Report to: Council Date
of Meeting: March 27, 2007
SUBJECT: Ruland Properties Inc. (The Remington
Group)
Phase
1 Approvals and Hold Removal
PREPARED BY:
RECOMMENDATION:
That the report dated
That the Hold Removal By-law attached to this report as Appendix A be enacted;
And that staff be authorized and directed to do all things necessary to give effect to this resolution.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Not applicable
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS:
Not applicable
1. Purpose 2.
Background 3. Discussion 4.
Financial
5. Others (Environmental,
Accessibility, Engage 21st, Affected Units) 6. Attachment(s)
The purpose of this report is to discuss the resolution of the appeals to Ruland Properties’ (The Remington Group) conditions of draft plan approval and to recommend enactment of a by-law to lift the Holding (H) provisions to facilitate the start of construction of the phase 1 residential apartment programme.
Council
granted draft plan approval to the Remington Group’s comprehensive, mixed-used
project in July, 2003, which anticipates a 20 year plus build-out.
In
June, 2004, the Markham Centre Zoning By-law (2004-196) was enacted to
implement the Remington Group’s plan.
Addressing various technical issues associated with the approvals required amendments to the conditions of draft plan approval and modifications to the approved Precinct Plan. These changes were endorsed by Council in June, 2006, and subsequently appealed by three area developers, on grounds which included an assertion that the condition of draft approval relating to entering into a cost sharing agreement established an unacceptable, and in their view, illegal precedent for their own existing and future approvals.
Staff have worked closely with the Remington Group and other
Markham Centre landowners to address issues associated with these appeals and,
as part of a series of discussions before the Ontario Municipal Board, the
remaining appeals were resolved on
In the interim, the Remington Group has been proceeding with their phase one site plan approvals to be in a position to finalize building permits, once the subdivision agreement has been executed. To-date, Council has endorsed site plan applications within Phase 1 for the Honeywell building, 175 townhomes, and four apartment buildings totalling approximately 432 units.
In anticipation of the appeals to the draft plan approval being resolved staff have commenced the subdivision agreement process. Given the complexity of the agreement and the lengthy timeframe required to resolve the appeals, the applicant is seeking to obtain conditional building permits in advance of the subdivision agreement being executed. One prerequisite to the issuance of a conditional building permit would be the lifting of the applicable Holding (H) provisions. The Markham Centre By-law contains a series of Hold removal conditions intended to ensure such matters as the orderly sequence of development; the execution of appropriate agreements; the completion of required studies; and, available servicing capacity, are addressed.
In this regard, staff note that the Hold (H) provisions have previously been lifted to facilitate construction of the Honeywell building, the construction of model suites, and to allow for the relocation of the heritage dwelling. Staff support the lifting of the (H) for the first four apartment buildings at this time, subject to the Building Department issuing only conditional building permits. Given the lengthy timelines associated with excavation, the construction of the underground garage structures and the completion of the buildings, the subdivision agreement will be executed long before occupancy of the buildings, and issuance of full building permits. Servicing allocation for these buildings was previously granted to the Remington Group at the time of draft plan approval in 2003.
It is recommended that once site plans have been endorsed by the Director of Planning and Urban Design, the following clauses be incorporated into the conditional building permits for these four buildings which must be fulfilled prior to occupancy of the buildings:
It is further recommended that Ruland execute an undertaking committing to execute the required agreements and to not compel the Town to issue full Building Permits until such time as the above conditions have been met. These conditions have been discussed with Ruland.
FINANCIAL TEMPLATE:
Not applicable
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS:
Not applicable
ACCESSIBILITY CONSIDERATIONS:
Not applicable
ENGAGE 21ST CONSIDERATIONS:
The
proposal aligns with the following key Town of
BUSINESS UNITS CONSULTED AND AFFECTED:
RECOMMENDED BY:
|
|
|
Valerie Shuttleworth, M.C.I.P., R.P.P. Director of |
|
Jim
Baird, M.C.I.P., R.P.P. Commissioner of Development Services |
Appendix 1 Hold (H) Removal By-law