private servicing easements will be required for access to water and sanitary sewer services as the proposed buildings will be serviced through Town of Caledon side. As such all the private easements are to be registered prior to site plan approval and copies provided to the Region along with the appropriate draft reference plan. Sincerely, Wajeeha Shahrukh Development Planning Services cc. Bernadette Sniatenchuk, Environment, Transportation and Planning, Region of Peel (ElM) Tom McLenaghan, Environment, Transportation and Planning, Region of Peel (ElM) Alison Docherty, Legal Services, Region of Peel (ElM) Environment, Transportation and Planning Services 10 Peel Centre Dr., Brampton, ON L6T 489 Tel: 905-791·7800 www.peelregion.ca APPENDIX '8' CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED City File Number: C01 E18.016 23 (JJ Dave Van Sickle Dan Krawzewski City ofBrampton 2 Wellington St. West Brampton, ON L6Y 4R2 September 6, 2013 Re: file # COIElS.016 Dear Mr. Kraszweski, I am writing this letter regarding file # CO 1E IS.0 16 in ward 2. This file pertains to the rezoning and commercial development ofthe northeast corner ofHighwood Road and Hurontario Street for a shopping plaza with an entrance/exit on Highwood Ave. My family and I live on Summer Valley Drive, which the traffic from this plaza would directly affect. Traffic from Strawberry Field, Anthem homes, and Mayfield Park neighborhoods will try to bypass the traffic lights on Mayfield and Highway 10 and take my street, Hillpath Crescent, Highwood Road, and Collingwood Avenue. I understand the Ministry ofTransportation will not be allowing southbound traffic to turn left into the plaza and traffic exiting the plaza will not be allowed to turn left to go southbound. Therefore motorists will have no choice but to use the Highwood exit. There is an elementary school on my street (St. Rita Elementry School) and it would be a safety issue for all ofthe young children to have a increased traffic passing through our street to get to the plaza. Our neighbourhood is already dangerous for children walking to school or crossing the road because we already have a lot oftraffic from parents driving their children to school. We do not even have a crossing guard. I respectfully object to having the entrance/exit on Highwood Road. Yours truly, ~etf Dave Van Sickle 89/21/2811 21:50 A PAGE 02/82 Alana Mason F2- r,o Nicole Cedrone st. Rita's Parent Council 30 Summer Valley Rd. 8rampton, ON L6Z4V6 October 1, 2013 Town of Caledon 6311 Old Church Rd. Caledon, ON L7C 1J6 Attention Brandon Ward- Development Approval and Planning Department Dear Mr. Ward~ Subject: File number POPA 08-06 and RZ 08-13- Proposed PJa~ at the NE corner of Highwood Rd. and Hurontario It has recent]y come to OUl' attention that an application for the development of the above area has been submitted to the City of Brampton and the Town of Caledon. We would like to express our opposition particularly because we understand that the only full moves access point for the entire plaza would be on Highwood Rd. QUI' community elementary school of St. Rita's has a l'egistratioo of 742 children. Approximately 75% of these children are bussed to and from school. The remaining children are either driven by parents or wa1k without benefit of a crossing guard. The only two access roads for the school (and the whole community of Summer Valley) are Summer Valley Dr. and Highwood Rd. The presence of a sole full moves access point for the plaza on Highwood Rd. would result in increased traffic on both these streets. This would greatly compromise the safety and well being of all our students. We would also like to point Ollt that the intersection of Hurontario and Highwood Rd. is already hazardous. In the spring of 2013, one of the mothers of our St. Rita's community was involved in a multi vehicle accident at this intersection while on her way to St. Rita's school to drop off her child. Other individuals in the community have also been involved in accidents at the same it1.tersection. We are also concerned about the proposed llnsignalized intersection on Hurontario. Our school boundary includes the al·ea of Valleywood and extends as far north as Old School Rd. Therefore, many of our students are bussed or driven through this stretch of road. An unsignalized intersection here would present even greater risk to an area that is already very challenging and busy. It should also be noted that when we have special organized events at the school (parent/teacher interview nights, information sessions regarding class trips etc.) our parking lot is not sufficient enough to accommodate our parking needs and the overflow vehicles park on the neighbouring streets particularly, Summer Valley Dr. Any extra traffic in this area would negatively impact all concerned. We realize that the Public Meeting regarding this proposed development took place on Sept. 9th, 2013 but our Council was just assembled and therefore, we are submjtting our concerns to you and the City of Brampton. Sincerely, O~'0r~ Alana Mason Nicole Cedrone Co-chairs St. Rita's Elementary School Parent Council To F, \ ( ~ c. 0 \ E. \ ~ -- W f\ ~ 3) ~ J)I\. N \<((. A S'2..€ "" SK' - s«.. tHc,,,j'-;--.re "3AQ.Qc. r-c e 66 f \~y> \~ l CI..vvJ.... ~\ogV'\9-~ - c il~ 0& nlZf\Mel'oN , Ye.cv2. S, A ) 8 IN: ~'" to 0 €~l) 2f- C\~ <:, f<' ~ \-CD.)-{ l<4.- '!,\ ~ i'" l-\ JJ. (1 ~ C-<'Zt. <,. ~ (2.. \ ~ (f-c..p.. ~ . ~ '(' i,l;, c...- ~~ <\. ') ~ %~~ 1J~ \ ~'('cl ~;lj\., \,,, u.~ood ~L-\j::: c.... e~\VV'~ C~~\'c... ~~()\, \1'(.0"", "":) f" ,,-.lr' ~ u ~ t-lt. eI4l f<> ~ e\~ w..u c..tk" -t.<. ~~ ~ W\,:J ~C< \'" i¥\Cwl-j ~~$. ~. t<"..i\i'-- eJ4\'~5 'IV'. Ck",.l. ~ ~ tW.. vvt~ w'SQ \e~ \fV\~~oA OW\-~ ~LvA~OU S , ~"\~'<~ r~~( 0'''' \occSl S'(~.'> ",.u k \-'v..~, c.,,,, ~ \ J, ilUt> ~ ,'<) (.1.<; "-'-"~ ~ <' \t w ~ ;""'\ (l-ks -.i JJ Ioe. "'*' ) ~\S't>, 1- \''''JJ cfZ c...c.~;~'. ' U~ ~ 1iVI.~ \.oJ.!. kcJ.. V Iy\LRC'vYtl V\o\~ LuAJ ~G\\""h~'I.-" ~ U!v\~SY-<.v"'~ \~c.(,S) ~S \ ~y\~ fa.c~.~ \J 0~~ w~~ ~01 CuA ~ \l ~ \ ~ i \I\, S",,<1.. "-,,, ~ ~~ ) cJ. (2J. cut\) \.-. i1'" ,'A 1J (Z.Cc..J.MQYo..-, ) \A) \..t\ \ \.~ ~\ ~ \ V\. Ifvt~ tUl ~1 ~D~~Q..~, ~ ~ \Xu. h"'l~el'( September 8, 2013 City ofBrampton 2 Wellington St. West, Brampton, Ontario L6Y 4R2 Attention: Mr. Dan Kraszewski, Director of Planning and Development Re: File# COIE18.016 - Ward 2 Dear Mr. D. Kraszewski; I am writing to you to express our opposition relating to the application for rezoning and commercial development located at the northeast comer of Highwood Road and Hurontario Street as referenced above. We have been residents in this neighbourhood for the past 7.5 years and have been personal witness to all the development that has occurred and the impacts that the past developments have had on this neighbourhood and the potential impacts this new development would have our neighbourhood. Please see below our concerns; • Increase in non-local vehicular traffic on Summer Valley, Highwood and Hill Path Crescent • Delivery trucks will use Summer Valley and Highwood Road as a short cut • The local streets - Summer Valley, Woodcreek Drive and Sweetbriar are already heavily congested during the school year with the number ofparents that must park on the street to drop / pick up their children from St. Rita School as they are not permitted to enter school property. • Safety ofthe children that live in the neighbourhood as the local park / playground is located on the East side ofSummer Valley opposite the majority of the housing in this neighbourhood • The current absence oftraffic control/speed limit enforcement will only get worse as the vehicle traffic is increased to access the new development • It is our understanding that all traffic that wishes to go south from the new development will need to enter Highwood and during peak times it is obvious to anyone they will take the Summer Valley route rather than wait at the traffic lights at Highwood Road and Hurontario Street. In addition all traffic going south on Hurontario Street will have to access the site via Highwood Road as well. • This area is currently overpopulated with Commercial Development and an overabundance of Restaurants in the area at the present time as well as there are already 3 gas stations in the area ofMayfield Road and Hurontario Street. • With this type ofdevelopment the increase in litter, garbage, shopping carts, pests, theft, vandalism, increase of noise, possible transit route etc. In closing we do not foresee any positive contributions from the proposed development to this neighbourhood as all the potential business / services that are being considered for this development are presently available in the area ofMayfield Road and Hurontario Street. This development is seemed to better service Caledon residents than those ofthe City of Brampton and should be so placed within Caledon boundaries and their subdivisions rather than impacting the established North Brampton communities. ;;;v- ~~~ ~JOhn Carpenter & Tara Patterson Brampton,On September 7,2013 To Whom it May Concern, We are writing this letter to voice our objection against the proposed commercial development north of Highwood st. and east of Highway 10. As there is only one way out of the development going both directions on to the side road Highwood Rd. we are concerned for the safety of residents in the neighbourhood, especially the children. More than likely one of the main ways in and out to the stores will be through the residential area along Summer Valley Rd. It will be very busy especially as the stores will be open 24 hours. St. Rita's school is on this street, and as an elementary teacher, I am especially concerned for the safety of young children going to and from school. I live on the west side of Hwy. 10 and I am sure there will be more traffic going through our development. With increased traffic in these developments our property values will possibly go down. This is very disconcerting as when we moved into this area we though the Brampton section of the proposed site would remain residential. It would be a much better plan to have the Brampton section remain a residential zone and have another entrance out onto Highway 10, thereby keeping truck and increased traffic away from Highwood and Summer Valley Rd and keep our residential community safe. We hope you take our concerns into consideration and keep our community safe. Yours sincerely, p'~;::r ~~ Brent and Pam Collins Andrew and Thm'esa Cell 8 September, 2013 Dan Kraszewski Acting Commissioner' of Planning, Design and Development City of Brampton 2 Wellington Street \Vest Brompton, ON L6Y Ial\2 File: COl E18.0"16 Dear Mr, Kraszewski, \Ve wish to raise OUl' objections to the proposed rczoning of Highwood RO<1<1 from residential to commcrcial. \Ve havc lived in the HrCH for less than Hyear, and part of the decision to movc here was due to the safe and peaceful ,'esidential neighbourhood. The proposed access to thc commercial development via Highwood 1\oa Land currcntly undevelopcd adjacent to ollr property on Hillpath Crescent is also zoned for residential. \Ve are eoncer'lled that if the development in Ale C01 E18.0"16 goes ahcu<1 as proposed, an applieation to rezone this land may also he reqnested, which we would he apposed to in addition to thc proposal cur1'ently hefi>r'c the City. Sincerely yours, ~\r~~~ Andrew and Th(~,'(~sa Cdl Tunde and Avobami Oladele September 7,2013 Senior Executive Director of Planning and Development City of Brampton 2 Wellington Street West, Brampton, ON L6Y 4R2 Attention: Dan Kraszewski OPPOSITION TO REZONING AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF NORTHEAST CORNER OF HIGHWOOD ROAD AND HURONTARIO FILE # COlE1S.016 - WARD 2 We received the notice circulated by the city in respect of the above. We are appreciative of the opportunity to be heard that the city has availed to residents of the neighbourhood. My family and I live on the east side of the intersection of Summer Valley and Highwood road. We have lived on the property for about 7 years. The neighbourhood is very family oriented anchored by the Catholic Elementary School (St. Rita). It is common to see children walk to school in the mornings, walk home for lunch and return home after school. It is also common to see young children ride bicycles in the evenings, and for children to dash across the street to the park which is directly opposite the school. With the opening of Strawberry Farms and Anthem residential neighbourhood (Kennedy and Mayfield), we have noticed increased vehicular movement along Summer ValleY/Highwood Road. This increase came from commuters cutting through Summer Valley and Highwood to join Highway 410 in order to bypass the traffic lights on Hurontario. Based on the current setting described above, my family and I are profoundly opposed to the proposed rezoning and development for the following reasons: A commercial development of the type proposed will further increase vehicular traffic on Summer Valley and Highwood therefore destroy the essence of a family oriented neighborhood. The safety of residents will be in jeopardy especially that of our children who will no longer be able to walk to school with minimum supervision. Characters with less noble motives will be drawn to the neighbourhood thereby putting lives and properties of residents at risk. Tunde and Ayobami Oladele The entrance to the proposed development being on Highwood Road will create a choke point on Highwood Road thereby causing traffic back up on Summer Valley and surrounding streets A commercial development of this magnitude will cause our property value to decline while our insurance rates will increase. We can expect increased case of vandalism and crime due to the share number of people that will be drawn to neighbourhood. We have had in the past incidents of cars parked on our driveways broken into. We can expect these incidents to increase. The neighborhood was sold to my family and I am sure to other residents as residential neighborhood. We moved into the areas in the belief that the city will keep the faith with its citizens. A change in zoning which will bring insecurity and untold hardship to residents cannot be in the interest of the city. We trust that based on the above stated reason, the city will retain the current residential zoning of the property. Should the city be bent on changing the zoning, converting the place into a parkette should be considered. A parkette will serve the children in the neighbourhood while at the same time help reinforce the city of Brampon's strategic priorities; one of which is environment stewardship. Truly yours, ~-~ Tunde &Ayobami Oladele Ameet Pradhanl Isha Pradhan September 6, 2013 File # COIE18.016 - Ward 2 Dan Kraszewski Senior Executive Director of Planning and Development City of Brampton 2 Wellington St West Brampton, On, L6Y 4R2 Dear Dan: I am writing to oppose the rezoning and commercial development of northeast comer of Highwood Rd and Hurontario. The purpose ofthis opposition is due to many valid reasons. Few of the concerns are: Safety concerns for us walking and playing in the neighbourhood. Potential increase in vandalism with the stores open for 24hrs. Increased noise pollution and would spoil the natural beauty in the area. I think that this is an important issue. It will benefit the community at large by assisting in not approving the developement. Thank you for your support. Sincerely, ~ s~+-en4Qc- 5/9-013 R.e..·. PfbI!> osed CO(NJ\..Qr C~£A..\ h0J el opt)\M c:d- -\-\ lJrorttorl 04 \-\ ~LJ:DJ w~ ar~ t..0 r \ -\--i ~ -\-0 ~xf r e.ss- ou (" CO(\I1\{i'\...-\- s,+e- a..+ \--\iC)hwoo8 Md \--\vrof\-\-orlo. OlJr reCl.Soi'-S 40. 06'(1'05 i(\5 -\-hLS 6'CcO-ec:.-\- o-c ~ · OS -(10 t\ OwS '. ). ~'S Co"'''' ~c\J d.Jv~\o~()\.-(t\..~ <-0\ \ \ \ t\Cfe~ -tso..-9Q.;c S\?f\i-PiCM~ I ~(fe('io..~ 01\ \-\\~l\wood" } 06'Qr,,-\-e- CL~om~ ~(AyQQ...(€- M6. wou.\d .be Cx>1\(.Qrl'\Da +be +k S~:, c:rQ. ch.\\Jr~pld~I\~/ · b,)<.\ ~ or wcc\¥-.i ~ o~ ~.. s.\.r~+.5- . ( ~, \-\id.~woo8 ~\feaJ,"\ ~q5 OJ\. il'lfE'crj.e 0-9 .sf-€Qd\~ ckl'l"e('s. \~i.s d~vQ!oG> ('I\~+ cUOLJ.\~ f~ adA,4) Ol\cJ2 (' \sK cl U~ ~ \(\~rea.s ~d -K'a-Q.~ ~ . ~. ~ ~rof0-S-e& f\~ ~ hav~ CL '"\CAVQrY\ or 9.<4 hr 5OD~ sf.or L.. .~ ,\\ \"cr~o~. ~ @035 Ib I JI'.:j' () -(l (' o~ j ~ &O""'~of\> (l(\d ( 0 t~s , W e. ar e.- CO"c..Q(f\.J1. d M -\=.k S 0 ~~ D~ ·ou r )~\ds ~ ~ l.QQS.e. CC4\S , ~.Q.( 0 ur- qy f OS \ h' OA--\---0 +..kiS ~ves"q{)\.cl-. ~ M.r:-~ Ou.... ' September 5th 2013 To: Dan Kraszewski - Senior Executive Director of planning and Development City of Brampton FILE # COIE18.016-Ward 2 . We live at 12 Hillpath Crescent. And will be directly affected by the proposed RE: Commercial Development at the northeast comer of Hurontario ( Hwy 10) and Highwood road. The reasons for our opposition are numerous traffic volume will increase substantially and the safety issues ofwhich there are many. We have a quiet neighbourhood now which would be adversely affected by the changes being proposed and would detracted from the peaceful and quiet neighbourhood we now live in. So we would like to voice our opposition to the proposed development that has been presented to us. Thank you BRIAN AND ~.» PHEH-l'd Slgn~UtrlJlf/P'~ Sign: (V\~~L~ l I \ \ \ ~ \ l \ ------1------~~----~· ---·~-~---·------·• _.,. ___ ~·-·-~-- -- • •--•- --·-r-• •·-•-•• -• "'•'" •••-·---•·~·•-··• .._ ••-•-- -•• -- l ~ --!------·~------····-··-·--· .... - ...... - ... ····-··-·----···-· --~-· ...... - ... ····--·--·---·--· ... ·--····· ··-·-·-· ··- ... ··········-..·-~-----· -····----··----·· ---· \ / 'X"{'Q7P 7?fJiQ~o'}Y[nY'd /lv?'7/)/' )JJrJl )?t7rJ'-V )inn 7/J/~ Jr"7prJ/l7) nrllpt)Y1;'-/?/7(/';y;r !5rn?if'?IV V7Jvr v II'll-t)'(y}?1f-/7-;t A / 't?jft'17() '!/'/f) lJ 1 :; I I. '.' I ' I 1 v L/vL,...., . :/'Il 7,-fftL,yif '1'677) P' rr:{7- i::rv /Jl ?jl'h4/7j ,fF ,,/)7?''IV'/ 1f" ''P O-MYTrfr)t'" , ~f /{J'tp,rcf-ff()/ !I r-P"'~-;)/;;' '27 '''},V).J (Y7(}l) v !y ~(YY' ,??,(J;? (y? I '-y vv?7"~~717/(j~' ~~~~.(j7?)/ r )'Jf61-l,VJr/YIr" (!J 7;)l-fl1-~/A.~yl -71 {~, Jl W?l~}O fwry' Jl i/W/" ~ l17fYr rft(Y'y/),/Y prl;u-y{? ? If Vi? T ~/~y~ '~?7J.7.rn-c/rrr ;; wv cYV{-t)~r lJ Vv?7 '}/t//?/l~ z..vV'O}'/l' /74?-~IV)/rrr }V-ry Jr'7 :- ''?IftrV);r 7t/.JtJ? !lJ7IY/ fYxY))71/7)rr-'77J-(f?J V d V "O)YdW??7fVY' YI1Yfr -;V~;"(1~o/q7M',;r ~ ;}~4~-h-i~ yu,wf ~/}'7J PJ7/r , .' ,J7 () --{)~?'Y-~vV /VJ'7(}''7--f'1 ,2.Y2? c/'U1,r nIt 7 J7 iJi1,7 7.J Vrt-'---v;}()7A/1Yi.J 71N1 r: Q~11fYl - CJ /0 ' g/ /~:I / 0 ;}ff (cr;:-?~ f nVI,:J)0/t~~} 4[,fL I,. U-~/t:'QJ/" r £/0 C' 57 I'd?:; J«~-r;v,/~0 ~ 'y nt-Zj ) . F2-1lo ' September 6th 2013 RE: proposed commercial development at the north east corner of Hurontario ( Hwv 10 ) and Highwood Road To whom it may concern: As a resident of Highwood Road whose back fence Is close to the Caledon boundary line and whose frontage is Highwood Road, we have major concerns regarding this development. Traffic: We already experience high traffic of both cars and school buses on Highwood Road due to the fact that It is a thoroughfare to the school on Summer Valley. This would be greatly Increased due to the proposed entrance to the plaza on Highwood Road. This proposed entrance is totally unacceptable to the homeowners on Highwood road. There are many young children on this street whose safety should be of prime importance. These children would not be safe due to increased traffic entering and leaving the plaza. The entrance on Highwood would quickly become the main entrance due to the fact that the entrance on Hurontario street is not permitting a left turn in or out ofthe plaza onto Hurontarlo street • We do not want/need the entrance on Highwood road I the delivery trucks that would enter and leave would pose a huge safety threat to our families. Can the developer find another entrance without using a residentail street? Although they may propose that trucks should not deliver between the hours of 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. this would not be monitored and would soon be abused Any customers the East , South and West will undoubtedly use Highwood road as the main entrance and exit as it will undoubtedly be the quickest way in and out of the plaza Therefore the traffic will be astronomical in volume. We currently see many speeders on the street, can you Imagine how many more there will be. We have already requested speed bumps on the street to no avail , will the city wait until a chUd or children is/are seriously injured or killed before they do something about this ? Lighting; Lighting from the proposed plaza would shine directly Into our home, this is unacceptable ifthe grocery store proposed Is a 24 hour access store. We already have the high mast lighting from the 410 to contend with. The proposed II drive through" stores will attract a lot of less than desired characters in the neighbourhood, this will greatly increase the potential for vandalism and crime in our area. This is proven by the amount of these people that currently hang out at the nm Hortons on Mayfield road. These are the same people that would frequent the new drive through stores. We do not want our children exposed to this...... ' J Parking: Noise The proposed layout shows parking that would be directly behind our home. There is no Indication of a proposed sound /lighting barrier or any green space shown on the plan behind our property. This Is totally unacceptable, we would lose all privacy in our home and garden, not to mention the amount of car exhaust fumes that would be a direct result of all this parking There is however an embankment and trees shown behind the Caledon properties that border the development area, ifthe development does continue can the Brampton home owners expect the same considerations? Property Valuesl Taxes: Has any study been made for the home owners that border the proposed development regarding the changes in the property value that may occur due to the development1 WfI, our taxes be lowered due to the fact that we have to put up with all the inconveniences that the development will cause. i.e. traffic, noise etc? These issues are ofgreat concern to us as homeowners that have recently undergone huge costly exterior renovations to improve our property to ensure it is retaining market value. These are just a few of the many concerns that I am sure all of the residents in the area are concerned about This plaza is totally unacceptable to the residents and should not in our opinion continue to be developed. We are sure that Brampton and Caledon councils can develop the area without allowing a plaza, housing would be more acceptable and would totally eradicate the above concerns. Thank You Mrs Valerie Moulsdale Mr Thomas Moulsdale Waud Familv September 6th, 20 13 To whom it may concern I am writing this letter to express the concerns of our family about the proposed development of a shopping centre at the end of our street. We have been living on Hillpath Crescent since 1999, and have been very happy here. We feel fairly safe living here, have many neighbors we respect and admire. Out brother-in-law, Jim Legere from ReMax realty tells us this is one of the most sought after neighborhoods in Brampton. If the proposed shopping centre is built on the property at the end of our street, we expect a significant decline in the things that make this a great neighborhood. · The increase in noise and traffic, .~nd potent~ a) for increased crime greatly concern us. We believe that our property values will go down. We know that our car insurance rates will go· up. Of particular concern to us will be the increase in traffic. \Vhen we moved in, there was no turning right onto Summer Valley from westbound on Mayfield, and no turning right onto Hurontario from Highwood~ Both of these restrictions have already been removed, and that has led to more traffic going through our sub-division than we would like. Based on the plan for the entrance to the proposed shopping centre, we expect many more vehicles will travel on our street (Hillpath) to enter/exit the plaza: .We also expect many more vehicles will be on Summer Valley Drive and Highwood Road. Our street (Hillpath) and Highwood arc not big enough to accommodate the number of vehicles that would result from a large shopping centre being built on the proposed site. Further, St. Rita's school in on Summer Valley Drive, and Brampton Christian School is just offHurontario. We fear an increase in traffic will put the students and their families from both these schools at greater risk. So we oppose the potential rezoning of this property at the end of our street. We think that site should be developed into some more homes, and that will maintain the quality of the neighborhood. \Ve would add that there is already a shopping centre at Mayfield and Hurontario street, which is a short walk or a very short drive for the residents of our subdivision. There is no need for another shopping centre here. Regards Brenda A. Waud 64 Ja rdin Drive, Unit 18 Conco rd, Ontario L4K 3P3 RECEI'IED T. 905.669.4055 CLERK'S DEPT. F. 905.669.0097 PLANNING PARTNERS INC. klmplanning.com SE P 0 5 20!3 REG. NO.: P- 108 FILE NO.: _ ____ September 4, 2013 City of Brampton City Clerk's Office 2 Well ington Street West Brampton, Ontario L6Y 4R2 Attention: M r. Peter Fay , Clerk RE: Public Hea ring September 9, 2013 Caledon JV Partnership- GSP G roup Incorporated Application for Amendment to O ffici al Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment Northeast Corner of Hurontario Street and Highwood Road City of Brampton File: COl E18.016-Ward 2 Dear Sir We act on behalf of West Mayfield Developments Ltd., the owner of Block 228, 43M l276 in the City of Brampton. Block 228 is a 0.3 m reserve that runs along the fron tage of Highwood Road which currently restricts access as currently proposed in the above noted application. In this regard, the roads and services required by the City and constructed by our cl ient provide a benefit which fac ilitates the proposed development of the applicants' lands under both the existing land use designation and the proposed. The existing subdivi::; ion agreement contains provisions which acknowledge that West Maytield has provided services which the applicants of the proposed deve lopment wi ll benefit from and require the Ciry to impose cond itions requiring the benefi ting owner to pay their proportionate share of the cost pri or to developmen t. In addition, based on our preliminary review. it would appear that the development is also util izing storm water sewers, san itary sewers and watermains and the stormwater management pond that our client designed and constructed that will benefit the appli c<:Ult. We wil l seek fa ir and reasonable compensation fo r those services which were provided for the benefit of these lands Ill terms of both land and construc tion costs. Planning Design • Development In the event that this proposal is to be approved, we would request that the Official Plan Amendment contain satisfactory provisions requiring the entering into a cost sharing agreement with our client and would request that the zoning by-law not be enacted until such time as a cost sharing agreement is reached. By copy of this letter to the Town of Caledon, we request that the same provisions apply to any Official Plan Amendment adopted to permit development in Caledon and that the zoning be withheld until an agreement is reached. We would be happy to discuss or meet with the applicant and staff from the respective municipalities should there be any questions or concerns with our request. Lastly, we would request notice of any subsequent meetings dealing with these matters in the City of Brampton and/or the Town of Caledon and notice of the adoption of any Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment. Yours truly, KLM PLANNING PARTNERS INC. 4'&.J.l f1\;s.~'r ~k:e'Jr.fL- Mark Yarranton, B.E.S., M.C.J.P., R.P.P. Cc: City of Brampton Planning Department - Paul Aldunate Town ofCaledon Clerk - Carey deGorter Town ofCaledon Planner - Brandon Ward West Mayfield Development Limited f2.--~\ Please refer to: John M. Alatl e-mail: [email protected] File No. 700598 Davies Howe Partners LLP September 9, 2013 Lawyers DELIVERED BY EMAIL The Fifth Floor Planning, Design and Development Committee 99 Spad ina Ave City of Brampton Toronto,Ontario 2 Wellington Street West MSV 3P8 Brampton, ON L6Y 4R2 T 416.977.7088 F 416.977.8931 Attention: Dan Kraszewski, Senior Executive Director of Planning, City d avieshowe. com ofBrampton Dear Members of the Committee: Re: Caledon JV Partnership - GSP Group Incorporated 12197, 12211 and 12231 Hurontario Street Application to Amend Official Plan and Zoning By-law Municipal File No.: C01E18.016 We are counsel to Snelgrove Plaza Inc., the owners of 163 and 175 Colonel Bertram Road and 3047 and 3037 Mayfield Road, legally described as Part of Lots 11, 14, 15 and 55, Concession 1 ENS and all of Lots 56 and 57, part of west half Lot 17, Registered Plan CH~8, Parts 1 and 2, Reference Plan 43R-7364 (Lot 55) in the City of Brampton. It is located at the south east comer of Hurontario Street and Mayfield Road. The property contains a Neighbourhood Commercial retail plaza containing a supermarket, a drugstore, a Tim Hortons and ancillary retail space. Caledon JV Partnership, through its planning consultant GSP Group Incorporated ("GSP Group"), has submitted an application to amend the City of Brampton Official Plan and Zoning By-law {the "Proposed Amendments"). These Proposed Amendments are being sought by the Applicant to allow for the construction of a commercial plaza which is to be anchored by a 51 ,000 square foot Sobey' s grocery store. [OHP 00247978] Page 2 Davies The purpose of this letter is to make submissions on behalf of our client expressing Howe its concerns with the Proposed Amendments being sought. The reasons for our Partners client's concerns include, but are not limited to, the following: lLP 1. The Proposed Amendments do not represent good planning and are not in the public interest. 2. GSP Group and the other consultants who have prepared background supporting reports in respect of the proposed development have not sufficiently demonstrated the feasibility and need for the commercial plaza and grocery store that would be permitted as a result of the Proposed Amendments. 3. The GSP study does not even identify our client's property in its analysis, except tangently and by reference to the market study, submitted on behalf of the proponent by TER. 4. The market impact study undertaken on behalf of the JV is deficient and/or flawed in a number of ways, including but not limited to: a. The failure to properly account for the impacts of e-commerce and on-line shopping; b. The failure to reflect and attribute the correct amount of inflow which can be attributed to the market area in both the primary and secondary trade areas, c. For assuming that the existing Sobey's store at the Snelgrove Plaza will be re-tenanted by a new Fresheo store; d. For its assumptions about market growth over the planning period and the anticipated amount of recapture. 5. The new development will be situated primarily in Caledon and will draw a large proportion of its market share from the City of Brampton and as such will have detrimental impacts on the planned function of other Brampton commercial retail facilities. 6. The commercial plaza facilitated by the Proposed Amendments will result in negative traffic impacts along Hurontario and on other parts of the road network and, in particular, at the intersection of Hurontario Street and Mayfield Road. 7. Such further reasons that may be provided at a later date. We ask that you please acknowledge receipt of this correspondence. [DHP 00247978 ] IJ····· Page 3 Davies Should you have any questions regarding the above, please contact the Howe undersigned or my associate Alexander J. Suriano at (416) 263~4S01. Partners LLP Sincerely, DAVIES HOWE PARTNERS LLP JMA:AJS Encl. cc: Client Peter Fay, City Clerk, City of Brampton Paul Aldunate, Planner, City of Brampton Marilyn Ball, Chief of Planning and Infrastructure Services, City of Brampton (OHP 00247978 ] September Gth 2013 Peter Fay City Clerk 2 Wellington Street West Brampton, Ontario lGY 4R2 Re: Application by Caledon JV Partnership GSP Group Incorporation (File: C01E1S.01G) Ward2 To amend the official plan and zoning by-law My wife and I have concerns regarding the above application. We submit the following consideration by all who have a vested interest in this development. 1) Increase in traffic Hwy 10 ( Hurontario) Highwood Road, Hillpath Crescent, Summer Valley Drive, Collingwood Avenue and others in this neighbourhood. Parking spaces at this Plaza total 500 (approx) according to drawing received. Trucks, Taxis, Delivery, Drop off vehicles, buses, Motorcycles all extra and must be considered. Pedestrian Safety including children is of prime concern. An Elementary school is located within walking distance (O.4km) of the proposed development with approximately 1100 students and staff. The students walk and are bused to school. These school buses (16) include special need buses which use Highwood Road and Summer Valley. There are approximately 5 other buses picking up in the neighbourhood. j!J:3 .284-Homes must use Highwood Road or Summer Valley Road to exit this Sub Division. Emergency Vehicles (Fire and Ambulance) from Valleywood (North of development) must use Highwood Road to get to the Caledon Sub Division. Property Values of Highwood Road a) Real estate agents making a Preliminary Analysis look at a decrease b} With the current economic situation this decrease could be substantial Future Development and existing in the immediate area: a)Residential development S.E. corner of Highwood Road and Hurontario (8 homes) - Fast Food outlet between Petro Canada Gas Bar and existing Plaza - Development S.E. corner Summer Valley and Mayfield Road - Development from existing Church (Orthadox) to new church and buildings. - Existing Plazas: a}S.E. Corner Mayfield Road and Hurontario - Tim Hortons M Sobeys - Shoppers Drug Mart b)N.E Corner of Mayfield Road and Hurontario -Royal Bank -Daycare -Restaurant -M&M -Pizza Take-out -Dollar Store 11 Shops total c)Two Major Gas retailers at Mayfield Road and Hurontario (Petro Canada) d)New Peel Police Headquarters- Caledon e) Future shopping centre off Hwy 10- Caledon f) Existing Christian School on Hwy 10 g) Strawberry Fields North of Mayfield on Kennedy Road 4. Snow Removal- Where are they going to plow to? (pile) 5. Drainage- Will the land be raised or lowered? Existing open drain at 13&21 Highwood. Usage? 6-Garbage- When and how will it be stored? How often will it be removed? 7- Existing trees- Do they plan to destroy? 8-Traffic. In closing, I urge this committee, the Mayor and Council of the City of Brampton and the Town of Caledon to place the Safety of its Citizens as the top priority and NOT allow any Entrance/ exit on Highwood Road. There is no doubt in my mind that any entrance/exit on Highwood Road from this development will create a very serious-traffic hazard due to the close proximity of family homes, a major intersection and already heavy traffic flow on Highwood Road. Cathy MacKay t'a.Lft '-IJJa<;~Uu; Jack MacKay ~ ~ L.\tv,J I ,uf Residents of : C.C. Dan KraszewsKI actrng Commissioner Planning, Design and development. Mayor city of Brampton Mayor Town of Caledon Paul Palleschi Regional Councillor John Hutton City Councillor •~.. RECE!VED ClE1lK'S DEPT. September 9,2013 SEP 0 9 2013 Attention: Peter Fay City Clerk REG. NO.: FilE NO.: ____ File: COIE18.016 Dear Mr. Fay, We would like to be notified of the adoption ofan Official Plan amendment, enactment of a proposed Zoning By-law andlor decision of Council with respect to draft approval of the proposed file above. Shirley and Ian Fisher cc. Dan Kraszewski Senior Executive Director of Planning and Development ·-env t)f liftt~~1~ton PLANNING, D~SIGN &DEVELOPMENT September 8, 2013 DATE SEP - 9 2013 Rec'd File No. Re: City plan number CO 1E 18.016 to develop commercial buildings at the north east comer ofHighwood Road and Hurontario Street. Dear Mr. Kraszewski, We are the original owners and residents of 37 Hillpath Cres. for the past 13 years. Our home is situated at the comer ofHighwood Road and Hi11path Cres and is almost directly opposite the proposed exit/entrance ofthe aforementioned proposed development. We are opposing the rezoning of the property (at the north east corner of Highwood and Hurontario) to commercial. We are outlining the major reasons for our opposition below for the consideration ofPlanning, Design and Development and Brampton City Council Safety and Traffic Our neighbourhood is comprised ofapproximately 300 detached, residential homes. We also have St. Rita's elementary school of approximately 745 students located at 30 Summer Valley. Building commercial property at one end ofthe development with access from Highwood Rd. would cause an increased flow oftraffic through Highwood Rd, Summer Valley Rd. and Hillpath Cr. The restricted RIIRO access on Hurontario would result in a lot ofextra traffic immediately in front of my home on Highwood Rd. In addition to the traffic entering and exiting at the proposed Highwood access point, we would experience traffic "cutting through" Collingwood Rd. on the NW comer of Mayfield and Hurontario. Traffic from communities east ofus (along Mayfield) would use our development to bypass 4 lights and much heavier traffic along Mayfield and Hurontario. We would also have customers of the existing Sobey's plaza (Mayfield and Hurontario) living off Colonel Bertram ''cutting through" Summer Valley Rd. The increased traffic would threaten the safety ofthe following parties: 1) People walking through and cycling in the neighbourhood. Our neighbourhood children walking to and from school currently travel without benefit of a crossing guard and often play on the streets. We have 2 young children ourselves, who both walk to St. Rita's everyday. Furthennore, our children have a paper route and therefore walk or cycle through the entire neighbourhood three times a week. Many adults also walk with their dogs or cycle through our streets on a daily basis for exercise. Increased traffic through the neighbourhood would be a significant threat to these parties. We already see vehicles not belonging to the neighbourhood driving through our streets well above the posted speed limits. 2) Those using the intersection ofHurontario and Highwood. Safety is of particular concern for those who walk and drive through here. Currently, there are both GO and Brampton bus stops on the West side of Hurontario and therefore, the area sees a fair amount of pedestrian traffic. There is also a GO stop on the East side of the intersection. This is already a dangerous intersection. We have personally been involved in and have seen many near misses involving pedestrians crossing here. We have also seen several car accidents occur at this intersection over the years, many of them attributable to high speed, distracted drivers and! or people running the red light. Approximately 75% of the 745 students at St. Rita's are bussed to and from school daily. This is a total of 12 buses driving through the neighbourhood to and from St. Rita's everyday. Other schools' buses also travel through this intersection. 3) Family and friends of our residents who come to visit us. We have 2 older parents and many other family friends and relatives with very young children that would hesitate to visit us for fear of having to contend with so much extra traffic and the associated safety issues. We have already seen a huge increase in traffic on the street since the 410 was opened. This proposed development would add even more. 4) Those driving to and from work- particularly those travelling at peak rush hour times. Our neighbourhood streets are already quite busy. As mentioned, every business day, approximately 16 busses come through this area of Highwood. Additionally, Summer Valley Rd. and Highwood Rd. are main passages for our neighbourhood to access the 410. These roads are also on the snow plow route (where snow plows tum around to head back north on Hurontario) and emergency vehicle route. Many individuals who miss their exit or entrance onto the 410/Hwy 10, make U turns at the intersection of Hillpath and Highwood. This includes full sized transport trucks. (The light standard near our house has already been knocked down by a truck. It leaned toward our house until it was repaired. During peak times, we have to wait for at least 10-12 vehicles to pass before we can back out of our driveway. The addition of a plaza would increase the hazards and would add further delay to all who have to back out into the main stream of traffic. Additionally, the distance between the proposed exit/entrance (at Highwood Rd.) of the plaza and the intersection of Hurontario and Highwood is very short and is approximately 5 car lengths. As it stands, The MTO, is allowing the proposed Hurontario entrance/exit to be "Right in" and "Right out" respectively. This leaves the Highwood Rd. entrance to be the only usable one for those coming from the North and the only option for those wanting to exit to go South on Hurontario. All of us residents who wish to go South on Hurontario would also have to wait in line with the patrons of the plaza. This will also severely disrupt the flow on Hurontario which is already very busy. All those leaving the plaza and travelling to Valleywood or Hwy 10 N (north of the plaza) would also use the Highwood access point because the Hurontario exit from the plaza does not allow for a comfortable enough distance to get over to their required extreme left lane labelled "For Local Traffic Only" or "Hwy ION" respectively. This only emphasizes the fact that the proposed Highwood entrance/exit would become the main access point to the plaza. All of us residents wanting to access the 410 S would have to wait in line to turn behind these individuals. 5) Those delivering and collecting mail Currently, we have 5 super mail boxes in the vicinity of the path where traffic would be increased. Canada Post's mail drop off/pick up and residents driving up to the mail box to pick up their mail would add be also be caught up in the traffic chaos. Feasibility of the Proposed Design We would also like to point out the existing plaza on the southeast comer of Mayfield and Hurontario consists of only 3 retail buildings- a 24hr grocery store, a smaller sized drug store and a coffee shop. This plaza has 2 full moves access points on much larger roads that allow traffic to enter and exit in both directions as well as 1 partial moves point that allows RIlRO supporting approx. 230 parking spots. Therefore, it is very hard to believe that this new proposed development with 5 retail structures (all larger than their current counterparts) with approximately 400-500 parking spots and only 1 full moves and one partial access point would operate without dramatically and negatively impacting the traffic of all of the surrounding comrnwlities (particularly that of our Summer VaUey community). Burden for Brampton Residents The proposed commercial plaza spans both municipalities of Brampton and Caledon. Approximately 75% of it would be on the Caledon side of the border. However, Brampton residents would bear most ofthe burden in terms oftraffic, safety and inconvenience. Noise and Pollution We currently contend with the noise and pollution from large trucks, high car volwnes, emergency vehicle sirens, and motorcycles along Hurontario. The additional vehicles and plaza itself would greatly increase noise, air and light pollution. Especially noteworthy is the proposed diagram seems to indicate a type of coffee shop and/or fast food restaurant with a drive through. As we know, the pollution from the idling cars is even greater than that from vehicles simply driving by. There would also be light from parking lot lights and signs. Because our home, is situated directly opposite the proposed Highwood access point we would feel these effects more than others. Health Concerns "Cars, buses, trucks and other motorized vehicles are one of the largest sources of air pollution that have been clearly linked to negative health effects. Air pollution from road traffic has been linked to a variety of negative health effects. Scientific studies in Canada, the United States, and Europe show that children living in areas with high road traffic volumes have more respiratory-related illness symptoms than other children. More specifically, a significant number of studies conclude that exposure to traffic pollution can aggravate asthma in children. Exposure to air pollution from road traffic has been linked to a number of other health issues including heart attack, coronary artery disease and increased risk of death from respiratory and cardiac conditions. Air pollution may worsen symptoms for people with existing heart and lung conditions. *" The increased traffic travelling directly through and around our current neighbourhood would dramatically increase our health risks. Property Damage Those who live in the surrounding neighbourhood have already been victims to property damage of homes and vehicles (ourselves included). As a result, Peel Regional Police have been asked to patrol the area more vigilantly_ The presence ofa 24 hr store and fast food or coffee shops would onJy attract more dubious individuals. They would also have the perfect excuse to loiter in our neighbourhood and may perform acts of vandalism in our area. Furthennore, those of us who temporarily park on the street in front of our homes would be risking damage from the increased traffic driving by. Quality ofLife and Property Values/ Financial Hardship When we were looking for a family home 13 years ago, we looked for a neighbourhood that would offer a conducive and secure place to raise our children. After all, isn't that what we all want for our children? When we all purchased our homes in this neighbourhood, we did so knowing all the available land around us was slated for residential use. We all wanted a place where our children could walk to school and play with friends on the street without having to fear for their safety and well being. This should not be taken away from us. The development of commercial property directly opposite us is going to severely compromise the quality of life for us and most other families. We feel that our own household will be atfected the greatest because of our proximity to what would surely become the main entrance for this commercial plaza. Everyone searches for the same attributes in a home where they intend to raise children- a nice, quiet neighbourhood where their children can grow up safely. Building commercial property in the proposed area would only decrease the property value of our home and would make it harder to sell. A more immediate affect would be an increase in our insurance rates. In conclusion, we implore the Planning, Design and Development Committee as well as Brampton Council to strongly consider our opposition and those of my fellow residents as the final decision will be affecting hundreds offamilies. );ZU'IJ Ii Shirley Fisher, Ian Fisher, Alexander Fisher, and Thomas Fisher *Quote from -http://healthycanadians.gc.calenvironment-environnementloutdoor-air exterieur/traf-eng. php cc: Paul Aldunate Planning, Design and Development F2-~l Attn: Dan Krazsewski Senior Executive Director of Planning and Development City of Brarnpton Re: File # COIE018.016 Dear Mr Krazsewski, Please find attached, the petition for the file number above opposing the Re-Zoning and proposed commercial development of the land on the NE comer of Hurontario and Highwood Rd. The reasons for opposition will be outlined in the Public Meeting on September 9,2013 Shirley Fisher 1 f1-q'2 } / . PETITION Opposing Plan COlE UUH6- Re-zoning and Commercial Development on the Northeast corner of llurontario St. and Highwood Rd- Ward 2. submitted hy Summer Valley community, Brampton residents Sept. 2013 NAME ADDRESS SIGNATURE (J LL {VJ '-L 1J J1A l i1~ ~tc 1--t:CLn L.1\i Qlfl Gm hoe.i aJ -Fa n u__t-h· Leu ~ · 3()__fh sir} ~l ' '" ~ ~ ~ ) ~o Q ,1\,~ (V\S)ot\u\c\ 'l / Cc~ fl.- ''\'b \ A PETITION ·J. Opposing I,Inn CO IE I S.O 16- Re-l:oning and Commercial Development on the Northeast corner of Huront:ario St. und Highwood Rd- \Vard 2. submitted by Summer Valley community, Brampton residents NAj\·IE ADDRESS ~ R M.t J o f't1 r:t-n_,;,ti1 at L(h~~ {/-;]a t-h.J ~~t~,l~f - T~! ~j Nl~lt ~.4 ,()c--\ I I I /,~ -· ·) ·· :1 , · I i .·~· ,·(. t ~ c- r~ c rl\ !J. i_) • ---~~------· ---~~~-----·c , --~·-··~------~- I Fl-q~ PErfiTION Opposing l'lan COlE lH.O 16 • Re-zoning and Dcvclopnu~nt on the Northeast corner of Hurontario St. and Highwood Rd- \Vard 2. submitted by Sumnter Valley cumn1unity, Calcdon resident~ Sept. 2013 NA~IE ADDRESS SIGNATUI~E <' 11 1 a(·f'1, l/c11 l 1)6J,\II5 ftlltr<. /'!',ILL~ PrflJ.~~ /ft/Af?~l~. ~l L\~\-ct~\- ~ -:s \"\'\t1Yl [_ ------L -- -·-- · F2-qza PETITION Opposing Plan COl El8.016- Re-zoning and Commercinl Development on the Northeast corner of Hurontario St. and Highwood Rd- Ward 2. submitted by Summer Valley community, Brampton residents __ _se NA1\'IE ADDRESS ------~~-=~~~~------~ c I ·----····--- ------· ····· ----L-...... ------· ._ __j Fz-qw PETITION Opposing Illan CO I It: IR.O 16 - l~c..._l:nning and llcvclnpmcnt on the Northcust corner of Hurontario St. nnd Highwood l~tl- \Vard 2 NA~IE ADDRESS SIGNATURE - ~L,~ k\_,:'\. C-~\ ~tc..·"·"" ..-.Lc d \,~, \-;_:,.,~ ' e.-\L. ' ----, v( ~, {; J1( \..) '-L~...... Xu Pcvtt r11 cr; f0C. ) ) • 1 .: j' - . . •.") \ (1~\;\'b\/' Opposing Plan COl El8.016- Re-·loning ;tntl Com1nercial Development on the Northeast corner of Hurontario St. untl Highwood Rtl- \Vard 2. submitted by Summer Valley cornmunity, Urampton residents Sept. 2013 NA~IE ADDRESS S((;NATURE - _j ~1-- '(c( PETI.TION Opposing Plun COl F.IN.OI6- l~e-zoning ~•nd Development nn the Northeast corner of Hurontario St. ~tntl Highwood Rd- \Vard 2 NA1\-IE ADDRESS SJ(;NATUI~E \fiC"{b~ll~ ~I LLAJ'lu 0J f\ /2 ~L~ ~r (tA\t'J \} i LLf\l'J\A ~/\ L.c~~~--( --ItWf.S ·J fLLAN i.A L~A \C.'\\ D ' -%I-\\~'-''-\\ ~o-.\r\ ; " LQv r I ~r------~ -r__t._.,______~ I~ 1<7 r-r> LCQ bva(\ -~ I ! I ------·------·- ·------~ ~,. ··--~···-· --- -·. -·- . -- -- -· -···-···----. ·····-· ------, .. -- I r2~'A PETITION Opposing Plan CO IE18.016- Re-zoning anc.J Development on the Northeast corner of Hurontario St. anc.J Highwood Rc.J- Warc.J 2 NAME ADDRESS SIGNATURE C L:-vl ~ co,._ \S C-3'"' g...,vi c:_L ~~ \\1\0_ / Ft.-tOD PETITION Opposing Plan COt El8.016- Re-zoning and Commercial Development on the Northeast corner of Hurontario St. and Highwood Rd- W~trd 2. submitted by Summer Valley community, Brampton residents Sept. 2013 NAi\'IE ADDRESS SIGNATURE ------jf------1 I L-______L_____ .·--···----·------·------·-----·.. ----·------.J .rz-{o) PETITION Opposing Plun CO I J.: 18.016 - Re-zoning ~anti Commercial Development on the Northeast corner of Huront:ario St. anc.lllighwood Rd- \Vard 2. submitted by Suntmer Valley community, IJrampton rc~ident~ Sept. 2013 NA~IE ..\DDI~ESS SI(;NATURE --_,~_.:?_.- __....,;;:.~ - I I ·:· I " ~ . l-CL1 ) ~\. ·. ~ , ..) f~. ! I z~ ~7-"'-~- f_,tcL.._,/-· --- ------~ 1.------+------+------L___------i_ ------·------t-----· . -~- .. --~------.·---- ·----· ------· i t_. ft~ \6~ PETITION ()pposing l,lun CO 1~: 18.016 - Re-·loning and Dcv~lopmcnt on the Northc:tst corner of Hurontario St. and Highwood Rd- \Vard 2 NAi\IE ..\Dili{ESS SIGNATURE ~------~------~------~~~~~~------ ·.· • L •, ~ _) ,.'- .._ \ ~-.A ~ ( l ..) .... • . . ., ··- - ''- t, <. c· ,.. " ,, (1 \.1 ' \ ~ . i I I r ( ! rr""' J j '-.j I ·----~------. J • // ,. i / .:'/1. /I J, •. - •. - . ! rz.~ I ot; PETITI()N Opposing Plnn C01 E 18.016- l~c-zoning and Commercial llcvclnpment on the Northenst corner of Huronturio St. and Highwood l{tl- \Vard 2. submitted by Sumntcr Valley cornmunity, Brumpton residents .------N:\~IE ADDRESS S tCLLE 'd F-t~ t!-elt .-- ,'KJ f- t \. ·-f-t:J(_ lt: r~.v\_ 0~JIC) (tJc:co~ ~· r L0\'\ )= ~ L- frl "i.'f-...!-1{)__ J\.LE X cvYK~t (\~ \01(fl -·~ t 1 /~1 , }Jtl~ \\~\ C},\"SI\~ ( ~J ....:~ -----~..::::::::, -, /\ \"\e .c~:~.\).t_ \_ .\ r) (;(,) ' !···.,;' / / ;, , . i • ,. .'. ·'. ' !if~@ ------1 t::l-'(0~ I)ETITION Opposing Plan CO 1•: 18.016 - Re-zoning and Development on the Northeast corner of Hurontario St. and Highwood Rd- \Vard 2 NAL\'IE ADDI{ESS SIGNATURE I /~-~L·--·-_,----__, ·.S:c.tx'\' l~.,f\r'e~"L .. _x.· . ::::.-.::------ I llJ).v\e.~ E~fe,\\} ~~t> ~~// J y· . "-~-\J (IC(( c./ ;)r y(jlfitt'JJ ··-y?/rcQ_J_ !\I? '-· . . ~ '/ f &~ \/\.../"'7 f I ______. / u '"'-' / I I I I I ! ! ; I 0 I - ------· I ------· --- . ---·- .. ------·-·---~------t------··- -- - ------~--- ' I I . •. February 2"d, 2009 Submission to Mr. Adrian J. Smith, M.C.I.P, R.P.P Director, Planning And Land Development Services, City of Brampton 2 Wellignton Street West Brampton, ON L6Y 4R2 RE: Application: \Vood Bull LLP- Forecast Inc. File C01E18.016- Ward 2 Highwood Road/ Hurontario I Highway 10 This submission is on behalf ofconcerned citizens of Highwood Road/ Hill path Cres./ Summer Valley Drive. We have sincere and grave concerns regarding the safety; investments and standard of living ofall concerned citizens. This includes: • Compromised safety for our neighborhood children and other residents due to increased traffic and strangers traveling through our neighborhood. • Increased traffic and busier side streets • Security concerns regarding personal property, cars and possible vandalism. • Increased noise, light and vehicular emissions pollutions as well as strew garbage. • Heighth, Substance and decor of fencing 8-1 0 foot high from ground level sound resistant, presentable all existing fencing to be removed Prior to any decision being made we request that the following be considered I. Saint Rita's School, Summer Valley (0.4 Km from entrance) a) Enrollment 929 b) School Buses 14 c) Special Need Buses 2 d) Walking Students 125 e) Staff 67 f) Volunteers 82 Note: School Extension does not show on existing photos or drawings 2. Property values of Highwood Road a) Real estate agents making a Preliminary Analysis look at a decrease b) with the current economic situation this decrease could be substantial 3. Future Development and Existing in the immediate area: a) Residential development S.E corner of Highwood Road & Hurontario (8 Homes) - Fast Food outlet between Petro Canada Gas Bar & Existing Plaza - Development S.E Corner Summer Valley & Mayfield Road - Development from existing Church (Orthadox) to new church and buildings - Existing Plazas: a) S.E Corner Mayfield Road & Hurontario - Tim Hortons - Sobeys F2-l0U2 - Shoppers Drug Mart b) N.E Comer Mayfield Road & Hurontario - Royal Bank - Daycare - Restaurant -M&M - Pizza Take-Out - Dollar Store - State Farm - 11 Shops Total c) Two Major Gas Retailers at Mayfield Road & Hurontario (Petro Canada & Sunoco) d) New Peel Regional Police H.Q - Caledon e) Future Shopping Center offHwy 10 - Caledon f) Existing Christian School on Hwy 10 g) Strawberry Fields North of Mayfield on Kennedy Road 4. Snow Removal- where are they going to plow to? (pile) 5. Drainage -' Will the land be raised or lowered? Existing open drain at 13 &21 Highwood. Usage? 6. Garbage - When and how will it be stored? How often will it be removed? 7. Existing trees - Do they plant to destroy? 8. Traffic. a) A group ofconcerned residents have already met with a few city planners and councilors to obtain some further infonnation about the development. Some highlights from these discussions are: - There is NO proposed left tum lane offHwy 10 for traffic entering the plaza. Consequently, most southbound traffic will enter the plaza through our neighborhood. - The ONLY proposed exit from the plaza to go southbound would be through our neighborhood. b) Moving of traffic light from Highwood Road, Hurontario (Hwy 10) & Collingwood Road will create a safety concern for residents of Brampton Living on the east side and west side of Hurontario (Hwy 10) It appears the Ministry of Transportation is saying no movement while the Town of Caledon is saying yes. What do the Region of Peel & the City of Brampton say? c) Use of Highwood Road by Construction Trucks and Delivery Trucks. Ministry of Transportation say only limited access proceeding south on Hwy 10. Forecast group are saying there will be no trucks on Highwood Road (only verbally - Not in writing). Will the City of Brampton erect No Truck signs on Highwood Road & Summer Valley? Do to existing subdivisions & future subdivisions traffic will increase on SummerValley & Highwood Road. Will City of Brampton do something to control traffic from Mayfield Road exiting to Summer Valley? To Highwood Road to Plaza? d) How late will the plaza be opened? Shoppers Drug Mart and Grocery Store 24 hours? e) Ifa walkway connects to any residential areas, we will have a problem with pedestrians hanging out and throwing things (garbage) over fences. f) Gangs are becoming prevalent in the city. Plazas create a meeting place. What security will be provided at the plaza? g) Some quotes from traffic impact study of a group hired by the developer are: • "The proposed retail developed is expected to generate 158 primary trips during the weekday a.m peek hour. 443 primary trips during the weekday p.m hour and 699 primary trips during the Saturday midday peak hour." Primary trips include both traffic entering and exiting the plaza. Many residents feel that with the increasing construction of homes in the area, these numbers will be much higher. • "Under existing conditions, each of the intersections operates at an acceptable level of service during the weekday a.m and p.m and Saturday midday peak hrs." Many residents feel this statement is vague and would like some clarification. • "Under existing conditions (yr 2010,2015 and 2020), majority of the boundary road intersections are expected to operate at an acceptable Level of Service and there is expected to be sufficient capacity available at all of these boundary road intersections to accommodate future increases in traffic." These include the intersection at Hwy 10 and Highwood. Again, many of us feel this statement is vague and requires clarification. If the developer wants our support, we would request answers in writing as well as an open discussion on changes that we will propose at any future meetings. We are concerned with the safety and well being of all ages who live in or visit the Snelgrove (City of Brampton - Town ofCaledon) Community. Attachments: Signatures - Addresses ofConcerned Citizens Total:A6 ~ 1 C.C - Peter Fay, City Clerk, City of Brampton - Mayor Town ofCaledon - Paul Palleschi Regional Councilor - John Hutton City Councilor Correspondence May Be Forwarded To: John J. MacKay "Jack" :Ci: L tE" J) () ;J I}/ ~ Yr{ t L D {A) c. .) / /,1 IH KK E= 1 1,__ !.flo+ ro) otJ , ) v t 1--1- AC:fE l'L" e. LC!ptVi; c A o 11 1=1:- lei Narnc:s Addrc:ss --- ,1 -· I ) ------~- ··· ------·----·····-··. ·------··----· --- . ---·----- --·- -··· ------ ·-----·--- ----·--. ------~------ ---- ·--· -· ) t:2-lcf\ Address rl __ tfJ{}_ @~~~~~ ~ _-~~L-...a.I.:A:....LllaO-- '( . (J------ (}1=----- @ ·------·· ----.. @r------ ff-- SJ---...-::-"'·---·-------- ~-~----- 49 .··----- \ • # ~) ' J Namt:s Address______-~- ___ _ n . I ~ f '. I I ' ~' I -r- '· '] • II I •• -. ' I ~ ~ .,, , I l.. ' \ , \' \ \ ~l \ ~ \.t < ' l A'DM i, T f-l LL ---···----·· 1, ·_) •. ..-) F2- ll \ Names Address______ .9. (..e..,\ l 0<"- ' :S e._., ~c, ~ Pr s;c o .....-:·. . ex-" ::;J / '"i'\" -- L ~ h', v' / / e: ,/C:, l ZELINKA PRIAMO LTD A 'Profc;si.oi?ILI.. P~ Pract:<= y City of Brampton January 16, 2009 PLANNING. DESIGN &DEVELOPMENT DATE· JAN 2 2 2009 Rec'd City of Brampton City Clerk File No. I <6 . b I 2 Wellington Street West C- o IE ~ Brampton, ON L6Y 4R2 Attention: Mr. Peter Fay, City Clerk Dear Mr. Fay: Re: Request for Notification Official Plan Amendment & Zoning By-law Amendment City of Brampton File No C01E18.016- Ward 2 Wood Bull LLP- Forecast Inc. Northeast Corner of Hurontario Street and Highwood Road City of Brampton, ON Zelinka Priamo Ltd. hereby requests to be notified of any further public meetings related to the Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment application for the above-noted location (File No C01 E18.016), as well as notice of passing of the Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law amendment. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. Yours very truly, ZELINKA PRIAMO L TO. Katherine Krizsan, BES Planner cc. John Corbett, Commissioner of Planning, Design and Development 5399 Eglinton Ave nue West, Suite 202 Toronto, Ontario M9C 5K6 Tel : 4 16-622-6064 Fax: 4 16-622-3463 Email: zo(O;lzoolan.com Wabs ita: zoolan.com F-1-l \:; PART NERS: GLEN SCHNARR & ASSOCIATES INC. GLEN SCHNARR, MCIP, RPP URBAN & REGIONAL PLANNE RS , lAND DEVELOPitiENT (ONSULTAHIS GLEN BROLl, MCIP, RPP (OLIN (HUNG, MCIP, RPP • ASSOCIATES: February 5, 2009 Our File: 265-018 CARL BRAWLEY, MCIP, RPP JEFF R. DUNCAN, CPT, ACST(A) City ofBrampton Planning Design and Development Department City of Brampton 2 Wellington Street West PLANNING. DESIGN & DEVELOPMENT Brampton Ontario L6Y 4R2 DATE: FEB 1 1 2009 Rec'd Attention: Paul Aldunate neNo. C o 1GJ 8 · 0/~ RE: Proposed Rezoning/Official Plan Amendment Wood Bull LLP Forecast Group Inc. (C01El8.016) City of Brampton, Region of Peel Paul, We are the Planning Consultants for the Mayfield Station Landowner group who collectively own land within the Mayfield West Phase 2 Secondary Plan area in the Town of Caledon. The Town and their consultants are currently working on preparing the Secondary Plan for this area which is located west of Highway I 0 and they are scheduled to complete the Secondary Plan in May 2010. Caledon 410 Developments Limited (Fieldgate), who are members of the Mayfield Station Landowner Group own approximately 90 acres of land on the west side of Highway 10 immediately across the highway from the Forecast Group Inc. lands which are subject to the above noted application. We attended the public meeting held at the City ofBrampton on Monday February 2nd 2009. On behalf ofour clients, please accept and consider our below comments on this application. Caledon 4 10 Developments Limited intends to develop their property for Commercial uses upon completion of the Mayfield West Phase 2 Secondary Plan. We do not have any objection to the use of the Forecast Group lands fo r Commercial purposes, however we do have some potential concerns with regards to proposed access to Highway I 0. As mentioned previously, the Secondary Planning process is well underway for Mayfield West Phase 2 and through that process road network configurati ons and access locations to Highway l 0 wi ll be evaluated by the Town's Urban Design and Traffic consultants. We would request that the City not approve an access to Highway I 0 from the Forecast Group site that may preclude future opportunities for access to Highway I 0 for the lands within the Secondary Plan area (west of Highway I 0). 10 Kui GSBRI DGE GARDEN CiRCLE Sum 700 MISSISSAUGA, OlllARIO L5R 3K6 TEL (905) 568-8888 FAX (905) 568-8894 WEBSITE www.gsai.ca F.2.-ll '1 (~ GLEN SCHNARR & ASSOCIATES INC. U RBA N & REG I ON AL P LANNERS , l AND D E VELOPMENT (ONSULTANTS Page 2 Provision for a signalized or full movement access to Highway 10 from the Forecast Group site would restrict the fl exibility for location of a Highway l 0 access point for the Secondary Plan area. We met with the proponents of this application along with both ofour Transportation Consultants on January 23rd 2009 to discuss our potential concerns and they informed us that they did not require a full movement access or signals at this location. After having the benefit of this meeting with Forecast Group and their Transportation Consultant we would be satisfied if a right-in right-out only access to Highway I 0 was approved for this site. Allowing for a right-in right-out only access would accomplish the objective of preserving flexibility for a future Highway l 0 access point and would allow the Secondary Plan process to properly evaluate the best location for this future full movement access. We would be happy to meet with City staff to di scuss this further. If you have any questions please feel free to contact the undersigned Yours very truly, GLEN SCHNARR & ASSOCIATES fN C. ~( 2 ~th ~an d , ~CIP , RPP, Planner Cc Caledon 410 Developments Limi ted A. Brown, LEA Consulting Inc Mayfield Station Landowner Group Cc ·. j\{y. {M )L\1~L41a.,k 64 Jardin Drive, Unit 18 Concord, Onta rio L4K 3P3 T. 905.669.4055 F. 905.669.0097 PLA NNING PARTNERS INC. klmplanning.com P-1 08 City of Brampton PLANNING, DESIGN &DEVELOPMENT February 2, 2009 DATE: FEB 0 3 2009 Aac'd City of Brampton File No. City C lerk's Office 2 Wellington Street West Brampton, Ontario L6Y 4R2 Attention: Mr. Peter Fay, Clerk RE: Public Hearing February 2, 2009 Application for Amendment to Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment Northeast Corner of Hurontario Street and Highwood Road City of Brampton File: COIE18.016-Ward 2 Town of Caledon File: POPA 08-06 & RZ 08-13 Dear Sir, We act on behalf of West M ayfield Developments Ltd., the ow ner of Block 228, 43M 1276 in the City o f Brampton. Block 228 is a 0.3 m reserve that runs along the frontage of Highwood Road whi ch currently restricts access as c urrently proposed in the above noted applicati on. In thi s regard, the roads and services required by the City and constructed by our client provide a bene fit which facilitate the proposed development of the applicants lands. The existing subdivision agreement contains provisions which ac knowledge that West Mayfield has provided services whi ch the appli cants of the proposed development will benefit from and require the C ity to impose conditions requiring the benefiting owner to pay their proportionate share of the cost prior to development. In addition, based on our preliminary review, it would appear th at the development is also utilizing stormwater sewers, sani tary sewers and watermains and the stormwater management pond that our client designed and constructed that will benefit the applicant. We will seek fair and reasonable compensation for those services whi ch benefit the proposed development tn terms of both land and construction costs. Planning Design • Development f2-(\1£ In the event that this proposal is to be approved, we would request that the Official Plan Amendment contain satisfactory provisions requiring the entering into a cost sharing agreement with our client and would request that the zoning by-law not be enacted until such time as a cost sharing agreement is reached. By copy of this letter to the Town of Caledon, we request that the same provisions apply to any Official Plan Amendment adopted to permit development in Caledon and that the zoning be withheld until an agreement is reached. We would be happy to discuss or meet with the applicant and staff from the respective municipalities should there be any questions or concerns with our request. Lastly, we would request notice of any subsequent meetings dealing with these maters in the City of Brampton and/or the Town of Caledon and notice of the adoption of any Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment. Yours truly, KLM PLANNING PARTNERS INC. Mark Yarranton, .E.S., M.C.I.P., R.P.P. Cc: City of Brampton Planning Department - Paul Aldunate Town of Caledon Clerk- Karen Landry Town of Caledon Planner - Casey Blakley Westmayfield Development Limited (~.. ;.. Fl- t\.-:r \J;}J/ Aldunate, Paul From: Kenneth Bokor Sent: 2009/01/17 5:36-PM To: [email protected]; Aldunate, Paul Cc: 'Deborah Seaton'; 'Mike Tucci'; 'Kenneth Bokor' Subject: Files: C01E18.018- City of Brampton and POPAOS-06 & RZ 08-13- Town of Caledon Hello Casey and Paul. My name is Kenneth Bokor and I am one of the Co-Chairman for the North-West Brampton Community Development Association (NWBCDA). We are a current Citizens Group representing the interests of Residents of Ward 2 in Brampton and I also live in Ward 2. I wanted to just take this opportunity to provide some comments to the above Applications by Forecast Inc. In November of 2008, I invited representatives from Forecast Inc. to attend our Monthly Public Meeting and present their Application concerning Commercial development on the property located on the east side of Hurontario Street and North of Highwood Drive. This property is situated in both the Municipalities of Caledon and Brampton. Since this property straddles both Cities, we also extended and invitation to those Caledon Residents living in the Valleywood Subdivision. As an active Brampton resident and Co-Chair of the Association, it was my intent to allow an opportunity for the Forecast Team to provide an awareness of the Proposal and solicit feedback from members of the public. I would like to comment by stating that the meeting was well received with about 80 people in attendance. The atmosphere was professional and the information presented informative. It was my observation at the meeting that the general concenseous of the Proposal by those present was one of approval. None of the persons in attendance had any major objections to the Proposal. Most questions and comments were centered around specific details and planning issues that would be addressed via Site Plan Approval and related Studies (ie: Traffic). These issues included: • fencing/screening/landscaping, specifically concerning the areas adjoining existing Residental homes • related noise concerns if above is inadequate • there was some discussions regarding the type of landscaping to be used (species of plants, trees, etc.) • increased traffic and the requirement for traffic signals at Hurontario and Highwood • ensuring that the commercial plaza and it's area be upkept to high standards of safety and cleanliness • timing/scheduling of truck deliveries to the various businesses As to be expected with any Development, most of the questions were raised by Brampton Residents that directly adjourned or were in very close proximity to the Site. It was my sense that all of the questions and concerns were addressed and that further public consultation would be conducted, especially targeting those Residents bounded by the Notification Area, as per the Planning Act. To summarize, I see no reason why this Application in principal should be denied and feel that Forecast Inc. will provide a sound Community-centric product servicing area residents. I was very pleased with the Architechtural Design shown and think that this Development will add to the small-town flare of the area. I do not think I will be able to attend any of the Public Information Meetings being held by the City of Brampton or the Town of Caledon, as my schedule is very hectic. However, I did want to make sure that I got my response to you both as a matter of public record. If either of you have any further questions, please don't hesitate to contact me. During daytime hours, my cellular number below is the most effective way to reach me. 1 Thank you both for your consideration of my comments. Regards, Kenneth Kenneth Bokor, Co-Chair North-West Brampton Community Development Association 2 ~ February 3, 2009. fl-1(1 \~ ~------~City of Brarnpton Adrian J. Smith PLANNING. DE3K~\I &!_;EVELOPMENT Director of Planning and Land Development Services City of Brampton DATE FEB O~ 2009 Rec'd 2 Wellington St. West Brampton, ON L6Y 4R2 FileNo. Attn: Mr. Adrian J. Smith It is on behalf of the St. Rita Catholic School Parent Advisory Council that this letter is submitted to officially declare our group's concerns over the proposed Plaza Development at Highwood Rd and Hwy. 10. An important role of the St. Rita Catholic School Parent Advisory Council and its members is to continually put the health and safety of our children first. The proposed development of the Highwood Rd plaza is in direct opposition to the safety of our children. Increased traffic in the St. Rita school area and community is strictly ooposed. Our main oppositions include: • We oppose any proposal for increased traffic within the school area. • We are against the fact that our school's primary and only entrance on Summer Valley Drive will be negatively affected. • We are opposed to the increase of strangers accessing and roaming the neighbourhood and ultimately imposing on our children's safety The proposed entrance to the plaza on Highwood Rd will undoubtedly result in Summer Valley Drive being used as a thruway for plaza goers. Using Summer Valley Drive as a thruway would let drivers eliminate (or bypass) 4 traffic lights and as such is seen as a foreseeable result. Increasing traffic through a school zone is never a good idea! The fact that the Developer has omitted any site, mention, or reference to our school on the proposed plans is unacceptable. St. Rita School is located 0.4 kms from the proposed Highwood Rd. entrance. We have 929 students enrolled; have 14 school buses driving on Highwood Rd. and Summer Valley Drive twice a day (lunch buses are in addition to this number); 2 Special Needs Buses; 125 walking students; 67 staff members driving to work; and 82 school volunteers. We are a community within ourselves and as such we officially oppose any development, which would increase traffic in our community. These are the primary safety concerns of the St. Rita School community. As representatives of our community and the members who are directly affected due to pure geography, we must also elude to surrounding concerns such as potential vandalism, littering, and security concerns regarding personal property and cars, increased n_oise, light and vehicular emissions pollution. We trust our concerns will be heard and addressed. Correspondence may be forwarded to: Nicole Cedrone or Kim Saniga Council Co-Chairs St. Rita Catholic School Parent Advisory Council 30 Summer Valley Drive Brampton, ON L6Z 4V6 ( '' P-\t.D C;i\ 231561 HOLDINGT LIMITED Specializing• In Land Development and Property Management February 13, 2009 ,.-----.--...... -41_, __-s City of Bn:: mpton PLANNING, DES{;i-: J:., ri::VELOPMENT City of Brampton DATE: FE~ 25 2G~9 Rec'd 2 Wellington Street West Brampton ON, L6Y 4R2 File No. Co\ b I g. Of .b Attention: Mr. Paul Aldunate Re: Proposal for the re-designation of lands on Highwood Road: Forecast Group (Your application C01 E18.016) Dear Sir: Further to the Public Meeting held on Feb. 2. 2009 that I attended: This letter is to express our concern with the approval of an application to re-designate lands on Highwood Road (your application C01 E18.016). We believe that the market report submitted with the application does not accurately assess the availability of commercial space in the study area for the following reasons: by not taking in to consideration. the many smaller commercial plaza's that would be negatively affected by the development; by not providing support for a proposal which would shift the location of commercial space away from the designated Town Center at Kennedy Road, to this location; and, Inaccurately represents the need for the commercial space at this time since the Mayfield West Secondary Plan has just been newly approved. We would also like to submit that the interface between the residents on Highwood Drive will be very negatively affected by this development if a loading bay and a main entrance is located along this residential street. By copy of this letter, we request to be made aware of any meetings or decisions that arise from this application. Yours truly. 231561 HOLDINGS LIMITED Per: Carmen Navaleza Management Office 2458 Dundas Street West Mlsslssauga Ontario L5K1R8 ph: 905.822.2615 fax: 905.822.9155 e-mail: [email protected] .. ] Adrian J. Smith Feb.Q~ 2009 Director of Planning and Land Development Services City of Brampton 2 Wellington St. W. Brampton, Ont. L6Y 4R2 Subject: Proposed construction ofplaza at N/E comer of Highwood Road & HwylO I am submitting my concerns as a resident at 26 Highwood Road with regard to the proposed plaza construction. My concern is with the proposed Re Zoning of the properties for the Retail Shopping Centre. The road access from the plaza onto Highwood Road from Hwy 10 (proposed 2nd entrance) is my main concern, since the only other road access to this plaza is a questionable entrance. It will mean that the Highwood Road entrance would become the Main entrance and exit. This will affect the immediate properties (mine), as well as, the Highwood Rd, Summer Valley Dr, and Hillpath Crescent traffic flows. There will be an overflow ofparking on our streets, which already have school buses and other neighbors delivering children to the school in the area This is a true residential area, with a public school on Summer Valley Road. The Planning Department did their job properly in the past when they deemed the lands as residential. I am sure at that time they were keeping in mind the many children living in the area, and others walking or delivered by car to the school. This is an added SAFETY issue for our children. At present, I shop at BRAMPTON'S, Sobey's Grocery Store, Shopper's Drug Mart, and Tim Horton, at Hurontario and Mayfield. Any similar stores in the New Caledon Plaza will affect these stores. I also deal with the Brampton TID Bank at W allness and Hurontario Street and anticipate many ofthe local residence will soon use the new RBC bank recently opened at Mayfield and Hwy 10. The additional new retail outlets, at the end of Summer Valley Drive, are already bringing service retail to our area In addition to the increase in traffic, there will be added inconvenience and safety issues when I am leaving my driveway. When I purchased my property, I did so knowing this was a completed residential neighborhood catering to young families. The proposed plaza will cause added headlight invasion, noise, and air pollution. For myself I expect to look across the street to homes with lawns and flowers. I do not want residential land changed to commercial land as I suspect it will not have a Rose Garden planned for me to look at and enjoy. When I chose this street to retire on, I considered what the Planning Department was keeping in mind. It was to get a piece of BRAMPTON BLOOMS, and NOT blossoms into Caledon olazas. Formerly Respond to Clayton Pifko please. ~~- '/i~~~. -. ?~f./. /.P(Y' (~ v c;~/ t1.N,; r- J - I , . .,~. ... •·.., ;.. :·..r• "ro !: 7 { .: I , I' ~· ,., f2- \zt, February 1, 2009 Director Planning and Land development Services City of Brampton 2 Wellington Street W Brampton, ON L6Y 4R2 Attention: Adrian Smith RE: PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OF PLAZA AT NIE CORNER OF HIGHWOOD AND HWY 10 (FILE: COIEI8.016-WARD 2) We refer to the invitation to public meeting that we received in respect of the above application for amendment to official pJan and zoning by-Jaw. As property owners in the neighborhood and residents, my family consider the proposed zoning amendment inappropriate and out of tune with the profile of the neighborhood as a family friendly community. The following are some of the reasons for our objections: There is only one entry and exit to the Summer ValleylHighwood neighborhood. The traffic on that road both in the morning and afternoon is already heavy with various school buses plying the route and parents dropping off their children at Sl Rita Elementary School. The proposed construction will further increase the traffic considerably thereby making it not conducive to children and young families; The neighborhood in question is currently not short of commercial units as there is already one recently completed plaza (Snelgrove Village Center) at the Summer VaileylMayfield entrance. In addition there is the plaza that houses So beys and Shoppers Drug Mart and another one planned (MayVan Plaza) at MayfieldlVan Kirk comer; all these plazas are within just about IIon of Highwood area Inadequate provision of shopping facilities in the neighborhood cannot be a valid excuse for approving the constructions that will affect the Peace and security enjoyed by families and children in a designated family neighborhood. Malls and plazas generally attract all sorts of people some with criminal tendencies. A plaza at the proposed location wiJJ create security and safety chaJJenges for residents which the residents and Brampton as a whole can ill afford. This is moreso in an environment that has lots ofyoung families and children. Based on all foregoing, we strongly opposed the zoning amendment that will lead to putting up a plaza in the proposed location. Furthermore, most of us move into this neighborhood so that our children can play save with other children of their age group in the neighborhood without any fear of been molested or abducted nor kidnapped believing it to be a designated family neighborhood. We thank you for considering these inputs in your decision. Adrian J. Smith Feb 02, 2009 Director ofPlanning and Land Development Services City of Brampton 2 Wellington St. W. Brampton, Onto L6Y 4R2 Subject: Proposed construction ofplaza on NIE comer ofHighwood Rd and Hwy 10. Dear Mr. Smith We are residents at _ Brampton. Our property is on the comer of Hillpath Crescent and Highwood Road (please see attached map) and is directly opposite the proposed plaza. We are a family with a young child and have several concerns regarding this proposed development. Most ofthe concerns relate to our safety and the increased traffic. Our specific concerns are: 1. We hear that the MTO is opposing the addition ofa traffic light and a dedicated left turn lane for those coming southbound on Hwy 10 at proposed Driveway 1. If one or both ofthese items are true then, as residents, we can expect a very significant increase in traffic coming down Highwood ofboth cars and trucks along with the usual school buses and seasonal snowplows. As per the last sheet (file # POPA 08-06 and R2 08-13) we understand i,.theory,since there is access from Highwood Road, the MTO would not grant access from Hwy 10, thus rendering Highwood to be the only access point The proposed Driveway 2 (Highwood Road) will cause a significant increase oftraffic on Highwood Road and Summer Valley Drive. We are concerned for the safety ofour children that play on the street and that get offthe school bus at that location. We also are concerned about our safety when exiting our driveways. 2. We have security concerns regarding personal property, cars and possible vandalism due to and increase ofunfamiliar people entering the neighborhood. 3. We anticipate the proposed plaza will cause an increase in noise, light and vehicular emissions pollution, as well as, strewn garbage and stray shopping carts. When we purchased our home, we did so knowing the land surrounding our home was zoned residential neighborhood complete with a school. That is what we wish to remain as such and request that the land not be re-zoned to commercial. We request that all our concerns be replied to in writing to the address below. Thanking you for your time and consideration. Ian Fisher Shirley Fisher Alexander Fisher -. -.-. - . /0.