The URL can be used to link to this page

AGENDA - General Committee - 20201117Town of Aurora General Committee Meeting Revised Agenda Date:Tuesday, November 17, 2020 Time:7 p.m. Location:Video Conference Pages 1.Procedural Notes This meeting will be held electronically as per Section 19. i) of the Town's Procedure By-law No. 6228-19, as amended, due to the COVID-19 situation. Mayor Mrakas in the Chair. Additional items are marked by an asterisk(*). 2.Approval of the Agenda 3.Declarations of Pecuniary Interest and General Nature Thereof 4.Community Presentations 5.Delegations Note: At this time, the Municipal Offices are closed. This meeting will be live streamed at https://www.youtube.com/user/Townofaurora2012/videos. Anyone wishing to provide comment on an agenda item is encouraged to visit www.aurora.ca/participation for guidelines on electronic delegation. *5.1.Rebecca Beaton, representing Regency Acres Ratepayers Association, Re: Item 8.1 - PDS20-068 - Stable Neighbourhood Policy Review - Urban Design Guidelines 1 6.Consent Agenda *6.1.Memorandum from Councillor Gaertner; Re: Letter from Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority, Re: Provincial Bill 229, Protect, Support and Recover from COVID-19 Act (Budget Measures), 2020 2 That the memorandum regarding Letter from Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority regarding Provincial Bill 229, Protect, Support and Recover from COVID-19 Act (Budget 1. Measures), 2020, be received for information. 7.Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes 7.1.Accessibility Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes of October 14, 2020 8 That the Acessibility Advisory Committee meeting minutes of October 14, 2020, be received for information. 1. 8.Consideration of Items Requiring Discussion (Regular Agenda) 8.1.PDS20-068 - Stable Neighbourhood Policy Review - Urban Design Guidelines 13 (Deferred from General Committee Meeting of November 3, 2020) That Report No. PDS20-068 be received; and1. That the revised Urban Design Guidelines for Stable Neighbourhoods as attached to this report be approved; and 2. That staff present an annual report to Council on minor variance application activity within the Town’s four Stable Neighbourhood Study Areas. 3. 8.2.PDS20-070 - Request for Traffic Calming Measures - Aurora Heights Drive and Seaton Drive 149 That Report No. PDS20-070 be received for information.1. 8.3.PDS20-031 - Regional MCR Update - Employment Land Conversions and Employment Land Mapping in Aurora 157 That Report No. PDS20-031 be received for information.1. 8.4.PDS20-069 - Administration of Capital Project 31116 179 That Report No. PDS20-069 be received for information.1. 8.5.CS20-022 - Audio Recordings of Closed Session Meetings 191 That Report No. CS20-022 be received; and1. That beginning with the first closed session meeting of 2021, staff audio record all closed session meetings; and 2. That access to the recordings be restricted to the Town Clerk, Chief Administrative Officer, Town Solicitor and the Town’s closed session meeting investigator; and 3. That a by-law be enacted at a future Council meeting to classify the recordings as permanent in the Town’s Record Retention 4. and Classification By-law. 8.6.CS20-023 - Approval of 2021 Meeting Schedule 195 That Report No. CS20-023 be received; and1. That the 2021 Meeting Schedule (Attachment No. 1) be approved; and 2. That the Town Clerk be authorized to make amendments to the Council and Committee Meeting Schedule as required. 3. 8.7.CMS20-028 - Sports Field Development Strategy Update 210 That Report No. CMS20-028 be received for information; and1. That the Director of Community Services be authorized to enter into agreements with local Schools and School Boards for the shared use of sports fields, including any ancillary agreements required for same. 2. 8.8.PDS20-074 - Request to Remove a Property from the Aurora Register of Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest, 93 Tyler Street 216 That Report No. PDS20-074 be received; and1. That the listed property located at 93 Tyler Street be removed from the Aurora Register of Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest. 2. 9.Notices of Motion 10.New Business 11.Public Service Announcements 12.Closed Session There are no Closed Session items for this meeting. 13.Adjournment ☐☐☐☐ ܆ ܆ ܆ ܆ 1MFBTFDMJDLIFSFGPSNPSFJOGPSNBUJPO &MFDUSPOJD%FMFHBUJPO3FRVFTU November 17, 2020 General Committee meeting Item 8.1 - PDS20-068 - Stable Neighbourhood Policy Review – Urban Design Guidelines Rebecca Beaton on behalf of the Regency Acres Ratepayers Association To address the Stable Neighbourhoods Design Guidelines staff report ✔ ✔ ✔ Page 1 of 225 100 John West Way Aurora, Ontario L4G 6J1 (905)727-3123 aurora.ca Town of Aurora Memorandum Councillor’s Office ______________________________________________________________________ Re: To: From: Date: Letter from Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority Re: Provincial Bill 229, Protect, Support and Recover from COVID-19 Act (Budget Measures), 2020 Mayor and Members of Council Councillor Wendy Gaertner November 17, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________ Recommendations 1.That Council receive the correspondence for information. Attachments Attachment 1: Letter from LSRCA, dated November 13, 2020, Re: Provincial Bill 229 Page 2 of 225 November 13, 2020 Lake Simcoe Watershed CAOs (via email distribution list) Dear Lake Simcoe Watershed CAOs: Re: Provincial Bill 229, Protect, Support and Recover from COVID-19 Act (Budget Measures), 2020 I am writing on behalf of the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority to seek your municipality’s support to address several changes introduced by the Province to the Conservation Authorities Act and the Planning Act in Bill 229, Protect, Support and Recover from COVID-19 Act (Budget Measures), 2020. These changes significantly limit the ability of conservation authorities to protect Ontario’s environment, ensure people and property are safe from natural hazards and to apply watershed-based decisions on development. Ultimately, these changes in many ways, remove much of conservation authorities’ ability to influence the overall health and protection of Ontario’s citizens and the environment. In 2018, the Province began to review Conservation Authority operations with three key goals in mind: •Improve consistency and transparency of the programs and services that conservation authorities deliver, •Provide additional oversight for municipalities and the province, and •Streamline conservation authority permitting and land use planning reviews to increase accountability, consistency, and transparency. Since the launch of the review, conservation authorities have been working to meet Provincial expectations regarding consistency and transparency of programs and services and to streamline planning and permitting processes. Since that time, authorities have worked collectively to: •Adopt consistent By-Laws by December of 2018, •Implement best management practices regarding governance and administration, •Voluntarily reduce timelines for issuance of permits, and •Initiate client centric service training and monitoring protocols to document improvements in service delivery. Conservation authorities have demonstrated their willingness to work with the Province and change to meet provincial expectations. Unfortunately, the current changes introduced by the Province show no regard for these efforts and many of the proposed changes have consequences which are counterproductive and will increase red tape, cost taxpayers more, and place Ontario’s residents and environment at risk. Attachment 1 Page 3 of 225 Page 2 of 5 The following is a summary of our concerns and a resolution that we would respectfully ask you to bring forward to your mayor and council to support. Summary of Concerns Provincial Bill 229 changes to both the Conservation Authorities Act and the Planning Act eliminates the conservation authorities’ science-based watershed approach which currently protects Ontario’s environment. • Conservation authorities are important agencies who help protect Ontario’s environment. Their science-based watershed information helps to steer development to appropriate places where it will not harm the environment or create risks to people. • CAs bring watershed science and information to the various tables where development and growth are being reviewed and discussed. • Provincial changes limit conservation authorities’ ability to provide input to municipal planning applications and to permit decisions and appeals. • The conservation authority watershed model has served Ontario well and is relied upon by many levels of government, businesses, and residents to protect the environment from upstream to downstream. • Conservation authorities undertake watershed-scale monitoring, data collection, management and modelling; watershed-scale studies, plans, assessments and strategies; and watershed-wide actions including stewardship, communication, outreach and education activities that protect our environment on a watershed basis. Bill 229 changes will create more costs, delays and red tape around permit and planning applications and appeals. • There are new appeal processes proposed which will significantly slow down the permitting process, creating delays and more red tape. This will also result in additional costs which would need to be recovered by increasing permit fees or through increases to municipal levies. • If applicants are not satisfied with decisions made by the Hearing Boards (CA Board of Directors and/or Executive), the new changes will allow applicants to appeal directly to the Minister, who could make his or her own decision and issue a permit. • Alternatively, or in addition, the applicant can appeal a decision of the conservation authority to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT). • These changes could add as many as 200 days to the application process. Bill 229 changes will remove conservation authorities’ ability to independently appeal decisions made around permits and municipal planning applications. This will put more people and infrastructure at risk of flooding and other natural hazards as well as add additional stressors to Ontario’s biodiversity. • Conservation authorities’ regulatory role is not always a popular one, but it is very important. Being able to participate in appeal processes ensures that the watershed lens is being applied to planning and land use decisions and that people and their property are protected from natural hazards such as flooding. Page 4 of 225 Page 3 of 5 • Without the ability to look at development applications on a watershed basis, we run the risk of the plan review process being piecemeal and exacerbate risks associated with natural hazards and for cumulative negative environmental impacts. Bill 229 changes will remove the responsibility for municipally appointed CA Board members to represent the interests of the Conservation Authority. • The Province has changed the ‘Duty to Members’ section of the Conservation Authorities Act to have municipal representatives on CA Boards act in the interests of their own municipality rather than the conservation authority’s interests. • This contradicts the fiduciary duty of board members to represent the best interests of the corporation they are overseeing. It puts an individual municipal interest above the conservation authority interests. • It is contrary to a recent recommendation by the Auditor General that states Conservation Authority Board Members should act in the interest of the Conservation Authority and not their municipality. • This change undermines the ability of Conservation Authority Boards to address the broader environmental and resource management issues facing our watersheds today. It limits discourse on these issues and other programs and services that address watershed-wide issues spanning municipal boundaries in a time of increasing climate change. Bill 229 will reduce the ability for enforcement of the Section 28 Regulation, putting residents and the environment at risk by not providing Conservation Authorities the necessary tools to control illegal activities. • The current revisions significantly limit a Conservation Authority’s ability to enforce the regulation. Conservation authorities will have to continue to rely on search warrants to gain entry to a property where infractions/compliance is a concern taking time and costing money. Reasonable grounds for obtaining a search warrant now cannot be obtained unless the activity can be viewed without entry onto the property (i.e. from the road). This will protect would be violators of the regulation. • The ability to issue Stop (work) Orders has been repealed. This is an important enforcement tool that conservation authorities have been requesting for years. Without this tool, conservation authorities must obtain an injunction to stop unauthorized activities. Obtaining injunctions takes further staff time and Authorities will incur significant costs for legal and court fees. Given the lack of Provincial funding this cost will be borne by our municipalities and ultimately the taxpayers. The time needed to obtain such an order can be lengthy resulting in unnecessary and significant damage to the environment, or alteration of a floodplain which then puts people at risk. • This unintended consequence is contrary to the Province’s Made in Ontario Plan which references getting tough with polluters. Illegal filling, dumping of contaminated materials, destruction of wetlands and significant habitat as identified in the Lake Simcoe Protection Plan are happening. Without the necessary tools, the public and environment are at risk. Draft Resolution of Support The following is a draft resolution of support for your consideration: WHEREAS the Province has introduced Bill 229, Protect, Support and Recover from COVID 19 Act - Schedule 6 – Conservation Authorities Act; Page 5 of 225 Page 4 of 5 WHEREAS the Legislation introduces several changes and new sections that could remove and/or significantly hinder conservation authorities’ role in regulating development, permit appeal process and engaging in review and appeal of planning applications; WHEREAS we rely on the watershed expertise provided by local conservation authorities to protect residents, property, and local natural resources on a watershed basis by regulating development and engaging in reviews of applications submitted under the Planning Act; WHEREAS the changes allow the Minister to make decisions without conservation authority watershed data and expertise; WHEREAS the Legislation suggests that the Minister will have the ability to establish standards and requirements for non-mandatory programs which are negotiated between the conservation authorities and municipalities to meet local watershed needs; WHEREAS municipalities require a longer transition time to put in place agreements with conservation authorities for non-mandatory programs; WHEREAS municipalities believe that the appointment of municipal representatives on conservation authority boards should be a municipal decision; and the Chair and Vice Chair of the conservation authority boards should be duly elected; WHEREAS the changes to the ‘Duty of Members’ contradicts the fiduciary duty of a conservation authority board member to represent the best interests of the conservation authority and its responsibility to the watershed; WHEREAS conservation authorities have already been working with the Province, development sector and municipalities to streamline and speed up permitting and planning approvals through Conservation Ontario’s Client Service and Streamlining Initiative; WHEREAS changes to the legislation will create more red tape and costs for the conservation authorities, their municipal partners, and potentially result in delays in the development approval process; AND WHEREAS municipalities value and rely on the natural habitats and water resources within conservation authority jurisdictions for the health and well-being of residents; municipalities value conservation authorities’ work to prevent and manage the impacts of flooding and other natural hazards; and municipalities value conservation authorities’ work to ensure safe drinking water; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED • THAT the Province of Ontario work with conservation authorities to address their concerns by repealing and/or amending changes to the Conservation Authorities Act and the Planning Act set out in Bill 229; • THAT the Province of Ontario delay enactment of clauses affecting municipal concerns; • THAT the Province of Ontario provide a longer transition period up to December 2022 for non- mandatory programs to enable coordination of conservation authority municipal budget processes; • THAT the Province respect the current conservation authority/municipal relationships; • AND THAT the Province embrace their long-standing partnership with the conservation authorities and provide them with the tools and financial resources they need to effectively implement their watershed management role. Page 6 of 225 Page 5 of 5 Thank you for your consideration and we look forward to continuing to work with your municipality into the future. Sincerely, Mike Walters Chief Administrative Officer m.walters@lsrca.on.ca cc: Regional and Municipal Clerks Page 7 of 225 1 Town of Aurora Accessibility Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes Date: Time: Location: Wednesday, October 14, 2020 7:00 p.m. Video Conference Committee Members: Councillor Rachel Gilliland (Acting Chair) Hailey Reiss (Vice Chair) (arrived 7:09 p.m.) Matthew Abas Max Le Moine Rachelle Stinson Members Absent: John Lenchak (Chair) Jo-anne Spitzer Other Attendees: Erin Hamilton, Sport and Community Development Specialist Chiara Mabrucco, Community Programmer Mat Zawada, Accessibility Advisor Linda Bottos, Council/Committee Coordinator _____________________________________________________________________ 1. Procedural Notes This meeting was held electronically as per Section 19. i) of the Town's Procedure By-law No. 6228-19, as amended, due to the COVID-19 situation. In the absence of the Chair and Vice Chair, the Committee consented to Councillor Gilliland acting as Chair for the meeting. The Chair called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. 2. Approval of the Agenda Moved by Matthew Abas Seconded by Max Le Moine Page 8 of 225 2 That the revised agenda as circulated by Legislative Services , including the following added item, be approved:  Item 6.5 – Round Table Discussion; Re: Town of Aurora Accessibility Plan 2018 to 2024 Carried 3. Declarations of Pecuniary Interest and General Nature Thereof There were no declarations of pecuniary interest under the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. M.50. 4. Receipt of the Minutes 4.1 Accessibility Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes of September 9, 2020 Moved by Matthew Abas Seconded by Rachelle Stinson That the Accessibility Advisory Committee meeting minutes of September 9, 2020, be received for information. Carried 5. Delegations None. 6. Matters for Consideration 6.1 Memorandum from Sport and Community Development Specialist; Re: Inclusion in Sport Manual Erin Hamilton, Sport and Community Development Specialist, presented an overview of the background and purpose of the development of the Inclusion in Sport Manual as a resource for the local sport community and their staff. Chiara Mabrucco, Community Programmer, was also in attendance to answer any questions from the Committee. The Committee and staff provided feedback on their appreciation of the Manual and content, and suggestions regarding consistency of language, text and image styling, person-first language, its potential as a school resource, and gender identify. Page 9 of 225 3 Moved by Matthew Abas Seconded by Max Le Moine 1. That the memorandum regarding Inclusion in Sport Manual be received; and 2. That the Accessibility Advisory Committee comments regarding the Inclusion in Sport Manual be received and referred to staff for consideration. Carried 6.2 Memorandum from Accessibility Advisor; Re: Accessibility Advisory Committee (AAC) Input and Comments for Site Plan Application SP- 2019-01 (Submission #3) Staff provided an overview of the comments submitted to the Planner by the Accessibility Advisor on behalf of the Committee. The Committee reviewed the site plan and inquired about the possibility of adding a crosswalk in the southeast corner of the site, and staff explained why this would not be recommended. The Committee supported the submitted comments and had no further input. Moved by Matthew Abas Seconded by Rachelle Stinson 1. That the memorandum regarding Accessibility Advisory Committee (AAC) input and comments for Site Plan Application SP-2019-01 (Submission #3) be received; and 2. That the Accessibility Advisory Committee comments regarding the site plan application be received and referred to staff for con sideration. Carried 6.3 Memorandum from Accessibility Advisor; Re: Accessibility Advisory Committee (AAC) Input and Comments for Site Plan Application SP- 2020-01 (Submission #2) Staff provided an overview of the comments submitted to the Planner by the Accessibility Advisor on behalf of the Committee and noted the applicant's lack of response to previously submitted comments. The Committee reviewed the site plan, supported the submitted comments, and had no further input. Page 10 of 225 4 Moved by Matthew Abas Seconded by Hailey Reiss 1. That the memorandum regarding Accessibility Advisory Committee (AAC) input and comments for Site Plan Application SP-2020-01 (Submission #2) be received; and 2. That the Accessibility Advisory Committee comments regarding the site plan application be received and referred to staff for consideration. Carried 6.4 Memorandum from Accessibility Advisor; Re: Accessibility Advisory Committee (AAC) Input and Comments for Site Plan Application SPM-2020-01 (Submission #2) Staff provided an overview of the comments submitted to the Planner by the Accessibility Advisor on behalf of the Committee and noted the applicant's positive response to previously submitted comments. The Committee reviewed the site plan, supported the submitted comments, and had no further input. Moved by Matthew Abas Seconded by Hailey Reiss 1. That the memorandum regarding Accessibility Advisory Committee (AAC) input and comments for Site Plan Application SPM-2020-01 (Submission #2) be received; and 2. That the Accessibility Advisory Committee comments regarding the site plan application be received and referred to staff for consideration. Carried 6.5 Round Table Discussion; Re: Town of Aurora Accessibility Plan 2018 to 2024 The Committee inquired about the status of evacuation chairs for Town facility stairways. Staff advised the approximate cost and the Committee agreed that one evacuation chair should be purchased and installed for testing and to determine the feasibility of further purchases. Staff advised that a scheduled, physical facility tour of the Stronach Aurora Recreation Complex and Aurora Family Leisure Complex would be held on Wednesday, October 21, 2020, from 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. with any available Page 11 of 225 5 Committee members, and noted that a virtual tour of the facilities would also be made available for Committee comment. Staff advised that a request was received from the Aurora Seniors' Centre for the installation of a permanent ramp and barrier-free, automatic door opener buttons to improve the path of travel to the bocce ball courts. Staff agreed to report back with a cost estimate for further discussion on budget options. Staff noted that the Library's barrier-free parking area would soon be unavailable, as well as Victoria and Church Streets, during phase one of the Library Square construction project, and offered alternative options for the Committee's comment. The Committee and staff discussed various aspects and concerns, and it was agreed that feedback to staff would include suggestions for continued barrier-free parking on Mosley Street, one temporary barrier-free parking spot with signage in the second tier parking lot (next to Aurora Cultural Centre), development of a Yonge Street drop-off/pick-up program, and campaigning information to create awareness of the available programs and paths of travel to the front doors of the Library on Yonge Street. Staff agreed to include follow-up information for further feedback at the next meeting. Moved by Matthew Abas Seconded by Hailey Reiss 1. That the Accessibility Advisory Committee comments regarding the Town of Aurora Accessibility Plan 2018 to 2024 be received and referred to staff for consideration and action as appropriate. Carried 7. Informational Items None. 8. Adjournment Moved by Hailey Reiss Seconded by Max Le Moine That the meeting be adjourned at 8:12 p.m. Carried Page 12 of 225 100 John West Way Aurora, Ontario L4G 6J1 (905) 727-3123 aurora.ca Town of Aurora General Committee Report No. PDS20 -068 ______________________________________________________________________ Subject: Stable Neighbourhood Policy Review – Urban Design Guidelines Prepared by: Edward Terry, RPP, Senior Policy Planner Department: Planning and Development Services Date: November 3, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________ Recommendation 1. That Report No. PDS20-068 be received; 2. That the revised Urban Design Guidelines for Stable Neighbourhoods as attached to this report be approved; and, 3. That Staff present an annual report to Council on Minor Variance application activity within the Town’s Four Stable Neighbourhood Study Areas. Executive Summary The purpose of this report is to provide Council with the results of public consultation undertaken for the Urban Design Guidelines prepared for new builds and additions within the four Stable Neighbourhood Study Areas. These Design Guidelines are intended to provide direction for homeowners, designers, architects and landscape architects by outlining the framework and design principles for the physical layout, massing and relationships of new builds and additions.  Urban Design Guidelines represent a planning tool that establishes clearer expectations for those designing and building new homes and additions within Stable Neighbourhoods.  Public consultation was undertaken in the four Stable Neighbourhood Study Areas to receive feedback on the Design Guidelines. Page 13 of 225 November 3, 2020 2 of 6 Report No. PDS20-068 Background In June 2019, Council adopted a new zoning by-law to protect the Town’s four Stable Neighbourhood Study Areas from incompatible new builds and additions. In addition, Council directed staff to finalize the Urban Design Guidelines and present them to a future Council meeting for consideration. On July 7 2020, Council provided direction to Staff to undertake consultation with the residents of the four stable neighbourhoods before returning to Council to present the Design Guidelines for consideration. Council’s Motion to defer stated: “That Report No. PDS20-048 – Stable Neighbourhood Policy Review – Urban Design Guidelines be deferred to a September 2020 General Committee meeting and a notification letter be sent to the residents of th e four stable neighbourhoods”. Due to the public consultation period ending on August 28 and the time required to consider and amend the design guidelines, additional time beyond September was needed for Staff and the Town’s planning consultant to review and present revised guidelines to Council for consideration. Analysis Urban Design Guidelines represent a planning tool that establishes clearer expectations for those designing and building new homes and additions within Stable Neighbourhoods Even though the Town’s Official Plan includes general Urban Design principles in Section 4, those principles are not specific to neighbourhoods with single detached dwellings. However, Section 4.1(a) does specify that one of the Town’s urban design objective is to “Adopt urban design guidelines that assist development, redevelopment and rehabilitation to provide diversity, amenity, comfort, safety and compatibility with the existing community.” The Stable Neighbourhoods urban design guidelines identify key attributes that contribute to the character of the host community and provide a framework to guide the design of new builds, additions and landscapes that: Page 14 of 225 November 3, 2020 3 of 6 Report No. PDS20-068  Reconciles compatibility with diversity, while avoiding both monotony and harsh contrasts;  Respects and reinforces the existing character of the neighbourhood; and,  Promotes a contextual design approach that considers the adjacent and surrounding development while fostering pedestrian scaled streetscapes while allowing for and encouraging appropriate flexibility, innovation, and diversity in design, essential to evolving communities. Design Guidelines will help communicate clearer expectations for those designing and building projects within Stable Neighbourhoods. Moreover, the guidelines complement the policies of the Official Plan and provide additional direction on means to achieve the objective and vision through building design, orientation and materials. Public consultation was undertaken in the four Stable Neighbourhood Study Areas to receive feedback on the Design Guidelines In accordance with Council direction, the Town mailed approximately 3,600 letters to all homeowners located within the four Stable Neighbourhood Study Areas advising them of draft Urban Design Guidelines and inviting their feedback. A copy of the letter issued by the Town is attached hereto as Appendix 1. The Urban Design Guidelines were made available for review on the Town’s website, however, any resident that requested a paper version of the guidelines were mailed a copy for their review. The Town received a written submission from the Regency Acres Ratepayer Association and five residents in the community. The comments received can be summarized as follows:  Include references to Official Plan policies in their entirety.  schematics, tables and figures are not always referenced in the adjacent text.  Should address the loss of privacy for nearby homes that results from second storey balconies or rear/side decks.  Council should be made aware of all infill building applications that are approved by planning staff which do not comply with specific recommendations in the Guidelines.  Interest to read the design guidelines for our stable neighbourhood area.  Growing number of homes being used as rentals and single family homes being turned into two family dwellings with basement apartments. Page 15 of 225 November 3, 2020 4 of 6 Report No. PDS20-068  Implementation of policies and regulations to protect our neighbourhoods and way of life  Minor wordsmithing suggestions The table in Appendix 2 provides lists the comments and the responses from staff and the Town’s planning consultant. Where appropriate, revisions have been made to the guidelines to reflect resident feedback. Proposed revisions include:  Adding related policies from the Official Plan in their entirety.  Adding language that better describes the diagrams and their purpose.  Adding the following text: “Minimizing the location of second floor balconies on rear and side elevations” and “Providing fencing that effectively screens the rear amenity and minimizes its exposure to/from adjacent properties.” In response to a resident comment about Council being made aware of all infill applications for new builds and additions that are approved by the Town which do not comply with the Guidelines, staff are proposing to present an annual report to Council summarizing approved Minor Variance applications within the Town’s Four Stable Neighbourhood Study Areas. Should the findings identify areas that need addressing, Staff may recommend amendments to the zoning standards of the Stable Neighborhood Zoning By-law that would be subject to public consultation in accordance with the Planning Act. Advisory Committee Review Not applicable Legal Considerations Urban design guidelines are not policies within the Official Plan and do not fall under the Planning Act. Once Council approves the guidelines, they may not be appealed to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal. Financial Implications There are no direct financial implications arising to the Town as a result of this report. Page 16 of 225 November 3, 2020 5 of 6 Report No. PDS20-068 Communications Considerations The Town of Aurora will use ‘Inform’ as the level of engagement for this project. There are five different levels of community engagement to consider, with each level providing the community more involvement in the decision-making process. These levels are: Inform, Consult, Involve, Collaborate and Empower. Examples of each can be found in the Community Engagement Policy. These options are based on the International Association of Public Participation (IAP2) Spectrum and assist in establishing guidelines for clearly communicating with our public and managing community engagement. In order to inform, this report will be posted to the Town’s website. The planning and development webpage will also be updated with the new guidelines. Alternative(s) to the Recommendation 1. That Council provide direction. Conclusions The Urban Design Guidelines for Stable Neighbourhoods represent a planning tool for managing character and protecting the host community from incompatible new builds and additions. Public consultation undertaken by staff has resulted in a number of revisions to the Design Guidelines. The Guidelines are intended to work together with the Stable Neighborhood Zoning By-law to implement the policies of the Official Plan to ensure compatibility while permitting the host community to evolve and be enhanced over time with continued financial investment. Implementing Design Guidelines will communicate clearer expectations for those designing and building projects within Stable Neighbourhoods. Moreover, it will complement the general policies of the Official Plan and provide addition detailed direction on means to achieve the objective and vision through build ing design, orientation and materials. Attachments Appendix 1 – Consultation Letter Appendix 2 – Public Consultation Table Appendix 3 – Revised Aurora Heights Urban Design Guidelines Page 17 of 225 November 3, 2020 6 of 6 Report No. PDS20-068 Appendix 4 – Revised Regency Acres Urban Design Guidelines Appendix 5 – Revised Temperance Street Urban Design Guidelines Appendix 6 – Revised Town Park Urban Design Guidelines Previous Reports General Committee Report PDS18-007 dated January 23, 2018 Special Council Report PDS18-040 dated May 29, 2018 General Committee Report PDS18-084 dated June 27, 2018 General Committee Report PDS18-089 dated July 17, 2018 General Committee Report PDS19-010 dated January 30, 2019 Public Planning Report PDS19-025 dated March 27, 2019 General Committee Report PDS19-039 dated June 4, 2019 General Committee Report PDS20-048 dated July 7, 2020 Pre-submission Review Agenda Management Team review on October 15, 2020 Approvals Approved by David Waters, Director, Planning and Development Services Approved by Doug Nadorozny, Chief Administrative Officer Page 18 of 225 Urban Design Guidelines are: Ŷ Prepared to help homeowners and builders understand the municipality's objectives for the design of their community. They also inform Council and staff in their review, and approval of planning DSSOLFDWLRQV8UEDQ'HVLJQ*XLGHOLQHVDUHLQWHQGHGWRLQÀXHQFHWKHGHVLJQRIQHZEXLOGLQJVDQG additions through Zoning, Plans of Subdivision/Condominium, Site Plan Approval and even the Minor Variance process. Ŷ Truly "guidelines"; they are not planning policy, nor are they enforceable development regulations. In other words, they have no statutory authority under the Planning Act. As a non-statutory planning tool, they are not subject to any appeal process, and can be amended at any time by the municipality, without formal process. Ŷ 7\SLFDOO\JLYHQIRUFHDWOHDVWSDUWLDOO\WKURXJKFRPSOHPHQWDU\2I¿FLDO3ODQSROLFLHV=RQLQJ%\ODZ regulations and/or Site Plan Approval requirements. The use of Urban Design Guidelines is typically IDFLOLWDWHGWKURXJK2I¿FLDO3ODQSROLF\WKDWLQGLFDWHVWKDWDOOQHZGHYHORSPHQWVKDOOEHFRQVLVWHQW ZLWKRUKDYHUHJDUGIRUWKHPXQLFLSDOLW\ V8UEDQ'HVLJQ*XLGHOLQHVRUWKURXJKVSHFL¿FUHJXODWLRQV XQGHUWKH=RQLQJ%\ODZ Urban Design Guidelines for Stable Neighbourhood Areas The Town of Aurora has completed Urban Design Guidelines for the Town’s four Stable Neighbourhoods: Aurora Heights Regency Acres Temperance Street Town Park July 22, 2020 Dear Resident, Attachment 1 Page 19 of 225 Town of Aurora Urban Design Guidelines For Additions and New Buildings in Stable Neighbourhoods Town Park Neighbourhood Prepared by The Planning Partnership l June 2020 Town of Aurora Urban Design Guidelines For Additions and New Buildings in Stable Neighbourhoods Temperance Street Neighbourhood Prepared by The Planning Partnership l June 2020 Town of Aurora Urban Design Guidelines For Additions and New Buildings in Stable Neighbourhoods Regency Acres Neighbourhood Prepared by The Planning Partnership l June 2020 Town of Aurora Urban Design Guidelines For Additions and New Buildings in Stable Neighbourhoods Aurora Heights Neighbourhood Prepared by The Planning Partnership l June 2020 Resident input received through the Stable Neighbourhoods policy review was important to help shape the Urban Design Guidelines. The Guidelines will be used in the site plan review process to complement the provisions RIWKH=RQLQJ%\ODZDQGSURYLGHJXLGDQFHRQKRZQHZEXLOGLQJVDQGDGGLWLRQVVKRXOGEHGHVLJQHGWR be compatible with the surrounding neighbourhood character. The Urban Design Guidelines are available for viewing; digital copies are available for download on the Town’s website at: https://www.aurora.ca/en/business-and-development/stable-neighbourhood-study.aspx If you prefer to receive a paper copy of the Urban Design Guidelines; please provide your mailing address to Town staff. Please provide your comments on the Urban Design Guidelines by email to ETerry@aurora.ca by August 28th 2020. Regards, Edward Terry, RPP, Senior Policy Planner Planning and Development Services 905-727-3123 Ext.4342 / eterry@aurora.ca 7RZQRI$XURUD-RKQ:HVW:D\%R[$XURUD21/*- Page 20 of 225 PUBLIC CONSULTATION SUMMARY Resident Comment Staff Response Page 3, under the heading of “Official Plan Policies that provide direction for Urban Design Guidelines include”, lists Policies 2.1 to 4.2.f.i, apparently verbatim from the original document. However, ‘Policy 8.1.4 Design Policies’ in this list is incomplete in that it ends with the following phrase: “…with particular attention to the following elements:”. This short paragraph ends with a colon and does not list the actual elements. In order for this section of the design guidelines to make sense, the elements should be listed. Staff will add the related policies from the Official Plan to the Design Guidelines in their entirety. Also on page 3, there is a similar issue under the heading of ‘Policy 4.2.f.i’ where it reads as follows: “To achieve human scale…the following urban design approaches should be implemented:”. The only items that follow relate to sun penetration and façade treatment. The complete list should be provided for this section to read properly and make sense. Staff will add the related policies from the Official Plan to the Design Guidelines in their entirety. Use of schematics, tables and figures: In reports, technical and policy documents, schematics and figures are used to illustrate/explicate a point being made in the body of the document. That is not the case with the four schematics on pages 4 and 5; these are not referenced in the adjacent text and are thus very unclear. Staff will add language/annotation to the Design Guidelines that will better describe the diagrams and their purpose. There is a missing word in the bulleted list under the heading “How will they be used”. We assume that the last bullet point should read ‘additions equal to or over 50 m2’. Noted and corrected. The streetscape schematic on page 4 has no explanation; hence, the point being illustrated is unclear. Staff will add language/annotation to the Design Guidelines that will better describe the diagrams and their purpose. On page 5, the two schematics showing lots laid out on a street differ but the point being illustrated is unclear. Furthermore, given the infill development that has occurred already in Regency Acres, we also take exception to the use of the term ”Minor Redevelopment” in the top schematic on page 5. Here it is defined as “existing dwelling is replaced by a new dwelling…”. It is hardly ‘minor’ when the infill home is twice the height and four times the square footage of the neighbouring homes. Staff will replace the reference to ‘minor redevelopment’ with ‘new buildings and additions’. $WWDFKPHQW Page 21 of 225 This section does not accurately describe the distinct character of Regency Acres for several reasons. Against the objections of RARA, Council decided to include the much newer Golf Links area in the Regency Acres Stable Neighbourhood. The Urban Design Guidelines for this hybrid ‘Regency Acres’ need to explicitly recognize that there are two distinct areas, each with very different characteristics. This was meant to be a general description, intended only to describe the ‘appearance’ of the homes as they impact the streetscape. It is not a commentary on the various design expressions. However, we will add to the discussion of the existing character, incorporating some of the points highlighted in the resident’s comments. For the most part, homes in the original Regency Acres subdivision were built without garages although over the years some homeowners have added detached garages or carports. Most homes still do not have garages. The Streetscape section on page 9 also states that some streets have a more rural character with swales open drainage ditches. There seems little point in mentioning the past character of the neighbourhood since construction to remove the last of the swales will be completed by October 2020. Staff will add to the description. Section 3.1 “Pattern of Lots” is generic with no differentiation among the four Stable Neighbourhoods. This is not problematic since the statements are written as if they are guiding principles. What is problematic is the disconnect between what the new Zoning By-laws stipulate and these broad statements. For example, one of the objectives listed on page 13 states “maintain the traditional range of building to lot relationship”. If this objective were to be met, then a GFA of 370 square metres or a lot coverage of 35% would not be allowed. In the original Regency Acres subdivision, lot coverage for the original homes and lots is in the rage of 15 to 20%. Thus, this statement is meaningless. Staff will add language to clarify that the guiding principles apply to all stable neighbourhoods. Also on page 13 under the heading “Design Guidelines”, the wording of “where possible” makes painfully obvious that none of these are enforceable. Guideline 6 a) and b) relate to measures to protect privacy. These two guidelines do not address the loss of privacy for nearby homes that results from second storey balconies or rear/side decks that are above the grade of adjacent properties. The placement of decks and balconies was something that Ratepayer groups specifically asked Council to address in a By-law, as some other communities have done. Council rejected this recommendation. Staff will add the following to Guideline 6: “Minimizing the location of second floor balconies on rear and side elevations;” “Providing fencing that effectively screens the rear amenity and minimizes its exposure to/from adjacent properties.” Page 22 of 225 On page 15 under the heading of “Building Height and Scale”, the statement about the homogeneous nature of the homes is repeated. We disagree with this conclusion as previously noted since the hybrid Regency is comprised of two stylistically distinct neighbourhoods. Other issues include the following: Staff will replace ‘homogeneous’ with ‘varied’ Item 16 under the heading of “Design Guidelines for Framing the Street” explicitly mentions split levels in the Aurora Heights guideline but not in the Regency Acres guideline. This is puzzling because both neighbourhoods include a large number of original homes that are split levels. Staff will clarify item 16. In item 18 on page 15, there is an obvious disconnect between the apparent goal of “provide appropriate transition to/from adjacent buildings” and the second part of the statement which reads “ensure that no new building is more than 1.5 storeys or 4.5 metres higher/lower than the adjacent dwellings”. Using ‘storeys’ as a measure is relatively meaningless given that the original homes typically have no more than 8 foot ceilings. In stark contrast, infill homes are likely to have 10- 11 foot ceiling heights on the main floor and 10 feet on the second floor; this results in drastically greater ‘massing’ per storey for infill homes. Using the absolute measure of height doesn’t help since many original Regency homes are less than 6 metres high. Allowing double the height for infill housing can hardly be seen to provide an ‘appropriate transition’. No change recommended. We strongly disagree with item 22 which states “ensure flat roof tops complement the massing and character of adjacent dwellings”. In our opinion, flat roof tops should be discouraged in all stable neighbourhoods because they reflect a very modern style that is incompatible with the existing housing stock. Flat roofs, associated with ‘contemporary’ designed homes can most definitely be compatible within an existing neighbourhood context and even a heritage context. Industry best practices and demonstrated award-winning designs, suggest that ‘contrast’ and ‘juxtaposition’ are much more successful in highlighting historic/heritage elements, than ‘copy-cats’. Moreover, design professional generally try to avoid the replication of historic homes or to create ‘traditional’ designs that, based on today’s building code/urban zoning, don’t usually produce authentic designs. The industry politely refers to these as ‘neo-traditional ecclectic’ but what they really mean to say is ‘a mix of incoherent/unrelated design elements’. Page 23 of 225 The role of the guidelines is not to take away property homeowners’ rights to design expression, but to point out the key consideration to achieve compatibility and appropriateness of design, which is to reflect scale and façade proportions. No change recommended. The inclusion of item 23 in this list is puzzling since it is our understanding that this stipulation regarding garage roof heights is actually part of the new Zoning By-law. Staff will remove this reference. In the subsection entitled “Garage width and Location”, it is important to differentiate between the two distinct neighbourhoods within the hybrid Regency Acres. Most homes in the older area still do not have garages. Garages are permitted uses in the Stable Neighbourhoods and there should be guidelines to address them. No change recommended. Under the heading of “Design Guidelines for Landscape Treatment”, item 31 states “Protect mature trees and encourage planting of new trees to enhance the urban canopy…”. The addition of this statement to a non-mandatory guideline is little more than a token gesture. The Town’s tree By-Law is woefully inadequate to protect Aurora’s urban canopy as evidenced by the number of mature trees homeowners can remove without a permit. The builder of the infill home at 75 Child Drive managed to preserve a healthy, mature silver maple in the front yard. This was an impressive tree that moderated the scale of the 10 metre home it shaded. Sadly, the new homeowner chose to have it removed shortly after moving in. Comment acknowledged. No change recommended. The term “articulated elevations” needs to be clarified in item 42 on page 18. Staff will add language to explain what ‘articulated’ may involve. Regarding entry elevation, we believe that item 45, which suggests that entry steps be kept to a maximum of 3, will ultimately need to be addressed in a By-law. One only has to drive through Regency Acres to see that most infill homes have entrances that are much higher than this recommendation. This adversely impacts the human scale of the streetscape and the infill homes’ connection to its neighbours. No change recommended. Item 61 on page 20 suggests that use of stucco be discouraged except as an accent material. While we agree that an infill home should not be entirely clad in stucco, some original homes have No change recommended. Page 24 of 225 already been stuccoed to deal with deteriorating bricks and mortar. Under the heading of “Building Materials” on page 20, item 62 recommends use of contemporary materials such as metal and concrete to complement the “modern” character of the neighbourhood. This recommendation is completely inappropriate since the original houses are not modern in the way in which ‘modern’ infill homes are designed. Staff will revise / clarify. Item 68 on page 20 recommends cedar and asphalt shingles. This is puzzling since cedar is not commonly used in this area; some original homes that now have newer metal roofs. Staff will add metal roofs to the list. We strongly recommend that photos be used to provide specific examples of “compatible” and “incompatible” design. The home at 80 Child is clearly incompatible; 21 Holman has elements that relate to features of the adjacent homes and is thus more compatible despite its greater size. As the guidelines are meant to provide general guidance on design and focus on positive examples, we would not recommend including ‘bad’ examples. If there are better examples that we can all agree on, we would consider including them. We were really disappointed when a lot on Temperance St was severed last year and 3 massive, 150+ year old spruce were cut down in order to build a house (currently in progress). To us, the mature trees are the pride of the neighborhood and the reason people choose to live here, instead of in new subdivisions. More than any guideline on design of homes, we strongly encourage reinvestigating the bylaws (which we hoped would help save the trees) which preserves the character of established neighbourhoods with focus on protecting the old trees. The concern is with the removal of mature trees; this is addressed in 3.2 Design Guidelines for Landscape Treatment, guideline #30 which states that mature trees should be protected. As a Temperance Street resident, I was very interested to read the design guidelines for our stable neighbourhood area — I actually printed them out! I of course share the concerns about redevelopment which, according to the Introduction, have been expressed by other members of the community. In particular, I worry about the scale and the architectural design of replacement dwellings. Staff appreciate the support for the guidelines and taking the time to go through the document in detail. Staff will make the necessary changes, which include correction of the reference to 1920s on page 7 and changing 'including' to 'and' some late 20th century homes Page 25 of 225 The details of the scale requirements are beyond the ability of my non-mathematical mind to process: I’ll know when a house is too big for a lot when I see it! But I accept the fact that today people want huge rooms (to heat, cool, and clean) and small gardens. I am better able to grasp architectural design. I was especially happy to see guideline number 70: “Avoid recreating historical architectural styles.” Yes! Time to move on. Just a couple of comments about really specific pieces of wording: Page 7, caption for old map: this does not show the Temperance Street area in the “late 1920s” but is, as noted, from the 1878 historical atlas [it is unfortunate that the actual late 1920s (1927) fire insurance plan does not show the west side of Temperance south of the crook in the road just north of Reuben] Page 10, first paragraph: One sentence says that a “significant number of older historic houses dominate the area, including some late 20th century houses [my italics] in the south.” I would not call late 20th century historic quite yet. Here’s hoping that everyone will take these guidelines very seriously. We read with interest the Stable Neighbourhood Study. Having lived in Toronto and seen the growth of monster homes in a neighbourhood not unlike ours (Aurora Heights) we are glad to see that the town is trying to preserve neighbourhood character. Sadly, recent builds on our street (Hill Drive) are certainly not in keeping with your proposals. What this report fails to address is the growing number of homes being used as rentals and single family homes being turned into two family dwellings with basement apartments. This, in our opinion, is a greater threat to the stability and character of our neighbourhood. Property maintenance is at an all-time low and these properties are easily identifiable by the poor The general concern is with single family homes being used as rental properties; Staff acknowledge the comment but this is not an urban design issue. Page 26 of 225 upkeep, large number of vehicles and excessive garbage put out each week. I would invite those who wrote this report to take a drive through the Aurora Heights and Regency neighbourhoods to see for themselves the real issue threatening the beauty and stability of our neighbourhoods. Although I admit I skimmed through some notes what I did read was positive and informing. That being said I have noticed ( in my humble opinion ) some new builds, ( I’m referring to demolishing of existing homes with new ) in the last few years which are ridiculously large for this neighbourhood . I have lived in my home on Johnson Road for close to 20 years and lived in my childhood home (different house on Johnson) prior for close to ten years. One reason I choose to live in this area was because of the more modest sized homes with proportional yards. The mature trees and quiet streets were also very pleasing. I’m noticing some changes as of late...Some of the newer builds appear very out of place and are not aesthetically sound. I have been lucky so far not to have been directly influenced by this, however I fear this in the future. A large two story house encroaching on a property line forming a shadow on my humble home. These houses were built in the 50’s/60’s and have a mid century modern appeal. By building huge homes, taking up the majority of the lot doesn’t help the appeal of the neighbourhood. That being said, there are a few homes that have have had major renovations, some even enlarging the home a little while still preserving the character of the area. It is not that I’m not ‘about’ change but it’s all in keeping with the overall feel of the neighbourhood. I can currently count 5 new builds,that to be honest, I’m surprised that were allowed to be built. I am proud of my little community and love when I see someone redoing their porch or renovating their home, that being said I am less then excited when I see an original home demolished first a huge dwelling that frankly looks more like a hall than a home. These are some of the more modest houses in Aurora. Very appealing to new buyers (who may not have a million dollars to spend in their first house). Also I assume appealing to the Maintaining the existing character of the community is what we are trying to achieve with the Design Guidelines. Page 27 of 225 elderly, as the house to yard ratio is on point and many homes have fewer stairs. You can’t say that about any new builds in Aurora. I would like my neighbourhood to remain cohesive. It reminds me of a skit I watched on Sesame Street in my youth... one of these things doesn’t look like the other...and they would show three apples and an orange. It’s similar to how I feel about the recent development... only it’s more like three apples and a watermelon. Thank you for your time, hoping you take this into consideration. Guidelines are not what the residents of the Stable Neighbourhood are interested in, we want policy and regulations to protect our neighbourhoods and way of life. The Urban Design Guidelines have been drafted to complement new Zoning policy that has recently been implemented as a result of the Stable Neighbourhood Study. The Zoning addresses matters such as height and massing. I read through the Urban Design Guidelines for the Town Park Neighbourhood. Do these guidelines have any clout? Will new builds continue to be as big and obtrusive looking as they have been in the last few years? The Urban Design Guidelines have been drafted to complement new Zoning policy that has recently been implemented as a result of the Stable Neighbourhood Study. The Zoning addresses matters such as height and size. The Urban Design Guidelines are intended to help address matters such as character and materials. Page 28 of 225 Town of Aurora Urban Design Guidelines For Additions and New Buildings in Stable Neighbourhoods Aurora Heights Neighbourhood Prepared by The Planning Partnership l October 2020 Attachment 3 Page 29 of 225 this page is intentionally left blank Page 30 of 225 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Aurora Heights Neighbourhood 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Purpose of the Design Guidelines 2 1.2 Design Guidelines Context 2 1.3 What are Design Guidelines 5 1.4 How will They Be Used 5 1.5 Objectives of the Design Guidelines 6 1.6 Character Attributes (general description) 8 2 Aurora Heights Character 11 3 Urban Design Guidelines 15 3.1 Pattern of Lots 15 3.2 Streetscapes 16 3.3 Architectural Forms and Styles 20 4 Implementation, Monitoring & Updates 23 a Appendix: Definitions and Glossary of Terms 24 Table of Contents Page 31 of 225 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Aurora Heights Neighbourhood Kemano Road Foreht CrescentJasper DriveHill Drive Orchard Heights Boulevard Devins Drive Aurora Heights DriveNavan Crescent Collins Crescent Ham m o n d D r i v e Boulding Drive Laurentide AvenueCabot CourtOtt aw a C o u r t Algonquin CrescentHaida DriveBigwin DriveTecumseh DriveH u r o n C o u r tKitimat CrescentSu n r a y P l a c e Dunha m Crescen t Aurora Heights Neighbourhood (Zoning by-law boundary) Page 32 of 225 1Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Aurora Heights Neighbourhood Guided by the community vision articulated in the Official Plan (OP), and building on the principles of ‘compatible’ develop- ment, the objective of the Urban Design Guidelines is to provide direction for the design of future residential uses that ‘respect and reinforce’ the unique character of Aurora’s Stable Neighbourhoods. Throughout a number of Aurora’s Stable Neighbourhoods, there is a growing trend of dwellings being renovated, en- larged, or replaced by new dwellings, which are often signifi- cantly larger and conflict with the existing character of the community. Through consultation with the community and feedback from residents, the Town identified a number of concerns. It should be noted that while there were generally two perspectives expressed - with equal support by those in favour of develop- ment and those opposed to change, the following are high- lights of some of the concerns that were heard: • Compatibility of new dwellings with the existing fabric of the community, mainly with respect to built form, height, architectural style and scale; • Issues of privacy, overlook and impact on sunlight in (pri- vate) amenity areas; • Preserving the integrity of the existing landscaped pattern of front and rear yards, notably with mature trees and large front lawns; • Side yard setbacks (the open space between dwellings) which form part of the neighbourhood character; • Existing zoning provisions (R3) which do not reflect what is in the ground today, especially lot coverage; • The limit of development and siting of additions and new builds in the Greenlands System; • Calculation of gross floor area as an added restriction in the By-law and how that number was achieved; • How grade is currently measured in the By-law, and the slope of a property, affecting the character of a lot relative to the street, in particular building height; It should also be noted that there was general recognition that the each of the four Stable Neighbourhoods are: • Unique and distinct and require an appropriate and custom- ized approach; • ‘In transition’ and while stable, are not static; • Require a regulatory framework that allows for flexibility in architectural style while respecting and reinforcing the existing neighbourhood character; and, • Urban Design Guidelines are a good tool to help with ‘fit’ for new infill development; To address some of these challenges, Town Council identi- fied the need for further direction in managing the built form of these changes in four specific neighbourhoods: Aurora Heights, Regency Acres, Temperance Street and Town Park. The Stable Neighbourhoods Study and Peer Review infor- mation report, presented to Town Council January 2019, suggested a number of recommendations for strengthening the protection of Stable Neighbourhoods. The report recom- mended additional planning tools for managing character, including the preparation of amendments to the Zoning By-law (By-law Number 6190-19 enacted June 25, 2019) and Urban Design Guidelines. 1 Introduction1 Introduction Page 33 of 225 2 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Aurora Heights Neighbourhood 1.1 Purpose of the Design Guidelines The purpose of the Urban Design Guidelines is to implement the Official Plan Vision for Stable Neighbourhoods, by identi- fying the key attributes that contribute to the character of the area and providing a framework to guide the design of addi- tions and new buildings and landscapes that: • Reconciles compatibility with diversity, while avoiding both monotony and harsh contrasts; • Respects and reinforces the existing character of the neigh- bourhood; and, • Promotes a contextual design approach that considers the adjacent and surrounding development and fosters pedes- trian scaled/oriented streetscapes, while allowing for and encouraging appropriate flexibility, innovation and diversity in design, intrinsic to evolving communities. The Urban Design Guidelines for Stable Neighbourhoods are intended to work alongside the Zoning By-law to implement the Official Plan vision for Stable Neighbourhoods, to ensure that new development is compatible with, and enhances exist- ing stable neighbourhoods. 1.2 Design Guidelines Context The Town’s Official Plan is one of the guiding documents that is used to direct and manage growth; it articulates the vision and objectives for how the community should be developed and outlines the policies for how land in the community should be used. The Official Plan is prepared with input from the public and the community and helps to ensure that future planning and development meets the specific needs of the community; it deals mainly with issues such as: • Where new housing, industry, offices and shops will be located • What services like roads, watermains, sewers, parks and schools will be needed • When, and in what order, parts of the community will grow • Community improvement initiatives The Town’s Council recognizes the importance of having a Vision to steer it through all of the many changes that are in the near and distant future and that, in order to be successful, meaningful and impactful, it must represent what the com- munity is today and what it aspires to be in the years to come. In this regard, one of the key objectives for the successful evo- lution and development of the community is ‘Ensuring Design Excellence’. Ensuring Design Excellence extends to all areas within the Town, including existing, older residential neighbourhoods. These areas are identified as ‘Stable Neighbourhoods’ in the Official Plan; this designation is intended to protect the Neigh- bourhoods from incompatible forms of development, while still permitting them to evolve and be enhanced over time. While it is recognized that Stable Neighbourhoods are places that will continue to attract new residents and evolve, the policies direct that new development is to be sympathetic to and compatible with the form and character of the area, and appropriately considers the character of the area and the surrounding neighbourhood context. Page 34 of 225 3Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Aurora Heights Neighbourhood Official Plan Policies that provide direction for Urban Design Guidelines include: Policy 2.1 Ensuring Design Excellence Ensure that Aurora promotes design excellence in all its land use and development decisions. High quality buildings, well-designed and functioning streetscapes, appropriate transi- tions between defined areas, integration between old and new development and connected open spaces are the elements that define a place. This Plan emphasizes the important link between managing growth, high quality design and Aurora’s continued evolution as a memorable and beautiful place. Policy 2.1.vi Protecting Stable Neighbourhoods It is the intent of this Plan to ensure that Aurora’s stable neigh- bourhoods are protected. Aurora’s existing neighbourhoods, both older and newer, are not only a defining element of Aurora’s character and urban structure, but also a tremendous asset and attractor for new residents and investment interests. This Plan seeks to ensure that the stability and vibrancy of these existing neighbourhoods is protected from the negative impacts of potential incompatible development and growth pressures. Any infill that occurs must be compatible with the established community character. Policy 8.0 Intent It is the intent of this Plan to ensure that the areas designated ‘Stable Neighbourhoods’.... are protected from incompatible forms of development and, at the same time, are permitted to evolve and be enhanced over time. All new development shall be compatible with its surrounding context and shall conform with all other applicable policies of this Plan. Policy 8.1.3: Development Policies New development and site alteration abutting existing residen- tial development shall be sympathetic to the form and charac- ter of the [sic] existing development and shall be compatible with regard to building scale and urban design. Policy 8.1.4: Design Policies a) All new development within the ‘Stable Neighbourhoods’ designation shall respect and reinforce the existing physical character and uses of the surrounding area, with particular attention to the following elements: i. the pattern of lots, streets and blocks; ii. the size and configuration of nearby lots; iii. the building type of nearby residential properties; iv. the heights and scale of nearby residential properties; v. the setback of buildings from the street; The Town of Aurora Official Plan September 27, 2010 50 vi. the pattern of rear and side-yard setbacks; and, vii. conservation and enhancement of cultural heritage resources. Policy 4.2a: New development, redevelopment, rehabilitation, and sub- division layout shall be encouraged to complement natural landscapes and grades, water courses, vegetation, heritage environments and existing or proposed adjacent buildings, through the conceptual design of buildings, their massing, siting, exterior, access and public areas. Policy 4.2c: Council shall support urban design which: • Reconciles compatibility with diversity; and, • Avoids both monotony and harsh contrasts. Policy 4.2.f: To achieve human scale, attractive and safe public environ- ments, in entryways, heritage areas, in and adjacent to streets and open spaces, the following: i. Development should encourage: • sun penetration on outdoor spaces such as sidewalks, streets, parks and court yards; • a micro climate which prevents wind tunnels and shelters against cold northerly winds; • access to historic areas by walking, cycling and transit; and, • practices that would mitigate local heat island effects such as the incorporation of green or white roofs, strategic planting of shade trees, and the use of light coloured paving materials. Page 35 of 225 4 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Aurora Heights Neighbourhood viii. All new parking shall be located at the rear of buildings. In areas that have already been developed, parking in front shall be encouraged to: • be screened by landscaping; • allow for visibility of store fronts from the street by limiting the depth of front parking areas; • not create large gaps between developments; • allow for substantially uniform setbacks from the street; • minimize conflict with pedestrian circulation; and, • be coordinated with adjacent commercial developments. ix. Non-residential uses shall be screened from abutting resi- dential uses where residential uses exist or are planned and the non-residential use does not exist or requires an Official Plan Amendment. x. Unsightly site elements such as loading, parking, refuse storage areas and transformers shall be screened to ensure the amenity of adjacent areas. xi. Visual screens may consist of landscaped buffer areas with grass strips, tree(s), shrubs and or decorative screens, walls or fences, as specified in municipal standards. Such screens shall not obscure visibility or compromise the sense of safety. xii. In order to mitigate the visual impact of roof top mechanical equipment (other than solar panels), such equipment shall be: • placed in locations that eliminate their visibility; and/or, • screened by raised parapets that complement the building design, material and colour; and/or, • placed in specially designed enclosures that complement the building design, material and colour. xiii. Council may require special urban design studies for development proposals to ensure the special requirements are met at Entryway locations. ii. Facade treatment should encourage: • elements of interest such as displays; • well-designed street furniture and landscaping; • a variety of textures and colours on walls and walkways; • human scale development that ensures people at grade do not feel over-powered by the built environment; and, • open balconies on upper floors overlooking streets espe- cially in mixed use areas and residential projects. iii. Pedestrians shall be protected from inclement weather with canopies or arcades at building entrances and along store fronts. iv. Upper storeys of larger buildings may require step- backs to achieve: • human scale buildings; • vistas to heritage sites; • harmony with natural contours; and, • diversity of scales without harsh contrast and monotony. v. Landscaping and underground wiring may be required to enhance public vistas in visually significant areas. vi. Council may require utility providers to consider innovative methods of containing utility services on or within streetscape features such as entryway features, light standards, transit shelters, etc., when determining appropriate locations for larger utility equipment and/or utility clusters. vii. In older sections of the community, Council may undertake tree planting, maintenance and renewal while in new areas developers shall undertake a street tree planting programme in accordance with municipal standards. Page 36 of 225 5Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Aurora Heights Neighbourhood 1.4 How will they be used? These Design Guidelines will be used to evaluate proposals for single-detached and semi-detached dwellings consisting of: - replacement dwellings or additions - new and replacement detached garages - accesory structures - additions/accesory structures equal to or over 50m2. The Design Guidelines : • Will be implemented through the Town’s Site Plan Approval process. • Are intended to provide guidance for homeowners, de- signers, architects, developers and landscape architects by outlining the framework and design principles for the site layout, massing and relationships of new and modified dwellings in the neighbourhood. • Are non-statutory statements and therefore have inherent flexibility in their interpretation and application. As a plan- ning tool, they may be changed or adjusted on a case-by- case basis. 1.3 What are Design Guidelines? The Zoning by-law addresses matters such as lot coverage, parking, setbacks and height - the ‘quantitative’ aspects of a neighbourhood’s physical form. While zoning regulates how buildings sit within a lot/block, it represents only one of the planning tools that may be used to guide and shape develop- ment. To create development that promotes ‘design excel- lence’, is ‘compatible’ with and ‘fits’ within its surrounding con- text, zoning is best used in conjunction with design guidelines. Design guidelines address the relative height, massing and ar- ticulation of elements (buildings and landscapes), their relation- ship to one another and to their surroundings - these ‘qualita- tive’ aspects of physical form work in combination with zoning parameters to lend shape and ‘character’ to a neighbourhood. These aspects are more effectively addressed through Urban Design Guidelines. Urban Design Guidelines are statements that include design guidance, criteria, standards and codes for how to shape the built environment, both the individual elements as well as how these should be spatially arranged and relate to one another. Urban Design Guidelines address diverse scales of develop- ment, from site specific to city-wide. Design Guidelines typical- ly address the design of buildings, landscape features and their organization within a defined area as well as their relationship to their surroundings - built and natural. Diagram generally illustrating the aspects of building that are addressed in the Zoning By-law. The Zoning By-law controls the use of land in terms of how it may be used, lot sizes/dimensions, where buildings and other structures can be located, the type of buildings permitted, height, parking requirements and setbacks. Diagram generally illustrating the contextual considerations for new buildings and additions addressed in Urban Design Guidelines. Urban design guidelines refine what happens inside the lot by further shaping the building(s) in relation to its context, in relation to the adjacent structures and the streetscape. Urban design considerations include elevation design, architec- tural style, use of materials, and landscape design in relation to the immediate and surrounding context. Rear Yard Setback Massing in relation to adjacent buildings Side Yard Setback Front Yard Setback Building Height Landscape /streetscape along the street Rhythm/placement of driveways along the street Building’s front-elevation as integral part of the streetscape Page 37 of 225 Site Local Neighbourhood Road 150mDiagrams generally illustrating the area to be considered, in relation to the scale of building proposed. When an addition to an existing building is proposed, the context area to be considered generally includes the adjacent lots indicated. When a new building (an existing dwelling is replaced by a new dwelling) is proposed, or a lot is severed, the context area to be considered generally includes the area indicated. Site Local Neighbourhood Road 6 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Aurora Heights Neighbourhood 1.5 Objectives of the Design Guidelines The recent development activity has posed a number of chal- lenges to maintaining the characteristics that define the Stable Neighbourhoods, including the Aurora Heights Neighbourhood. These design guidelines work in combination with zoning standards to address the placement, scale and design of new buildings and additions relative to their surroundings and pro- vide guidance to: • promote compatible development; • enhance neighbourhood character; and, • promote good urban design and best practices. Page 38 of 225 7Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Aurora Heights Neighbourhood Neighbourhood Character Neighbourhood character refers to the “look and feel” of a place, and it considers the public and private realm components that define the area, including topography, age and style of housing, built environment, land use patterns, landscaping, street patterns, open space, natural heritage areas and streetscapes. Going beyond a categorization of the private and public realm, the character of individual properties and buildings cannot be viewed in isolation from the character of the street and surrounding context. Neighbourhoods evolve over time, the incremental / cumu- lative changes that occur are important to the continued viability and vibrancy of the area; these changes, when taken in context, help to shape the character of the neighbourhood, including the following key attributes: • Pattern of Lots; • Streetscapes; • Architectural Forms & Styles; and, • Cultural Heritage Resources. Page 39 of 225 8 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Aurora Heights Neighbourhood 1.6 Character Attributes (general description) Pattern of Lots While the Zoning By-law speaks to individual lot sizes and lot frontages, urban design focuses on the combined/cumulative effect of the individual lots over a larger area, as an overall pat- tern. The pattern of lots is important as it informs where and how a building sits relative to the street and to one another, resulting in a rhythm of solid and void along the street as well as the proportion of building to landscape over the larger area. Streetscapes Streetscapes encompass the elements that contribute to spatially defining, articulating and animating the street environ- ment, within both the public and private domains. Streetscape design requires that these elements are considered in a comprehensive manner, including the placement of buildings and driveways, building features that face the street, the open spaces between buildings, the roof line of buildings along the street, and landscaping within the street boulevard and front yards. The illustrations below generally show these components, in plan and elevation view. Figure ground graphic reflecting the pattern of lots Kemano Road Foreht CrescentAlgonquin CrescentHaida DriveStreetscape elevation Streetscape Plan Page 40 of 225 9Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Aurora Heights Neighbourhood Architectural Forms & Styles The Zoning By-law speaks to how a building sits within a lot and a building ‘envelope’. It does not address the form and style of buildings which have a tremendous collective impact on the character of an area. While a rigorous adherence to a particular form or style is neither desirable nor realistic (even in new subdivisions), there are key elements of all building designs that can be used to ensure that different forms and styles can co-exist alongside one another in a compatible and complementary manner. This may include: front porches, windows, doors, horizontal bands, specific roof lines, etc. Examples of architectural forms and styles Page 41 of 225 10 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Aurora Heights Neighbourhood Houses in Aurora Heights with large building setbacks contribute to the sense of openness in the neighbourhood’s streetscapes Aurora Heights road pattern Wide boulevards and mature trees dominate the neighbourhood’s streetscapes Aurora Heights lot pattern Kemano Road Foreht CrescentJasper DriveHill Drive Orchard Heights Boulevard Devins Drive Aurora Heights DriveNavan Crescent Collins Crescent Ham m o n d D r i v e Boulding Drive Laurentide AvenueCabot CourtOtt aw a C o u r t Algonquin CrescentHaida DriveBigwin DriveTecumseh DriveH u r o n C o u r tKitimat CrescentSu n r a y P l a c e Dunham Crescen t Kemano Road Foreht CrescentJasper DriveHill Drive Orchard Heights Boulevard Devins Drive Aurora Heights DriveNavan Crescent Collins Crescent Ham m o n d D r i v e Boulding Drive Laurentide AvenueCabot CourtO t t aw a C o u r t Algonquin CrescentHaida DriveBigwin DriveTecumseh DriveH u r o n C o u r tKitimat CrescentSu n r a y P l a c e Dunham Crescent Aurora Heights streetscape Page 42 of 225 11Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Aurora Heights Neighbourhood Detached garage is located to the rear and attached carport integrated to the massing of the dwelling to address the street frontage 2 Aurora Heights Character Aurora Heights is located in the Yonge Street and Aurora Heights Drive area. It is characterized by large lots within a curvilinear pattern of wide streets with some variation in top- ography. These conditions, together with the well spaced low profile houses and generous setbacks with limited landscap- ing, contribute to a strong sense of openness. As Aurora Heights continues to evolve, the construction of new buildings, building additions and building renovations is more common than ever. In order to ensure this construction fits well within the neighbourhood’s character, future develop- ment should ensure compatibility through the recognition and enhancement of neighbourhood character and the promotion of good urban design. For the Aurora Heights Neighbourhood, it is recognized that its character arises from a combination of the following key attributes. Pattern of Lots In the Aurora Heights Neighbourhood, a curvilinear street grid provides the frame for long, irregular, uninterrupted blocks lined with large-spacious lots. The combination of well spaced houses with low profile roof lines and front doors, large and consistent front and side yard setbacks and wide streets and boulevards result in a sense of openness throughout the neighbourhood. In recent years, older houses have been demolished and replaced by new larger/taller ones, placed closer to the street edge and/or adjacent units, while new additions, sometimes larger in height and massing than the main building, have been added onto existing homes. These new dwellings/additions, together with the significant integrated garages and front driveways, have impacted the character of the neighbourhood, altering the pattern of lots. Streetscapes In the Aurora Heights Neighbourhood, the streetscape environ- ment is defined by: • Significant street widths, especially at curves and turning circles in cul-de-sacs. • Buildings that are generally 1 to 2 storeys, with most hav- ing shallow pitched roofs. • A consistent placement of dwellings generously setback from the street. • Driveways that act as the main access to lots and to garages, with parking pads/driveways being as wide as the garage itself. • A mixture of small attached garages, carports, detached garages in the backyard or driveway parking. • Landscaping that includes significant grassy front lawns with shrubbery and some mid-age trees. • Sidewalks with a grassed and/or treed boulevard provided on one side of most streets, with the more prominent streets having a sidewalk on both sides. Page 43 of 225 12 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Aurora Heights Neighbourhood Split-level houses are common in Aurora Heights Stone and brick are frequently used materials in the Neighbourhood Architectural Forms and Styles Aurora Heights is generally characterized by modest 1 to 2 storey mid-century dwelling forms that are simple in form and without intricate details. Many of the dwellings are split- level and shallow pitched roofs are common, with their peak towards the centre of the house, or extending parallel to the street, creating a less visibly striking feature. Low profile front entrances are often flush with the main front wall or set back to create a small porch. Some front entrances are also located to the side of the house. Predominant materi- als include a variety of brick, stucco, siding and stone. The architectural style and colour palette of the houses are relatively consistent along each street. Page 44 of 225 13Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Aurora Heights Neighbourhood Low profile houses dominate the Neighbourhood’s built form Page 45 of 225 14 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Aurora Heights Neighbourhood Kemano Road Foreht CrescentJasper DriveHill Drive Orchard Heights Boulevard Devins Drive Aurora Heights DriveNavan Crescent Collins Crescent Ham m o n d D r i v e Boulding Drive Laurentide AvenueCabot CourtOtt aw a C o u r t Algonquin CrescentHaida DriveBigwin DriveTecumseh DriveH u r o n C o u r tKitimat CrescentSu n r a y P l a c e Dunha m Crescen t Figure ground graphic reveals modest rear setbacks when compared to the depths of the dwellings, as well as consistency of building sizes/depths and placement among those on the same street frontage, which results in an even rhythm of built form to void along the neighbourhood’s streetscapes. Page 46 of 225 15Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Aurora Heights Neighbourhood Design Guidelines 1 Where possible, ensure that the rhythm along the street- scapes is respected and reinforced. 2 Where possible, enhance the public domain while main- taining appropriate separation of private areas. 3 Where possible, maintain the traditional building to lot rela- tionship and encourage dwellings are in proportion to their lot sizes. 4 Maintain generous open space in the rear yard to allow for space for light, landscaping and recreational uses. 5 Ensure a measure of privacy between neighbours by provid- ing sufficient distance between the back wall of the house and the rear property line. 6 Address rear yard privacy and sunlight issues when ex- tending a home towards the rear property line or building a new dwelling by: a) Minimizing extensions beyond the adjacent dwellings rear wall. b) Keeping windows to a minimum on side elevations when the rear wall of the renovated/new dwelling extends beyond the adjacent dwelling’s wall. c) Minimizing the location of second floor balconies on rear and side elevations. d) Providing fencing that effectively screens the rear amen- ity and minimizes its exposure to/from adjacent proper- ties. 7 Provide enough distance between detached garages and the rear property line to minimize their impact on adjacent lots and allow opportunities for planting. Rear yard setbacks Provide enough distance from the garage to the rear property line Provide enough distance from the house to the rear property line Minimize extensions beyond adjacent dwelling’s rear wall 3 Urban Design Guidelines The Zoning By-law establishes clear regulations for lot cover- age, landscaping, front/rear yard setbacks and interior/exter- ior side yard setbacks. These guidelines are not intended to duplicate the Zoning By-law, but instead, to work in conjunc- tion with the zoning standards to not only ensure ‘no adverse impact’ through quantified performance standards, but also ‘compatibility’ of development through qualitative, context related design measures. As such, the guidelines in this section are organized based upon the three key attributes that contribute to the character of the Aurora Heights Neighbourhood. They are not intended to be detailed but rather, provide general guidance for all stable neighbourhoods. 3.1 Pattern of Lots Lot Sizes/Configurations and Rear Setbacks While lot size conditions the development possibilities in terms of building size/coverage, the way it is configured determines how the development relates to the public realm and other buildings along the street, as well as the consistency of the neighbourhood. The objectives of the Urban Design Guidelines regarding lot size and its configuration and rear setbacks are to: • Ensure compatible/similar lot sizes that enhance the rhythm along the streetscapes; • Ensure lot configuration that reflect those of properties close by while achieving the desire relationship between the dwelling and the streetscape. • Generally maintain the traditional range of building to lot relationship; • Ensure that dwellings are in proportion to their lot sizes; • Maintain the level of openness in the rear yard; and, • Allow a measure of privacy between neighbours by provid- ing space for light, landscaping and recreational uses. Page 47 of 225 16 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Aurora Heights Neighbourhood Front setback approaches Front setback reflects that of adjacent units Front setback is the average of that of adjacent units NewNew Generally consistent spacing between buildings Design Guidelines Between Buildings and the Street 8 Reflect the front setback of adjacent dwellings; when substantially different, ensure the new dwelling’s setback is equal to the average distance of those on either side of it. 9 Encourage a pedestrian oriented streetscape by placing new units close to the street edge/property line. 10 Provide side yard setbacks that reflect those of adjacent homes, or are the average distance of those on either side of the development, in accordance with existing zoning standards, to a minimum of 1.5 metres and 3.0m beyond the main rear wall of adjacent dwellings. Design Guidelines Between Buildings 11 Maintain consistent spacing between dwellings. 12 Maintain a consistent ‘street wall’. 13 Provide space for light and landscaping between neigh- bours. 14 Protect the privacy between units by minimizing the num- ber of windows on side elevations. 3.2 Streetscapes The form (height, scale and massing) and placement (setbacks) of buildings in relation to the street and to adjacent develop- ments are important considerations that define streetscapes. The height, scale, massing and placement of buildings are important to creating the ‘street wall’ and framing the street- scape. Front Yard and Side Yard Setbacks The relationship between buildings through placement on the lot is important to ensure a consistent neighbourhood ‘feel’, and defines/frames the street while impacting the sense of openness and enclosure. The positioning of houses on their lots contribute significantly to the streetscapes and the charac- ter of the Aurora Heights Neighbourhood. The Zoning By-law establishes clear regulations for front yard setbacks and interior/exterior side yard setbacks. The object- ives of the Design Guidelines in directing the relationship of the building to the side lot lines are to: • Maintain a consistent spacing between dwellings, and • Allow a measure of privacy between neighbours by provid- ing space for light and landscaping. Page 48 of 225 17Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Aurora Heights Neighbourhood Encourage shallow pitched roofs that reflect those in the neighbourhood A consistent building height of 1.5 storeys frames the streetscape Approach to height and scale including transition Maximum 1.5 storeys difference between adjacent dwellings Consistent height Appropriate transition to lower dwellings Building Height and Scale Buildings in Aurora Heights range from 1 to 2 storeys, with a mix of architectural styles ranging from cottage bungalows to homes with projecting garages; split level houses are common in the neighbourhood. For the purposes of these guidelines, a storey shall be defined as one level of habitable living space. The objectives of the Design Guidelines in directing the rela- tionship of the building scale along the street are to: • Ensure a scale, massing, roof line and building orientation that is commonly found in the neighbourhood; • Ensure a sensitive transition to adjacent residential dwell- ings; and, • Promote more pedestrian-scaled streets. Design Guidelines for Framing the Street 15 On blocks where single storey or 1.5 storey homes are pre- dominant, second storey additions or new 2 storey homes may require particular attention to ensure sensitive transi- tions to adjacent properties. 16 Where possible, maintain the existing lot grading and the neighbourhood’s characteristic first floor height, and, if appropriate, consider split level houses when related to the lot’s grading. 17 Design to reflect the massing of the surrounding built form context for those elevations exposed to the public and pro- vide any additional massing away from them. 18 Provide appropriate transition to/from existing adjacent buildings and ensure no new building is more than 1.5 stor- eys or 4.5m higher/lower than the adjacent dwellings. 19 Aim for clean, modern lines and simple geometry that com- plement the surrounding built form character. 20 Discourage historic architectural styles. 21 Encourage roof lines with shallower pitches to reflect those of existing dwellings in the neighbourhood, and consider simple, articulated profiles to generate visual interest. 22 Ensure flat roof tops complement the massing and charac- ter of adjacent dwellings. Page 49 of 225 18 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Aurora Heights Neighbourhood Garage & Driveway Width and Location Garages and driveways should be located and sized based on the established pattern of the neighbourhood. In Aurora Heights parking is provided as either small attached garag- es- carports (mostly flush or projected beyond the main front wall of the dwelling), detached garages located at the rear or driveway pads in front of the dwelling. The objectives of the Design Guidelines in directing the width and location of garages and driveways along the street are to: • Ensure that garage doors do not dominate the front facade of the house; • Minimize the garage and driveway presence on the street- scape; and, • Maintain a consistent garage type and driveway width along the street. attached/ integrated front garage attached recessed garage detached recessed garage (front) detached recessed garage (rear) Design Guidelines for Driveways and Garages 23 For attached garages/carports, de-emphasize their visual impact on the streetscape by: a) Integrating the attached garage/carport into the massing and design of the dwelling. b) Recessing them from the main front wall and avoid projecting it beyond the main front wall of the adjacent dwellings. c) Considering the attached garages include a second stor- ey over the garage, where height limitations permit. d) Designing the roof line of the attached garage/carport to be compatible with and complement the roof line of the dwelling. Where appropriate, consider extending the dwelling’s roof to cover garages/carports to reflect mod- ern, minimalistic architectural styles. e) Integrating garage doors into the dwelling’s façade design. f) Ensuring that garage doors do not dominate the front facade of the house. 24 Encourage a consistent garage type and location along the street. 25 Encourage narrow driveways and ensure their widths do not substantially exceed the garage/carport width. 26 Encourage rear detached garages. 27 Where detached garages are proposed, locate them re- cessed from the dwelling’s main front wall, and design them to reflect and complement the materials and character of the house. 28 Ensure the size of the garage is compatible with the size of the lot/dwelling; a) Front-facing attached garages should not take up more than 50% of the width of the main front wall of the dwelling. b) A maximum of a 2-car garage is considered appropriate for this neighbourhood. 29 Where appropriate due to lot grading, consider half-below grade garages; ensure it is recessed from the main front wall and livable spaces are place on top of it (i.e. proportion- ate windows or balconies addressing the main frontage). Example of appropriate garage configurations that support the neighbourhood’s character and a pedestrian-oriented public realm attached recessed garage covers maximum 50% of main front wall Page 50 of 225 19Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Aurora Heights Neighbourhood 33 Minimize hard surface landscaping/pavement in front yards and consider them for walkways and driveways only. 34 Encourage permeable paving for new walkways and drive- ways to reduce run-off to storm sewers and soften the streetscape appearance. 35 Provide a walkway from the front door to the sidewalk or to the driveway in the absence of a sidewalk. 36 Provide landscaping in front of blank walls. 37 Encourage front yard hedges do not exceed 1.2m in height, to allow for “eyes to the street” and avoid blocked views from/to dwellings. 38 Avoid privacy fencing at the front of the house; if con- sidered, privacy fencing should not extend beyond the main front wall of the dwelling. 39 Favour corner lot fencing materials that complement the dwelling’s character as well as that of the surrounding neighbourhood; 40 Encourage the use of natural stone finishes for paving and landscape walls. Landscape Treatment In Aurora Heights generous setbacks provide for front yards with extensive grassed areas and mature trees. In some cases, minimalistic/simple landscaping is provided along the dwelling edge and/or entrance features to complement them. The objectives of the Design Guidelines with respect to land- scape are to: • Maintain the green landscape character of the neighbourhood; • Plan for the urban canopy; • Screen views to rear yard parking; and, • Preserve mature trees. Design Guidelines for Landscape Treatment 30 Protect mature trees and encourage planting of new trees to enhance the urban canopy and create tree-lined streets. 31 Enhance the bio-resiliency of the area through planting of native, non-invasive trees and shrubs. 32 Encourage grassed areas to cover most of the front yard and consider keeping any landscape elements simple and complementary to the dwelling’s design and materiality. Mature trees and extensive grassed areas dominate front yards Simple front yard landscaping complements the dwelling’s side entrance Page 51 of 225 20 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Aurora Heights Neighbourhood • Ensure that the prominence of house front entrance and the proportion of glazing are maintained and consistent with the surrounding neighbourhood; and, • Ensure the entrance remain the main feature of the house and is oriented to and clearly visible from the street. Design Guidelines 41 Design dwellings to have articulated elevations, especially those exposed to streets and/or open spaces. Articulated elevations might include changes in plane, projections, en- hanced fenestration, highlighted entrances, complementary materials, among other architectural elements. 42 Avoid blank walls facing the public realm (i.e. streets and open spaces) 43 Incorporate the vertical and horizontal proportions, rhythm and elevation design elements of surrounding dwellings including fenestration, lintels, sills, cornice and roof lines. 44 Ensure traditional architectural styles are properly exe- cuted and reflect their fundamental attributes. When not expressed / executed properly, these styles detract from the overall quality of the neighbourhood and can result in a hodge/podge of disparate design elements. 45 Consider contemporary architectural styles and ensure they reflect the proportions and fenestration of surrounding dwellings. 46 Consider keeping entry steps to a maximum of 3 and en- sure they lead to an entrance element/portico. 3.3 Architectural Forms and Styles Front Elevation Treatment The character of a neighbourhood is not static but rather, evolving and maturing with each home that is built or added onto. This creates a variety of styles, design expressions and materials that, layered over time, enhances and contributes to the character of a neighbourhood. This is most apparent along the streetscape. The main front wall of a dwelling has an important role in defining and framing the streetscape. Its design / articulation is equally important to animating the street, and to establishing a positive connection to the broader neighbourhood. In the Aurora Heights Neighbourhood most dwellings have low profile front entrances, close to grade, either flush or recessed from the main front wall and connected to the driveway, not the sidewalk, by modest walkways. Flush entrances are often covered by shallow pitch roofs that extend beyond the width of the entrance feature. Windows are generous in size and often wider in proportions. The objectives of the Design Guidelines in directing the relationship of the building front elevation and entrance to the street are to: • Encourage a variety of architectural forms and styles that reflect the evolution of the neighbourhood while enhancing its character. • Promote “eyes on the street” and a strong presence of the main elevation on the street; The design of new dwelling reflects the proportions of those adjacent to it Overall height and horizontal composition (base, mid- dle and top), including consistent ground floor height Vertical breaks and changes in plane Architectural details including windows (proportions and scale) Page 52 of 225 21Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Aurora Heights Neighbourhood 47 Encourage entrance features close to the ground when grading permits (1-2 steps). 48 Design entrances to be consistent with the height and rela- tionship to the street of adjacent dwellings. 49 Ensure front doors are prominent, clearly visible and ap- proachable from the street via a walkway or driveway. 50 Encourage entrance features to be located at the front wall and highlight their prominence through articulated architec- tural elements. 51 Discourage side entrances. If they are considered, highlight their presence through massing and architectural gestures that provide a “public face” (e.g. wrapping porches/stoops and articulated elements) and provide a clear connection to the sidewalk or driveway. 52 Encourage weather protection elements at the main en- trance and design them to complement the overall design of the dwelling. 53 Where appropriate, consider extending the dwelling’s roof to cover entrance features to reflect modern - minimalistic architectural styles. 54 Avoid metallic - cottage style awnings attached to main front wall. 55 For new homes or additions to existing ones located where there is a dominant pattern of existing front porches, incor- porate similar elements into the design and encourage they are consistent in size and style with those in the surround- ing neighbourhood. 56 Design porch roof to complement the roof lines and propor- tions of the dwelling. 57 Provide enough glazing in the main elevation(s) through windows that complement the proportions and style of the dwelling, and those of adjacent dwellings. 58 Discourage ornamented styles with excessive decorative details. 59 Ensure corner units to display equal design quality on both elevations visible from the street and consider: a) Locating the main entrance at the exterior side wall. b) Incorporating wrap-around porches and corner features where appropriate. Example of a slightly recessed entrance feature covered by the main roof Simple architectural lines and massing are predominant in the neighbourhood An example of a contemporary style dwelling with simple architectural lines and enhanced entrance feature Page 53 of 225 22 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Aurora Heights Neighbourhood Design Guidelines 60 Encourage a variety of coordinated materials that enhance and complement both the surrounding neighbourhood as well as the design style of the building.This may include more contemporary materials such as metal and concrete, in combination with brick, stone and wood. 61 Promote the use of high quality materials. The following are recommended as primary building materials in the Aurora Heights Neighbourhood: a) Brick. b) Wood clapboard (siding) or wood batten. 62 Discourage the use of stone and stucco or its equivalent as main materials, and consider their use as secondary or accent materials only. 63 Consider natural finishes. 64 Provide colour palettes that take their cues from the built form on surrounding streets and/or are compatible with it. 65 Favour traditional red to light grey bricks, and a variety of colours/tones for wood clapboard/batten, including lighter ones. Avoid bright palettes. 66 Consider metallic railings and window frames as well as painted wood for porches, porch railings, bay window sur- rounds and shutters. 67 Consider cedar and asphalt shingles on roofs, as well as metal roofing when appropriate. 68 For additions or renovations to an existing building, incor- porate materials and colours that are consistent with and complement the main building. Building Materials The variety of building materials contributes to the interest along the street and to the varied architectural character of the neighbourhood. There should be no strict imposition of material palettes. How- ever, broad categories of building appearances are identified and described which provide sufficient flexibility to accommo- date variety, while ensuring that no jarring interventions will be inserted to interrupt the visual harmony of a neighbourhood. The objectives of the Design Guidelines for renovations, addi- tions and new construction are to: • Ensure high quality materials are used; • Preserve the variety of design, colour and building materials within a range that enhances the character of the neigh- bourhood; and, • Ensure that while buildings will inevitably change over time, they will maintain the cohesive visual character of the street. A variety of wood clapboard and brick are extensively used as primary materials Stone is used as secondary/accent material at the elevation base Page 54 of 225 23Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Aurora Heights Neighbourhood Residential Zones R3-SN (497) R7-SN (497) R3-SN (498) R3-SN (499) New BuildingBuilding Addition (equal to or greater than 50m2) or 4 Implementation, Monitoring & Updates Planning & Development Services‘Basic’ Site Plan Process & Urban Design Review • Site Design (grading, servicing, lot coverage and configuration, setbacks, garage and driveway width and location) • Urban Design Guidelines • Zoning • Building Design (building height and massing,architectural design, front elevation treatment, building materials, heritage resources) • Major alterations to existing heritage buildings need to obtain a Heritage Permit through the review and approval by Council prior to the issuance of site plan approval. • Refer to Site Plan Application Guide Site Plan Approval Building Permit Building Division • Ontario Building Code • Refer to Building Permit Application Guide+ Page 55 of 225 24 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Aurora Heights Neighbourhood Front building face width: the width of the main front wall of a dwelling, including a front-facing attached garage. Front-facing attached garage: a garage that is built into the front structure of a dwelling, with a garage door that faces and is accessed from the street. Historic/traditional style home: broad range of styles developed in the 19th and early 20th century, each displaying very unique features. Traditional home designs are influenced by historic styles (i.e. Victorian, Colonial, Craftsman, or Neo- classical architecture). Common features among them include large/open porches with overhanging beams and rafters, dormers, and tall/pitched rooftops with one or more gables. Common materials include brick, wood, stucco, and stone. Main Front Wall: the dwelling’s primary exterior front wall, not including permitted projections or a front attached garage door. Modern/contemporary Style: variety of styles developed in the latter half of the 20th century. Their design is based on the simple/clean lines, shapes and forms, mostly related to their structure. Straight lines, big openings, bold roofs lines (flat or low-sloped) and minimum texture are often seen in this type of houses. Common materials include concrete, brick, wood, and stucco. Stable Neighbourhoods: existing, older residential neighbour- hoods where a thriving community and a distinctive built/natur- al environment coexist and depend on each other. Sympathetic: that is compatible and supportive of an specific(s) built characteristic or element. Vicinity / Surrounding Context: area near or surrounding a particular place, or that is in enough proximity to share a physical relationship. Adverse Impact: Any impairment, disruption, destruction or harmful alteration. Articulated Elevation: A building elevation (usually the front and any publicly exposed building face) whose design includes a comprehensive combination of changes in plane, projections, enhanced fenestration, highlighted entrances, complementary materials, among other architectural elements (ie. not a plain, blank, flat wall). Building Footprint: the footprint of a house is the total ground area covered by the home including garages and porches. Character: a unique combination of features (i.e. existing pattern of development, built form and streetscape design) that should be embraced and reinforced. Coexist: two or more elements /structures that harmoniously exist in the same place. Compatible: As per the OP “...development that may not ne- cessarily be the same or similar to the existing buildings in the vicinity, but, nonetheless, enhances an established community and coexists with existing development without causing any undue adverse impact on surrounding properties.” Complement: built form that responds in a respectful and thoughtful manner to its context to reinforce it and make better. Enhance: strengthen, exalt and/or further improve the qualities that contribute to the character of a place. Reinforce. Existing: found in a particular place i.e. neighbourhood, street, development pattern. As per the OP”...means lawfully in existence on the date of this Plan’s adoption, and for greater certainty does not include a use, building or structure that is in existence on that date without being lawful”. appendix: Definitions & Glossary of Terms Page 56 of 225 25Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Aurora Heights Neighbourhood this page is intentionally left blank Page 57 of 225 Page 58 of 225 Town of Aurora Urban Design Guidelines For Additions and New Buildings in Stable Neighbourhoods Regency Acres Neighbourhood Prepared by The Planning Partnership l October 2020 Attachment 4Page 59 of 225 this page is intentionally left blank Page 60 of 225 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Regency Acres Neighbourhood 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Purpose of the Design Guidelines 2 1.2 Design Guidelines Context 2 1.3 What are Design Guidelines 5 1.4 How will They Be Used 5 1.5 Objectives of the Design Guidelines 6 1.6 Character Attributes (general description) 8 2 Regency Acres Character 11 3 Urban Design Guidelines 15 3.1 Pattern of Lots 15 3.2 Streetscapes 16 3.3 Architectural Forms and Styles 20 4 Implementation, Monitoring & Updates 23 a Appendix: Definitions and Glossary of Terms 24 Table of Contents Page 61 of 225 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Regency Acres Neighbourhood Murray Drive Fairway Drive Glenview Drive Cossar Drive Stoddar DriveNisbet DrivePatrick DriveBailey CrescentDavis R o a d Richardson Drive Glas s D r i v e Holman Crescent Child Drive Baldwin RoadSpringburn Crescent Corbett Crescent Seaton DriveMorning CrescentWillis Drive Banbury CourtRegency Acres Neighbourhood (Zoning by-law boundary) Page 62 of 225 1Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Regency Acres Neighbourhood Guided by the community vision articulated in the Official Plan (OP), and building on the principles of ‘compatible’ develop- ment, the objective of the Urban Design Guidelines is to provide direction for the design of future residential uses that ‘respect and reinforce’ the unique character of Aurora’s Stable Neighbourhoods. Throughout a number of Aurora’s Stable Neighbourhoods, there is a growing trend of dwellings being renovated, en- larged, or replaced by new dwellings, which are often signifi- cantly larger and conflict with the existing character of the community. Through consultation with the community and feedback from residents, the Town identified a number of concerns. It should be noted that while there were generally two perspectives expressed - with equal support by those in favour of develop- ment and those opposed to change, the following are high- lights of some of the concerns that were heard: • Compatibility of new dwellings with the existing fabric of the community, mainly with respect to built form, height, architectural style and scale; • Issues of privacy, overlook and impact on sunlight in (pri- vate) amenity areas; • Preserving the integrity of the existing landscaped pattern of front and rear yards, notably with mature trees and large front lawns; • Side yard setbacks (the open space between dwellings) which form part of the neighbourhood character; • Existing zoning provisions (R3) which do not reflect what is in the ground today, especially lot coverage; • The limit of development and siting of additions and new builds in the Greenlands System; • Calculation of gross floor area as an added restriction in the By-law and how that number was achieved; • How grade is currently measured in the By-law, and the slope of a property, affecting the character of a lot relative to the street, in particular building height; It should also be noted that there was general recognition that the each of the four Stable Neighbourhoods are: • Unique and distinct and require an appropriate and custom- ized approach; • ‘In transition’ and while stable, are not static; • Require a regulatory framework that allows for flexibility in architectural style while respecting and reinforcing the existing neighbourhood character; and, • Urban Design Guidelines are a good tool to help with ‘fit’ for new infill development; To address some of these challenges, Town Council identi- fied the need for further direction in managing the built form of these changes in four specific neighbourhoods: Aurora Heights, Regency Acres, Temperance Street and Town Park. The Stable Neighbourhoods Study and Peer Review infor- mation report, presented to Town Council January 2019, suggested a number of recommendations for strengthening the protection of Stable Neighbourhoods. The report recom- mended additional planning tools for managing character, including the preparation of amendments to the Zoning By-law (By-law Number 6190-19 enacted June 25, 2019) and Urban Design Guidelines. 1 Introduction Page 63 of 225 2 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Regency Acres Neighbourhood 1.1 Purpose of the Design Guidelines The purpose of the Urban Design Guidelines is to implement the Official Plan Vision for Stable Neighbourhoods, by identi- fying the key attributes that contribute to the character of the area and providing a framework to guide the design of addi- tions and new buildings and landscapes that: • Reconciles compatibility with diversity, while avoiding both monotony and harsh contrasts; • Respects and reinforces the existing character of the neigh- bourhood; and, • Promotes a contextual design approach that considers the adjacent and surrounding development and fosters pedes- trian scaled/oriented streetscapes, while allowing for and encouraging appropriate flexibility, innovation and diversity in design, intrinsic to evolving communities. The Urban Design Guidelines for Stable Neighbourhoods are intended to work alongside the Zoning By-law to implement the Official Plan vision for Stable Neighbourhoods, to ensure that new development is compatible with, and enhances exist- ing stable neighbourhoods. 1.2 Design Guidelines Context The Town’s Official Plan is one of the guiding documents that is used to direct and manage growth; it articulates the vision and objectives for how the community should be developed and outlines the policies for how land in the community should be used. The Official Plan is prepared with input from the public and the community and helps to ensure that future planning and development meets the specific needs of the community; it deals mainly with issues such as: • Where new housing, industry, offices and shops will be located • What services like roads, watermains, sewers, parks and schools will be needed • When, and in what order, parts of the community will grow • Community improvement initiatives The Town’s Council recognizes the importance of having a Vision to steer it through all of the many changes that are in the near and distant future and that, in order to be successful, meaningful and impactful, it must represent what the com- munity is today and what it aspires to be in the years to come. In this regard, one of the key objectives for the successful evo- lution and development of the community is ‘Ensuring Design Excellence’. Ensuring Design Excellence extends to all areas within the Town, including existing, older residential neighbourhoods. These areas are identified as ‘Stable Neighbourhoods’ in the Official Plan; this designation is intended to protect the Neigh- bourhoods from incompatible forms of development, while still permitting them to evolve and be enhanced over time. While it is recognized that Stable Neighbourhoods are places that will continue to attract new residents and evolve, the policies direct that new development is to be sympathetic to and compatible with the form and character of the area, and appropriately considers the character of the area and the surrounding neighbourhood context. Page 64 of 225 3Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Regency Acres Neighbourhood Official Plan Policies that provide direction for Urban Design Guidelines include: Policy 2.1 Ensuring Design Excellence Ensure that Aurora promotes design excellence in all its land use and development decisions. High quality buildings, well-designed and functioning streetscapes, appropriate transi- tions between defined areas, integration between old and new development and connected open spaces are the elements that define a place. This Plan emphasizes the important link between managing growth, high quality design and Aurora’s continued evolution as a memorable and beautiful place. Policy 2.1.vi Protecting Stable Neighbourhoods It is the intent of this Plan to ensure that Aurora’s stable neigh- bourhoods are protected. Aurora’s existing neighbourhoods, both older and newer, are not only a defining element of Aurora’s character and urban structure, but also a tremendous asset and attractor for new residents and investment interests. This Plan seeks to ensure that the stability and vibrancy of these existing neighbourhoods is protected from the negative impacts of potential incompatible development and growth pressures. Any infill that occurs must be compatible with the established community character. Policy 8.0 Intent It is the intent of this Plan to ensure that the areas designated ‘Stable Neighbourhoods’.... are protected from incompatible forms of development and, at the same time, are permitted to evolve and be enhanced over time. All new development shall be compatible with its surrounding context and shall conform with all other applicable policies of this Plan. Policy 8.1.3: Development Policies New development and site alteration abutting existing residen- tial development shall be sympathetic to the form and charac- ter of the [sic] existing development and shall be compatible with regard to building scale and urban design. Policy 8.1.4: Design Policies a) All new development within the ‘Stable Neighbourhoods’ designation shall respect and reinforce the existing physical character and uses of the surrounding area, with particular attention to the following elements: i. the pattern of lots, streets and blocks; ii. the size and configuration of nearby lots; iii. the building type of nearby residential properties; iv. the heights and scale of nearby residential properties; v. the setback of buildings from the street; The Town of Aurora Official Plan September 27, 2010 50 vi. the pattern of rear and side-yard setbacks; and, vii. conservation and enhancement of cultural heritage resources. Policy 4.2.a: New development, redevelopment, rehabilitation, and sub- division layout shall be encouraged to complement natural landscapes and grades, water courses, vegetation, heritage environments and existing or proposed adjacent buildings, through the conceptual design of buildings, their massing, siting, exterior, access and public areas. Policy 4.2.c: Council shall support urban design which: • Reconciles compatibility with diversity; and, • Avoids both monotony and harsh contrasts. Policy 4.2.f: To achieve human scale, attractive and safe public environ- ments, in entryways, heritage areas, in and adjacent to streets and open spaces, the following: i. Development should encourage: • sun penetration on outdoor spaces such as sidewalks, streets, parks and court yards; • a micro climate which prevents wind tunnels and shelters against cold northerly winds; • access to historic areas by walking, cycling and transit; and, • practices that would mitigate local heat island effects such as the incorporation of green or white roofs, strategic planting of shade trees, and the use of light coloured paving materials. Page 65 of 225 4 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Regency Acres Neighbourhood viii. All new parking shall be located at the rear of buildings. In areas that have already been developed, parking in front shall be encouraged to: • be screened by landscaping; • allow for visibility of store fronts from the street by limiting the depth of front parking areas; • not create large gaps between developments; • allow for substantially uniform setbacks from the street; • minimize conflict with pedestrian circulation; and, • be coordinated with adjacent commercial developments. ix. Non-residential uses shall be screened from abutting resi- dential uses where residential uses exist or are planned and the non-residential use does not exist or requires an Official Plan Amendment. x. Unsightly site elements such as loading, parking, refuse storage areas and transformers shall be screened to ensure the amenity of adjacent areas. xi. Visual screens may consist of landscaped buffer areas with grass strips, tree(s), shrubs and or decorative screens, walls or fences, as specified in municipal standards. Such screens shall not obscure visibility or compromise the sense of safety. xii. In order to mitigate the visual impact of roof top mechanical equipment (other than solar panels), such equipment shall be: • placed in locations that eliminate their visibility; and/or, • screened by raised parapets that complement the building design, material and colour; and/or, • placed in specially designed enclosures that complement the building design, material and colour. xiii. Council may require special urban design studies for development proposals to ensure the special requirements are met at Entryway locations. ii. Facade treatment should encourage: • elements of interest such as displays; • well-designed street furniture and landscaping; • a variety of textures and colours on walls and walkways; • human scale development that ensures people at grade do not feel over-powered by the built environment; and, • open balconies on upper floors overlooking streets espe- cially in mixed use areas and residential projects. iii. Pedestrians shall be protected from inclement weather with canopies or arcades at building entrances and along store fronts. iv. Upper storeys of larger buildings may require step- backs to achieve: • human scale buildings; • vistas to heritage sites; • harmony with natural contours; and, • diversity of scales without harsh contrast and monotony. v. Landscaping and underground wiring may be required to enhance public vistas in visually significant areas. vi. Council may require utility providers to consider innovative methods of containing utility services on or within streetscape features such as entryway features, light standards, transit shelters, etc., when determining appropriate locations for larger utility equipment and/or utility clusters. vii. In older sections of the community, Council may undertake tree planting, maintenance and renewal while in new areas developers shall undertake a street tree planting programme in accordance with municipal standards. Page 66 of 225 5Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Regency Acres Neighbourhood 1.4 How will they be used? These Design Guidelines will be used to evaluate proposals for single-detached and semi-detached dwellings consisting of: - replacement dwellings or additions - new and replacement detached garages - accesory structures - additions/accesory structures equal to or over 50m2. The Design Guidelines : • Will be implemented through the Town’s Site Plan Approval process. • Are intended to provide guidance for homeowners, de- signers, architects, developers and landscape architects by outlining the framework and design principles for the site layout, massing and relationships of new and modified dwellings in the neighbourhood. • Are non-statutory statements and therefore have inherent flexibility in their interpretation and application. As a plan- ning tool, they may be changed or adjusted on a case-by- case basis. 1.3 What are Design Guidelines? The Zoning by-law addresses matters such as lot coverage, parking, setbacks and height - the ‘quantitative’ aspects of a neighbourhood’s physical form. While zoning regulates how buildings sit within a lot/block, it represents only one of the planning tools that may be used to guide and shape develop- ment. To create development that promotes ‘design excel- lence’, is ‘compatible’ with and ‘fits’ within its surrounding con- text, zoning is best used in conjunction with design guidelines. Design guidelines address the relative height, massing and ar- ticulation of elements (buildings and landscapes), their relation- ship to one another and to their surroundings - these ‘qualita- tive’ aspects of physical form work in combination with zoning parameters to lend shape and ‘character’ to a neighbourhood. These aspects are more effectively addressed through Urban Design Guidelines. Urban Design Guidelines are statements that include design guidance, criteria, standards and codes for how to shape the built environment, both the individual elements as well as how these should be spatially arranged and relate to one another. Urban Design Guidelines address diverse scales of develop- ment, from site specific to city-wide. Design Guidelines typical- ly address the design of buildings, landscape features and their organization within a defined area as well as their relationship to their surroundings - built and natural. Diagram generally illustrating the aspects of building that are addressed in the Zoning By-law. The Zoning By-law controls the use of land in terms of how it may be used, lot sizes/dimensions, where buildings and other structures can be located, the type of buildings permitted, height, parking requirements and setbacks. Diagram generally illustrating the contextual considerations for new buildings and additions addressed in Urban Design Guidelines. Urban design guidelines refine what happens inside the lot by further shaping the building(s) in relation to its context, in relation to the adjacent structures and the streetscape. Urban design considerations include elevation design, architec- tural style, use of materials, and landscape design in relation to the immediate and surrounding context. Rear Yard Setback Massing in relation to adjacent buildings Side Yard Setback Front Yard Setback Building Height Landscape /streetscape along the street Rhythm/placement of driveways along the street Building’s front-elevation as integral part of the streetscape Page 67 of 225 6 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Regency Acres Neighbourhood 1.5 Objectives of the Design Guidelines The recent development activity has posed a number of chal- lenges to maintaining the characteristics that define the Stable Neighbourhoods, including the Regency Acres Neighbourhood. These design guidelines work in combination with zoning standards to address the placement, scale and design of new buildings and additions relative to their surroundings and pro- vide guidance to: • promote compatible development; • enhance neighbourhood character; and, • promote good urban design and best practices. Site Local Neighbourhood Road 150mDiagrams generally illustrating the area to be considered, in relation to the scale of building proposed. When an addition to an existing building is proposed, the context area to be considered generally includes the adjacent lots indicated. When a new building (an existing dwelling is replaced by a new dwelling) is proposed, or a lot is severed, the context area to be considered generally includes the area indicated. Site Local Neighbourhood Road Page 68 of 225 7Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Regency Acres Neighbourhood Neighbourhood Character Neighbourhood character refers to the “look and feel” of a place, and it considers the public and private realm components that define the area, including topography, age and style of housing, built environment, land use patterns, landscaping, street patterns, open space, natural heritage areas and streetscapes. Going beyond a categorization of the private and public realm, the character of individual properties and buildings cannot be viewed in isolation from the character of the street and surrounding context. Neighbourhoods evolve over time, the incremental / cumu- lative changes that occur are important to the continued viability and vibrancy of the area; these changes, when taken in context, help to shape the character of the neighbourhood, including the following key attributes: • Pattern of Lots; • Streetscapes; • Architectural Forms & Styles; and, • Cultural Heritage Resources. Page 69 of 225 8 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Regency Acres Neighbourhood 1.6 Character Attributes (general description) Pattern of Lots While the Zoning By-law speaks to individual lot sizes and lot frontages, urban design focuses on the combined/cumulative effect of the individual lots over a larger area, as an overall pat- tern. The pattern of lots is important as it informs where and how a building sits relative to the street and to one another, resulting in a rhythm of solid and void along the street as well as the proportion of building to landscape over the larger area. Streetscapes Streetscapes encompass the elements that contribute to spatially defining, articulating and animating the street environ- ment, within both the public and private domains. Streetscape design requires that these elements are considered in a comprehensive manner, including the placement of buildings and driveways, building features that face the street, the open spaces between buildings, the roof line of buildings along the street, and landscaping within the street boulevard and front yards. The illustrations below generally show these components, in plan and elevation view. Figure ground graphic reflecting the pattern of lots Fairway Drive Glenview Drive Cossar Drive Stoddar DriveSpringburn Crescent Streetscape elevation Streetscape Plan Page 70 of 225 9Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Regency Acres Neighbourhood Architectural Forms & Styles The Zoning By-law speaks to how a building sits within a lot and a building ‘envelope’. It does not address the form and style of buildings which have a tremendous collective impact on the character of an area. While a rigorous adherence to a particular form or style is neither desirable nor realistic (even in new subdivisions), there are key elements of all building designs that can be used to ensure that different forms and styles can co-exist alongside one another in a compatible and complementary manner. This may include: front porches, windows, doors, horizontal bands, specific roof lines, etc. Examples of architectural forms and styles Page 71 of 225 10 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Regency Acres Neighbourhood Detached garages setback from main building and driveways as main access to lots Wide streets and generous setbacks enhance the sense of openness Regency Acres road pattern Regency Acres streetscape Regency Acres lot pattern Murray Drive Fairway Drive Glenview Drive Cossar Drive Stoddar DriveNisbet DrivePatrick DriveBailey CrescentDavis R o a d Richardson Drive Glas s D r i v e Holman Crescent Child Drive Baldwin RoadSpringburn Crescent Corbett Crescent Seaton DriveMorning CrescentWillis Drive Banbury CourtMurray Drive Fairway Drive Glenview Drive Cossar Drive Stoddar DriveNisbet DrivePatrick DriveBailey CrescentDavis R o a d Richardson Drive Glas s D r i v e Holman Crescent Child Drive Baldwin RoadSpringburn Crescent Corbett Crescent Seaton DriveMorning CrescentWillis Drive Banbury CourtPage 72 of 225 11Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Regency Acres Neighbourhood 2 Regency Acres Character Regency Acres is a relatively new neighbourhood located in the Yonge Street and Henderson Drive area. It is characterized by wide streets, large lots and low profile houses with gener- ous setbacks and limited landscaping, all of which contributes to a strong sense of openness. As Regency Acres continues to evolve, the construction of new buildings, building additions and building renovations is more common than ever. In order to ensure this construction fits well within the neighbourhood’s character, future develop- ment should ensure compatibility through the recognition and enhancement of neighbourhood character and the promotion of good urban design. For the Regency Acres Neighbourhood, it is recognized that its character arises from a combination of the following key attributes. Pattern of Lots In the Regency Acres Neighbourhood, the main grid consists of wide streets that follow a curvilinear pattern, and is comple- mented by ‘loop’ type streets or cul-de-sacs to the interior of the neighbourhood. The result is a grid of mostly long-uninter- rupted blocks, where large and spacious lots permit significant front and side yard setbacks, with well spaced houses setback consistently along the streetscapes. In recent years, older houses have been demolished and replaced by new larger/taller ones, placed closer to the street edge and/or adjacent units, while new additions, sometimes larger in height and massing than the main building, have been added onto existing homes. These new dwellings/additions, together with the significant integrated garages and front driveways, have impacted the character of the neighbourhood, altering the pattern of lots. Streetscapes In the Regency Acres Neighbourhood, the streetscape environ- ment is defined by: • Buildings that are generally 1 to 2 storeys, with most hav- ing shallow pitched roofs. • A consistent placement of dwellings generously setback from the street. • Driveways that act as the main access to lots and to garages, with parking pads/driveways being as wide as the garage itself. • A mixture of garage/parking configurations that include a mix of small detached garages to the rear and car-ports (as side extensions of the dwelling) for older units, or front-in- tegrated garages on newer ones, which creates greater visual impact and greater building massing along the street. Some units only have parking pads at the front, and often they are part of older subdivisions built without garages. • Landscaping that is dominated by grassy front lawns and some mid-age trees. • Sidewalks with a grassed boulevard provided on one side of most streets, with the more prominent streets having a treed boulevard. Other streets have a less urban character with open drainage ditches and no sidewalks. Page 73 of 225 12 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Regency Acres Neighbourhood A brick house in Regency Acres with simple architecture and recessed garage Low profile houses with shallow pitched roof lines dominate the Neighbour- hood’s built form Architectural Forms and Styles Built form in Regency Acres is generally characterized by well- spaced, modest 1 to 2-storey houses with shallow pitched roofs of different shapes. Low profile front entrances with little or no front porch are predominant, as well as the use of a variety of brick, stucco, siding and stone. However, two distinct areas can be recognized: • Units built around the 1960’s which include a mix of small bungalows, back splits, single storey duplexes and 2-storey semi-detached homes. Many of the bungalows in the area reflect the style of modest homes built post WWII, with some elements of the 1960 style. • Units built around the 1980’s and close to Golf Links, are larger and include attached garages. The architectural style and colour palette of the houses in the neighbourhood are relatively consistent along each street. Page 74 of 225 13Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Regency Acres Neighbourhood Example of a mid-century house in Regency Acres Page 75 of 225 14 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Regency Acres Neighbourhood Murray Drive Fairway Drive Glenview Drive Cossar Drive Stoddar DriveNisbet DrivePatrick DriveBailey CrescentDavis R o a d Richardson Drive Gla s s D r i v e Holman Crescent Child Drive Baldwin RoadSpringburn Crescent Corbett Crescent Seaton DriveMorning CrescentWillis Drive Banbury CourtFigure ground graphic reveals rear setbacks vary depending on the location of the lot on the block and the shape of the block itself. There is a generally even rhythm of built form and void among units on the same frontage, with few exceptions where rear yards are either very small - to non-existent, or deeper than the neighbour- hood’s average. There is also a tendency to keep dwellings depths consistent along the same streetscape/block frontage. Page 76 of 225 15Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Regency Acres Neighbourhood Design Guidelines 1 Where possible, ensure that the rhythm along the street- scapes is respected and reinforced. 2 Where possible, enhance the public domain while main- taining appropriate separation of private areas. 3 Where possible, maintain the traditional building to lot rela- tionship and encourage dwellings are in proportion to their lot sizes. 4 Maintain generous open space in the rear yard to allow for space for light, landscaping and recreational uses. 5 Ensure a measure of privacy between neighbours by provid- ing sufficient distance between the back wall of the house and the rear property line. 6 Address rear yard privacy and sunlight issues when ex- tending a home towards the rear property line or building a new dwelling by: a) Minimizing extensions beyond the adjacent dwellings rear wall. b) Keeping windows to a minimum on side elevations when the rear wall of the renovated/new dwelling extends beyond the adjacent dwelling’s wall. c) Minimizing the location of second floor balconies on rear and side elevations. d) Providing fencing that effectively screens the rear amen- ity and minimizes its exposure to/from adjacent proper- ties. 7 Provide enough distance between detached garages and the rear property line to minimize their impact on adjacent lots and allow opportunities for planting. Rear yard setbacks Provide enough distance from the garage to the rear property line Provide enough distance from the house to the rear property line Minimize extensions beyond adjacent dwelling’s rear wall The Zoning By-law establishes clear regulations for lot cover- age, landscaping, front/rear yard setbacks and interior/exter- ior side yard setbacks. These guidelines are not intended to duplicate the Zoning By-law, but instead, to work in conjunc- tion with the zoning standards to not only ensure ‘no adverse impact’ through quantified performance standards, but also ‘compatibility’ of development through qualitative, context related design measures. As such, the guidelines in this section are organized based upon the three key attributes that contribute to the character of the Regency Acres Neighbourhood. They are not intended to be detailed but rather, provide general guidance for all stable neighbourhoods. 3.1 Pattern of Lots Lot Sizes/Configurations and Rear Setbacks While lot size conditions the development possibilities in terms of building size/coverage, the way it is configured determines how the development relates to the public realm and other buildings along the street, as well as the consistency of the neighbourhood. The objectives of the Urban Design Guidelines regarding lot size and its configuration and rear setbacks are to: • Ensure compatible/similar lot sizes that enhance the rhythm along the streetscapes; • Ensure lot configuration that reflect those of properties close by while achieving the desire relationship between the dwelling and the streetscape. • Generally maintain the traditional range of building to lot relationship; • Ensure that dwellings are in proportion to their lot sizes; • Maintain the level of openness in the rear yard; and, • Allow a measure of privacy between neighbours by provid- ing space for light, landscaping and recreational uses. 3 Urban Design Guidelines Page 77 of 225 16 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Regency Acres Neighbourhood Front setback approaches Front setback reflects that of adjacent units Front setback is the average of that of adjacent units NewNew Generally consistent spacing between buildings Design Guidelines Between Buildings and the Street 8 Reflect the front setback of adjacent dwellings; when substantially different, ensure the new dwelling’s setback is equal to the average distance of those on either side of it. 9 Encourage a pedestrian oriented streetscape by placing new units close to the street edge/property line. 10 Provide side yard setbacks that reflect those of adjacent homes, or are the average distance of those on either side of the development, in accordance with existing zoning standards, to a minimum of 1.5 metres and 3.0m beyond the main rear wall of adjacent dwellings. Design Guidelines Between Buildings 11 Maintain consistent spacing between dwellings. 12 Maintain a consistent ‘street wall’. 13 Provide space for light and landscaping between neigh- bours. 14 Protect the privacy between units by minimizing the num- ber of windows on side elevations. 3.2 Streetscapes The form (height, scale and massing) and placement (setbacks) of buildings in relation to the street and to adjacent develop- ments are important considerations that define streetscapes. The height, scale, massing and placement of buildings are important to creating the ‘street wall’ and framing the street- scape. Front Yard and Side Yard Setbacks The relationship between buildings through placement on the lot is important to ensure a consistent neighbourhood ‘feel’, and defines/frames the street while impacting the sense of openness and enclosure. The positioning of houses on their lots contribute significantly to the streetscapes and the charac- ter of the Regency Acres Neighbourhood. The Zoning By-law establishes clear regulations for front yard setbacks and interior/exterior side yard setbacks. The object- ives of the Design Guidelines in directing the relationship of the building to the side lot lines are to: • Maintain a consistent spacing between dwellings; and • Allow a measure of privacy between neighbours by provid- ing space for light and landscaping. Page 78 of 225 17Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Regency Acres Neighbourhood Approach to height and scale including transition Maximum 1.5 storeys difference between adjacent dwellings Consistent height Appropriate transition to lower dwellings Shallow pitched roof lines complement simple building geometry Consistent low-profile, 1.5 storey dwellings along the streetscape Building Height and Scale Buildings in Regency Acres range from 1 to 2 storeys, with a varied architectural style that include small bungalows, back splits, single storey duplexes and 2-storey semi-detached. For the purposes of these guidelines, a storey shall be defined as one level of habitable living space. The objectives of the Design Guidelines in directing the rela- tionship of the building scale along the street are to: • Ensure a scale, massing, roof line and building orientation that is commonly found in the neighbourhood; • Ensure a sensitive transition to adjacent residential dwell- ings; and, • Promote more pedestrian-scaled streets. Design Guidelines for Framing the Street 15 On blocks where single storey or 1.5 storey homes are pre- dominant, second storey additions or new 2 storey homes may require particular attention to ensure sensitive transi- tions to adjacent properties. 16 Where possible, maintain the existing lot grading and the neighbourhood’s characteristic first floor height, and, if appropriate, consider split level houses when related to the lot’s grading. 17 Design to reflect the massing of the surrounding built form context for those elevations exposed to the public and pro- vide any additional massing away from them. 18 Provide appropriate transition to/from existing adjacent buildings and ensure no new building is more than 1.5 stor- eys or 4.5m higher/lower than the adjacent dwellings. 19 Aim for clean, modern lines and simple geometry that com- plement the surrounding built form character. 20 Discourage historic architectural styles. 21 Encourage roof lines with shallower pitches to reflect those of existing dwellings in the neighbourhood, and consider simple, articulated profiles to generate visual interest. 22 Ensure flat roof tops complement the massing and charac- ter of adjacent dwellings. Page 79 of 225 18 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Regency Acres Neighbourhood Garage & Driveway Width and Location Garages and driveways should be located and sized based on the established pattern of the neighbourhood. In Regency Acres parking is provided as either small attached garages/car- ports, detached garages at the rear or driveway parking pads. The objectives of the Design Guidelines in directing the width and location of garages and driveways along the street are to: • Ensure that garage doors do not dominate the front facade of the house; • Minimize the garage and driveway presence on the street- scape; and, • Maintain a consistent garage type and driveway width along the street. Design Guidelines for Driveways and Garages 23 For attached garages/carports, de-emphasize their visual impact on the streetscape by: a) Integrating the attached garage/carport into the massing and design of the dwelling. b) Recessing them from the main front wall and avoid projecting it beyond the main front wall of the adjacent dwellings. c) Considering the attached garages include a second stor- ey over the garage, where height limitations permit. d) Designing the roof line of the attached garage/carport to be compatible with and complement the roof line of the dwelling. Where appropriate, consider extending the dwelling’s roof to cover garages/carports to reflect mod- ern, minimalistic architectural styles. e) Integrating garage doors into the dwelling’s façade design. f) Ensuring that garage doors do not dominate the front facade of the house. 24 Encourage a consistent garage type and location along the street. 25 Encourage narrow driveways and ensure their widths do not substantially exceed the garage/carport width. 26 Encourage rear detached garages. 27 Where detached garages are proposed, locate them re- cessed from the dwelling’s main front wall, and design them to reflect and complement the materials and character of the house. 28 Ensure the size of the garage is compatible with the size of the lot/dwelling; a) Front-facing attached garages should not take up more than 50% of the width of the main front wall of the dwelling. b) A maximum of a 2-car garage is considered appropriate for this neighbourhood. 29 Where appropriate due to lot grading, consider half-below grade garages; ensure it is recessed from the main front wall and livable spaces are place on top of it (i.e. proportion- ate windows or balconies addressing the main frontage). attached/ integrated front garage attached recessed garage detached recessed garage (front) detached recessed garage (rear) Example of appropriate garage configurations that support the neighbourhood’s character and a pedestrian-oriented public realm attached recessed garage covers maximum 50% of main front wall Page 80 of 225 19Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Regency Acres Neighbourhood 33 Minimize hard surface landscaping/pavement in front yards and consider them for walkways and driveways only. 34 Encourage permeable paving for new walkways and drive- ways to reduce run-off to storm sewers and soften the streetscape appearance. 35 Provide a walkway from the front door to the sidewalk or to the driveway in the absence of a sidewalk. 36 Provide landscaping in front of blank walls. 37 Encourage front yard hedges do not exceed 1.2m in height, to allow for “eyes to the street” and avoid blocked views from/to dwellings. 38 Avoid privacy fencing at the front of the house; if con- sidered, privacy fencing should not extend beyond the main front wall of the dwelling. 39 Favour corner lot fencing materials that complement the dwelling’s character as well as that of the surrounding neighbourhood; 40 Encourage the use of natural stone finishes for paving and landscape walls. Landscape Treatment In Regency Acres generous setbacks provide for front yards with extensive grassed areas and, in some cases, minimalistic/ simple landscaping complementing entrance features. Mature trees are common in the landscape. The objectives of the Design Guidelines with respect to land- scape are to: • Maintain the green landscape character of the neighbourhood; • Plan for the urban canopy; • Screen views to rear yard parking; and, • Preserve mature trees. Design Guidelines for Landscape Treatment 30 Protect mature trees and encourage planting of new trees to enhance the urban canopy and create tree-lined streets. 31 Enhance the bio-resiliency of the area through planting of native, non-invasive trees and shrubs. 32 Encourage grassed areas to cover most of the front yard and consider keeping any landscape elements simple and complementary to the dwelling’s design and materiality. Mature trees are retained Extensive grassed areas with minimal landscape elements complementing the dwelling’s design Page 81 of 225 20 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Regency Acres Neighbourhood • Ensure that the prominence of house front entrance and the proportion of glazing are maintained and consistent with the surrounding neighbourhood; and, • Ensure the entrance remain the main feature of the house and is oriented to and clearly visible from the street. Design Guidelines 41 Design dwellings to have articulated elevations, especially those exposed to streets and/or open spaces. Articulated elevations might include changes in plane, projections, en- hanced fenestration, highlighted entrances, complementary materials, among other architectural elements. 42 Avoid blank walls facing the public realm (i.e. streets and open spaces) 43 Incorporate the vertical and horizontal proportions, rhythm and elevation design elements of surrounding dwellings including fenestration, lintels, sills, cornice and roof lines. 44 Ensure traditional architectural styles are properly exe- cuted and reflect their fundamental attributes. When not expressed / executed properly, these styles detract from the overall quality of the neighbourhood and can result in a hodge/podge of disparate design elements. 45 Consider contemporary architectural styles and ensure they reflect the proportions and fenestration of surrounding dwellings. 46 Consider keeping entry steps to a maximum of 3 and en- sure they lead to an entrance element/portico. 3.3 Architectural Forms and Styles Front Elevation Treatment The character of a neighbourhood is not static but rather, evolving and maturing with each home that is built or added onto. This creates a variety of styles, design expressions and materials that, layered over time, enhances and contributes to the character of a neighbourhood. This is most apparent along the streetscape. The main front wall of a dwelling has an important role in defining and framing the streetscape. Its design / articulation is equally important to animating the street, and to establishing a positive connection to the broader neighbourhood. In the Regency Acres neighbourhood most dwellings have low profile front entrances, close to grade, with small porches or stoops that generally lead to the driveway; side entrances are also common in the neighbourhood. Windows are generous in size and often wider in proportions. The objectives of the Design Guidelines in directing the relationship of the building front elevation and entrance to the street are to: • Encourage a variety of architectural forms and styles that reflect the evolution of the neighbourhood while enhancing its character. • Promote “eyes on the street” and a strong presence of the main elevation on the street; The design of new dwelling reflects the proportions of those adjacent to it Overall height and horizontal composition (base, mid- dle and top), including consistent ground floor height Vertical breaks and changes in plane Architectural details including windows (proportions and scale) Page 82 of 225 21Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Regency Acres Neighbourhood 47 Encourage low-profile entrance features close to the ground when grading permits (1-2 steps). 48 Design entrances to be consistent with the height and rela- tionship to the street of adjacent dwellings. 49 Ensure front doors are prominent, clearly visible and ap- proachable from the street via a walkway or driveway. 50 Encourage entrance features to be located at the front wall and highlight their prominence through articulated architec- tural elements. 51 Discourage side entrances. If they are considered, highlight their presence through massing and architectural gestures that provide a “public face” (e.g. wrapping porches/stoops and articulated elements) and provide a clear connection to the sidewalk or driveway. 52 Encourage weather protection elements at the main en- trance and design them to complement the overall design of the dwelling. 53 Where appropriate, consider extending the dwelling’s roof to cover entrance features to reflect modern - minimalistic architectural styles. 54 Avoid metallic - cottage style awnings attached to main front walls. 55 For new homes or additions to existing ones located where there is a dominant pattern of existing front porches, incor- porate similar elements into the design and encourage they are consistent in size and style with those in the surround- ing neighbourhood. 56 Design porch roof to complement the roof lines and propor- tions of the dwelling. 57 Provide enough glazing in the main elevation(s) through windows that complement the proportions and style of the dwelling, and those of adjacent dwellings. 58 Discourage ornamented styles with excessive decorative details. 59 Ensure corner units to display equal design quality on both elevations visible from the street and consider: a) Locating the main entrance at the exterior side wall. b) Incorporating wrap-around porches and corner features where appropriate. Highlighted side entrances Livable spaces are located to the front of the dwelling provide a strong relation- ship between the private and public realm through generous glazing Entrance at grade, covered by main dwelling’s roof and connected to the lot’s access Page 83 of 225 22 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Regency Acres Neighbourhood Design Guidelines 60 Encourage a variety of coordinated materials that enhance and complement both the surrounding neighbourhood as well as the design style of the building.This may include more contemporary materials such as metal and concrete, in combination with brick, stone and wood. 61 Promote the use of high quality materials. The following are recommended as primary building materials in the Regency Acres Neighbourhood: a) Brick. b) Wood clapboard (siding) or wood batten. 62 Discourage the use of stone and stucco or its equivalent as main materials, and consider their use as secondary or accent materials only. 63 Consider natural finishes. 64 Provide colour palettes that take their cues from the built form on surrounding streets and/or are compatible with it. 65 Favour traditional red to light coloured bricks, and a variety of colours/tones for wood clapboard/batten, including lighter ones. Avoid bright palettes. 66 Consider metallic railings and window frames as well as painted wood for porches, porch railings, bay window sur- rounds and shutters. 67 Consider cedar and asphalt shingles on roofs, as well as metal roofing when appropriate. 68 For additions or renovations to an existing building, incor- porate materials and colours that are consistent with and complement the main building. Building Materials The variety of building materials contributes to the interest along the street and to the varied architectural character of the neighbourhood. There should be no strict imposition of material palettes. How- ever, broad categories of building appearances are identified and described which provide sufficient flexibility to accommo- date variety, while ensuring that no jarring interventions will be inserted to interrupt the visual harmony of a neighbourhood. The objectives of the Design Guidelines for renovations, addi- tions and new construction are to: • Ensure high quality materials are used; • Preserve the variety of design, colour and building materials within a range that enhances the character of the neigh- bourhood; and, • Ensure that while buildings will inevitably change over time, they will maintain the cohesive visual character of the street. Contemporary infill house design with materials and colours that complement the surrounding traditional material palettes Lighter tone of brick and metallic framing complement the simplicity of the dwelling’s design Page 84 of 225 23Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Regency Acres Neighbourhood Residential Zones R3-SN (497) R7-SN (497) R3-SN (498) R3-SN (499) New BuildingBuilding Addition (equal to or greater than 50m2) or 4 Implementation, Monitoring & Updates Planning & Development Services‘Basic’ Site Plan Process & Urban Design Review • Site Design (grading, servicing, lot coverage and configuration, setbacks, garage and driveway width and location) • Urban Design Guidelines • Zoning • Building Design (building height and massing,architectural design, front elevation treatment, building materials, heritage resources) • Major alterations to existing heritage buildings need to obtain a Heritage Permit through the review and approval by Council prior to the issuance of site plan approval. • Refer to Site Plan Application Guide Site Plan Approval Building Permit Building Division • Ontario Building Code • Refer to Building Permit Application Guide+ Page 85 of 225 24 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Regency Acres Neighbourhood Front building face width: the width of the main front wall of a dwelling, including a front-facing attached garage. Front-facing attached garage: a garage that is built into the front structure of a dwelling, with a garage door that faces and is accessed from the street. Historic/traditional style home: broad range of styles developed in the 19th and early 20th century, each displaying very unique features. Traditional home designs are influenced by historic styles (i.e. Victorian, Colonial, Craftsman, or Neo- classical architecture). Common features among them include large/open porches with overhanging beams and rafters, dormers, and tall/pitched rooftops with one or more gables. Common materials include brick, wood, stucco, and stone. Main Front Wall: the dwelling’s primary exterior front wall, not including permitted projections or a front attached garage door. Modern/contemporary Style: variety of styles developed in the latter half of the 20th century. Their design is based on the simple/clean lines, shapes and forms, mostly related to their structure. Straight lines, big openings, bold roofs lines (flat or low-sloped) and minimum texture are often seen in this type of houses. Common materials include concrete, brick, wood, and stucco. Stable Neighbourhoods: existing, older residential neighbour- hoods where a thriving community and a distinctive built/natur- al environment coexist and depend on each other. Sympathetic: that is compatible and supportive of an specific(s) built characteristic or element. Vicinity / Surrounding Context: area near or surrounding a particular place, or that is in enough proximity to share a physical relationship. Adverse Impact: Any impairment, disruption, destruction or harmful alteration. Articulated Elevation: A building elevation (usually the front and any publicly exposed building face) whose design includes a comprehensive combination of changes in plane, projections, enhanced fenestration, highlighted entrances, complementary materials, among other architectural elements (ie. not a plain, blank, flat wall). Building Footprint: the footprint of a house is the total ground area covered by the home including garages and porches. Character: a unique combination of features (i.e. existing pattern of development, built form and streetscape design) that should be embraced and reinforced. Coexist: two or more elements /structures that harmoniously exist in the same place. Compatible: As per the OP “...development that may not ne- cessarily be the same or similar to the existing buildings in the vicinity, but, nonetheless, enhances an established community and coexists with existing development without causing any undue adverse impact on surrounding properties.” Complement: built form that responds in a respectful and thoughtful manner to its context to reinforce it and make better. Enhance: strengthen, exalt and/or further improve the qualities that contribute to the character of a place. Reinforce. Existing: found in a particular place i.e. neighbourhood, street, development pattern. As per the OP”...means lawfully in existence on the date of this Plan’s adoption, and for greater certainty does not include a use, building or structure that is in existence on that date without being lawful”. appendix: Definitions & Glossary of Terms Page 86 of 225 25Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Regency Acres Neighbourhood this page is intentionally left blank Page 87 of 225 Page 88 of 225 Town of Aurora Urban Design Guidelines For Additions and New Buildings in Stable Neighbourhoods Temperance Street Neighbourhood Prepared by The Planning Partnership l October 2020 Attachment 5Page 89 of 225 this page is intentionally left blank Page 90 of 225 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Temperance Street Neighbourhood 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Purpose of the Design Guidelines 2 1.2 Design Guidelines Context 2 1.3 What are Design Guidelines 5 1.4 How will They Be Used 5 1.5 Objectives of the Design Guidelines 6 1.6 Character Attributes (general description) 8 2 Temperance Street Character 11 3 Urban Design Guidelines 15 3.1 Pattern of Lots 15 3.2 Streetscapes 16 3.3 Architectural Forms and Styles 20 3.4 Cultural Heritage Resources 23 4 Implementation, Monitoring & Updates 24 a Appendix: Definitions and Glossary of Terms 25 Table of Contents Page 91 of 225 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Temperance Street Neighbourhood Kennedy Street West Yonge StreetReuben Street Temperance StreetRansom Street Temperance Street Neighbourhood (Zoning by-law boundary) Page 92 of 225 1 1 Introduction Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Temperance Street Neighbourhood Guided by the community vision articulated in the Official Plan (OP), and building on the principles of ‘compatible’ develop- ment, the objective of the Urban Design Guidelines is to provide direction for the design of future residential uses that ‘respect and reinforce’ the unique character of Aurora’s Stable Neighbourhoods. Throughout a number of Aurora’s Stable Neighbourhoods, there is a growing trend of dwellings being renovated, en- larged, or replaced by new dwellings, which are often signifi- cantly larger and conflict with the existing character of the community. Through consultation with the community and feedback from residents, the Town identified a number of concerns. It should be noted that while there were generally two perspectives expressed - with equal support by those in favour of develop- ment and those opposed to change, the following are high- lights of some of the concerns that were heard: • Compatibility of new dwellings with the existing fabric of the community, mainly with respect to built form, height, architectural style and scale; • Issues of privacy, overlook and impact on sunlight in (pri- vate) amenity areas; • Preserving the integrity of the existing landscaped pattern of front and rear yards, notably with mature trees and large front lawns; • Side yard setbacks (the open space between dwellings) which form part of the neighbourhood character; • Existing zoning provisions (R3) which do not reflect what is in the ground today, especially lot coverage; • The limit of development and siting of additions and new builds in the Greenlands System; • Calculation of gross floor area as an added restriction in the By-law and how that number was achieved; • How grade is currently measured in the By-law, and the slope of a property, affecting the character of a lot relative to the street, in particular building height; It should also be noted that there was general recognition that the each of the four Stable Neighbourhoods are: • Unique and distinct and require an appropriate and custom- ized approach; • ‘In transition’ and while stable, are not static; • Require a regulatory framework that allows for flexibility in architectural style while respecting and reinforcing the existing neighbourhood character; and, • Urban Design Guidelines are a good tool to help with ‘fit’ for new infill development; To address some of these challenges, Town Council identi- fied the need for further direction in managing the built form of these changes in four specific neighbourhoods: Aurora Heights, Regency Acres, Temperance Street and Town Park. The Stable Neighbourhoods Study and Peer Review infor- mation report, presented to Town Council January 2019, suggested a number of recommendations for strengthening the protection of Stable Neighbourhoods. The report recom- mended additional planning tools for managing character, including the preparation of amendments to the Zoning By-law (By-law Number 6190-19 enacted June 25, 2019) and Urban Design Guidelines. 1 Introduction Page 93 of 225 2 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Temperance Street Neighbourhood 1.1 Purpose of the Design Guidelines The purpose of the Urban Design Guidelines is to implement the Official Plan Vision for Stable Neighbourhoods, by identi- fying the key attributes that contribute to the character of the area and providing a framework to guide the design of addi- tions and new buildings and landscapes that: • Reconciles compatibility with diversity, while avoiding both monotony and harsh contrasts; • Respects and reinforces the existing character of the neigh- bourhood; and, • Promotes a contextual design approach that considers the adjacent and surrounding development and fosters pedes- trian scaled/oriented streetscapes, while allowing for and encouraging appropriate flexibility, innovation and diversity in design, intrinsic to evolving communities. The Urban Design Guidelines for Stable Neighbourhoods are intended to work alongside the Zoning By-law to implement the Official Plan vision for Stable Neighbourhoods, to ensure that new development is compatible with, and enhances exist- ing stable neighbourhoods. 1.2 Design Guidelines Context The Town’s Official Plan is one of the guiding documents that is used to direct and manage growth; it articulates the vision and objectives for how the community should be developed and outlines the policies for how land in the community should be used. The Official Plan is prepared with input from the public and the community and helps to ensure that future planning and development meets the specific needs of the community; it deals mainly with issues such as: • Where new housing, industry, offices and shops will be located • What services like roads, watermains, sewers, parks and schools will be needed • When, and in what order, parts of the community will grow • Community improvement initiatives The Town’s Council recognizes the importance of having a Vision to steer it through all of the many changes that are in the near and distant future and that, in order to be successful, meaningful and impactful, it must represent what the com- munity is today and what it aspires to be in the years to come. In this regard, one of the key objectives for the successful evo- lution and development of the community is ‘Ensuring Design Excellence’. Ensuring Design Excellence extends to all areas within the Town, including existing, older residential neighbourhoods. These areas are identified as ‘Stable Neighbourhoods’ in the Official Plan; this designation is intended to protect the Neigh- bourhoods from incompatible forms of development, while still permitting them to evolve and be enhanced over time. While it is recognized that Stable Neighbourhoods are places that will continue to attract new residents and evolve, the policies direct that new development is to be sympathetic to and compatible with the form and character of the area, and appropriately considers the character of the area and the surrounding neighbourhood context. Page 94 of 225 3Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Temperance Street Neighbourhood Official Plan Policies that provide direction for Urban Design Guidelines include: Policy 2.1 Ensuring Design Excellence Ensure that Aurora promotes design excellence in all its land use and development decisions. High quality buildings, well-designed and functioning streetscapes, appropriate transi- tions between defined areas, integration between old and new development and connected open spaces are the elements that define a place. This Plan emphasizes the important link between managing growth, high quality design and Aurora’s continued evolution as a memorable and beautiful place. Policy 2.1.vi Protecting Stable Neighbourhoods It is the intent of this Plan to ensure that Aurora’s stable neigh- bourhoods are protected. Aurora’s existing neighbourhoods, both older and newer, are not only a defining element of Aurora’s character and urban structure, but also a tremendous asset and attractor for new residents and investment interests. This Plan seeks to ensure that the stability and vibrancy of these existing neighbourhoods is protected from the negative impacts of potential incompatible development and growth pressures. Any infill that occurs must be compatible with the established community character. Policy 8.0 Intent It is the intent of this Plan to ensure that the areas designated ‘Stable Neighbourhoods’.... are protected from incompatible forms of development and, at the same time, are permitted to evolve and be enhanced over time. All new development shall be compatible with its surrounding context and shall conform with all other applicable policies of this Plan. Policy 8.1.3: Development Policies New development and site alteration abutting existing residen- tial development shall be sympathetic to the form and charac- ter of the [sic] existing development and shall be compatible with regard to building scale and urban design. Policy 8.1.4: Design Policies a) All new development within the ‘Stable Neighbourhoods’ designation shall respect and reinforce the existing physical character and uses of the surrounding area, with particular attention to the following elements: i. the pattern of lots, streets and blocks; ii. the size and configuration of nearby lots; iii. the building type of nearby residential properties; iv. the heights and scale of nearby residential properties; v. the setback of buildings from the street; The Town of Aurora Official Plan September 27, 2010 50 vi. the pattern of rear and side-yard setbacks; and, vii. conservation and enhancement of cultural heritage resources. Policy 4.2a: New development, redevelopment, rehabilitation, and sub- division layout shall be encouraged to complement natural landscapes and grades, water courses, vegetation, heritage environments and existing or proposed adjacent buildings, through the conceptual design of buildings, their massing, siting, exterior, access and public areas. Policy 4.2c: Council shall support urban design which: • Reconciles compatibility with diversity; and, • Avoids both monotony and harsh contrasts. Policy 4.2.f: To achieve human scale, attractive and safe public environ- ments, in entryways, heritage areas, in and adjacent to streets and open spaces, the following: i. Development should encourage: • sun penetration on outdoor spaces such as sidewalks, streets, parks and court yards; • a micro climate which prevents wind tunnels and shelters against cold northerly winds; • access to historic areas by walking, cycling and transit; and, • practices that would mitigate local heat island effects such as the incorporation of green or white roofs, strategic planting of shade trees, and the use of light coloured paving materials. Page 95 of 225 4 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Temperance Street Neighbourhood viii. All new parking shall be located at the rear of buildings. In areas that have already been developed, parking in front shall be encouraged to: • be screened by landscaping; • allow for visibility of store fronts from the street by limiting the depth of front parking areas; • not create large gaps between developments; • allow for substantially uniform setbacks from the street; • minimize conflict with pedestrian circulation; and, • be coordinated with adjacent commercial developments. ix. Non-residential uses shall be screened from abutting resi- dential uses where residential uses exist or are planned and the non-residential use does not exist or requires an Official Plan Amendment. x. Unsightly site elements such as loading, parking, refuse storage areas and transformers shall be screened to ensure the amenity of adjacent areas. xi. Visual screens may consist of landscaped buffer areas with grass strips, tree(s), shrubs and or decorative screens, walls or fences, as specified in municipal standards. Such screens shall not obscure visibility or compromise the sense of safety. xii. In order to mitigate the visual impact of roof top mechanical equipment (other than solar panels), such equipment shall be: • placed in locations that eliminate their visibility; and/or, • screened by raised parapets that complement the building design, material and colour; and/or, • placed in specially designed enclosures that complement the building design, material and colour. xiii. Council may require special urban design studies for development proposals to ensure the special requirements are met at Entryway locations. ii. Facade treatment should encourage: • elements of interest such as displays; • well-designed street furniture and landscaping; • a variety of textures and colours on walls and walkways; • human scale development that ensures people at grade do not feel over-powered by the built environment; and, • open balconies on upper floors overlooking streets espe- cially in mixed use areas and residential projects. iii. Pedestrians shall be protected from inclement weather with canopies or arcades at building entrances and along store fronts. iv. Upper storeys of larger buildings may require step- backs to achieve: • human scale buildings; • vistas to heritage sites; • harmony with natural contours; and, • diversity of scales without harsh contrast and monotony. v. Landscaping and underground wiring may be required to enhance public vistas in visually significant areas. vi. Council may require utility providers to consider innovative methods of containing utility services on or within streetscape features such as entryway features, light standards, transit shelters, etc., when determining appropriate locations for larger utility equipment and/or utility clusters. vii. In older sections of the community, Council may undertake tree planting, maintenance and renewal while in new areas developers shall undertake a street tree planting programme in accordance with municipal standards. Page 96 of 225 5Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Temperance Street Neighbourhood 1.4 How will they be used? These Design Guidelines will be used to evaluate proposals for single-detached and semi-detached dwellings consisting of: - replacement dwellings or additions - new and replacement detached garages - accesory structures - additions/accesory structures equal to or over 50m2. The Design Guidelines : • Will be implemented through the Town’s Site Plan Approval process. • Are intended to provide guidance for homeowners, de- signers, architects, developers and landscape architects by outlining the framework and design principles for the site layout, massing and relationships of new and modified dwellings in the neighbourhood. • Are non-statutory statements and therefore have inherent flexibility in their interpretation and application. As a plan- ning tool, they may be changed or adjusted on a case-by- case basis. 1.3 What are Design Guidelines? The Zoning by-law addresses matters such as lot coverage, parking, setbacks and height - the ‘quantitative’ aspects of a neighbourhood’s physical form. While zoning regulates how buildings sit within a lot/block, it represents only one of the planning tools that may be used to guide and shape develop- ment. To create development that promotes ‘design excel- lence’, is ‘compatible’ with and ‘fits’ within its surrounding con- text, zoning is best used in conjunction with design guidelines. Design guidelines address the relative height, massing and ar- ticulation of elements (buildings and landscapes), their relation- ship to one another and to their surroundings - these ‘qualita- tive’ aspects of physical form work in combination with zoning parameters to lend shape and ‘character’ to a neighbourhood. These aspects are more effectively addressed through Urban Design Guidelines. Urban Design Guidelines are statements that include design guidance, criteria, standards and codes for how to shape the built environment, both the individual elements as well as how these should be spatially arranged and relate to one another. Urban Design Guidelines address diverse scales of develop- ment, from site specific to city-wide. Design Guidelines typical- ly address the design of buildings, landscape features and their organization within a defined area as well as their relationship to their surroundings - built and natural. Diagram generally illustrating the aspects of building that are addressed in the Zoning By-law. The Zoning By-law controls the use of land in terms of how it may be used, lot sizes/dimensions, where buildings and other structures can be located, the type of buildings permitted, height, parking requirements and setbacks. Diagram generally illustrating the contextual considerations for new buildings and additions addressed in Urban Design Guidelines. Urban design guidelines refine what happens inside the lot by further shaping the building(s) in relation to its context, in relation to the adjacent structures and the streetscape. Urban design considerations include elevation design, architec- tural style, use of materials, and landscape design in relation to the immediate and surrounding context. Rear Yard Setback Massing in relation to adjacent buildings Side Yard Setback Front Yard Setback Building Height Landscape /streetscape along the street Rhythm/placement of driveways along the street Building’s front-elevation as integral part of the streetscape Page 97 of 225 6 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Temperance Street Neighbourhood 1.5 Objectives of the Design Guidelines The recent development activity has posed a number of chal- lenges to maintaining the characteristics that define the Stable Neighbourhoods, including the Temperance Street Neighbour- hood. These design guidelines work in combination with zoning standards to address the placement, scale and design of new buildings and additions relative to their surroundings and pro- vide guidance to: • promote compatible development; • enhance neighbourhood character; and, • promote good urban design and best practices. Site Local Neighbourhood Road 150mDiagrams generally illustrating the area to be considered, in relation to the scale of building proposed. When an addition to an existing building is proposed, the context area to be considered generally includes the adjacent lots indicated. When a new building (an existing dwelling is replaced by a new dwelling) is proposed, or a lot is severed, the context area to be considered generally includes the area indicated. Site Local Neighbourhood Road Page 98 of 225 7Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Temperance Street Neighbourhood Neighbourhood Character Neighbourhood character refers to the “look and feel” of a place, and it considers the public and private realm components that define the area, including topography, age and style of housing, built environment, land use patterns, landscaping, street patterns, open space, natural heritage areas and streetscapes. Going beyond a categorization of the private and public realm, the character of individual properties and buildings cannot be viewed in isolation from the character of the street and surrounding context. Neighbourhoods evolve over time, the incremental / cumu- lative changes that occur are important to the continued viability and vibrancy of the area; these changes, when taken in context, help to shape the character of the neighbourhood, including the following key attributes: • Pattern of Lots; • Streetscapes; • Architectural Forms & Styles; and, • Cultural Heritage Resources. Page 99 of 225 8 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Temperance Street Neighbourhood 1.6 Character Attributes (general description) Pattern of Lots While the Zoning By-law speaks to individual lot sizes and lot frontages, urban design focuses on the combined/cumulative effect of the individual lots over a larger area, as an overall pat- tern. The pattern of lots is important as it informs where and how a building sits relative to the street and to one another, resulting in a rhythm of solid and void along the street as well as the proportion of building to landscape over the larger area. Streetscapes Streetscapes encompass the elements that contribute to spatially defining, articulating and animating the street environ- ment, within both the public and private domains. Streetscape design requires that these elements are considered in a comprehensive manner, including the placement of buildings and driveways, building features that face the street, the open spaces between buildings, the roof line of buildings along the street, and landscaping within the street boulevard and front yards. The illustrations below generally show these components, in plan and elevation view. Figure ground graphic reflecting the pattern of lots Reuben Street Temperance StreetStreetscape elevation Streetscape Plan Page 100 of 225 9Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Temperance Street Neighbourhood Architectural Forms & Styles The Zoning By-law speaks to how a building sits within a lot and a building ‘envelope’. It does not address the form and style of buildings which have a tremendous collective impact on the character of an area. While a rigorous adherence to a particular form or style is neither desirable nor realistic (even in new subdivisions), there are key elements of all building designs that can be used to ensure that different forms and styles can co-exist alongside one another in a compatible and complementary manner. This may include: front porches, windows, doors, horizontal bands, specific roof lines, etc. Cultural Heritage Resources Cultural heritage resources are important character-giving elements of our communities and where feasible, should be preserved, integrated and enhanced. At the same time, the impact of new developments on heritage buildings and the character of a street / area should be minimized. This means that new buildings in proximity to heritage buildings should be compatible in height, massing and placement on the lot and complementary in style, materials and details. Examples of architectural forms and styles Temperance Street Area_Late 1920s; 1878 County Atlas Map Page 101 of 225 10 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Temperance Street Neighbourhood Houses placed close to the street edge provide for a more urban neighbourhood character Mature trees and enhanced landscaping are essential part of the neighbourhood’s character Temperance Street road pattern Temperance Street streetscape Temperance Street lot pattern Kennedy Street West Yonge StreetReuben Street Temperance StreetRansom Street Kennedy Street West Yonge StreetReuben Street Temperance StreetRansom Street Page 102 of 225 11Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Temperance Street Neighbourhood 2 Temperance Street Character The Temperance Street Neighbourhood is an older urban neighbourhood located in the Temperance Street and Kennedy Street West area, and directly connected to the Yonge Street commercial corridor. The neighbourhood encompasses the southern end of Temperance Street and acts as a transition area along the westernmost edge of the modified grid street network along Yonge Street. The neighbourhood is characterized by an eclectic mix of building forms and architectural styles largely extending north- south along Temperance Street, and narrower streets and intersections. Smaller setbacks and a large concentration of 1.5 to 2.5 storey houses, together with prominent porches, mature trees and generous landscaping help to creates a strong sense of enclosure to the streetscape and a more comfortable ped- estrian environment. Older historic houses dominate the neighbourhood and some from the late 20th century can be found in the south. Over time, the Temperance Street area has continued to evolve, change and mature, with the construction of both new buildings, building additions and building renovations. While the incremental pattern of development activity has resulted in a visually rich and interesting neighbourhood character, future development should ensure compatibility through the recog- nition and enhancement of neighbourhood character and the promotion of good urban design. For the Temperance Street Neighbourhood, it is recognized that its character arises from a combination of the following key attributes. Pattern of Lots The Neighbourhood reflects a regular, orthogonal grid with Temperance Street acting as the north-south neighbourhood spine parallel to Yonge, and 3 east-west streets intersecting it. Most lots are narrow and deep, and relatively large compared to those on other similar urban settings. Although houses have variable front and side yard setbacks, buildings are generally placed closer to the street edge, which enhances the compact character of the neighbourhood and streetscape. Lots are either accessed via a driveway or walkway. Streetscapes In the Temperance Street Neighbourhood, the streetscape environment is defined by: • Streets and intersections narrower than those in the newer neighbourhoods. • Buildings that are generally 1.5 to 2.5 storeys, with most having pitched roofs. • A variation in the placement of dwellings from the street, with most in the older buildings located relatively close to the street. • Garages that are not prominent on the streetscape and, where provided, they are generally set back from the front façade or detached and placed to the rear of the property, with the exception of the newer houses. • Significant mature trees and landscaping. • Sidewalks are provided on at least one side of almost all streets, some with a boulevard. Page 103 of 225 12 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Temperance Street Neighbourhood Example of an older historic dwellings in the Neighbourhood Historic style houses with significant porches and pitched roof linesSiding, as well as brick, are common materials Architectural Forms and Styles As the Temperance Street neighbourhood is located adjacent to a traditional main street, there are a mix of adjacent land uses that add to the diverse building forms in the area and makes it. However, a significant number of older historic hous- es dominate the area, including some late 20th century houses in the south. Newer construction can be found in the southern part of the neighbourhood. Most of the buildings in the neighbourhood face the street and provide a positive presence on the public realm, includ- ing prominent front doors and significant front porches that frequently softened the design of front facades. There is a wide range of roof lines and pitches, with a steeper pitch dominating older built forms. Page 104 of 225 13Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Temperance Street Neighbourhood Section of the ‘Downtown Area Heritage Properties with Buildings ‘ Map Dated February2012 Cultural Heritage Resources The majority of properties located located on Ransom Street, Reuben Street, Kennedy Street West and Temperance Street are either designated or listed heritage properties under the Ontario Heritage Act. These are protected in the Official Plan to ensure that Aurora’s cultural heritage resources are conserved and enhanced to the long-term benefit of the community. The Temperance Street Neighbourhood is unique in that it is essentially focused on two sides of a few streets and that many of the existing lots back onto the Main Street (Yonge Street). It will be particularly important to maintain the character of this small area, as pressures for potential development occur along Yonge Street. New developments will likely be in higher density mixed use building forms and thus the impact of those types of buildings on the neighbourhood should be carefully considered.Temperance StYONGE STREETChurch St Gurnett StKennedy St EMill StReuben St nnedy St W Ransom Crt Ransom St Tyler St Park Temperance St20 15224-15226 8 8 6 9 8 8 7 3 7& 7A 5 96 90 226181412 191513 211713 16 18 1511-13 17 11 98 96 92 90 86 82 78 74 68 64 60 58 56 54 50 46 42 99 95 91 89 87 83 79 81 57 55 47 41 39 37 20 16 12 33 31 29 27 25 23 19 15 11 42 38 34 30 28 26 24 20 16 12 41 39 37 31 29 25 21 19 15 11 34 32 30 28 18- 20 16 37 35 31 29 27 23 50 46 42 40 38 34 28 16 12 45 37 35 31 29 15 11 55 50 46 44 42 28 41 35-37 13 32 24 12 39B 150 148 144 140 138 136 122 120 118 116 102 100 14 1 1 13 146 144 142 140 138 134 126 120 110 108 104 102 100 143 139 137 121 119 117 113 107 103 101 39A 14961 14967 14973 14981 14987 14993 1500515017 15029 15037 15055 15085 15105 15117 15145 15157 15165 15171 15185 1518715191 15195 15199 15203 15207 15213 15217 15221 15225 15231 15233 15243 14958 14980 14988 14996 15004 15010 15018 15032 15040 15048 15054 15064 15074 15086- 15088 15106 15114 15120 15124 15132 15136 15140 15150 15160 15186 15198 15208 15210 15216 15218 15222 15226 15230 15236 15240 15242 1525515252 15229 15220 15228 Pending List Listed Heritage Property Designated Heritage Property Page 105 of 225 14 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Temperance Street Neighbourhood Kennedy Street West Yonge StreetReuben Street Temperance StreetRansom Street Figure ground graphic reveals the neighbourhood has an array of rear setbacks that is directly related to the existing variety in lot depths and shapes, and building footprints/sizes. However, clusters of 3-5 adjacent lots along the same streetscape share the same rear setback and very similar built form configurations/size. Page 106 of 225 15Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Temperance Street Neighbourhood Design Guidelines 1 Where possible, ensure that the rhythm along the street- scapes is respected and reinforced. 2 Where possible, enhance the public domain while main- taining appropriate separation of private areas. 3 Where possible, maintain the traditional building to lot rela- tionship and encourage dwellings are in proportion to their lot sizes. 4 Maintain generous open space in the rear yard to allow for space for light, landscaping and recreational uses. 5 Ensure a measure of privacy between neighbours by provid- ing sufficient distance between the back wall of the house and the rear property line. 6 Address rear yard privacy and sunlight issues when ex- tending a home towards the rear property line or building a new dwelling by: a) Minimizing extensions beyond the adjacent dwellings rear wall. b) Keeping windows to a minimum on side elevations when the rear wall of the renovated/new dwelling extends beyond the adjacent dwelling’s wall. c) Minimizing the location of second floor balconies on rear and side elevations. d) Providing fencing that effectively screens the rear amen- ity and minimizes its exposure to/from adjacent proper- ties. 7 Provide enough distance between detached garages and the rear property line to minimize their impact on adjacent lots and allow opportunities for planting. Rear yard setbacks Provide enough distance from the garage to the rear property line Provide enough distance from the house to the rear property line Minimize extensions beyond adjacent dwelling’s rear wall 3 Urban Design Guidelines The Zoning By-law establishes clear regulations for lot cover- age, landscaping, front/rear yard setbacks and interior/exter- ior side yard setbacks. These guidelines are not intended to duplicate the Zoning By-law, but instead, to work in conjunc- tion with the zoning standards to not only ensure ‘no adverse impact’ through quantified performance standards, but also ‘compatibility’ of development through qualitative, context related design measures. As such, the guidelines in this section are organized based upon the four key attributes that contribute to the character of the Temperance Street Neighbourhood. They are not intended to be detailed but rather, provide general guidance for all stable neighbourhoods. 3.1 Pattern of Lots Lot Sizes/Configurations and Rear Setbacks While lot size conditions the development possibilities in terms of building size/coverage, the way it is configured determines how the development relates to the public realm and other buildings along the street, as well as the consistency of the neighbourhood. The objectives of the Urban Design Guidelines regarding lot size and its configuration and rear setbacks are to: • Ensure compatible/similar lot sizes that enhance the rhythm along the streetscapes; • Ensure lot configuration that reflect those of properties close by while achieving the desire relationship between the dwelling and the streetscape. • Generally maintain the traditional range of building to lot relationship; • Ensure that dwellings are in proportion to their lot sizes; • Maintain the level of openness in the rear yard; and, • Allow a measure of privacy between neighbours by provid- ing space for light, landscaping and recreational uses. Page 107 of 225 16 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Temperance Street Neighbourhood Front setback approaches Front setback reflects that of adjacent units Front setback is the average of that of adjacent units NewNew Generally consistent spacing between buildings Design Guidelines Between Buildings and the Street 8 Reflect the front setback of adjacent dwellings; when substantially different, ensure the new dwelling’s setback is equal to the average distance of those on either side of it. 9 Encourage a pedestrian oriented streetscape by placing new units close to the street edge/property line. 10 Provide side yard setbacks that reflect those of adjacent homes, or are the average distance of those on either side of the development, in accordance with existing zoning standards, to a minimum of 1.5 metres and 3.0m beyond the main rear wall of adjacent dwellings. Design Guidelines Between Buildings 11 Maintain consistent spacing between dwellings. 12 Maintain a consistent ‘street wall’. 13 Provide space for light and landscaping between neigh- bours. 14 Protect the privacy between units by minimizing the num- ber of windows on side elevations. 3.2 Streetscapes The form (height, scale and massing) and placement (setbacks) of buildings in relation to the street and to adjacent develop- ments are important considerations that define streetscapes. The height, scale, massing and placement of buildings are important to creating the ‘street wall’ and framing the street- scape. Front Yard and Side Yard Setbacks The relationship between buildings through placement on the lot is important to ensure a consistent neighbourhood ‘feel’, and defines/frames the street while impacting the sense of openness and enclosure. The positioning of houses on their lots contribute significantly to the streetscapes and the charac- ter of the Temperance Street Neighbourhood. The Zoning By-law establishes clear regulations for front yard setbacks and interior/exterior side yard setbacks. The object- ives of the Design Guidelines in directing the relationship of the building to the side lot lines are to: • Maintain a consistent spacing between dwellings, and • Allow a measure of privacy between neighbours by provid- ing space for light and landscaping. Page 108 of 225 17Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Temperance Street Neighbourhood Approach to height and scale including transition Maximum 1.5 storeys difference between adjacent dwellings Consistent height Appropriate transition to lower dwellings Articulated dwelling design reflects the original lot grading Articulated 2.5 storey buildings with entry porches frame the street Building Height and Scale Buildings in Temperance Street range from 1.5 to 2.5 storeys, with a mix of architectural styles ranging from mostly historic houses to some 20th century homes. For the purposes of these guidelines, a storey shall be defined as one level of habitable living space. The objectives of the Design Guidelines in directing the rela- tionship of the building scale along the street are to: • Ensure a scale, massing, roof line and building orientation that is commonly found in the neighbourhood; • Ensure a sensitive transition to adjacent residential dwell- ings; and, • Promote more pedestrian-scaled streets. Design Guidelines for Framing the Street 15 On blocks where single storey or 1.5 storey homes are pre- dominant, second storey additions or new 2 storey homes may require particular attention to ensure sensitive transi- tions to adjacent properties. 16 Where possible, maintain the existing lot grading and the neighbourhood’s characteristic first floor height. 17 Design to reflect the massing of the surrounding built form context for those elevations exposed to the public and pro- vide any additional massing away from them. 18 Provide appropriate transition to/from existing adjacent buildings and ensure no new building is more than 1.5 stor- eys or 4.5m higher/lower than the adjacent dwellings. 19 Favour traditional architectural styles and ensure modern ones complement the surrounding dwellings. 20 Encourage roof lines with steeper pitches and articulated roof lines to reflect those of existing dwellings in the neigh- bourhood. 21 Discourage flat rooftops. Page 109 of 225 18 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Temperance Street Neighbourhood Garage & Driveway Width and Location Garages and driveways should be located and sized based on the established pattern of the neighbourhood. In Temperance Street garages are generally not a prominent feature of the streetscape, and they are typically set back from the front facade or detached and located to the rear of the property. The objectives of the Design Guidelines in directing the width and location of garages and driveways along the street are to: • Ensure that garage doors do not dominate the front facade of the house; • Minimize the garage and driveway presence on the street- scape; and, • Maintain a consistent garage type and driveway width along the street. attached/ integrated front garage attached recessed garage detached recessed garage (front) detached recessed garage (rear) Design Guidelines for Driveways and Garages 22 For attached garages/carports, de-emphasize their visual impact on the streetscape by: a) Integrating the attached garage/carport into the massing and design of the dwelling. b) Recessing them from the main front wall and avoid projecting it beyond the main front wall of the adjacent dwellings. c) Considering the attached garages include a second stor- ey over the garage, where height limitations permit. d) Designing the roof line of the attached garage/carport to be compatible with and complement the roof line of the dwelling. e) Integrating garage doors into the dwelling’s façade design. f) Ensuring that garage doors do not dominate the front facade of the house. 23 Encourage a consistent garage type and location along the street. 24 Encourage narrow driveways and ensure their widths do not substantially exceed the garage/carport width. 25 Encourage rear detached garages. 26 Consider tandem parking for narrower lots. 27 Where detached garages are proposed, locate them re- cessed from the dwelling’s main front wall, and design them to reflect and complement the materials and character of the house. 28 Ensure the size of the garage is compatible with the size of the lot/dwelling; a) Front-facing attached garages should not take up more than 50% of the width of the main front wall of the dwelling. b) A maximum of a 2-car garage is considered appropriate for this neighbourhood. Example of appropriate garage configurations that support the neighbourhood’s character and a pedestrian-oriented public realm attached recessed garage covers maximum 50% of main front wall Page 110 of 225 19Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Temperance Street Neighbourhood 31 Encourage a combination of grassed areas and plantings that complement the design dwelling and animate the street edge. 32 Minimize hard surface landscaping/pavement in front yards and consider them for walkways and driveways only. 33 Encourage permeable paving for new walkways and drive- ways to reduce run-off to storm sewers and soften the streetscape appearance. 34 Provide a walkway from the front door to the sidewalk or to the driveway in the absence of a sidewalk. 35 Provide landscaping in front of blank walls. 36 Encourage front yard hedges do not exceed 1.2m in height, to allow for “eyes to the street” and avoid blocked views from/to dwellings. 37 Avoid privacy fencing at the front of the house; if con- sidered, privacy fencing should not extend beyond the main front wall of the dwelling. 38 Favour corner lot fencing materials that complement the dwelling’s character as well as that of the surrounding neighbourhood; 39 Encourage the use of natural stone finishes for paving and landscape walls. Landscape Treatment As dwellings in Temperance Street are located close to the street edge, front yards are mostly a combination of grassed areas with mature trees and decorative low plantings and shrubs that complement porches and entrance features, while providing transition from the public to the private spaces. in the neighbourhood side yards are often delineated by fences and/or generous planting. The objectives of the Design Guidelines with respect to land- scape are to: • Maintain the green landscape character of the neighbourhood; • Plan for the urban canopy; • Screen views to rear yard parking; and, • Preserve mature trees. Design Guidelines for Landscape Treatment 29 Protect mature trees and encourage planting of new trees to enhance the urban canopy and create tree-lined streets. 30 Enhance the bio-resiliency of the area through planting of native, non-invasive trees and shrubs. Hard surfaces are limited to the parking and walkway areas while complementing landscaping enhances the dwelling’s design Page 111 of 225 20 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Temperance Street Neighbourhood • Ensure that the prominence of house front entrance and the proportion of glazing are maintained and consistent with the surrounding neighbourhood; and, • Ensure the entrance remain the main feature of the house and is oriented to and clearly visible from the street. Design Guidelines 40 Design dwellings to have articulated elevations, especially those exposed to streets and/or open spaces. Articulated elevations might include changes in plane, projections, en- hanced fenestration, highlighted entrances, complementary materials, among other architectural elements. 41 Avoid blank walls facing the public realm (i.e. streets and open spaces) 42 Incorporate the vertical and horizontal proportions, rhythm and elevation design elements of surrounding dwellings including fenestration, lintels, sills, cornice and roof lines. 43 Ensure traditional architectural styles are properly exe- cuted and reflect their fundamental attributes. When not expressed / executed properly, these styles detract from the overall quality of the neighbourhood and can result in a hodge/podge of disparate design elements. 44 Consider contemporary architectural styles and ensure they reflect the proportions and fenestration of surrounding dwellings. 3.3 Architectural Forms and Styles Front Elevation Treatment The character of a neighbourhood is not static but rather, evolving and maturing with each home that is built or added onto. This creates a variety of styles, design expressions and materials that, layered over time, enhances and contributes to the character of a neighbourhood. This is most apparent along the streetscape. The main front wall of a dwelling has an important role in defining and framing the streetscape. Its design / articulation is equally important to animating the street, and to establishing a positive connection to the broader neighbourhood. As a neighbourhood with a strong historic character, dwellings in Temperance Street have prominent entries with significant front porches that generally step down to a front walkway and/ or driveway. Glazing is provided through modest windows of vertical proportions, aligned vertically to one another or to entrances. The objectives of the Design Guidelines in directing the relationship of the building front elevation and entrance to the street are to: • Encourage a variety of architectural forms and styles that reflect the evolution of the neighbourhood while enhancing its character. • Promote “eyes on the street” and a strong presence of the main elevation on the street; The design of new dwelling reflects the proportions of those adjacent to it Overall height and horizontal composition (base, mid- dle and top), including consistent ground floor height Vertical breaks and changes in plane Architectural details including windows (proportions and scale) Page 112 of 225 21Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Temperance Street Neighbourhood 45 Consider keeping entry steps to a maximum of 5 and ensure they lead to a significant porch/entrance element/ portico. 46 Design entrances to be consistent with the height and rela- tionship to the street of adjacent dwellings. 47 Ensure front doors are prominent, clearly visible and ap- proachable from the street via a walkway or driveway. 48 Encourage entrance features to be located at the front wall and highlight their prominence through articulated architec- tural elements. 49 Discourage side entrances. If they are considered, highlight their presence through massing and architectural gestures that provide a “public face” (e.g. wrapping porches/stoops and articulated elements) and provide a clear connection to the sidewalk or driveway. 50 Encourage weather protection elements at the main en- trance and design them to complement the overall design of the dwelling. 51 Avoid metallic - cottage style awnings attached to main front wall. 52 For new homes or additions to existing ones located where there is a dominant pattern of existing front porches, incor- porate similar elements into the design and encourage they are consistent in size and style with those in the surround- ing neighbourhood. 53 If appropriate, consider porches that are as wide as the main front wall but ensure steps are only slightly wider than the entrance doors. 54 Design porch roof to complement the roof lines and propor- tions of the dwelling. 55 Provide enough glazing in the main elevation(s) through windows that complement the proportions and style of the dwelling, and those of adjacent dwellings. 56 Ensure corner units to display equal design quality on both elevations visible from the street and consider: a) Locating the main entrance at the exterior side wall. b) Incorporating wrap-around porches and corner features where appropriate. Articulated front elevation and roof lines animate the streetscape Dwelling’s mass is broken through the articulation of the front elevation and the use of accent materials to emphasize the entrance portion Articulated corner porch as main element of the front elevation Page 113 of 225 22 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Temperance Street Neighbourhood Design Guidelines 57 Encourage a variety of coordinated materials that enhance and complement both the surrounding neighbourhood as well as the design style of the building.This may include more contemporary materials such as metal and concrete, in combination with brick, stone and wood. 58 Promote the use of high quality materials. The following are recommended as primary building materials in the Temper- ance Street Neighbourhood: a) Brick. b) Wood clapboard (siding) or wood batten. 59 Discourage the use of stone and stucco or its equivalent as main materials, and consider their use as secondary or accent materials only. 60 Consider natural finishes. 61 Provide colour palettes that take their cues from the built form on surrounding streets and/or are compatible with it. 62 Favour colours and materials from a heritage palette, including dark (reds and browns) and yellow buff brick and a variety of colours/tones for wood clapboard/batten. Avoid bright palettes. 63 Consider metallic railings and window frames as well as painted wood for porches, porch railings, bay window sur- rounds and shutters. 64 Consider cedar and asphalt shingles on roofs, as well as metal roofing when appropriate. 65 For additions or renovations to an existing building, incor- porate materials and colours that are consistent with and complement the main building. Building Materials The variety of building materials contributes to the interest along the street and to the varied architectural character of the neighbourhood. There should be no strict imposition of material palettes. How- ever, broad categories of building appearances are identified and described which provide sufficient flexibility to accommo- date variety, while ensuring that no jarring interventions will be inserted to interrupt the visual harmony of a neighbourhood. The objectives of the Design Guidelines for renovations, addi- tions and new construction are to: • Ensure high quality materials are used; • Preserve the variety of design, colour and building materials within a range that enhances the character of the neigh- bourhood; and, • Ensure that while buildings will inevitably change over time, they will maintain the cohesive visual character of the street. Brick as primary material in heritage palettes Wood clapboard as primary material with stone used as accent and metallic railings complementing the dwelling’s architecture Page 114 of 225 23Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Temperance Street Neighbourhood 3.4 Cultural Heritage Resources The objectives of the Design Guidelines with respect to Cultural Heritage Resources are: • Preserve and highlight valuable Heritage Buildings in the area • Ensure the design of new dwellings and ancillary struc- tures enhances and highlights existing Heritage Buildings through appropriate placement, scale/massing and facade and streetscape treatments Design Guidelines 66 Place additions to heritage buildings on the rear or side, recessed from the main front wall of the heritage building. 67 Locate new garages to the rear or setback on the side of the heritage building, and design them to complement it. 68 Ensure appropriate integration of heritage buildings into new developments on the same site by providing: a) The new structure’s main wall or that of ancillary build- ings is setback from that of the heritage building. b) The height of the new structure is maximum 1 storey greater than the heritage building (or 3.5m measured to the top of the new structure’s roof). c) The proportions and palette of materials/colours of the new structure reflect and complement those of the Heritage Building. d) The new structure is physically and visually compatible with, subordinate to, and distinguishable from the herit- age building. e) No heritage attribute of the heritage building is concealed by the new structure (i.e. the heritage attributes identi- fied in the designation by-law should remain visible from the street). f) No addition or new construction will negatively impact the heritage building if removed in the future. 69 Design new buildings to minimize their impact on heritage buildings on adjacent lots and to acknowledge/highlight them by ensuring: a) The new building setback is equal to that of the heritage building, or is the average distance between the setbacks of the buildings on either side of the new development. b) The height of the new dwelling is equal to or maximum 1.5 storeys or 4.5m taller than that of the Heritage Build- ing. 70 Avoid recreating historical architectural styles. 71 Reflect the rhythm of the horizontal and vertical architectural elements of the adjacent or on-site heritage building in the design of new dwellings/structures/additions. 72 Provide the finished first floor height of any new dwelling/ structure/addition is consistent with the finished first floor height of adjacent or on-site heritage buildings. 73 Design new elevations to reflect the heritage building’s proportions of glazing vs. solid, and those of windows and doors (width and height). 74 Reflect the design and proportions of the landscape treat- ment of adjacent heritage properties. 75 When considered, contemporary designs shall respond to / reflect key elements of the adjacent heritage buildings, including for examples: a) Its scale, massing and overall proportions. b) The arrangement and proportions of its elevation ele- ments (horizontal and vertical articulation, rhythm of windows). c) Its materials and colours. Page 115 of 225 24 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Temperance Street Neighbourhood Residential Zones R3-SN (497) R7-SN (497) R3-SN (498) R3-SN (499) New BuildingBuilding Addition (equal to or greater than 50m2) or 4 Implementation, Monitoring & Updates Planning & Development Services‘Basic’ Site Plan Process & Urban Design Review • Site Design (grading, servicing, lot coverage and configuration, setbacks, garage and driveway width and location) • Urban Design Guidelines • Zoning • Building Design (building height and massing,architectural design, front elevation treatment, building materials, heritage resources) • Major alterations to existing heritage buildings need to obtain a Heritage Permit through the review and approval by Council prior to the issuance of site plan approval. • Refer to Site Plan Application Guide Site Plan Approval Building Permit Building Division • Ontario Building Code • Refer to Building Permit Application Guide+ Page 116 of 225 25Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Temperance Street Neighbourhood Front-facing attached garage: a garage that is built into the front structure of a dwelling, with a garage door that faces and is accessed from the street. Heritage Attribute: attributes of the property, buildings and structures that contribute to the property’s cultural heritage value or interest. They may inlcude but are not limited to archi- tectural style/design, massing/scale, composition, function, interior spatial configurations, external layouts, and location. Historic/traditional style home: broad range of styles developed in the 19th and early 20th century, each displaying very unique features. Traditional home designs are influenced by historic styles (i.e. Victorian, Colonial, Craftsman, or Neo- classical architecture). Common features among them include large/open porches with overhanging beams and rafters, dormers, and tall/pitched rooftops with one or more gables. Common materials include brick, wood, stucco, and stone. Main Front Wall: the dwelling’s primary exterior front wall, not including permitted projections or a front attached garage door. Modern/contemporary Style: variety of styles developed in the latter half of the 20th century. Their design is based on the simple/clean lines, shapes and forms, mostly related to their structure. Straight lines, big openings, bold roofs lines (flat or low-sloped) and minimum texture are often seen in this type of houses. Common materials include concrete, brick, wood, and stucco. Stable Neighbourhoods: existing, older residential neighbour- hoods where a thriving community and a distinctive built/natur- al environment coexist and depend on each other. Sympathetic: that is compatible and supportive of an specific(s) built characteristic or element. Vicinity / Surrounding Context: area near or surrounding a particular place, or that is in enough proximity to share a physical relationship. Adverse Impact: Any impairment, disruption, destruction or harmful alteration. Articulated Elevation: A building elevation (usually the front and any publicly exposed building face) whose design includes a comprehensive combination of changes in plane, projections, enhanced fenestration, highlighted entrances, complementary materials, among other architectural elements (ie. not a plain, blank, flat wall). Building Footprint: the footprint of a house is the total ground area covered by the home including garages and porches. Character: a unique combination of features (i.e. existing pattern of development, built form and streetscape design) that should be embraced and reinforced. Coexist: two or more elements /structures that harmoniously exist in the same place. Compatible: As per the OP “...development that may not ne- cessarily be the same or similar to the existing buildings in the vicinity, but, nonetheless, enhances an established community and coexists with existing development without causing any undue adverse impact on surrounding properties.” Complement: built form that responds in a respectful and thoughtful manner to its context to reinforce it and make better. Enhance: strengthen, exalt and/or further improve the qualities that contribute to the character of a place. Reinforce. Existing: found in a particular place i.e. neighbourhood, street, development pattern. As per the OP”...means lawfully in existence on the date of this Plan’s adoption, and for greater certainty does not include a use, building or structure that is in existence on that date without being lawful”. Front building face width: the width of the main front wall of a dwelling, including a front-facing attached garage. appendix: Definitions & Glossary of Terms Page 117 of 225 Page 118 of 225 Town of Aurora Urban Design Guidelines For Additions and New Buildings in Stable Neighbourhoods Town Park Neighbourhood Prepared by The Planning Partnership l October 2020 Attachment 6Page 119 of 225 this page is intentionally left blank Page 120 of 225 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Town Park Neighbourhood 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Purpose of the Design Guidelines 2 1.2 Design Guidelines Context 2 1.3 What are Design Guidelines 5 1.4 How will They Be Used 5 1.5 Objectives of the Design Guidelines 6 1.6 Character Attributes (general description) 8 2 Town Park Character 11 3 Urban Design Guidelines 15 3.1 Pattern of Lots 15 3.2 Streetscapes 16 3.3 Architectural Forms and Styles 20 3.4 Cultural Heritage Resources 23 4 Implementation, Monitoring & Updates 24 a Appendix: Definitions and Glossary of Terms 25 Table of Contents Page 121 of 225 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Town Park NeighbourhoodWells StreetHarrison Avenue Connaught Avenue Kennedy Street East Cousins Drive Royal Road Dunning Avenue Wenderly DriveChurch Street Metcalfe Street Mosley Street Yonge StreetGurnett StreetVictoria StreetLarmont StreetBerczy StreetEdward StreetTown Park Neighbourhood (Zoning by-law boundary) Page 122 of 225 1Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Town Park Neighbourhood Guided by the community vision articulated in the Official Plan (OP), and building on the principles of ‘compatible’ develop- ment, the objective of the Urban Design Guidelines is to provide direction for the design of future residential uses that ‘respect and reinforce’ the unique character of Aurora’s Stable Neighbourhoods. Throughout a number of Aurora’s Stable Neighbourhoods, there is a growing trend of dwellings being renovated, en- larged, or replaced by new dwellings, which are often signifi- cantly larger and conflict with the existing character of the community. Through consultation with the community and feedback from residents, the Town identified a number of concerns. It should be noted that while there were generally two perspectives expressed - with equal support by those in favour of develop- ment and those opposed to change, the following are high- lights of some of the concerns that were heard: • Compatibility of new dwellings with the existing fabric of the community, mainly with respect to built form, height, architectural style and scale; • Issues of privacy, overlook and impact on sunlight in (pri- vate) amenity areas; • Preserving the integrity of the existing landscaped pattern of front and rear yards, notably with mature trees and large front lawns; • Side yard setbacks (the open space between dwellings) which form part of the neighbourhood character; • Existing zoning provisions (R3) which do not reflect what is in the ground today, especially lot coverage; • The limit of development and siting of additions and new builds in the Greenlands System; • Calculation of gross floor area as an added restriction in the By-law and how that number was achieved; • How grade is currently measured in the By-law, and the slope of a property, affecting the character of a lot relative to the street, in particular building height; It should also be noted that there was general recognition that the each of the four Stable Neighbourhoods are: • Unique and distinct and require an appropriate and custom- ized approach; • ‘In transition’ and while stable, are not static; • Require a regulatory framework that allows for flexibility in architectural style while respecting and reinforcing the existing neighbourhood character; and, • Urban Design Guidelines are a good tool to help with ‘fit’ for new infill development; To address some of these challenges, Town Council identi- fied the need for further direction in managing the built form of these changes in four specific neighbourhoods: Aurora Heights, Regency Acres, Temperance Street and Town Park. The Stable Neighbourhoods Study and Peer Review infor- mation report, presented to Town Council January 2019, suggested a number of recommendations for strengthening the protection of Stable Neighbourhoods. The report recom- mended additional planning tools for managing character, including the preparation of amendments to the Zoning By-law (By-law Number 6190-19 enacted June 25, 2019) and Urban Design Guidelines. 1 Introduction Page 123 of 225 2 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Town Park Neighbourhood 1.1 Purpose of the Design Guidelines The purpose of the Urban Design Guidelines is to implement the Official Plan Vision for Stable Neighbourhoods, by identi- fying the key attributes that contribute to the character of the area and providing a framework to guide the design of addi- tions and new buildings and landscapes that: • Reconciles compatibility with diversity, while avoiding both monotony and harsh contrasts; • Respects and reinforces the existing character of the neigh- bourhood; and, • Promotes a contextual design approach that considers the adjacent and surrounding development and fosters pedes- trian scaled/oriented streetscapes, while allowing for and encouraging appropriate flexibility, innovation and diversity in design, intrinsic to evolving communities. The Urban Design Guidelines for Stable Neighbourhoods are intended to work alongside the Zoning By-law to implement the Official Plan vision for Stable Neighbourhoods, to ensure that new development is compatible with, and enhances exist- ing stable neighbourhoods. 1.2 Design Guidelines Context The Town’s Official Plan is one of the guiding documents that is used to direct and manage growth; it articulates the vision and objectives for how the community should be developed and outlines the policies for how land in the community should be used. The Official Plan is prepared with input from the public and the community and helps to ensure that future planning and development meets the specific needs of the community; it deals mainly with issues such as: • Where new housing, industry, offices and shops will be located • What services like roads, watermains, sewers, parks and schools will be needed • When, and in what order, parts of the community will grow • Community improvement initiatives The Town’s Council recognizes the importance of having a Vision to steer it through all of the many changes that are in the near and distant future and that, in order to be successful, meaningful and impactful, it must represent what the com- munity is today and what it aspires to be in the years to come. In this regard, one of the key objectives for the successful evo- lution and development of the community is ‘Ensuring Design Excellence’. Ensuring Design Excellence extends to all areas within the Town, including existing, older residential neighbourhoods. These areas are identified as ‘Stable Neighbourhoods’ in the Official Plan; this designation is intended to protect the Neigh- bourhoods from incompatible forms of development, while still permitting them to evolve and be enhanced over time. While it is recognized that Stable Neighbourhoods are places that will continue to attract new residents and evolve, the policies direct that new development is to be sympathetic to and compatible with the form and character of the area, and appropriately considers the character of the area and the surrounding neighbourhood context. Page 124 of 225 3Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Town Park Neighbourhood Official Plan Policies that provide direction for Urban Design Guidelines include: Policy 2.1 Ensuring Design Excellence Ensure that Aurora promotes design excellence in all its land use and development decisions. High quality buildings, well-designed and functioning streetscapes, appropriate transi- tions between defined areas, integration between old and new development and connected open spaces are the elements that define a place. This Plan emphasizes the important link between managing growth, high quality design and Aurora’s continued evolution as a memorable and beautiful place. Policy 2.1.vi Protecting Stable Neighbourhoods It is the intent of this Plan to ensure that Aurora’s stable neigh- bourhoods are protected. Aurora’s existing neighbourhoods, both older and newer, are not only a defining element of Aurora’s character and urban structure, but also a tremendous asset and attractor for new residents and investment interests. This Plan seeks to ensure that the stability and vibrancy of these existing neighbourhoods is protected from the negative impacts of potential incompatible development and growth pressures. Any infill that occurs must be compatible with the established community character. Policy 8.0 Intent It is the intent of this Plan to ensure that the areas designated ‘Stable Neighbourhoods’.... are protected from incompatible forms of development and, at the same time, are permitted to evolve and be enhanced over time. All new development shall be compatible with its surrounding context and shall conform with all other applicable policies of this Plan. Policy 8.1.3: Development Policies New development and site alteration abutting existing residen- tial development shall be sympathetic to the form and charac- ter of the [sic] existing development and shall be compatible with regard to building scale and urban design. Policy 8.1.4: Design Policies a) All new development within the ‘Stable Neighbourhoods’ designation shall respect and reinforce the existing physical character and uses of the surrounding area, with particular attention to the following elements: i. the pattern of lots, streets and blocks; ii. the size and configuration of nearby lots; iii. the building type of nearby residential properties; iv. the heights and scale of nearby residential properties; v. the setback of buildings from the street; The Town of Aurora Official Plan September 27, 2010 50 vi. the pattern of rear and side-yard setbacks; and, vii. conservation and enhancement of cultural heritage resources. Policy 4.2a: New development, redevelopment, rehabilitation, and sub- division layout shall be encouraged to complement natural landscapes and grades, water courses, vegetation, heritage environments and existing or proposed adjacent buildings, through the conceptual design of buildings, their massing, siting, exterior, access and public areas. Policy 4.2c: Council shall support urban design which: • Reconciles compatibility with diversity; and, • Avoids both monotony and harsh contrasts. Policy 4.2.f: To achieve human scale, attractive and safe public environ- ments, in entryways, heritage areas, in and adjacent to streets and open spaces, the following: i. Development should encourage: • sun penetration on outdoor spaces such as sidewalks, streets, parks and court yards; • a micro climate which prevents wind tunnels and shelters against cold northerly winds; • access to historic areas by walking, cycling and transit; and, • practices that would mitigate local heat island effects such as the incorporation of green or white roofs, strategic planting of shade trees, and the use of light coloured paving materials. Page 125 of 225 4 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Town Park Neighbourhood viii. All new parking shall be located at the rear of buildings. In areas that have already been developed, parking in front shall be encouraged to: • be screened by landscaping; • allow for visibility of store fronts from the street by limiting the depth of front parking areas; • not create large gaps between developments; • allow for substantially uniform setbacks from the street; • minimize conflict with pedestrian circulation; and, • be coordinated with adjacent commercial developments. ix. Non-residential uses shall be screened from abutting resi- dential uses where residential uses exist or are planned and the non-residential use does not exist or requires an Official Plan Amendment. x. Unsightly site elements such as loading, parking, refuse storage areas and transformers shall be screened to ensure the amenity of adjacent areas. xi. Visual screens may consist of landscaped buffer areas with grass strips, tree(s), shrubs and or decorative screens, walls or fences, as specified in municipal standards. Such screens shall not obscure visibility or compromise the sense of safety. xii. In order to mitigate the visual impact of roof top mechanical equipment (other than solar panels), such equipment shall be: • placed in locations that eliminate their visibility; and/or, • screened by raised parapets that complement the building design, material and colour; and/or, • placed in specially designed enclosures that complement the building design, material and colour. xiii. Council may require special urban design studies for development proposals to ensure the special requirements are met at Entryway locations. ii. Facade treatment should encourage: • elements of interest such as displays; • well-designed street furniture and landscaping; • a variety of textures and colours on walls and walkways; • human scale development that ensures people at grade do not feel over-powered by the built environment; and, • open balconies on upper floors overlooking streets espe- cially in mixed use areas and residential projects. iii. Pedestrians shall be protected from inclement weather with canopies or arcades at building entrances and along store fronts. iv. Upper storeys of larger buildings may require step- backs to achieve: • human scale buildings; • vistas to heritage sites; • harmony with natural contours; and, • diversity of scales without harsh contrast and monotony. v. Landscaping and underground wiring may be required to enhance public vistas in visually significant areas. vi. Council may require utility providers to consider innovative methods of containing utility services on or within streetscape features such as entryway features, light standards, transit shelters, etc., when determining appropriate locations for larger utility equipment and/or utility clusters. vii. In older sections of the community, Council may undertake tree planting, maintenance and renewal while in new areas developers shall undertake a street tree planting programme in accordance with municipal standards. Page 126 of 225 5Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Town Park Neighbourhood 1.4 How will they be used? These Design Guidelines will be used to evaluate proposals for single-detached and semi-detached dwellings consisting of: - replacement dwellings or additions - new and replacement detached garages - accesory structures - additions/accesory structures equal to or over 50m2. The Design Guidelines : • Will be implemented through the Town’s Site Plan Approval process. • Are intended to provide guidance for homeowners, de- signers, architects, developers and landscape architects by outlining the framework and design principles for the site layout, massing and relationships of new and modified dwellings in the neighbourhood. • Are non-statutory statements and therefore have inherent flexibility in their interpretation and application. As a plan- ning tool, they may be changed or adjusted on a case-by- case basis. 1.3 What are Design Guidelines? The Zoning by-law addresses matters such as lot coverage, parking, setbacks and height - the ‘quantitative’ aspects of a neighbourhood’s physical form. While zoning regulates how buildings sit within a lot/block, it represents only one of the planning tools that may be used to guide and shape develop- ment. To create development that promotes ‘design excel- lence’, is ‘compatible’ with and ‘fits’ within its surrounding con- text, zoning is best used in conjunction with design guidelines. Design guidelines address the relative height, massing and ar- ticulation of elements (buildings and landscapes), their relation- ship to one another and to their surroundings - these ‘qualita- tive’ aspects of physical form work in combination with zoning parameters to lend shape and ‘character’ to a neighbourhood. These aspects are more effectively addressed through Urban Design Guidelines. Urban Design Guidelines are statements that include design guidance, criteria, standards and codes for how to shape the built environment, both the individual elements as well as how these should be spatially arranged and relate to one another. Urban Design Guidelines address diverse scales of develop- ment, from site specific to city-wide. Design Guidelines typical- ly address the design of buildings, landscape features and their organization within a defined area as well as their relationship to their surroundings - built and natural. Diagram generally illustrating the aspects of building that are addressed in the Zoning By-law. The Zoning By-law controls the use of land in terms of how it may be used, lot sizes/dimensions, where buildings and other structures can be located, the type of buildings permitted, height, parking requirements and setbacks. Diagram generally illustrating the contextual considerations for new buildings and additions addressed in Urban Design Guidelines. Urban design guidelines refine what happens inside the lot by further shaping the building(s) in relation to its context, in relation to the adjacent structures and the streetscape. Urban design considerations include elevation design, architec- tural style, use of materials, and landscape design in relation to the immediate and surrounding context. Rear Yard Setback Massing in relation to adjacent buildings Side Yard Setback Front Yard Setback Building Height Landscape /streetscape along the street Rhythm/placement of driveways along the street Building’s front-elevation as integral part of the streetscape Page 127 of 225 6 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Town Park Neighbourhood 1.5 Objectives of the Design Guidelines The recent development activity has posed a number of chal- lenges to maintaining the characteristics that define the Stable Neighbourhoods, including the Town Park Neighbourhood. These design guidelines work in combination with zoning standards to address the placement, scale and design of new buildings and additions relative to their surroundings and pro- vide guidance to: • promote compatible development; • enhance neighbourhood character; and, • promote good urban design and best practices. Site Local Neighbourhood Road 150mDiagrams generally illustrating the area to be considered, in relation to the scale of building proposed. When an addition to an existing building is proposed, the context area to be considered generally includes the adjacent lots indicated. When a new building (an existing dwelling is replaced by a new dwelling) is proposed, or a lot is severed, the context area to be considered generally includes the area indicated. Site Local Neighbourhood Road Page 128 of 225 7Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Town Park Neighbourhood Neighbourhood Character Neighbourhood character refers to the “look and feel” of a place, and it considers the public and private realm components that define the area, including topography, age and style of housing, built environment, land use patterns, landscaping, street patterns, open space, natural heritage areas and streetscapes. Going beyond a categorization of the private and public realm, the character of individual properties and buildings cannot be viewed in isolation from the character of the street and surrounding context. Neighbourhoods evolve over time, the incremental / cumu- lative changes that occur are important to the continued viability and vibrancy of the area; these changes, when taken in context, help to shape the character of the neighbourhood, including the following key attributes: • Pattern of Lots; • Streetscapes; • Architectural Forms & Styles; and, • Cultural Heritage Resources. Page 129 of 225 8 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Town Park Neighbourhood 1.6 Character Attributes (general description) Pattern of Lots While the Zoning By-law speaks to individual lot sizes and lot frontages, urban design focuses on the combined/cumulative effect of the individual lots over a larger area, as an overall pattern. The pattern of lots is important as it informs where and how a building sits relative to the street and to one another, resulting in a rhythm of solid and void along the street as well as the proportion of building to landscape over the larger area. Streetscapes Streetscapes encompass the elements that contribute to spatially defining, articulating and animating the street environ- ment, within both the public and private domains. Streetscape design requires that these elements are considered in a comprehensive manner, including the placement of buildings and driveways, building features that face the street, the open spaces between buildings, the roof line of buildings along the street, and landscaping within the street boulevard and front yards. The illustrations below generally show these components, in plan and elevation view. Figure ground graphic reflecting the pattern of lots Streetscape elevation Streetscape Plan Page 130 of 225 9Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Town Park Neighbourhood Architectural Forms & Styles The Zoning By-law speaks to how a building sits within a lot and a building ‘envelope’. It does not address the form and style of buildings which have a tremendous collective impact on the character of an area. While a rigorous adherence to a particular form or style is neither desirable nor realistic (even in new subdivisions), there are key elements of all building designs that can be used to ensure that different forms and styles can co-exist alongside one another in a compatible and complementary manner. This may include: front porches, windows, doors, horizontal bands, specific roof lines, etc. Cultural Heritage Resources Cultural heritage resources are important character-giving elements of our communities and where feasible, should be preserved, integrated and enhanced. At the same time, the impact of new developments on heritage buildings and the character of a street / area should be minimized. This means that new buildings in proximity to heritage buildings should be compatible in height, massing and placement on the lot and complementary in style, materials and details. Sketches of Heritage Resources From the Town of Aurora LACAC report (1985) Examples of architectural forms and styles Wellington Street East_Late 1920s; 1878 County Atlas Map Page 131 of 225 10 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Town Park Neighbourhood Town Park road pattern Town Park streetscape Town Park lot patternWells StreetHarrison Avenue Connaught Avenue Kennedy Street East Cousins Drive Royal Road Dunning Avenue Wenderly DriveChurch Street Metcalfe Street Mosley Street Yonge StreetGurnett StreetVictoria StreetLarmont StreetBerczy StreetEdward StreetWells StreetHarrison Avenue Connaught Avenue Kennedy Street East Cousins Drive Royal Road Dunning Avenue Wenderly DriveChurch Street Metcalfe Street Mosley Street Yonge StreetGurnett StreetVictoria StreetLarmont StreetBerczy StreetEdward StreetPage 132 of 225 11Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Town Park Neighbourhood Pattern of Lots In the Town Park Neighbourhood, the distinctive grid pattern of streets and blocks is grounded in the historic system of land surveying which created the orthogonal pattern of Concession Roads and Side roads and as such, is oriented along the Yonge Street and Wellington Street axes. The grid continues into the newer parts of the area, south of Metcalf Street, with only minor deviations to accommodate the water course that runs through this portion of the neigh- bourhood. Lots are relatively large and the majority are oriented in the north-south direction, resulting in most of the east-west streets having more ‘front doors’ facing onto them. Over time, existing lots have been subdivided to allow for the development smaller units, older houses have been demol- ished and replaced with newer, much larger homes which have significant integrated garages and front driveways, and new additions, sometimes larger in height and massing than the main building, have been added onto existing homes. This has the effect of altering the pattern of lots in the neighbourhood. As part of the historic core of the community, Town Park neigh- bourhood is one of the oldest neighbourhoods in Aurora. Its character is distinguished by a concentration of older homes on relatively large lots, architectural variety, prominent porches, mature tree-lined streets and significant open areas of land- scape. Many of the homes in the area are also designated and listed heritage properties. Over time, the Town Park area has continued to evolve, change and mature, with the construction of both new buildings, build- ing additions and building renovations. While the incremental pattern of development activity has resulted in a visually rich and interesting neighbourhood character, future development should ensure compatibility through the recognition and enhancement of neighbourhood character and the promotion of good urban design. For the Town Park Neighbourhood, it is recognized that its char- acter arises from a combination of the following key attributes. Streetscapes In the Town Park Neighbourhood, the streetscape environment is defined by: • Buildings that are generally 1.5 to 2.5 storeys, with most having pitched roofs. • A variation in the placement of dwellings from the street, with most in the older area located relatively close to the street. • Garages are mostly attached and recessed from the main front wall with parking pads/driveways being as wide as the garage itself. Detached garages are either located to match the dwelling’s setback or slightly recessed from it. How- ever, in the newer areas, garages tend to be integrated with the main building at the front of the house, creating greater visual impact and greater building massing along the street. • A abundance of mature of trees and landscaping. • Sidewalks on at least one side of almost all streets, and some in conjunction with a planted boulevard. 2 Town Park Character Page 133 of 225 12 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Town Park Neighbourhood Architectural Forms and Styles As one of the oldest neighbourhoods in Aurora, the Town Park Neighbourhood is characterized by the predominance of herit- age buildings and a variety of architectural forms and styles. The area’s long history, spanning from the 1800s to today, is represented in the diversity of building styles, including Gothic, Edwardian Classic, Vernacular Homestead, Georgian and Craftsman styles of architecture that are found in the north parts of the neighbourhood, and mid-to-late 20th century houses and newer construction found in the south parts of the neighbourhood. Buildings generally face the street and provide a positive pres- ence on the public realm, including prominent front doors and porches. There is a wide range of roof forms (hip and gable) and pitches, with a steeper pitch dominating older built forms, located gen- erally to the north of the Neighbourhood. Examples of stones residence in Town Park Older historic houses are predominant in the Neighbourhood Siding, as well as brick and stone, are common materials in Town Park Page 134 of 225 13Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Town Park Neighbourhood Edwardian Classicism Gothic Revival Vernacular Architecture Cultural Heritage Resources The majority of properties located in the north part of the Town Park are either designated or listed heritage properties under the Ontario Heritage Act. These are protected in the Official Plan to ensure that Aurora’s cultural heritage resources are conserved and enhanced to the long-term benefit of the com- munity. In particular, Policy 2.1.xi., for the Town Park North/ South Neighbourhood states that: “Promote the conservation and enhancement of Aurora’s cul- tural heritage resources. Cultural heritage resources, whether they are buildings, monuments, landscapes, archaeological sites, or districts, tell the story of a community’s evolution and provide important visual reminders that can help to define a sense of place.’ Page 135 of 225 14 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Town Park NeighbourhoodWells StreetHarrison Avenue Connaught Avenue Kennedy Street East Cousins Drive Royal Road Dunning Avenue Wenderly DriveChurch Street Metcalfe Street Mosley Street Yonge StreetGurnett StreetVictoria StreetLarmont StreetBerczy StreetEdward StreetFigure ground graphic reveals generous rear setbacks and generally even rhythm of built form and void along the neighbourhood’s streetscapes, as well as tendency to keep dwellings depths consistent Page 136 of 225 15Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Town Park Neighbourhood Design Guidelines 1 Where possible, ensure that the rhythm along the street- scapes is respected and reinforced. 2 Where possible, enhance the public domain while main- taining appropriate separation of private areas. 3 Where possible, maintain the traditional building to lot rela- tionship and encourage dwellings are in proportion to their lot sizes. 4 Maintain generous open space in the rear yard to allow for space for light, landscaping and recreational uses. 5 Ensure a measure of privacy between neighbours by provid- ing sufficient distance between the back wall of the house and the rear property line. 6 Address rear yard privacy and sunlight issues when ex- tending a home towards the rear property line or building a new dwelling by: a) Minimizing extensions beyond the adjacent dwellings rear wall. b) Keeping windows to a minimum on side elevations when the rear wall of the renovated/new dwelling extends beyond the adjacent dwelling’s wall. c) Minimizing the location of second floor balconies on rear and side elevations. d) Providing fencing that effectively screens the rear amen- ity and minimizes its exposure to/from adjacent proper- ties. 7 Provide enough distance between detached garages and the rear property line to minimize their impact on adjacent lots and allow opportunities for planting. Rear yard setbacks Provide enough distance from the garage to the rear property line Provide enough distance from the house to the rear property line Minimize extensions beyond adjacent dwelling’s rear wall 3 Urban Design Guidelines The Zoning By-law establishes clear regulations for lot cover- age, landscaping, front/rear yard setbacks and interior/exter- ior side yard setbacks. These guidelines are not intended to duplicate the Zoning By-law, but instead, to work in conjunc- tion with the zoning standards to not only ensure ‘no adverse impact’ through quantified performance standards, but also ‘compatibility’ of development through qualitative, context related design measures. As such, the guidelines in this section are organized based upon the four key attributes that contribute to the character of the Town Park Neighbourhood. They are not intended to be detailed but rather, provide general guidance for all stable neighbourhoods. 3.1 Pattern of Lots Lot Sizes/Configurations and Rear Setbacks While lot size conditions the development possibilities in terms of building size/coverage, the way it is configured determines how the development relates to the public realm and other buildings along the street, as well as the consistency of the neighbourhood. The objectives of the Urban Design Guidelines regarding lot size and its configuration and rear setbacks are to: • Ensure compatible/similar lot sizes that enhance the rhythm along the streetscapes; • Ensure lot configuration that reflect those of properties close by while achieving the desire relationship between the dwelling and the streetscape. • Generally maintain the traditional range of building to lot relationship; • Ensure that dwellings are in proportion to their lot sizes; • Maintain the level of openness in the rear yard; and, • Allow a measure of privacy between neighbours by provid- ing space for light, landscaping and recreational uses. Page 137 of 225 16 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Town Park Neighbourhood Front setback approaches Front setback reflects that of adjacent units Front setback is the average of that of adjacent units NewNew Generally consistent spacing between buildings Design Guidelines Between Buildings and the Street 8 Reflect the front setback of adjacent dwellings; when substantially different, ensure the new dwelling’s setback is equal to the average distance of those on either side of it. 9 Encourage a pedestrian oriented streetscape by placing new units close to the street edge/property line. 10 Provide side yard setbacks that reflect those of adjacent homes, or are the average distance of those on either side of the development, in accordance with existing zoning standards, to a minimum of 1.5 metres and 3.0m beyond the main rear wall of adjacent dwellings. Design Guidelines Between Buildings 11 Maintain consistent spacing between dwellings. 12 Maintain a consistent ‘street wall’. 13 Provide space for light and landscaping between neigh- bours. 14 Protect the privacy between units by minimizing the num- ber of windows on side elevations. 3.2 Streetscapes The form (height, scale and massing) and placement (setbacks) of buildings in relation to the street and to adjacent develop- ments are important considerations that define streetscapes. The height, scale, massing and placement of buildings are important to creating the ‘street wall’ and framing the street- scape. Front Yard and Side Yard Setbacks The relationship between buildings through placement on the lot is important to ensure a consistent neighbourhood ‘feel’, and defines/frames the street while impacting the sense of openness and enclosure. The positioning of houses on their lots contribute significantly to the streetscapes and the charac- ter of the Town Park Neighbourhood. The Zoning By-law establishes clear regulations for front yard setbacks and interior/exterior side yard setbacks. The object- ives of the Design Guidelines in directing the relationship of the building to the side lot lines are to: • Maintain a consistent spacing between dwellings, and • Allow a measure of privacy between neighbours by provid- ing space for light and landscaping. Page 138 of 225 17Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Town Park Neighbourhood Approach to height and scale including transition Maximum 1.5 storeys difference between adjacent dwellings Consistent height Appropriate transition to lower dwellings Articulated 2.5 storey buildings frame the street in a consistent manner Proper transition from 2 .5 to 3 storey buildings Building Height and Scale Buildings in Town Park range from 1.5 to 2.5 storeys, with an eclectic mix of architectural styles ranging from 1800s to 20th century homes. For the purposes of these guidelines, a storey shall be defined as one level of habitable living space. The objectives of the Design Guidelines in directing the rela- tionship of the building scale along the street are to: • Ensure a scale, massing, roof line and building orientation that is commonly found in the neighbourhood; • Ensure a sensitive transition to adjacent residential dwell- ings; and, • Promote more pedestrian-scaled streets. Design Guidelines for Framing the Street 15 On blocks where single storey or 1.5 storey homes are pre- dominant, second storey additions or new 2 storey homes may require particular attention to ensure sensitive transi- tions to adjacent properties. 16 Where possible, maintain the existing lot grading and the neighbourhood’s characteristic first floor height. 17 Design to reflect the massing of the surrounding built form context for those elevations exposed to the public and pro- vide any additional massing away from them. 18 Provide appropriate transition to/from existing adjacent buildings and ensure no new building is more than 1.5 stor- eys or 4.5m higher/lower than the adjacent dwellings. 19 Favour traditional architectural styles and ensure modern ones complement the surrounding dwellings. 20 Encourage roof lines with steeper pitches and articulated roof lines to reflect those of existing dwellings in the neigh- bourhood. 21 Discourage flat rooftops. Page 139 of 225 18 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Town Park Neighbourhood Garage & Driveway Width and Location Garages and driveways should be located and sized based on the established pattern of the neighbourhood. In Town Park garages are mostly attached and recessed from the main front wall with parking pads/driveways being as wide as the garage itself. Detached garages are either located to match the dwell- ing’s setback or slightly recessed from it. The objectives of the Design Guidelines in directing the width and location of garages and driveways along the street are to: • Ensure that garage doors do not dominate the front facade of the house; • Minimize the garage and driveway presence on the street- scape; and, • Maintain a consistent garage type and driveway width along the street. attached/ integrated front garage attached recessed garage detached recessed garage (front) detached recessed garage (rear) Design Guidelines for Driveways and Garages 22 For attached garages/carports, de-emphasize their visual impact on the streetscape by: a) Integrating the attached garage/carport into the massing and design of the dwelling. b) Recessing them from the main front wall and avoid projecting it beyond the main front wall of the adjacent dwellings. c) Considering the attached garages include a second stor- ey over the garage, where height limitations permit. d) Designing the roof line of the attached garage/carport to be compatible with and complement the roof line of the dwelling. e) Integrating garage doors into the dwelling’s façade design. f) Ensuring that garage doors do not dominate the front facade of the house. 23 Encourage a consistent garage type and location along the street. 24 Encourage narrow driveways and ensure their widths do not substantially exceed the garage/carport width. 25 Encourage rear detached garages. 26 Where detached garages are proposed, locate them recessed from the dwelling’s main front wall, and design them to reflect and complement the materials and character of the house. 27 Ensure the size of the garage is compatible with the size of the lot/dwelling; a) Front-facing attached garages should not take up more than 50% of the width of the main front wall of the dwelling. b) A maximum of a 2-car garage is considered appropriate for this neighbourhood. Example of appropriate garage configurations that support the neighbourhood’s character and a pedestrian-oriented public realm attached recessed garage covers maximum 50% of main front wall Page 140 of 225 19Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Town Park Neighbourhood Landscape Treatment Front yards in Town Park are varied with most of the dwellings having modest front yards with a combination of grassed areas and low landscape elements along entry features. Mature trees are common in the landscape. The objectives of the Design Guidelines with respect to land- scape are to: • Maintain the green landscape character of the neighbourhood; • Plan for the urban canopy; • Screen views to rear yard parking; and, • Preserve mature trees. Design Guidelines for Landscape Treatment 28 Protect mature trees and encourage planting of new trees to enhance the urban canopy and create tree-lined streets. 29 Enhance the bio-resiliency of the area through planting of native, non-invasive trees and shrubs. 30 Minimize hard surface landscaping/pavement in front yards and consider them for walkways and driveways only. 31 Encourage permeable paving for new walkways and driveways to reduce run-off to storm sewers and soften the streetscape appearance. 32 Provide a walkway from the front door to the sidewalk or to the driveway in the absence of a sidewalk. 33 Provide landscaping in front of blank walls. 34 Encourage front yard hedges do not exceed 1.2m in height, to allow for “eyes to the street” and avoid blocked views from/to dwellings. 35 Avoid privacy fencing at the front of the house; if con- sidered, privacy fencing should not extend beyond the main front wall of the dwelling. 36 Favour corner lot fencing materials that complement the dwelling’s character as well as that of the surrounding neighbourhood; 37 Encourage the use of natural stone finishes for paving and landscape walls. Enhanced front yard landscape animates the street edge Landscape incorporates mature tree and lower plantings addressing entrance Simple front yard landscape includes mature tree and a walkway connecting the entrance to the sidewalk Page 141 of 225 20 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Town Park Neighbourhood • Promote “eyes on the street” and a strong presence of the main elevation on the street; • Ensure that the prominence of house front entrance and the proportion of glazing are maintained and consistent with the surrounding neighbourhood; and, • Ensure the entrance remain the main feature of the house and is oriented to and clearly visible from the street. Design Guidelines 38 Design dwellings to have articulated elevations, especially those exposed to streets and/or open spaces. Articulated elevations might include changes in plane, projections, en- hanced fenestration, highlighted entrances, complementary materials, among other architectural elements. 39 Avoid blank walls facing the public realm (i.e. streets and open spaces) 40 Incorporate the vertical and horizontal proportions, rhythm and elevation design elements of surrounding dwellings including fenestration, lintels, sills, cornice and roof lines. 41 Ensure traditional architectural styles are properly exe- cuted and reflect their fundamental attributes. When not expressed / executed properly, these styles detract from the overall quality of the neighbourhood and can result in a hodge/podge of disparate design elements. 42 Consider contemporary architectural styles and ensure they reflect the proportions and fenestration of surrounding dwellings. 3.3 Architectural Forms and Styles Front Elevation Treatment The character of a neighbourhood is not static but rather, evolving and maturing with each home that is built or added onto. This creates a variety of styles, design expressions and materials that, layered over time, enhances and contributes to the character of a neighbourhood. This is most apparent along the streetscape. The main front wall of a dwelling has an important role in defining and framing the streetscape. Its design / articulation is equally important to animating the street, and to establishing a positive connection to the broader neighbourhood. Although a neighbourhood with an eclectic character, dwellings in Town Park generally have prominent entries with significant front porches or projected walls that include entrance features. Entrances generally step down to a front walkway and/or drive- way. Windows vary in size and proportions but are generally aligned vertically to one another or to entrances. The objectives of the Design Guidelines in directing the relationship of the building front elevation and entrance to the street are to: • Encourage a variety of architectural forms and styles that reflect the evolution of the neighbourhood while enhancing its character. The design of new dwelling reflects the proportions of those adjacent to it Overall height and horizontal composition (base, mid- dle and top), including consistent ground floor height Vertical breaks and changes in plane Architectural details including windows (proportions and scale) Page 142 of 225 21Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Town Park Neighbourhood 43 Consider keeping entry steps to a maximum of 4 and ensure they lead to a significant porch/entrance element/ portico. 44 Design entrances to be consistent with the height and rela- tionship to the street of adjacent dwellings. 45 Ensure front doors are prominent, clearly visible and ap- proachable from the street via a walkway or driveway. 46 Encourage entrance features to be located at the front wall and highlight their prominence through articulated architec- tural elements. 47 Discourage side entrances. If they are considered, highlight their presence through massing and architectural gestures that provide a “public face” (e.g. wrapping porches/stoops and articulated elements) and provide a clear connection to the sidewalk or driveway. 48 Encourage weather protection elements at the main en- trance and design them to complement the overall design of the dwelling. 49 Avoid metallic - cottage style awnings attached to main front wall. 50 For new homes or additions to existing ones located where there is a dominant pattern of existing front porches, incor- porate similar elements into the design and encourage they are consistent in size and style with those in the surround- ing neighbourhood. 51 If appropriate, consider porches that are as wide as the main front wall but ensure steps are only slightly wider than the entrance doors. 52 Design porch roof to complement the roof lines and propor- tions of the dwelling. 53 Provide enough glazing in the main elevation(s) through windows that complement the proportions and style of the dwelling, and those of adjacent dwellings. 54 Ensure corner units to display equal design quality on both elevations visible from the street and consider: a) Locating the main entrance at the exterior side wall. b) Incorporating wrap-around porches and corner features where appropriate. Corner unit with consistent elevation treatment on both sides framing the street Articulated elevation with changes in plane and pitched roof lines Entries are prominent with large porches Page 143 of 225 22 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Town Park Neighbourhood Design Guidelines 55 Encourage a variety of coordinated materials that enhance and complement both the surrounding neighbourhood as well as the design style of the building.This may include more contemporary materials such as metal and concrete, in combination with brick, stone and wood. 56 Promote the use of high quality materials. The following are recommended as primary building materials in the Town Park Neighbourhood: a) Brick. b) Wood clapboard (siding) or wood batten. 57 Discourage the use of stone and stucco or its equivalent as main materials, and consider their use as secondary or accent materials only. 58 Consider natural finishes. 59 Provide colour palettes that take their cues from the built form on surrounding streets and/or are compatible with it. 60 Favour dark and buff brick and a variety of colours/tones for wood clapboard/batten. Avoid bright palettes. 61 Consider metallic railings and window frames as well as painted wood for porches, porch railings, bay window sur- rounds and shutters. 62 Consider cedar and asphalt shingles on roofs. 63 For additions or renovations to an existing building, incor- porate materials and colours that are consistent with and complement the main building. Building Materials The variety of building materials contributes to the interest along the street and to the varied architectural character of the neighbourhood. There should be no strict imposition of material palettes. How- ever, broad categories of building appearances are identified and described which provide sufficient flexibility to accommo- date variety, while ensuring that no jarring interventions will be inserted to interrupt the visual harmony of a neighbourhood. The objectives of the Design Guidelines for renovations, addi- tions and new construction are to: • Ensure high quality materials are used; • Preserve the variety of design, colour and building materials within a range that enhances the character of the neigh- bourhood; and, • Ensure that while buildings will inevitably change over time, they will maintain the cohesive visual character of the street. Wood clapboard in lighter tones is characteristic of the neighbourhoodBrick as main and accent material Page 144 of 225 23Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Town Park Neighbourhood 3.4 Cultural Heritage Resources The objectives of the Design Guidelines with respect to Cultural Heritage Resources are: • Preserve and highlight valuable Heritage Buildings in the area • Ensure the design of new dwellings and ancillary struc- tures enhances and highlights existing Heritage Buildings through appropriate placement, scale/massing and facade and streetscape treatments Design Guidelines 64 Place additions to heritage buildings on the rear or side, recessed from the main front wall of the heritage building. 65 Locate new garages to the rear or setback on the side of the heritage building, and design them to complement it. 66 Ensure appropriate integration of heritage buildings into new developments on the same site by providing: a) The new structure’s main wall or that of ancillary build- ings is setback from that of the heritage building b) The height of the new structure is maximum 1 storey greater than the heritage building (or 3.5m measured to the top of the new structure’s roof.) c) The proportions and palette of materials/colours of the new structure reflect and complement those of the Heritage Building. d) The new structure is physically and visually compatible with, subordinate to, and distinguishable from the herit- age building. e) No heritage attribute of the heritage building is concealed by the new structure (i.e. the heritage attributes identi- fied in the designation by-law should remain visible from the street). f) No addition or new construction will negatively impact the heritage building if removed in the future. 67 Design new buildings to minimize their impact on heritage buildings on adjacent lots and to acknowledge/highlight them by ensuring: a) The new building setback is equal to that of the heritage building, or is the average distance between the setbacks of the buildings on either side of the new development. b) The height of the new dwelling is equal to or maximum 1.5 storeys or 4.5m taller than that of the Heritage Build- ing. 68 Avoid recreating historical architectural styles. 69 Reflect the rhythm of the horizontal and vertical architectural elements of the adjacent or on-site heritage building in the design of new dwellings/structures/additions. 70 Provide the finished first floor height of any new dwelling/ structure/addition is consistent with the finished first floor height of adjacent or on-site heritage buildings. 71 Design new elevations to reflect the heritage building’s proportions of glazing vs. solid, and those of windows and doors (width and height). 72 Reflect the design and proportions of the landscape treat- ment of adjacent heritage properties. 73 When considered, contemporary designs shall respond to / reflect key elements of the adjacent heritage buildings, including for examples: a) Its scale, massing and overall proportions. b) The arrangement and proportions of its elevation ele- ments (horizontal and vertical articulation, rhythm of windows). c) Its materials and colours. Extension to the back reflects scale and architectural proportions/details of original structure Page 145 of 225 24 Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Town Park Neighbourhood Residential Zones R3-SN (497) R7-SN (497) R3-SN (498) R3-SN (499) New BuildingBuilding Addition (equal to or greater than 50m2)Planning & Development Services‘Basic’ Site Plan Process & Urban Design Review • Site Design (grading, servicing, lot coverage and configuration, setbacks, garage and driveway width and location) • Urban Design Guidelines • Zoning • Building Design (building height and massing,architectural design, front elevation treatment, building materials, heritage resources) • Major alterations to existing heritage buildings need to obtain a Heritage Permit through the review and approval by Council prior to the issuance of site plan approval. • Refer to Site Plan Application Guide Site Plan Approval Building Permit Building Division • Ontario Building Code • Refer to Building Permit Application Guide or + 4 Implementation, Monitoring & Updates Page 146 of 225 25Urban Design Guidelines for Additions & New Buildings • Town Park Neighbourhood Front-facing attached garage: a garage that is built into the front structure of a dwelling, with a garage door that faces and is accessed from the street. Heritage Attribute: attributes of the property, buildings and structures that contribute to the property’s cultural heritage value or interest. They may inlcude but are not limited to archi- tectural style/design, massing/scale, composition, function, interior spatial configurations, external layouts, and location. Historic/traditional style home: broad range of styles developed in the 19th and early 20th century, each displaying very unique features. Traditional home designs are influenced by historic styles (i.e. Victorian, Colonial, Craftsman, or Neo- classical architecture). Common features among them include large/open porches with overhanging beams and rafters, dormers, and tall/pitched rooftops with one or more gables. Common materials include brick, wood, stucco, and stone. Main Front Wall: the dwelling’s primary exterior front wall, not including permitted projections or a front attached garage door. Modern/contemporary Style: variety of styles developed in the latter half of the 20th century. Their design is based on the simple/clean lines, shapes and forms, mostly related to their structure. Straight lines, big openings, bold roofs lines (flat or low-sloped) and minimum texture are often seen in this type of houses. Common materials include concrete, brick, wood, and stucco. Stable Neighbourhoods: existing, older residential neighbour- hoods where a thriving community and a distinctive built/natur- al environment coexist and depend on each other. Sympathetic: that is compatible and supportive of an specific(s) built characteristic or element. Vicinity / Surrounding Context: area near or surrounding a particular place, or that is in enough proximity to share a physical relationship. Adverse Impact: Any impairment, disruption, destruction or harmful alteration. Articulated Elevation: A building elevation (usually the front and any publicly exposed building face) whose design includes a comprehensive combination of changes in plane, projections, enhanced fenestration, highlighted entrances, complementary materials, among other architectural elements (ie. not a plain, blank, flat wall). Building Footprint: the footprint of a house is the total ground area covered by the home including garages and porches. Character: a unique combination of features (i.e. existing pattern of development, built form and streetscape design) that should be embraced and reinforced. Coexist: two or more elements /structures that harmoniously exist in the same place. Compatible: As per the OP “...development that may not ne- cessarily be the same or similar to the existing buildings in the vicinity, but, nonetheless, enhances an established community and coexists with existing development without causing any undue adverse impact on surrounding properties.” Complement: built form that responds in a respectful and thoughtful manner to its context to reinforce it and make better. Enhance: strengthen, exalt and/or further improve the qualities that contribute to the character of a place. Reinforce. Existing: found in a particular place i.e. neighbourhood, street, development pattern. As per the OP”...means lawfully in existence on the date of this Plan’s adoption, and for greater certainty does not include a use, building or structure that is in existence on that date without being lawful”. Front building face width: the width of the main front wall of a dwelling, including a front-facing attached garage. appendix: Definitions & Glossary of Terms Page 147 of 225 Page 148 of 225 100 John West Way Aurora, Ontario L4G 6J1 (905) 727-3123 aurora.ca Town of Aurora General Committee Report No. PDS 20-0 70 ______________________________________________________________________ Subject: Request for Traffic Calming Measures - Aurora Heights Drive and Seaton Drive Prepared by: Michael Bat, Traffic/Transportation Analyst Department: Planning and Development Services Date: November 17, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________ Recommendation 1. That Report No. PDS20-070 be received for information. Executive Summary This report presents to Council the results of the traffic calming warrant analysis undertaken for Aurora Heights Drive and Seaton Drive.  The existing road conditions of Aurora Heights Drive and Seaton Drive are generally consistent with the Town’s design standards for a collector road.  The subject locations did not meet the minimum requirements under Warrant No. 3 as set out in the Town’s Traffic Calming Policy. Background In response to petitions received from area residents for traffic calming measures, Town staff completed warrant analyses following the procedures and methodologies outlined in the Town’s Traffic Calming Policy for two locations:  The west leg of Aurora Heights Drive between Bathurst Street and Delayne Drive; and,  Seaton Drive between Morning Crescent and Simmons Crescent. The subject locations are shown in Attachment 1. Page 149 of 225 November 17, 2020 2 of 7 Report No. PDS20-070 Analysis The existing road conditions of Aurora Heights Drive and Seaton Drive are generally consistent with the Town’s design standards for a collector road Aurora Heights Drive: is a two-lane major collector road with single lane per travel direction. It has an urban cross-section with curbs and sidewalks on both sides of the road. The existing pavement is measured 8 metres wide and in accordance to the Town Zoning By-law No. 4574-04.T the posted speed limit is 40 km/h. Seaton Drive: is a two-lane minor collector road with single lane per travel direction. It has an urban cross-section with curbs on both sides of the road and sidewalks provided along the south-east side of the road. The existing pavement is measured 7.5 metres wide and in accordance to the Town Zoning By-law No. 4574-04.T the posted speed limit is 40 km/h. The subject locations did not meet the minimum requirements under Warrant No. 3 as set out in the Town’s Traffic Calming Policy As set out in the Town’s Traffic Calming Policy, a total of three warrants must be satisfied in order for traffic calming measures to be considered as are described below: Warrant No. 1: Petition, will ensure that residents in the immediate area are in support of traffic calming measures. Warrant No. 2: Safety Requirements, will ensure traffic calming measures are installed so as to create an increase in traffic safety. Warrant No. 3: Technical Requirements, will ensure that traffic calming measures are implemented on streets that have a proven need for such measures. Following the Town’s Traffic Calming Policy, the warrant analysis results are summarized in Table 1 for Aurora Heights Drive and Table 2 for Seaton Drive. Page 150 of 225 November 17, 2020 3 of 7 Report No. PDS20-070 Table 1: West Leg of Aurora Heights Dr. between Bathurst St. & Delayne Dr. Warrant Criteria Requirement Site Parameters Yes / No Warrant No. 1 (Petition) Petition Minimum 70% 71% Yes Warrant 1 Met? Yes Warrant No. 2 (Safety Requirements) Emergency Response Consultation No Comments Yes Transit Services Consultation No Comments Yes Sidewalks Minimum 1 side Both Sides Yes Road Grade Maximum 5% < 2% Yes Warrant 2 Met? Yes Warrant No. 3 (Technical Requirements) Minimum Speed 85th Percentile Minimum 15 km/h Over Posted Speed Limit 14 km/h Over Posted Speed Limit No Minimum Volumes Between 1,500 and 8,000 Vehicles Per Day 1,605 Vehicles Per Day Yes Minimum Block Length Minimum 120 m Approx. 270 m Yes Special Circumstances - None - Warrant 3 Met? No All Warrants 1 - 3 Met? No Page 151 of 225 November 17, 2020 4 of 7 Report No. PDS20-070 Table 2: Seaton Drive between Morning Crescent and Simmons Crescent Warrant Criteria Requirement Site Parameters Yes / No Warrant No. 1 (Petition) Petition Minimum 70% 82% Yes Warrant 1 Met? Yes Warrant No. 2 (Safety Requirements) Emergency Response Consultation No Comments Yes Transit Services Consultation No Comments Yes Sidewalks Minimum 1 side South-East Side Yes Road Grade Maximum 5% < 2% Yes Warrant 2 Met? Yes Warrant No. 3 (Technical Requirements) Minimum Speed 85th Percentile Minimum 15 km/h Over Posted Speed Limit 12 km/h Over Posted Speed Limit No Minimum Volumes Between 1,500 and 8,000 Vehicles Per Day 1,258 Vehicles Per Day No Minimum Block Length Minimum 120 m Approx. 290 m Yes Special Circumstances - None - Warrant 3 Met? No All Warrants 1 - 3 Met? No As shown in Tables 1 and 2, both locations did not satisfy the minimum requirements for Warrant No. 3. According to Figure 1: Traffic Calming Process Flow Chart” in the Town’s Traffic Calming Policy, the traffic calming proposal status for the subject locations are defined in Steps G and H: Step G: Warrant 3 consists of evaluations of speeds, traffic volumes and block lengths. Failure to meet any one of the technical warrants would result in a location being rejected for implementation of traffic calming measures. Step. H: If the proposal does not meet the criteria outlined in Warrant 3, then a report will be submitted to Council indicating that staff does not recommend proceeding with the study, outlining the reasons why. If Council requests that the study continue a recommendation from Council must be forwarded to Staff requesting the study continue. Page 152 of 225 November 17, 2020 5 of 7 Report No. PDS20-070 Alternatively, if Council decides not to continue with the study then a letter will be sent to the proponents indicating that the study will not continue. Advisory Committee Review Not Applicable. Legal Considerations Not Applicable. Financial Implications None. Communications Considerations The Town of Aurora will use ‘Inform’ as the level of engagement for this project. There are five different levels of community engagement to consider, with each level providing the community more involvement in the decision-making process. These levels are: Inform, Consult, Involve, Collaborate and Empower. Examples of each are found in the Community Engagement Policy. These options are based on the International Association of Public Participation (IAP2) Spectrum and assist in establishing guidelines for clearly communicating with our public and managing community engagement. In order to inform the public, this report will be posted to the Town’s website. In addition, area residents were notified by mail on November 2, 2020 that this staff report will be presented to the General Committee meeting of November 17, 2020. Link to Strategic Plan This report supports the Strategic Plan goal of Support an Exceptional Quality of Life for All by examining traffic patterns and identify potential solutions to improve movement and safety at key intersections in the community. Page 153 of 225 November 17, 2020 6 of 7 Report No. PDS20-070 Alternative(s) to the Recommendation 1. That Council direct staff to install traffic calming measures for the west leg of Aurora Height Drive between Bathurst Street and Delayne Drive and the associated cost to be funded by Capital Project No. 34519 – Traffic Calming. 2. That Council direct staff to install traffic calming measures for Seaton Drive between Morning Crescent and Simmons Crescent and the associated cost to be funded by Capital Project No. 34519 – Traffic Calming. Conclusions In response to recent inquiries received from residents for traffic calming, Town staff completed warrant analyses following the procedures and methodologies listed in the Town’s Traffic Calming Policy for two locations:  Aurora Heights Drive between Bathurst Street and Delayne Drive (west leg); and,  Seaton Drive between Morning Crescent and Simmons Crescent. Based upon the information presented herein, the subject locations did not satisfy the minimum requirements outlined in the Town’s Traffic Calming Policy and therefore staff do not recommend the installation of traffic calming measures. Attachments Attachment 1: Subject Locations Previous Reports None. Pre-submission Review Agenda Management Team review on October 29, 2020 Page 154 of 225 November 17, 2020 7 of 7 Report No. PDS20-070 Approvals Approved by David Waters, MCIP, RPP, PLE, Director, Planning & Development Services Approved by Doug Nadorozny, Chief Administrative Officer Page 155 of 225 Map created by the Town of Aurora Corporate Services Department, IT Division - Business Solutions, October 16th, 2020.Base data provided by York Region and Aurora - GIS. This is not a legal survey. SUBJECT LOCATION MAPREQUEST FOR TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES ATAURORA HEIGHTS DRIVE AND SEATON DRIVE PDS20-070Township of KingWellington Heights CrtA u r o r a H e i g h t s D r i v eWhisperingPine TrGilbank Dr Delayne DrBATHURST STREETMorning CresPetch CresSeaton DrS e a t o n D r K n o w le s C re s G la s s D r Holman CresSimmons Cres S i m m o nsCres Confederation Park Attachment #1 0 25 50 Metres ¯ 0 50 100 Metres Properties WithinTraffic Calming Measures ¯ Page 156 of 225 100 John West Way Aurora, Ontario L4G 6J1 (905) 727-3123 aurora.ca Town of Aurora General Committee Report No. PDS 20-031 ______________________________________________________________________ Subject: Regional MCR Update: Employment Land Conversions and Employment Land Mapping in Aurora Prepared by: Michael Logue, Senior Policy Planner Department: Planning and Development Services Date: November 17, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________ Recommendation 1. That Report No. PDS20-031 be received for information. Executive Summary This report seeks to update Council on land-owner initiated employment land conversion requests and Regional employment land mapping, occurring as part of York Region’s Municipal Comprehensive Review.  York Region’s proposed criteria to evaluate employment area conversion requests was released in March 2019  The Region requested input on proposed employment area mapping and conversions and reassessed initial positions  One request in Secondary Plan Area 2C was deemed not to require a conversion to proceed  Two requests near Highway 404 & Wellington Street East were not approved by Regional Council  One previously unevaluated request near Yonge & Edward Streets was not approved  One previous request reconsidered and one final request on Centre Crescent were approved Page 157 of 225 November 17, 2020 2 of 9 Report No. PDS20-031  Two Magna Employment Area requests were approved by Regional Council  Magna and Aurora East Employment Areas will not be mapped in the Regional Official Plan  One late request for conversion in Aurora was not considered by York Region Background Employment areas are defined in the Provincial Policy Statement (2020) as “areas designated in an Official Plan for a cluster of business and economic activities including, but not limited to manufacturing, warehousing, offices, and associated retail and ancillary facilities.” Employment lands in the appropriate locations are key to maintaining a diverse and competitive economy. Jobs in employment areas account for more than half of Aurora’s employment base. Employment planning is an important input into land needs assessment. Land budgeting and growth forecasting require confirming the employment land base, and its ability to accommodate jobs. The process by which non-employment uses, such as residential or major retail, are introduced into employment areas is called a conversion. The changing nature of the economy and the market value of residential land has created considerable pressure to convert employment areas. The Growth Plan requires upper and single-tier municipalities (such as York Region, in Aurora’s case) to designate and set density targets for employment areas in the Official Plans and to assess requests for employment area conversion. These are new Regional responsibilities whereas previously, employment designations were only included in local municipal official plans. The tests for employment conversions are quite stringent, as employment lands are considered a finite resource to be protected for the long-term. York Region’s proposed criteria to evaluate employment area conversion requests was released in March 2019 In March 2019 York Region released a staff report entitled “Proposed Employment Area Conversion Criteria.” The Growth Plan provides five criteria for assessing requests for employment land conversions. Regional staff developed an additional nine criteria, expanding on the existing Provincial criteria and providing further detail based on a York Page 158 of 225 November 17, 2020 3 of 9 Report No. PDS20-031 Region context. The combined total of fourteen criteria are organized into the five theme areas as listed in Table 1. Table 1 Employment Area Conversion Criteria in York Region Theme Area Growth Plan York Region Total Supply 2 2 4 Viability 1 4 5 Access 0 1 1 Infrastructure 1 0 1 Region-wide Interests 1 2 3 Total 5 9 14 Of the fourteen criteria, the following three appear to be particularly important:  Lands in recently designated and largely vacant employment areas (such as the 2C East employment lands in Aurora), because large new employment areas are key opportunities to attract or retain large or growing businesses;  Lands in areas where the entire perimeter of the site is surrounded by lands designated and intended to remain designated for employment area purposes (i.e., conversions not to create a ‘hole in the doughnut’); and,  Preserving employment lands fronting 400-series highways, which are of strategic significance due to providing efficient movement of goods, access to major transportation infrastructure, and are desirable from an economic development perspective for being visible high-profile areas. The Region’s final deadline for submission of employment land conversion requests was November 29, 2019. Analysis The Region requested input on proposed employment area mapping and conversions and reassessed initial positions Since the Region’s revised November 2019 deadline for conversion requests, Regional staff hosted landowner meetings and contacted property owners within 120 metres of each proposed conversion, up to January 2020. Regional staff also hosted a virtual public information centre to obtain input, in June 2020. On September 17, 2020, a special meeting of Regional Council was held, where a total of 14 deputations and 24 communications were received. Considering these consultations, as well as local municipal council positions, final recommendations on Page 159 of 225 November 17, 2020 4 of 9 Report No. PDS20-031 employment lands were brought forward to York Region’s Committee of the Whole on October 15, 2020. Although report PDS19-069 in December 2019 initially recommended that Town staff’s rationale within the report be forwarded to York Region as Aurora Council’s position on the conversion requests, that recommendation did not carry. Regional staff considered Aurora to be one of only two municipalities not to have local municipal Council positions (i.e. no decision). However, since Town staff reported to Aurora Council in December 2019 via PDS19- 069, the list of employment conversion requests in Aurora have changed, the Region’s positions on the Aurora requests have changed, and Regional employment land mapping for Aurora has been released. Below is an update on the seven previously reported employment land conversion requests in Aurora, and two new submissions. One request in Secondary Plan Area 2C was deemed not to require a conversion to proceed The request at 1588 St. John’s Sideroad (site A4 in Attachment 1) is to permit an education/sports complex on Block 5 of the Aurora Mills subdivision. Given that the proposed use is permitted elsewhere in other employment areas as per Aurora’s Official Plan, the proposed use may be accommodated through the local planning approval process. The applicant has advised staff that the proposed education/sports complex is not proceeding at this time. Two requests near Highway 404 and Wellington Street East were not approved by Regional Council Both Smart Centres requests for conversion A5 and A6, in the vicinity of Highway 404 and Wellington Street East, were denied. They are located at the southwest corner of Wellington Street East and First Commerce Drive/future Goulding Ave extension, and the northwest corner of Wellington Street East and Highway 404, respectively. The A5 proposal was to add a retirement living apartment over a permitted one storey retail building. Request A6, which Smart Centres delegated to Regional Council on September 17 and October 15, 2020, was for four rental apartment buildings on lands designated for office, south of the Desjardins office building and east of the Walmart store. The requests were denied primarily due to their proximity to Highway 404. Page 160 of 225 November 17, 2020 5 of 9 Report No. PDS20-031 One previously unevaluated request near Yonge & Edward Streets was not approved Also refused was site A7 at 240 Edward Street. Known locally as the Cartwright building, this was a request that was received at the time of writing PDS19-069, and neither Regional nor Town staff had reviewed the submission at that time. The request was rejected due to the potential of introducing compatibility issues with surrounding employment uses, and potentially destabilizing the area. One previous request was reconsidered and one final request on Centre Crescent was approved Request A1 at 180-182 Centre Crescent, which was previously not recommended for approval by York Region staff, has been re-evaluated in light of discussions with Town staff, and will be permitted to proceed. A final conversion request in Aurora accepted for evaluation by York Region just prior to the November 29, 2019 deadline was A8: 181 Centre Crescent. This property is on the west side of Centre Crescent, across from 180 and 182 Centre Crescent. In terms of rationale, both requests for conversion were approved due to being long- standing residential uses pre-dating their employment designations, they are directly adjacent the current Aurora Promenade boundary, and are within 500 metres of the Aurora GO Train station (a prime consideration for inclusion in Aurora’s Major Transit Station Area). Two Magna Employment Area requests were approved by Regional Council Request A2 at 377 Magna Drive, and request A3 at 20 and 25 Mavrinac Boulevard, on the south and north sides of Wellington Street East at Stronach Boulevard respectively, are being permitted to proceed. Request A3 at the foot of Mavrinac Boulevard is a long- standing request previously presented to Aurora Council in 2016. Request A3 initially included almost the entire balance of the Magna Employment Area’s lands, with the exception of the current Magna headquarters building at 337 Magna Drive, an adjacent research and development facility at 375 Magna Drive, and a future office block at the southeast corner of Wellington Street East and Stronach Boulevard. However, the A3 request was subsequently revised to exclude 1289 Wellington Street East, geographically separated from the rest of the employment area at the southwest corner of Wellington Street East and Leslie Street. Page 161 of 225 November 17, 2020 6 of 9 Report No. PDS20-031 Magna and Aurora East Employment Areas will not be mapped in the Regional Official Plan The Region’s initial employment lands mapping excluded not only the permitted conversions located within the Magna employment area, but also excluded lands not subject to a conversion request, such as 337 and 375 Magna Drive, and the southeast corner of Wellington Street East and Stronach Boulevard. The results of this exercise would have left only one Regionally-mapped parcel of employment land remaining in the entire Magna Employment Area, the 1289 Wellington Street East property at Wellington and Leslie Street, previously part of request A3. The Region, after consulting with Town staff, have agreed to make the necessary boundary adjustments in the Region’s employment land mapping as part of the updated Regional Official Plan to exclude 1289 Wellington Street East and the entirety of the Magna Employment Area. As seen in Attachment 1, the Aurora East Employment Area, southwest of St. John’s Sideroad and Earl Stewart Drive, was not considered Regionally-significant and excluded from York’s mapping. In addition, the portions of the Industrial Parkway employment area that are currently part of the Aurora Promenade or the proposed Major Transit Station Area surrounding the Aurora GO Station, will also be excluded from the Region’s employment land mapping. The Region notes some employment areas are more appropriately designated by local municipalities and not in the Regional Official Plan. The Town of Aurora may maintain existing employment designations for lands currently designated as employment in the local Official Plan or change the designation to permit non-employment uses. The new Regional Official Plan will include a policy that will encourage lands identified as employment at the area municipal level, but not at the Regional scale, to continue to be mapped and protected for employment uses in local Official Plans. One late request for conversion in Aurora was not considered by York Region For consistency across the Region, and after already revising the deadline for submitting employment conversions from May 2019 to November 2019, Regional Council was firm in its position not to accept requests past the final deadline. At the September 17, 2020 non-statutory meeting of Regional Council, a communication was included regarding 275 Wellington Street East which is the site of Transcontinental Printing in Aurora. Dated September 11, 2020, this request was received more than nine months past the deadline and was not evaluated by Regional or Town staff. The opportunity to resubmit the conversion request will be at the time of the next Regional Page 162 of 225 November 17, 2020 7 of 9 Report No. PDS20-031 Official Plan Review which is expected to be a minimum of five years after the Province issues final approval in 2022. Advisory Committee Review Not applicable. Legal Considerations Legal considerations are contained throughout the report. Financial Implications Any conversion of employment lands to non-employment purposes will have an impact the Town’s planned development and ongoing revenues. Conformity to the policies of the new Regional Official Plan, once adopted, will occur through the Town’s Official Plan review. Costs associated with the OP review have already been approved in the Town’s Capital Budget, and consultants retained in accordance with the Town’s procurement process. Communications Considerations The Town of Aurora will use ‘Inform’ as the level of engagement for this project. There are five different levels of community engagement to consider, with each level providing the community more involvement in the decision-making process. These levels are: Inform, Consult, Involve, Collaborate and Empower. Examples of each can be found in the Community Engagement Policy. These options are based on the International Association of Public Participation (IAP2) Spectrum and assist in establishing guidelines for clearly communicating with our public and managing community engagement. In order to inform, this report with be posted to the Town’s website. Link to Strategic Plan Proposed changes to Regional Official Plan that incorporate the policies of the Provincial Growth Plan supports the Town’s Strategic Plan vision for an inclusive, growing, family-oriented community that integrates green spaces, environmental sustainability, economic vitality and communal gathering spaces. It also supports the Strategic Plan’s guiding principles to broaden outreach and leverage partnerships, while Page 163 of 225 November 17, 2020 8 of 9 Report No. PDS20-031 validating its goals and objectives to improve mobility and connectivity; invest in sustainable infrastructure; strengthen the fabric of the community; encouraging the stewardship and sustainability of Aurora’s natural resources; and enabling a diverse, creative and resilient economy. Alternative(s) to the Recommendation 1. That Council provide direction. Conclusions York Region have finalized their position on seven employment land conversion requests previously presented to Aurora Council, considered an eighth request received just prior to the November 2019 submission deadline, and did not review a potential ninth request submitted in September 2020 because the submission window was closed. Of the eight requests received prior to the submission deadline, three were refused, and five were permitted to proceed (four being approved and one not requiring a conversion). Employment Areas will be mapped and protected in the new Regional Official Plan and include a policy that encourages lands identified as employment at the local municipal level, but not at the Regional scale, to continue to be mapped and protected for employment uses in local Official Plans. Attachments Attachment 1 – York Region’s Town of Aurora Proposed ROP Employment Area Mapping and Conversion Requests, October 2020 Attachment 2 – Summary of York Region Staff Employment Area Conversion Recommendations, October 2020 Attachment 3 – York Region Site Specific Employment Area Conversion Assessment Summary, October 2020 Attachment 4 – Request for Employment Conversion, Communication re: 275 Wellington Street East, Town of Aurora, September 2020 Previous Reports PDS19-042, Regional MCR Update: Intensification Areas & Employment Land Conversion Requests, May 21 2019 Page 164 of 225 November 17, 2020 9 of 9 Report No. PDS20-031 PDS19-069, Regional MCR Update: Aurora Employment Land Conversion Requests, December 3 2019 Pre-submission Review Agenda Management Team review on October 29, 2020 Approvals Approved by David Waters, MCIP, RPP, PLE, Director, Planning and Development Services Approved by Doug Nadorozny, Chief Administrative Officer Page 165 of 225 A3A3A2A2A2A1A4A6A5A7A8Town ofNEWMARKETTown ofWHITCHURCH-STOUFFVILLETownship ofKINGCity ofRICHMOND HILLTown ofAURORAVandorf SideroadWoodbine AvenueWarden AvenueLeslie StreetDufferin StreetSt John's SideroadWellington Street West15th SideroadAurora RoadBloomingtonRoadYonge StreetBayview Avenue18th Sideroad*)404¬H:\Development\D01 - Demography\2017 Municipal Comprehensive Review\Employment Strategy\Employment Land Analysis\Conversion Criteria\October 2020 Staff Report\Municipal Maps\Employment Conversion Request Aurora Aug2020.mxd Town of Aurora Proposed ROP EmploymentArea Mapping and Conversion RequestsProduced by:The Regional Municipality of YorkCorporate Services, Planning and Economic DevelopmentAugust 2020 Data:© Queen’s Printer for Ontario 2003-2020 See York.ca for disclaimer information.00.51KmOctober 2020Towns and VillagesUrban AreaLake/RiverRailwayRegional Municipal BoundaryLocal Municipal BoundaryExisting Employment Area (as of 2017 York Region Employment Area Inventory)Proposed ROP Employment AreaEmployment Area conversion request supportedEmployment Area conversion request not supportedEmployment Area conversion not requireddd,DEdϭPage 166 of 225 Staff Report IDSubmitted By On behalf of Address Municipality Staff RecommendationLocal Municipal Council PositionA1 Matt Bagnali, Larkin Plus Luba Czepurnyi180 & 182 Centre CrescentAuroraArea not identified as employment in the Regional Official Plan. Designation at the discretion of the Local Municipality. UnknownA2 Malone Given Parsons Stronach Group 377 Magna Drive AuroraArea not identified as employment in the Regional Official Plan. Designation at the discretion of the Local Municipality. UnknownA3 Malone Given ParsonsTFP Aurora Development Limited20 & 25 Mavrinac BoulevardAuroraArea not identified as employment in the Regional Official Plan. Designation at the discretion of the Local Municipality. UnknownA4 Humphries Planning 2352107 Ontario Inc. 1588 St. John's SideroadAuroraConversion Not Required. Designate as employment in the Regional Official PlanUnknownA5 MHBC Planning1623 Wellington Street Developments Limited Southwest Corner of Wellington Street and First Commerce DriveAuroraNot recommended for conversion to non-employment uses. Designate as employment in the Regional Official Plan.UnknownA6 MHBC PlanningWhitwell Developments Limited, Calloway REIT (Aurora North) Inc., and SmartREIT (Aurora North II) Inc.Northwest corner of Highway 404 and Wellington Street EastAuroraNot recommended for conversion to non-employment uses. Designate as employment in the Regional Official Plan.UnknownA7Michael Smith Planning Consultants; Development Coordinators Ltd.M6 Developments Inc. 240 Edward Street AuroraNot recommended for conversion to non-employment uses. Designate as employment in the Regional Official Plan.UnknownA8 David Tomlinson David Tomlinson 181 Centre Crescent AuroraArea not identified as employment in the Regional Official Plan. Designation at the discretion of the Local Municipality. UnknownSummary of York Region Staff Employment Area Conversion Recommendations1of1Ϭ$77$&+0(17(PSOR\PHQW$UHD&RQYHUVLRQUHTXHVWVKLJKOLJKWHGLQJUH\DUHWKRVHZKHUHWKH5HJLRQUHFRPPHQGV&RXQFLOQRWDSSURYHKRZHYHUKDYHEHHQVXSSRUWHGRUGHIHUUHGIRUODWHUFRQVLGHUDWLRQE\/RFDO0XQLFLSDOFRXQFLOPage 167 of 225 ATTACHMENT 1 York Region Site Specific Employment Area Conversion Assessment Summary Request#: A1 Town of Aurora Address 180 & 182 Centre Crescent Site Area 0.73 ha Employment Area Industrial Parkway North Applicant Matt Bagnali, Larkin Plus Owner Luba Czepurnyi Nature of Request A request to re-designate subject lands from employment and light industrial uses to residential use. Summary of Assessment -Conversion to non-employment uses reflects the evolving local urban structure, will likely have minimal impact on adjacent employment uses and results in a more logical employment area boundary. -Conversion to permit non-employment uses recognizes that the surrounding context has changed since the lands were originally designated as employment. -Site is not integral to support employment land employment growth to 2051. Recommendation: Area not identified as employment in the Regional Official Plan. Designation at the discretion of the Local Municipality. No position at this time. Local Municipal Council Position Page 168 of 225 2 Request#: A2 Town of Aurora Address 377 Magna Drive Site Area 7.96 ha Employment Area Magna Applicant MGP Malone Given Parsons Owner Stronach Group Nature of Request A request to re-designate lands from Business Park employment use to Mixed Use, Medium –High Density Residential, and Community Commercial uses. Summary of Assessment -Conversion to non-employment uses reflects the evolving local urban structure, will likely have minimal impact on adjacent employment uses and results in a more logical employment area boundary. -Conversion to permit non-employment uses recognizes that the surrounding context has changed since the lands were originally designated as employment. -Site is not integral to support employment land employment growth to 2051. No position at this time. Local Municipal Council Position Recommendation:Area not identified as employment in the Regional Official Plan. Designation at the discretion of the Local Municipality. Page 169 of 225 3 Request#: A3 Town of Aurora Address 20 & 25 Mavrinac Boulevard Site Area 6.90 ha Employment Area Magna Applicant MGP Malone Given Parsons Owner TFP Aurora Development Limited Nature of Request A request to re-designate lands from Business Park employment use to Residential uses. Summary of Assessment -Conversion to non-employment uses reflects the evolving local urban structure, will likely have minimal impact on adjacent employment uses and results in a more logical employment area boundary. -Conversion to permit non-employment uses recognizes that the surrounding context has changed since the lands were originally designated as employment. -Site is not integral to support employment land employment growth to 2051. Recommendation:Area not identified as employment in the Regional Official Plan. Designation at the discretion of the Local Municipality. No position at this time. Local Municipal Council Position Page 170 of 225 4 Address 1588 St. John's Sideroad Site Area 1.05 ha Employment Area Aurora 2C Applicant Humphries Planning Owner 2352107 Ontario Inc. Nature of Request A request to permit the development of an education and sports complex on Block 5. This use is not permitted through local municipal Business Park designation. Summary of Assessment -Site is in proximity to Highway 404, contributing to the Region’s and local municipality’s economic development potential and supporting goods movement. Converting this site is contrary to Regional and Provincial planning objectives. -The proposed use on these lands is considered an employment use elsewhere in the Town of Aurora Official Plan. On this basis, the proposed use could be accommodated through the local planning approval process. Recommendation:Conversion is not required as increased flexibility in the permitted uses for this site, including the uses requested, can be accommodated through Regional and Local municipal employment area planning frameworks. Designate as employment in the Regional Official Plan. No position at this time. Request#: A4 Town of Aurora Local Municipal Council Position Page 171 of 225 5 Request#: A5 Town of Aurora Address Southwest Corner of Wellington Street /First Commerce Drive Site Area 0.81 ha Employment Area Wellington/404 Applicant MHBC Planning Owner 1623 Wellington Street Developments Limited Nature of Request A request to re-designate subject lands from Business Park employment use to mixed-use including retail and residential uses for retirement living. Summary of Assessment -Existing site-specific permissions on the site already allow for more flexible employment uses such as retail. Introducing residential uses, such as seniors housing, is not suitable for the surrounding context due to lack of amenities within proximity that support age friendly communities. -Site is part of a larger contiguous employment area, and the introduction of non-employment uses, such as residential uses for retirement living,has the potential to destabilize the employment area and/or negatively impact viability of existing or future surrounding employment uses and adding pressure for future conversions on adjacent parcels. Site is in proximity to Highway 404, contributing to the Regional and local municipality’s economic development potential and supporting goods movement. Converting this site is contrary to Regional and Provincial planning objectives. Recommendation:Not recommended for conversion to non-employment uses. Designate as employment in the Regional Official Plan. No position at this time. Local Municipal Council Position Page 172 of 225 6 Request#: A6 Town of Aurora Address Northwest corner of Highway 404 and Wellington Street East Site Area 4.35 ha Employment Area Wellington/404 Applicant MHBC Planning Owner Whitwell Developments Limited, Calloway REIT (Aurora North) Inc., and SmartREIT (Aurora North II) Inc. Nature of Request A request to re-designate subject lands from Business Park employment use to mixed-use, including residential uses. Summary of Assessment - Existing site-specific permissions on the site already allow for more flexible employment uses such as retail. The introduction of non -employment uses, such as residential, is not compatible with the surrounding context due to its proximity to a 400 series highway. - Site is part of a larger contiguous employment area, and the introduction of non-employment uses has the potential to destabilize the employment area and/or negatively impact viability of existing or future surrounding employment uses and adding pressure for future conversions of adjacent parcels. - Site has visibility from and/or is adjacent to, Highway 404, contributing to the Regional and local municipality’s economic development potential and supporting goods movement. Converting this site is contrary to Regional and Provincial planning objectives. Recommendation:Not recommended for conversion to non-employment uses. Designate as employment in the Regional Official Plan. No position at this time. Local Municipal Council Position Page 173 of 225 7 Request#: A7 Town of Aurora Address 240 Edward Street Site Area 3.1 ha Employment Area Industrial Parkway South Applicant Michael Smith Planning Consultants; Development Coordinators Ltd. Owner M6 Developments Inc. Nature of Request A request to re-designate subject lands to a designation that permits the proposal for redevelopment of the existing building and two new buildings; a 6-storey, 352 bed long-term care facility and a 6-storey retirement home facility. Summary of Assessment - Site is part of a larger contiguous employment area, and the introduction of non-employment uses has the potential to destabilize the employment area and/or negatively impact viability of existing or future surrounding employment uses and adding pressure for future conversions in adjacent parcels. - Permitting non-employment uses could potentially introduce compatibility issues with surrounding employment uses. Recommendation: Not recommended for conversion to non-employment uses. Designate as employment in the Regional Official Plan. No position at this time. Local Municipal Council Position Page 174 of 225 8 Request#: A8 Town of Aurora Address 181 Centre Crescent Site Area 0.19 ha Employment Area Industrial Parkway North Applicant David Tomlinson Owner David Tomlinson Nature of Request A request to re-designate the subject lands from employment to non- employment uses. Summary of Assessment -Conversion to non-employment uses reflects the evolving local urban structure, will likely have minimal impact on adjacent employment uses and results in a more logical employment area boundary. -Conversion to permit non-employment uses recognizes that the surrounding context has changed since the lands were originally designated as employment. -Site is not integral to support employment land employment growth to 2051. Recommendation:Area not identified as employment in the Regional Official Plan. Designation at the discretion of the Local Municipality. No position at this time. Local Municipal Council Position Page 175 of 225 3 Church Street, Suite 200, Toronto, Ontario M5E 1M2 T 416-947-9744 F 416-947-0781 Project No. 2094 September 11, 2020 The Council of the Regional Municipality of York York Region Administrative Centre 17250 Yonge Street Newmarket, Ontario, L3Y 6Z1 Attention: Council members of the Regional Municipality of York Re: Request for Employment Conversion 275 Wellington Street East, Town of Aurora We are the planning consultants for Dream Unlimited, the owners of 275 Wellington Street East (“The Subject Site”) in the Town of Aurora. The subject site currently contains a 2-storey printing facility operated by Transcontinental Printing. We are submitting this letter on behalf of our client to request an employment conversion on 275 Wellington Street East to permit a mix of uses including residential. As you are aware, York Region is currently undertaking a Municipal Comprehensive Review (“MCR”) which will likely result in the adoption of a new Official Plan. Pursuant to the Growth Plan and the Provincial Policy Statement, upper-tier municipalities are now required to identify lands required to accommodate employment to 2041 and beyond. Lands may only be converted from employment lands to non-employment lands through upper-tier MCR’s. Non-employment lands include any designation that permits a non-employment use(s) (this includes mixed-use). As you may know, 275 Wellington Street East is located in a Built-Up Area as identified in the Growth Plan (2019) mapping. The site is not located within a Provincially Significant Employment Zone, Provincially Significant Employment Zones were recently identified in the Growth Plan 2019 (A Place to Grow). At the regional level, 275 Wellington Street East is located within an Urban Area as per Schedule A, Regional Structure of the York Region Official Plan. The site is not included as a Strategic Employment Area as part of the York Region Official Plan. At the local level, 275 Wellington Street East is designated Aurora Promenade and Existing Employment- General Industrial as per Schedule A, Land Use Map of the Town of Aurora Official Plan, and is zoned E1, Service Employment and E2, General Employment by Zoning By-law No. 6000-17, as amended. The subject site is an atypical employment site for a variety of reasons. First, the portion of the site that fronts on to Wellington Street East is designated Aurora Promenade which $77$&+0(17 Page 176 of 225 2 permits dwelling units in all building types, commercial uses, tourist accommodations, small- scale institutional uses. The properties surrounding the subject site are designated Aurora Promenade, Existing Commercial, Existing Major Institutional and Existing Employment – Light Industrial/ Service. Wellington Street East is classified as a Boulevard by the Town of Aurora Official Plan. Second, the subject site is within 400 metres of the Aurora GO Station and is within a Major Transit Station Area as described the in the Growth Plan 2019. Third, the site is across the street from St. Maximilian Kolbe Catholic High School, the locational proximity of a sensitive land uses such as a high school would limit the type of employment development that could occur on site. The employment conversion request is being made to achieve the objectives of the Aurora Promenade designation that already exists on the site through an employment conversion that would allow the viable redevelopment of the subject site. Intensification in this area of the Town of Aurora is supportive of numerous Provincial, Regional and Town planning objectives. An employment conversion on this site is an obvious opportunity to support the optimization of land use and infrastructure in keeping with local, regional and provincial policies. Considering the location of the site on Wellington Street East and the proximity to the Aurora GO Station, the subject lands are currently underutilized. The conversion request would facilitate an opportunity for mixed-use development to optimize the locational proximity to the Aurora GO Station and achieve the intensification goals of York Region. For the foregoing reasons, we would like the opportunity for regional council and staff to consider an employment conversion on the subject site. We trust that the foregoing is satisfactory for your purposes, however, if you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned or Tyler Hughes from our office. Thank you again for considering us in this regard. Yours very truly, Michael Bissett, MCIP, RPP Bousfields Inc. Page 177 of 225 WELLINGTON STREET EAST REGIONAL ROAD 15JOHN W WAYCENTRE STREETEEEETTINDUS T R I A L PARKW A Y N O R T H MARY STREETSUBJECTSITEPage 178 of 225 100 John West Way Aurora, Ontario L4G 6J1 (905) 727-3123 aurora.ca Town of Aurora General Committee Report No. PDS 20-069 ______________________________________________________________________ Subject: Administration of Capital Project No. 31116 Prepared by: Anca Mihail, Manager of Engineering and Capital Delivery Department: Planning and Development Services Date: November 17, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________ Recommendation 1. That Report No. PDS20-069 be received for information. Executive Summary This report provides information to Council’s regarding the administration of Capital Project No. 31116 – mill and overlay of the following streets: Dunning Avenue, Edward Street, Golf Links Drive, Industrial Parkway South, McClellan Way, Orchard Heights Blvd, Tamarac Trail and Yonge Street (south of Dunning Avenue).  Capital Project No. 31116 was approved by Council in April 2018 as an in-year Capital Project  Capital Project No. 31116 is a road rehabilitation capital project involving the mill and overlay of 18 km of municipal roads in Aurora.  Capital Project No. 31116 was included in the Town’s 10-year capital rehabilitation plan with a budget of $3.28 million  The design was completed in-house by Engineering staff, with the electrical design for the two intersection’s AODA improvements being delivered by a consulting electrical engineer.  In an effort to minimize overall project cost increases arising from a delay in the tender of the construction contract, staff decided to tender the contract in two stages. Page 179 of 225 November 17, 2020 2 of 8 Report No. PDS20-069  Capital Project No. 31116 was substantially completed in 2019 and it is currently under maintenance. Background At the Council meeting of April 23, 2019, the following resolution was passed: “That staff report back with further information regarding Council’s concerns about the administration of Capital Project No. 31116 – M & O – Dunning Ave, Edward St, Golf Links Drive, Industrial Parkway S, McClellan Way, Orchard Heights Blvd, Tamarac Trail, Yonge Street.” Council requested staff report back on the reasons for splitting the capital project in two stages and tendering them separately. More information was also requested regarding the AODA improvements included in the project and reasons that resulted in the request for additional funding. Capital Project No. 31116 was approved by Council in April 2018 as an In-year Capital Project In 2018, a year with the municipal election, it was anticipated that the approval of the 2019 annual operating and capital budget might be delayed. Late approval of the 2019 budget would delay the tendering and commencement of routine replacement and maintenance projects. In an effort to ensure that no delays were experienced in the delivery of the Town’s planned routine repair and replacement (R&R) capital works, Council approved the 2018 in-year Capital budget consisting of ten (10) R&R projects, with capital project #31116 being one of them (see Attachment 1). Capital project No. 31116 is a road rehabilitation capital project involving the mill and overlay of 18 km of municipal roads in Aurora. Capital Project No. 31116 consisted of the rehabilitation (mill and overlay) of 18 km of municipal roads in Aurora as follows, (see Attachment 2 and Attachment 3):  Dunning Avenue from Yonge Street to the end;  Edward Street from Dunning Avenue to Yonge Street  Golf Links Drive from Yonge Street to Murray Drive  Industrial Parkway South from Industry Street to Engelhard Drive Page 180 of 225 November 17, 2020 3 of 8 Report No. PDS20-069  McClellan Way from Bathurst Street to Spence Drive  Orchards Heights Blvd from Hill Drive (W) to Yonge Street  Tamarac Trail from Henderson Drive (W) to Henderson Drive (E)  Yonge Street from Golf Links Drive/Dunning Avenue to 150m south of Henderson Capital Project No. 31116 was included in the Town’s 10-year capital rehabilitation plan with a budget of $3.28 million The project involved:  mill and overlay (50mm depth) of all the streets mentioned above;  removal and replacement of existing catch basins and manholes tops and covers and perform all necessary adjustments;  repairs to existing sidewalks;  installation of speed cushions on Golf Links Drive;  AODA improvements to two intersections on Yonge Street, at Yonge Street and Murray Drive and at Yonge Street and Brookland Avenue, part of th e Yonge Street resurfacing from Dunning Avenue to South of Henderson. The AODA upgrades to these two intersections included the installation of tactile plates, Accessible Pedestrian Signals (APS), which replaced a traditional visual-only signal and provided audible information, depressed curbs and concrete pads. Analysis The design was completed in-house by Engineering staff, with the electrical design for the two intersection’s AODA improvements being delivered by a consulting electrical engineer The design of the civil works was completed in house by the engineering staff, and the design of the AODA improvements to the two traffic lights at Yonge and Murray Drive, and Yonge and Brookland Avenue, was completed by Moon-Matz, an engineering consulting firm. Page 181 of 225 November 17, 2020 4 of 8 Report No. PDS20-069 As part of the Town’s Accessibility Plan, the Accessibility Committee has approved a multi-year capital project list in support of its plan. The projects within this list are delivered by the appropriate asset owners which typically are Facilities and Engineering Services. Furthermore, when a road is being rehabilitated or reconstructed, the municipality has the obligation to update its intersections to the current AODA standards. Two of the projects identified within the accessibility plan were addressed as part of this project. The two intersections upgraded for AODA compliance, are located at Yonge and Murray Drive and Yonge and Brookland Avenue, as part of the Yonge Street resurfacing from Dunning to south of Henderson. The AODA upgrades to these two intersections included the installation of tactile plates, Accessible Pedestrian Signals (APS), which replaced a traditional visual-only signal and provided audible information, depressed curbs and concrete pads. The Town experienced delays in the delivery of the electrical design for this project’s planned intersection improvements thus impeding its ability to proceed with the tendering of planned construction work within its desired timelines. In an effort to minimize overall project cost increases arising from a delay in the tender of its construction contract, staff decided to tender the contract in two stages. Due to a delay in the delivery of the electrical design for the intersection improvements, staff decided to tender the capital project in two stages to take advantage of the design readiness for the section of the project that did not include electrical work. The project was divided in two tenders making sure economies of scale would be achieved. In arriving at this decision, Engineering staff consulted with Finance and Procurement staff who agreed that, in consideration of the rationale provided, the proj ect should be tendered in two stages, provided that Best Management Practices are being adhered to, by tendering and substantially completing the entire capital project in the same year, (i.e. 2019), which was accomplished. Staff strive to minimize the need to split one capital project in two or more tenders, as this is seldom done. However, the electrical design for the two intersections on Yonge Street was delayed by the electrical engineer and in an effort to minimize any incremental costs arising from this delay, staff decided to proceed to tender the part of Page 182 of 225 November 17, 2020 5 of 8 Report No. PDS20-069 the project that was ready, in order to take advantage of the very competitive tender prices at the beginning of the year (i.e. late January and early February). Also, staff was concerned that a delay in tendering the project would result in a delay in completing the work before the construction cut-off date of November 1. Construction work that starts late in the spring/summer will usually extends beyond the construction cut-off date of November 1, resulting in unavoidable extra costs (if paving takes place at temperatures below 7 Celsius) and increased inconvenience to area residents. The project involved two tenders and included the following work:  Roadway rehabilitation of Orchard Heights Blvd., Tamarac Trail, McClellan Way and Industrial Parkway South, Tender 2019-30-PDS-ENG, PO #1353, please see Attachment #2. Tender 2019-30-PDS-ENG was awarded by the Director of Planning and Development Services on March 7, 2019.  Roadway rehabilitation of Yonge Street, Edward Street, Golf Links Drive and Dunning Avenue, Tender 2019-42-PDS-ENG, PO #1363, please see Attachment #3. Tender 2019-42-PDS-ENG was awarded by Council on April 23, 2019 and additional funding of $365,300 was approved. The lowest bidder was Forest Contractors Ltd. for both tenders. Unit prices differed between the first and second tender with some unit prices seeing an increase (e.g. base asphalt repairs, milling of asphalt and surface course asphalt), others a decrease (e.g. reinstate traffic signal loops), while others were kept the same (e.g. unit price for staging, traffic control and signage, certain removal items, rout and seal cracks, supply, place and compact crusher limestone for road base, apply tack coat prior to paving surface coarse asphalt). Capital Project No. 31116 was substantially completed in 2019 and it is currently under maintenance The project was completed in the Fall of 2019 and it is currently under maintenance. The contractor is currently addressing deficiencies. If outstanding deficiencies are being addressed by the end of this year, holdbacks will be released and the project can be closed. The project is expected to yield an estimated surplus of $492,000 when completed which will be returned to source. Page 183 of 225 November 17, 2020 6 of 8 Report No. PDS20-069 Advisory Committee Review Not applicable. Legal Considerations None. Financial Implications Table No. 1 presents the project financials to date. Table No.1 – Project Financials Approved Budget – Capital Project 2-4-31116-5059 $3,283,710 Additional Funding approved by Council on April 23, 2019 (Report PDS19-030) $365,300 Total Funding approved for Capital Project No. 31116 $3,649,010 Contractor’s payments to date (PO #1353, PO#1363) $2,936,687 Contractor’s holdbacks to date (maintenance and CLA) $194,000 Geotechnical Investigation $19,965 Construction Signage $5,450 Total expenditure to date $3,156,102 Estimated surplus (to be returned to source) $492,908 Please note that the estimated surplus of $492,908 includes 20% project contingency ($341,906) and an estimated saving on the overall project cost of $151,002. All unused funds will be returned to source once the project is closed. Communications Considerations None. Page 184 of 225 November 17, 2020 7 of 8 Report No. PDS20-069 Link to Strategic Plan This report supports the Strategic Plan goal of Supporting an Exceptional Quality of Life for All through its accomplishment in satisfying requirements in the following key objective within this goal statement: Invest in sustainable infrastructure: Maintain and expand infrastructure to support forecasted population growth through technology, waste management, roads, emergency services and accessibility. Alternative(s) to the Recommendation 1. That Council provide direction. Conclusions Capital Project No. 31116 consisted of the rehabilitation (mill and overlay) of 18 km of municipal roads in Aurora. The engineering design was completed in-house by engineering staff, with the electrical design for the two intersections improvements on Yonge Street being delivered by an external consulting engineer specialized in electrical work. In consideration of the circumstances of this project and in consultation with Procurement and Financial Management, engineering staff tendered this project’s construction contract in two stages. Throughout this process, engineering staff ensured that the Best Management Practices were being adhered to, by tendering and substantially completing the Capital Project in 2019. The project was completed in the Fall of 2019, within budget, and it is currently under maintenance with the contractor addressing minor deficiencies. If outstanding deficiencies are addressed by the end of this year, holdbacks will be released and the project can be closed. The project is expected to yield an estimated surplus of $492,000 when completed which will be returned to source. Attachments Attachment #1: Capital project #31116, budget sheet Attachment #2: Roadway Rehabilitation on Orchard Heights Blvd., Tamarac Trail, McClellan Way, Industrial Parkway South Attachment #3: Roadway Rehabilitation on Yonge Street, Golf links Drive, Dunning Ave, Edward Ave. Page 185 of 225 November 17, 2020 8 of 8 Report No. PDS20-069 Previous Reports PDS19-030 – Award of Tender 2019-42-PDS-ENG, dated April 16, 2019. Pre-submission Review Agenda Management Team review on October 29, 2020 Approvals Approved by David Waters, Director, Planning and Development Services Approved by Doug Nadorozny, Chief Administrative Officer Page 186 of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xpenditures (VWLPDWHG([SHQGLWXUHV &2175$&76 Expenditures Total Funding ,QIUDVWUXFWXUH6XVWDLQDELOLW\5HVHUYHV 5'66':/.667/*765 5 6WRUP6HZHUV&RQWULEXWLRQ Funding Total Total Over (Under) Funded Attachment #1 Page 187 of 225 7RZQRI$XURUD &DSLWDO3URMHFWV 3URMHFW 'HSDUWPHQW 9HUVLRQ <HDU 0 2'XQQLQJ$YH(GZDUG6W*ROI/LQNV'U,QG3NZ\60F&OHOODQ:D\2UFKDUG 3ODQQLQJ 'HYHORSPHQW6HUYLFHV )LQDO$SSURYHG%XGJHW *DOOHU\ Q:\_Departments_space\Works\Capital Projects\CP 31116 - Reconstruction of Dunning Edward Golf Links Industrial Pkwy S McClellan Orchard Heights Page 188 of 225 Map created by the Town of Aurora, Engineering and Capital Delivery Division, April 12th, 2019. Map updated by IT Services Division, October 15th, 2020. Base data provided by York Region and Aurora - GIS. This is a conceptual drawing, refer to engineering drawings for exact specifications. This is not a legal survey. Centre St Walton DrMosaics AveCousins DrGowan LnDunning AveBATHURST STREETMark St Springburn Cres Glass Dr Alex Gardner Cir Burgon Pl Wells StOak Crt Milgate PlCreek'sMeadow LnTilstonGrWellingtonHeightsCrtWellsSt NDrHawthorne Ln O t t a w a C rt M aple Fields CirMorningCresHolman CresAurora H e ightsDrRoyal Rd Egan CrescksSpence DrMilestone Cres Beacon Hall DrMcC l e n nyD rHENDERSON DRIVE Masters Row BonnellCresCentreCresonMoffat Cres Candac VSeaton DrStoddart DrGolf Links Dr Brook la n d A v e Cli f tR dKendrick CresVictoria StAlm C r t George St Parkl andCrtMurdock Ave Kennedy St E Webster DrMatch Point CrtPoplarCres Iber Crt McCle l la n WayAlberyCres Whitfield Crt Dinsmore Terr Irwin Ave Tyler StHilldale RdYONGE STREETHill DrTrillium DrKennedy St W Del ayn e Dr T Gleave CrtW indhamTrGeorge StPetch Cres BirkshDennis Reed Crt FalconwoodHollowHo l l a n dAsh D a n b r o o k C r t Autumn Way Kemano Rd Dunham Cres Cr ow's Nest Gt Industrial Pkwy SSisman AveHur o n Crt Industrial PkwyBriardale Pl and Mur ra y D r Mendy's Forest Keystone Crt Mugford Rd SpringfairAveMarksbury Crt W iltonTrMurray DrNisbet DrChurch St Navan Cres Industrial Pkwy SWilliam Heath Crt Larmont StCr o s s i ngBridgeIllingworth Crt Ardill Cres George StMachell AveTimberlaneBlvdV at a C rt Heathwood Heights Dr Moorcrest DrMcL e o d D r Ham m o nd Dr Gilbank DrPineneedle DrMcDonald Dr MahoganyCrtDavidson RdSkip RachewoodCrt Kennedy St W Community Centre LnK enneth C am pb ell Crt Harrison Ave Batson Dr VANDORF SIDEROAD JTannery Creek Cres Kemano Rd JarvisAveIndustrial Pkwy STemperance StWhisperingPineTrEdward StCorbett CresWilesCrtKennedy St E Child Dr CypressCrtReuben St Mosley StYONGE STREETM a r s h Harbour Timpson D rAvondaleCresLangman PlEdward StOrchard Heights Blvd Clubi n e Crt Dodie St Laurentide AveMary St Wallace Merchant Crt TeasdaleCrtLoringDoolittleCrtCedar CresMcClella n W a y Simmons Cres Woodroof Cres WattsMeadowPatrick DrO wl's F o o tC resLensmith Dr Baycroft LnLi t t leEr ikaWay Deerho r n C resCottonwoodHollow CrtM eado w o o dDrMark St Baldwin RdAuroraHeig h t sDrValleyCresSpruce StKennedy St WMill StBritton TrWells StWhisperingPineTrWilli s D r Furbacher Ln Buchanan Cres TamaracTrCaseyCrtLaurwoodCrt Ma ry StTimbertrail Cres McGee Cres Harriman RdSTREETBanff DrW i lli s Dr Greenb riarC r t Falan Heights Cres Beatty Cres Hunting TrKnoleHaven DrLacey Crt Spruce StK lee s C res Closs Sq James Henry Dr kerCrtSeaton Dr Birksh CrawfordRose DrApril Gdns Hutchinson Rd Fairway Dr Engelhard Dr Caruso GdnsForehtCresWethersfield Crt Pinehurst CrtHillaryPl Centre St I ndust r ia l Pkwy NMilestone Cres WenderlyDrCloss Sq LeeGtHighland CrtE Knowles CresBoulding Dr CabotCrtMaple StHillside Dr Hillview Rd Bayfair Rd Woodhave n AvePoplar CresSpyglassCr t GreenlefeCrtIndustrial Pkwy SDrCousins Dr E J ones Crt Underh i llC resChild DrWELLINGTON STREET WEST Masters Row J a r v isAveOdinCresBrittonTrGlenview DrSiouxGtFi e l di ng Dr Catherine Ave BanburyCrtKitimat CresAlla ura Blvd Sunr a y Pl Cossar DrmsonTerr Haskell Cres Batson Dr Gilbert Dr Murray Dr Connaught Ave Richardson Dr Metcalfe St Cranb erry Ln Cady Crt Ad a i rDr Lanew o o d D r Edward StAshford Crt Kenlea Crt M u r ra y D r Industry StMoorcrest Dr H eathw o o d Heigh t s D r Pine Hill CresBigwin DrPoplar Crt BirchCrtDawson Cres DevlinPl Walton Dr AttrCranberry LnTimpson DrEngelhard DrHollandview Tr Corner Ridge Rd TecumsehDr Tamarac Tr Timber line Tr Devins Dr SanduskyCresWardle Gt Crawford Rose DrButternut Ridge TrCollins Cres De erg len T eValhalla CrtWoodroof Cres Gurnett StJasper DrFleuryStBeacon John Bradbury CrtHaida DrWindham Tr Anderson Pl Johnson RdBerczy StBaileyCresChadburnCresScanlon Crt Stonecliffe CresTrBrowningCrtKen SinclairCresWELLINGTON STREET EAST Hill Dr Davi s RdAlgonquinCresCorner Ridge Rd Harmon Ave Devins Dr Bell Dr O rchardH eigh t s Blv d MeadowL a rk LnSenatorCrtI ronsho reCr t Richardson DrOld Yonge StCrossin Aurora Heights Dr Willia m C rossley Crt CameronAveBlack Waln ut CrtRansom StCopland TrWa ter Well LnLougheedCrtSt. Andrew's Crt BeechbrookeWay T homp kins Cr es TTHENDERSON DRIVE YONGE STREETRai lway/GO Tr a n si t Line WELLINGTON STREET WESTTownship of KingYONGE STREETAttachment #2 PDS20-069 ¯ Subject Lands ROADWAY REHABILITATION - ORCHARD HEIGHTS BOULEVARD, TAMARAC TRAIL, MCCLELLAN WAY AND INDUSTRIAL PARKWAY SOUTH Page 189 of 225 CrtAveEdward StIndustrial Pkwy SHENDERSON DRIVEMurray DrMurray DrMurray DrRichardson DrYONGE STREETRailway/GO Transit LineYONGE STREETMurray DrEdward StreetIndustrial Pkwy SHENDERSON DRIVEGolf Links DriveCousins DrRoyal RdDunning AveNisbet DrFairway DrRichardson DrChild DrGeorge StAllaura BlvdGlass DrDavis RdStoddart DrEngelhard DrVANDORF SIDEROADCossar DrPatrick DrTrillium DrCorbettCresBrooklandSeaton DrDavidson RdGlenview DrWilliamCrossley CrtWenderly DrBailey CresWebster DrDevlin PlRansom StJohn Bradbury CrtVata CrtWilesCrtCarusoGardensBanburyCrtDodie StCameron AveJonesCrtCousins Dr ESpringburn CresLee GatePoplar CresMosaics AveThompkinsCresAdairDrSanduskyCresHighlandHutchinsonRdCasey CrtIberCrtWilliamHeath CrtTeasdale CrtEldonCres Greenbria r C rt Spyglass C rt LOCATION OF PROPOSED ROAD REHABILITATIONGOLF LINKS DR, DUNNING AVE, EDWARD ST, YONGE ST (SOUTH) ANDAODA TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFICATIONSMap created by the Town of Aurora Planning and Development Services Department, April 2nd, 2019. Base data provided by York Region and Aurora - GIS. This is not a legal survey.¯0 100 200MetresPDS20-069Attachment #3KEY PLANPage 190 of 225 100 John West Way Aurora, Ontario L4G 6J1 (905) 727-3123 aurora.ca Town of Aurora General Committee Report No. CS20-0 22 ______________________________________________________________________ Subject: Audio Recordings of Closed Session Prepared by: Michael de Rond, Town Clerk Department: Corporate Services Date: November 17, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________ Recommendation 1. That Report No. CS20-022 be received; and 2. That, beginning with the first closed session meeting of 2021, staff audio record all closed session meetings; and, 3. That access to the recordings be restricted to the Town Clerk, Chief Administrative Officer, Town Solicitor and the Town’s closed session meeting investigator; and, 4. That a by-law be enacted at a future Council meeting to classify the recordings as permanent in the Town’s Record Retention and Classification By-law Executive Summary This report provides logistical information regarding Council’s decision to record future closed session meetings. The report includes the following;  Staff are proposing to use a variety of methods to record each closed session meeting, beginning with the first meeting in January 2021  The audio recordings will be stored in a secured place with restricted access  Staff are proposing to keep the audio recordings in perpetuity Background On September 29, 2020, Council adopted the following motion; Page 191 of 225 November 17, 2020 2 of 4 Report No. CS20-022 1. Now Therefore Be It Hereby Resolved That staff be directed to report back before the end of the year on the recommendation to have all future closed session meetings of Council audio-recorded; and 2. Be It Further Resolved That the report include recommended policies pertaining to security, limited access for investigation purposes only and what protocols should be put into place for the retention and destruction of these records. Analysis Staff are proposing to use a variety of methods to record each closed session meeting, beginning with the first meeting in January 2021 When operating normally, closed session meetings of Council occur in the Holland Room. The COVID-19 pandemic has forced Council into meeting differently, including closed session meetings in the Council Chambers to better incorporate mitigating health measures, or via the Zoom meetings platform which is completely virtual. Regardless of the location and format of the meeting, staff will be able to audio record the closed session meetings using any device or method as deemed appropriate by the Clerk, including use of a handheld recorder, built-in AV equipment or electronic meeting software, to produce an audio-only recording of a meeting. Staff are further recommending that audio recordings commence with the first meeting in the 2021. The audio recordings will be stored in a secured place with restricted access Staff will ensure the recordings are kept in a safe place where only the Town Clerk has access. The Town Solicitor and Chief Administrative Officer will be granted access when requested. Access to the audio recordings will not be provided to individual members of Council or through the Freedom of Information (FOI) process. Should a closed session investigation request be received, the relevant audio recording(s) may be accessed by the closed meeting investigator if they determine they would be helpful to the investigation. Staff are proposing to keep the audio recordings in perpetuity As Aurora is one of the few municipalities to record closed session meetings, there is not a road map when it comes to retention of the files. The industry standard for Page 192 of 225 November 17, 2020 3 of 4 Report No. CS20-022 retention of recordings of any type of Council meeting is permanent, and staff proposing this also be applied to closed session audio recordings. This does not pose either short - term or long-term storage capacity concerns for staff. Further to this, there is no limitation period for closed session meeting investigations. While its reasonable to assume that the likelihood of a closed session investigation decreases over time, there are plausible scenarios where a request is submitted for a meeting at least 5-10 years ago. Advisory Committee Review None Legal Considerations Audio recordings of meetings are considered a corporate record for the purposes of the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (MFIPPA). A person may request access to such records, and the Town Clerk would be required to release the records unless a specific exemption applies. The release of an audio recording of a closed session meeting would likely be refused, in accordance with subsection 6(1)(a) of MFIPPA, which is the exemption that generally applies to closed session records. Despite the Town’s refusal to release the record, a person may appeal this decision to the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner (IPC). Through the appeal process, the IPC may order that the Town release an audio recording of a closed session meeting in whole or part. In addition, as is the case for any other record of the Town, a court may order the release of the audio recording in a legal proceeding. Financial Implications There are no direct financial implication arising as a result of this report. Communications Considerations None Page 193 of 225 November 17, 2020 4 of 4 Report No. CS20-022 Link to Strategic Plan Recording closed session meetings promote progressive corporate excellence and continuous improvement by implementing policy and processes that reflect sound and accountable governance. Alternative(s) to the Recommendation 1. Council provide direction Conclusions Council has deemed it appropriate to record all future closed session meetings. This report provides logistical details regarding these recordings. Attachments None Previous Reports None Pre-submission Review Agenda Management Team review on October 29, 2020 Approvals Approved by Techa van Leeuwen, Director, Corporate Services Approved by Doug Nadorozny, Chief Administrative Officer Page 194 of 225 100 John West Way Aurora, Ontario L4G 6J1 (905) 727-3123 aurora.ca Town of Aurora General Committee Report No. CS20-0 23 ______________________________________________________________________ Subject: Approval of 2021 Meeting Schedule Prepared by: Samantha Yew, Deputy Town Clerk Department: Corporate Services Date: November 17, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________ Recommendation 1. That Report No. CS20-023 be received; and 2. That the 2021 Meeting Schedule (Attachment No. 1) be approved; and 3. That the Town Clerk be authorized to make amendments to the Council and Committee Meeting Schedule as required. Executive Summary The purpose of this report is to establish a 2021 Meeting Schedule for Council and Committee meetings.  Approval of the meeting schedule is required as per the Procedure By-law  The proposed 2021 Meeting Schedule was developed using dates established in the Procedure By-law and Committee Terms of Reference Background Approval of the meeting schedule is required as per the Procedure By-law As per Section 19 of By-law Number 6228-19, as amended (the Procedure By-law), Council approves a Meeting Schedule of Council and Standing Committee meetings for each calendar year. In order to allow for report forecasting, agenda planning, and sufficient public notice, a 2021 Meeting Schedule must be approved before the end of 2020. Page 195 of 225 November 17, 2020 2 of 3 Report No. CS20-023 Analysis The proposed 2021 Meeting Schedule was developed using dates established in the Procedure By-law and Committee Terms of Reference Section 19 of the Procedure By-law establishes rules for the timing of Standing Committee and Council meetings. The proposed 2021 Meeting Schedule, developed using the provisions in the By-law and past meeting schedule practices, is provided as Attachment No. 1. Town Advisory Committees, Aurora Cultural Centre Board, Aurora Public Library Board, Aurora Economic Development Board, and Joint Council Committee will continue to be scheduled as outlined in their respective Terms of Reference or by-law. The Aurora Appeal Tribunal and Property Standards Committee have established monthly placeholder dates as the number of appeals received increased in 2020. These placeholder dates are reflected in the Schedule. Budget Committee meetings will be brought forward for Council approval in a future report. Environmental Advisory Committee and Anti-Black Racism and Anti-Racism Task Force meeting dates will be added once they are established by the Committees. Advisory Committee Review None Legal Considerations None Financial Implications None Communications Considerations Upon Council approval, the 2021 Meeting Schedule will be posted to the Town website. Page 196 of 225 November 17, 2020 3 of 3 Report No. CS20-023 Link to Strategic Plan The proposed 2021 Meeting Schedule supports Progressive corporate excellence and continuous improvement by implementing policy and processes that reflect sound and accountable governance. Alternative(s) to the Recommendation 1. Council may choose to amend the schedule. 2. Council may choose to approve an alternative Meeting Schedule. Conclusions This report has been prepared to provide Council with a proposed 2021 Meeting Schedule. In order to allow for report forecasting, agenda planning, and sufficient public notice, approval of the 2021 Meeting Schedule is required. Attachments Attachment 1 – Proposed 2021 Meeting Schedule Previous Reports None Pre-submission Review Agenda Management Team review on October 29, 2020 Approvals Approved by Techa Van Leeuwen, Director, Corporate Services Approved by Doug Nadorozny, Chief Administrative Officer Page 197 of 225 Attachment 1 – Proposed 2021 Meeting Schedule Page 198 of 225 Attachment 1 – Proposed 2021 Meeting Schedule Page 199 of 225 Attachment 1 – Proposed 2021 Meeting Schedule Page 200 of 225 Attachment 1 – Proposed 2021 Meeting Schedule Page 201 of 225 Attachment 1 – Proposed 2021 Meeting Schedule Page 202 of 225 Attachment 1 – Proposed 2021 Meeting Schedule Page 203 of 225 Attachment 1 – Proposed 2021 Meeting Schedule Page 204 of 225 Attachment 1 – Proposed 2021 Meeting Schedule Page 205 of 225 Attachment 1 – Proposed 2021 Meeting Schedule Page 206 of 225 Attachment 1 – Proposed 2021 Meeting Schedule Page 207 of 225 Attachment 1 – Proposed 2021 Meeting Schedule Page 208 of 225 Attachment 1 – Proposed 2021 Meeting Schedule Page 209 of 225 100 John West Way Aurora, Ontario L4G 6J1 (905) 727-3123 aurora.ca Town of Aurora General Committee Report No. CMS20 -028 ______________________________________________________________________ Subject: Sports Field Development Strategy Update Prepared by: John Firman, Manager of Business Support Department: Community Services Date: November 17, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________ Recommendation 1. That Report No. CMS20-028 be received for information; and 2. That the Director of Community Services be authorized to enter into agreements with local Schools and School Boards for the shared use of sports fields, including any ancillary agreements required for same. Executive Summary This report is intended to provide Council with an update related to actions arising from the Sport Field Development Strategy that was received by Council in January, 2020.  The Sports Field Development Strategy provided recommendations for field development over the next 10 years to support existing and future sports field needs  The Stronach Group has extended access to the fields previously known as the “Magna Fields” through 2025  Development of two senior softball diamonds on the Hallmark lands will address the immediate need for ball diamonds  Additional research from sport field user groups has not been possible during the current pandemic/pandemic recovery environment  The Town is proceeding with non-capital works to increase the inventory of smaller rectangular sports fields  Staff continue to review and implement opportunities for field development on Town land or re-purposing existing fields Page 210 of 225 November 17, 2020 2 of 6 Report No. CMS20-028  Town staff are engaging local schools and school boards in discussions related to partnership projects to develop additional full-size rectangular sports fields. Background The Sports Field Development Strategy provided recommendations for field development over the next 10 years to support existing and future sports field needs On January 20, 2020 staff presented a comprehensive Sports Field Development Strategy (SFDS) developed by Monteith Brown Planning Consultants. This SFDS is needed to help ensure that the Town is properly positioned to meet the existing and future outdoor sports field needs for the community. This will help maximize opportunities with existing assets and provide informed recommendations for the acquisition/development of new assets. The most urgent need identified in the SFDS was the need to replace the fields known as the Magna Fields, as it was anticipated that those fields would only be available for use for another two or three years. Analysis The Stronach Group has extended access to the fields previously known as the “Magna Fields” through 2025 Staff have recently received confirmation from a representative of The Stronach Group, owners of the soccer fields on Wellington (formerly referred to as the “Magna Fields”) that there are no plans to develop the property for the next five years and as such have confirmed the availability of the Stronach Fields to be used as they are currently , in support of the Aurora Youth Soccer Club through the Town. Staff will be working with the Stronach Group to facilitate a name change for this location, to ensure the fields are now referred to as the Stronach Fields, to accurately represent the ownership of the property and to acknowledge the donation of field usage by The Stronach Group. Page 211 of 225 November 17, 2020 3 of 6 Report No. CMS20-028 Development of two senior softball diamonds on the Hallmark lands will address the immediate need for ball diamonds The SFDS identified the immediate need for two additional ball diamonds and recommended that the Town proceed with the existing plans to build two senior softball diamonds on the Hallmark Lands. On June 23, 2020 Council approved report CMS20- 14 and directed staff to commence the tendering process for this project. Additional research from sport field user groups has not been possible during the current pandemic/pandemic recovery environment Following presentation of the SFDS to Council, staff began to undertake further research to clarify and support the needs for additional specific sports fields. Shortly thereafter, the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic were realized, and staff have since been unable to continue to additional research. Staff also began to engage sport field user groups to acquire more supporting data from them related to their current and future sports field needs. Given that all of these user groups are either completely or mostly volunteer-run, they have limited capacity to engage in detailed research projects of this nature. Also, impacted by the effects of the pandemic, Town staff have suspended any requests for further research from the user groups. Staff plan to re-engage user groups in the future, in order to obtain additional data to support future field development recommendations. The Town is proceeding with non-capital works to increase the inventory of smaller rectangular sports fields Operational Services, Parks Operations has included plans for the development of lands within existing park spaces for future junior sized (3v3 and 5v5) rectangular fields. As this work does not include any major construction or the installation of permanent equipment such as goal posts, all work will be completed within normal operations and within the 2021 Operating Budget. This includes:  Edward Coltham Park: two 5v5 fields  Trent Park: two 5v5 fields  Chapman Park: one 3v3 field (already used in previous years – no new work required) Page 212 of 225 November 17, 2020 4 of 6 Report No. CMS20-028 Staff continue to review and implement opportunities for field development on Town land or re-purposing existing fields Following the construction of the accessible playground at Queens Diamond Jubilee Park, the existing 7v7 field was reduced in size, and while it meets the minimum requirements of 7v7 field dimensions it is the smallest 7v7 field in the Towns inventory and not well utilized by user groups for that reason. This field can remain as is and still be available for training purposes, but can also be re-purposed for use as two 3v3 fields in future. Staff have also received a verbal commitment from the York Region District School Board to enter into an agreement for use of the 7v7 field behind the former George Street Public School. This property adjoins Lions Park and the field exists almost exclusively on School Board land, with a small portion encroaching on Town land. Staff will work with Legal Services to enter into a formal agreement with the school board. Town staff are engaging local schools and school boards in discussions related to partnership projects to develop additional full-size rectangular sports fields Staff had initial discussions with the York Region District School Board, York Catholic District School Board and St. Andrew’s College during the development of the SFDS and are now re-engaging both boards to further investigate partnership opportunities. Staff are attempting to meet with the York Region District School Board to discuss opportunities at:  The Dr. G.W. Williams Secondary School  Aurora High School  The new secondary school planned for 2024 opening on Bayview Ave. Staff have met twice with the York Catholic District School Board to discuss opportunities at Cardinal Carter Catholic High School and various Catholic elementary schools. The SFDS identified the sport field at Aurora Montessori School as a potential partnership opportunity, however, upon discussion with the school it was learned that future development plans for the school include removing the sport field for expansion of the school building. Staff will also be engaging the French Catholic School Board, St. Andrew’s College and St. Anne’s School to further discuss potential partnership opportunities. Page 213 of 225 November 17, 2020 5 of 6 Report No. CMS20-028 Advisory Committee Review The Community Advisory Committee (CAC) was provided with an overview of the SFDS during the development of the strategy, including an overview of how the study was being approached, research being completed and the objectives. The CAC will be updated on the progress to date at the CAC meeting scheduled for November 19, 2020, and will continue to be engaged on an ongoing basis. Legal Considerations The Town will enter into an agreement with the York Region District School Board to obtain an exclusive licence to access and provide permits for the soccer fields from April to October of each year. The Town will be responsible for maintaining the fields, which includes mowing, lining, and fertilizing. The agreement will also include insurance and indemnification provisions. Any further agreements with other school boards will contain similar provisions. Financial Implications As funding is limited in this regard, a clear funding strategy is required in support of all initiatives arising from Town’s Outdoor Field Development Study. A funding strategy will be presented to Council as part of future Sports Field capital considerations. The additional field maintenance work for Lions Park can be accommodated within the current Parks Operations operating budget. Communications Considerations The Town will use “inform” as the level of engagement for this in itiative, under the Town’s engagement policy. Communications will be issued through the Town’s website and social media accounts, as needed, based on next steps. Link to Strategic Plan An Outdoor Field Development Strategy supports the Strategic Plan goal of Supporting an exceptional quality of life for all in its accomplishment in satisfying requirements in the following key objective within this goal statement: Objective 4: Encouraging an active and healthy lifestyle Page 214 of 225 November 17, 2020 6 of 6 Report No. CMS20-028 Alternative(s) to the Recommendation 1. Council may provide further direction. Conclusions That the Director of Community Services be authorized to enter into an agreement with the York Region District School Board for the shared use of sports fields. Attachments None Previous Reports CMS20-001 Outdoor Field Development Strategy, January 14, 2020 CMS20-014 Hallmark Lands: Request for Information and User Group Survey Results Pre-submission Review Agenda Management Team review on October 29, 2020 Approvals Approved by Robin McDougall, Director, Community Services Department Approved by Doug Nadorozny, Chief Administrative Officer Page 215 of 225 100 John West Way Aurora, Ontario L4G 6J1 (905) 727-3123 aurora.ca Town of Aurora General Committee Report No. PDS 20-074 ______________________________________________________________________ Subject: Request to Remove a Property from the Aurora Register of Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest 93 Tyler Street Prepared by: Carlson Tsang, Planner/Heritage Planning Department: Planning and Development Services Date: November 17, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________ Recommendation 1. That Report No. PDS20-074 be received; and, 2. That the listed property located at 93 Tyler Street be removed from the Aurora Register of Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest. Executive Summary The purpose of this report is to provide the General Committee with the necessary information to support the delisting of 93 Tyler Street from the Aurora Register of Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest.  The Heritage Advisory Committee’s Working Group performed an evaluation of the property and concludes that the property is not worthy of heritage designation. Background Property Description The subject property is located on the south side of Tyler Street, south of Wellington Street West and west of George Street (see Attachment 1). The property is listed on the Town’s Register of Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest. There is a two- storey residence and a double-car detached garage on the property (see Attachment 2). Records show that the house was constructed in 1913. The architectural appearance of the house can be described as a simplified version of the Classic Revival style, characterized by gable roofs with a bricked chimney, a verandah at the front façade, Page 216 of 225 November 17, 2020 2 of 5 Report No. PDS20-074 traditional sash windows with wooden shutters and a triple bay window on the east side wall. The building contains a rear addition constructed as early as the 1970’s. History of the Property In 1912, George Case purchased the property as an investment and constructed a t wo- storey detached dwelling in 1913. The house was rented by a local tanner until the property was sold to the Town’s constable named Duncan Cram in 1918. The property was subsequently purchased by Harriet Welsh, who was the widow of Israel Welsh from Whitchurch Township. Harriet Welsh moved to this neighborhood for her children, Harry and Verna, to attend Aurora High School. The Welsh family only lived in the house for a few years, but kept ownership of the property until 1946. Harry Welsh went on to become the chairman of the department of physics at the University of Toronto. For most of the time since Welshes’ departure, the building has been a rental property. The building has been unoccupied for nearly ten years. The interior of the building is subject to severe deterioration. Ontario Heritage Act 93 Tyler Street is a non-designated property listed on the Town’s Heritage Register. The principal implication of properties being listed is outlined in Section 27 (3) of the Ontario Heritage Act where owners are required to provide the Town at least 60 days’ notice in writing of their intention to demolish or remove a building or structure on the property. This notice period allows Council to make informed decisions and consult with the Heritage Advisory Committee regarding whether or not the property requires designation under the Ontario Heritage Act for long-term protection. Provincial Policy Statement (2020) The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) provides policy direction on matters of provincial interest. The PPS identifies that significant built heritage resources and significant cultural heritage landscapes shall be conserved. Built heritage resource is defined in the PPS as a building, structure, monument, installation or any manufactured remnant that contributes to a property’s cultural heritage value or interest as identified by a community; and they are generally located on a property that has been designated under Part IV or V of the Ontario Heritage Act, or included on local, provincial and/or federal registers. Page 217 of 225 November 17, 2020 3 of 5 Report No. PDS20-074 York Region and Town of Aurora Official Plans The York Region Official Plan encourages local municipalities to compile and maintain a register of significant cultural heritage resources, in consultation with heritage experts and local heritage committees. It requires local municipalities to conserve significant cultural heritage resources and ensure that development and site alteration of adjacent lands to protected heritage properties will conserve the attributes of the protected heritage property. The Town’s Official Plan states that all significant heritage resources shall be designated as being of cultural heritage value or interest in accordance with the Ontario Heritage Act to ensure effective protection and their continuing maintenance, conservation and restoration. Analysis The Heritage Advisory Committee’s Working Group performed an evaluation of the property and concludes that the property is not worthy of heritage designation. On October 15th, 2020, the Heritage Advisory Committee’s Evaluation Working Group met with Planning Staff to perform an evaluation of the subject property based on the criteria prescribed in Ontario Regulation 09/06 and the Town’s Heritage Evaluation Guidelines (see Attachment 3). The property scored 40.4/100. The score places the property in Group 3, which suggests that the property is not worthy of heritage designation under the Ontario Heritage Act. The following is a summary of the comments from the Working Group:  The exterior of the building does not exhibit any unique elements that represents a rare architectural style or construction method. The elevations do not display a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit.  While the building is associated with Harry Welsh who was a renowned physicist and educator at the University of Toronto, Welsh only lived on the property for a brief period of time and therefore was not considered to be of significant importance to the local community.  The building has limited contextual value due to its age which establishes limited symbolic significance as a historical residence. However, the building is not part of Page 218 of 225 November 17, 2020 4 of 5 Report No. PDS20-074 any historic grouping or distinctive setting. The building is not considered to be a heritage landmark in the local community. Advisory Committee Review The Heritage Advisory Committee reviewed the application at its meeting on November 2, 2020. The Committee discussed about the property’s association with Harry Welsh who was a renowned physicist from the University of Toronto, and the building’s relationship with the historic neighbourhood. Although the building ha s some level of contextual value, the Committee recognized that there is not enough evidence to suggest that the property meets the criteria for heritage designation. The Committee noted that the building’s interior is subject to severe deterioration as it has been vacant for many years. The Committee agreed with the results of the evaluation undertaken by the HAC Working group and supported the removal of 93 Tyler Street from the Aurora Register of Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest. Legal Considerations None. Financial Implications There are no financial implications. Communications Considerations The Town of Aurora will use ‘Inform’ as the level of engagement for this matter. There are five different levels of community engagement to consider, with each level providing the community more involvement in the decision-making process. These levels are: Inform, Consult, Involve, Collaborate and Empower. Examples of each can be found in the Community Engagement Policy. These options are based on the International Association of Public Participation (IAP2) Spectrum and assist in establishing guidelines for clearly communicating with our public and managing community engagement. In order to inform the public, this report will be posted to the Town’s website. Page 219 of 225 November 17, 2020 5 of 5 Report No. PDS20-074 Link to Strategic Plan The conservation of heritage resources supports the Strategic Plan goal of Supporting an Exceptional Quality of Life for All through its accomplishment in satisfying requirements in objective Celebrating and Promoting our Culture. Alternative(s) to the Recommendation 1. That 93 Tyler Street continue to be a listed (non-designated) property on the Aurora Registrar of Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest. Conclusions The Heritage Advisory Committee’s Working Group performed an evaluation of the existing building at 93 Tyler Street and concludes that it does not meet the criteria for heritage designation under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. Staff recommend that 93 Tyler Street be removed from the Aurora Register of Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest. Attachments Attachment 1 – Location Map Attachment 2 – Photos of the building Attachment 3 – Evaluation Working Group Score Previous Reports HAC20-014 – Delisting of 93 Tyler Street - November 2, 2020 Pre-submission Review Reviewed by the Chief Administrative Officer and Director of Planning and Development Services Approvals Approved by David Waters, Director, Planning and Development Services Approved by Doug Nadorozny, Chief Administrative Officer Page 220 of 225 LOCATION MAP ADDRESS: 91 Tyler Street ATTACHMENT 1 SUBJECT LANDS Map created by the Town of Aurora Planning and Building Services Department, August 29 2019. Base data provided by York Regio n & the Town of Aurora. Air Photos taken Spring 2018, © First Base Solutions Inc., 2018 Orthophotography. 0 10 20 30 40 4 Metres Subject Property Page 221 of 225 Attachment 2Front ElevationPage 222 of 225 Side ElevationPage 223 of 225 Rear ElevationPage 224 of 225 Municipal Address: _______________________________________________ Legal Description: _____________________ Lot: ______ Cons: _______ Group: Date of Evaluation: ________________ Name of Recorder: _____________ HISTORICAL E G F P TOTAL Date of Construction 30 20 10 0 /30 Trends/Patterns/Themes 40 27 14 0 /40 Events 15 10 5 0 /15 Persons/Groups 15 10 5 0 /15 Archaeological (Bonus) 10 7 3 0 /10 7 3 0 /10 /10 Historic Grouping (Bonus) 10 HISTORICAL TOTAL /100 ARCHITECTURAL E G F P TOTAL Design 20 13 7 0 /20 Style 30 20 10 0 /30 Architectural Integrity 20 13 7 0 /20 Physical Condition 20 13 7 0 /20 Design/Builder 10 7 3 0 /10 Interior (Bonus) 10 7 3 0 /10 ARCHITECTURAL TOTAL /100 ENVIRONMENTAL/CONTEXTUAL TOTAL Design Compatibility 40 27 14 0 /40 Community Context 20 13 7 0 /20 Landmark 20 13 7 0 /20 Site 20 13 7 0 /20 ENVIRONMENTAL/CONTEXTUAL TOTAL /100 SCORE INDIVIDUAL OLD AURORA Historical Score X 40% = _______ X 20% = _______ Architectural Score X 40% = _______ X 35% = _______ Enviro/Contextual Score X 20% = _______ X 45% = _______ TOTAL SCORE HERITAGE BUILDING EVALUATION: SCORESHEET GROUP 1 = 70-100 GROUP 2 = 45-69 GROUP 3 = 44 or less Plan 30 LOT 33 93 Tyler Street Oct 15, 2020 Carlson Tsang Construction Date 10 8 50 57 10 29 4 45 10 10.1520.25 40.4 Attachment 3 Page 225 of 225