Report to: Development Services Committee Report Date: June 22, 2010
SUBJECT: Information Report: Thornhill
Infill Housing By-laws (File Number: 10 118360)
PREPARED BY: Dave Miller, MCIP, RPP Senior
Project Coordinator ext 4960
RECOMMENDATION:
1)
That the report entitled
“Information Report: Thornhill Infill Housing By-laws (File Number 10 118360)”
be received;
2)
That the Thornhill Subcommittee
and Town staff establish a process of consultation with ratepayer
representatives and other stakeholders in Thornhill to consider the scope and
possible merit of amendments to the Town’s Infill Housing By-laws;
3)
That the Thornhill Subcommittee
report back to the Development Services Committee in the Fall 2010, at which
time the Development Services Committee may provide direction regarding next
steps, which may include authorizing staff to prepare a draft By-law and
schedule a Public Meeting;
4)
And that Staff be authorized
and directed to do all things necessary to give effect to this resolution.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
This report is
in response to a discussion and a request by Development Services Committee (DSC)
on May 4th, 2010 that staff bring forward
an information report to update them on infill housing by-laws in Thornhill. The discussion on May 4th also
referred to earlier requests by the Wards 1 and 2 (Thornhill) Councillors that
staff review the provisions of the Thornhill Infill Housing By-laws. Thornhill residents have in recent years
expressed concern to DSC that new home construction and additions to existing
homes in some established parts of Thornhill were, in the opinion of some
residents, not in keeping with the character of the neighbourhood. Some residents have also expressed the
opinion that flooding impacts could be mitigated through stricter zoning
controls.
Committee of
Adjustment decisions in granting minor variances for larger homes in Thornhill
have also been criticized from time to time.
History
of the Town’s Infill By-laws
In January 1989
a Working Committee (Task Force) on Infill Housing was established to deal with
concerns about individuals buying lots within established neighbourhoods,
tearing down the existing home and replacing it with a much larger home. The Task Force mandate was to consider the
issue of infill housing and to make recommendations with respect to appropriate
policies relating to the regulation of infill housing. The Task Force reviewed existing Town policies
and By-laws, policies and practices of other municipalities, and submissions
from residents and stakeholders. The
Task Force made recommendations in two categories - construction related
concerns and compatibility of new dwellings with existing dwellings. The compatibility of new dwellings to the
existing dwellings was addressed by the passing of Infill Housing By-laws for
certain areas of Markham that were identified by Council as being of concern
(Figure 1). The Task Force members felt
that to address the issue of compatibility it was necessary to modify the
zoning so that new development was further regulated to more closely resemble
the existing development. The Mayor’s
1989 Task Force on Infill Housing spent a lot of time and resources looking at
these issues prior to making recommendations about the provisions to be
included in the Infill By-laws.
The Town passed three
separate infill By-laws in the early 1990’s, amending parent By-laws 2237 and
1767 (parts of Thornhill) and 1229 (Markham Village). There were two subsequent amendments in the
early 1990’s. An amendment to By-law
2237 further refined the Infill provisions that apply to the Heritage area of
Thornhill, and an amendment to By-law 122-72 added Infill By-law provisions to
the Oakcrest Avenue, Sabiston Drive and Riverbend Road area of Unionville (see
Figure 1). The Infill By-laws introduce
additional development standards and zoning restrictions to limit the size and
massing of new dwellings, or additions to existing
dwellings, in the identified communities and neighbourhoods. Markham currently has four separate infill
By-laws containing four sets of zoning provisions for infill housing.
The current review of the
Infill By-law provisions is to ensure that the character of older established
areas is protected, while allowing new homes desirable for today’s housing
market and lifestyles
Based on the recent direction of DSC, Town staff
have initiated a review of the Town’s current Infill By-law provisions.
The objective of
the current review of Infill Housing standards is to ascertain if refinements
to the existing provisions will give added protection to the character of older
established areas, while still allowing the new homes that are desirable for
today’s housing market and lifestyles. To
date, only a few possible changes are being suggested by staff for further
review and possible refinement. These
include:
1.
The definition of Net Lot Area;
2.
The Maximum Garage Projection;
3.
The Maximum Garage Width (the
garage opening for motor vehicles); and
4.
Reverse Sloped Driveways.
Prior to staff
formulating recommendations regarding any amendments to the Infill Housing
By-law, public and stakeholder input should be obtained. Consequently, staff
recommend that a process, similar to the recently initiated process to
determine if the Varley Village area of Unionville should be subject to Infill
By-law provisions, be established. The
Thornhill Sub-committee and Town staff could establish a process of
consultation with ratepayer representatives and other stakeholders in
Thornhill, to consider the scope and possible merit of amendment to the Infill
By-law. Staff
anticipate that there will be a wide range of opinions regarding changes
to the Infill By-laws.
The possible refinements to the Infill Housing By-laws identified by
staff are being suggested as a starting point for discussion. While the current review stems from concerns
identified by Thornhill Councillors, any refinements to the Infill Housing
By-laws could also be considered across the Town’s other Infill By-law areas.
A statutory public meeting, with formal notice would be required
prior to any zoning amendment(s).
Other municipal Infill
Housing By-laws
A review of the
provisions relating to infill housing in North York, Oakville, Burlington,
Oshawa, Vaughan and Richmond Hill was recently carried out, and compared
against Markham’s provisions. Markham’s
Infill By-law provisions are consistent with the municipalities surveyed, and
in some cases our Infill By-laws contain some of the most restrictive provisions.
Solutions to mitigating
impacts from flooding will come from engineering solutions related to storm
water management, not refinements to the Infill Housing By-laws
Refinements to
the Infill Housing By-laws won’t protect homes or neighbourhoods from future
flooding. Refinements to the Infill
Housing By-law development standards will only apply on a go forward
basis. Consequently, the affects of amending
the Infill By-law will only occur incrementally as new homes are built and even
then will have a limited impact on individual sites. The solution to mitigating impacts from
flooding or preventing future flooding, will come from
engineering solutions related to storm water management.
To mitigate the
impacts from flooding in Thornhill the Town of Markham has initiated a Class
Environmental Assessment study to assess the existing stormwater system
conditions and the alternative solutions to improve the stormwater system
performance in West Thornhill.
This report is
in response to a discussion and a request by Development Services Committee on
May 4th, 2010 that staff bring forward an
information report to update them on infill housing by-laws in Thornhill. The report provides Development Services
Committee with an overview of the Town’s current Infill Housing By-laws
together with suggestions about possible refinements to the development
standards of these By-laws. The
objective of the current review of Infill Housing standards is to ascertain if
refinements to the existing provisions will give added protection to the
character of older established areas, while still allowing the new homes that
are desirable for today’s housing market and lifestyles. Staff is also
seeking Development Services Committees direction on how best to seek input
from the public and other stakeholders regarding any proposed refinements to
the Town’s Infill Housing By-laws.
At Development Services Committee on May 4th,
2010, there was discussion about a review of Infill Housing By-laws in
Thornhill. The discussion involved strategies
to mitigate impacts from flooding in Thornhill, and included a suggestion that
amending the Infill Housing By-law provisions could play a role is such
mitigation. There was reference to
earlier requests by Thornhill Councillors for staff to review concerns
expressed by certain Thornhill residents regarding infill housing,
neighbourhood character, and Committee of Adjustment decisions permitting
larger homes. This report is in response
to that discussion and a request by Development Services Committee that staff bring forward an information report to update them on
the status of the infill housing by-laws.
Mayor’s 1989
Task Force on Infill Housing
In January 1989 a Working Committee (Task Force) on Infill
Housing was established. It was
comprised of Councillors and staff.
Residents of each of the four wards most affected by Infill Housing, a
builder of custom homes, and the chair of the Committee of Adjustment were also
asked to participate. Its mandate was to
consider the issue of infill housing and to make recommendations with respect
to appropriate policies relating to the regulation of infill housing.
The Task Force reviewed existing policies and By-laws,
policies and practices of other municipalities, correspondence from residents
and stakeholders. The Task Force also
toured affected areas of Markham and adjacent Municipalities, and held working
group sessions and two public information meetings.
The Task Force met about once a month, for a total of ten
meetings, during 1989. As noted above two
Public Information Meetings were also held to receive input from the public and
other stakeholders. Following the two
Public Information Meetings the Task Force held two additional working sessions
to finalize its recommendations. The
Task Force made recommendations in two categories - construction related
concerns and compatibility of new dwellings with existing dwellings. Most of the construction related concerns
were addressed through non-zoning approaches, such as the property standards
by-law and a new noise by-law. The
compatibility of new dwellings to the existing dwellings was addressed by the
passing of the Infill Housing By-laws for certain areas of Markham identified
by Council as being of concern. The Task
Force members felt that to address the issue of compatibility it was necessary
to modify the zoning so that new development more closely resembled the
existing development. However, the Task
Force members also recognized the need to build new homes incorporating the
present market needs. Thus the standards
recommended and incorporated into the Infill By-laws were viewed as a
compromise between the desire to protect the existing housing stock and the
desire to accommodate new standards in housing.
The Mayor’s 1989 Task Force on Infill Housing spent a lot
of time and resources looking at these issues prior to making recommendations
about the provisions to be included in the Infill By-laws. Staff are of the
opinion that the Infill By-laws, created through this exhaustive review, have
appropriately balanced the desire to protect existing homes while allowing new
homes desirable to today’s housing markets and lifestyles.
Staff are not recommending a major new study
or Task Force process at this time. Rather,
we are seeking the direction of Development Services Committee as to a scoped
process to identify possible refinements to the existing Infill By-laws to
potentially address any concerns of Committee and representatives of the public
in the affected areas.
Demolition
Control
In 1989 Council also passed a demolition control By-law. This By-law designates the Town of Markham as
an area of demolition control. Until
1995 applicants for a residential demolition were required to
submit dimensioned site plan and building elevations of the new dwelling
proposed for the subject property. A
Sub-committee of Council met with applicants and reviewed the proposed dwelling
to evaluate its compatibility, size and height.
However, by 1995 committee recognized that this process was unpopular,
cumbersome, and time consuming. The
requirement to obtain Council approval for routine demolitions when a building
was damaged or in disrepair delayed the prompt and effective mitigation of the
hazard. Consequently, in 1995 the
process was changed and the authority to issue a demolition permit was delegated
to the Chief Building Official who could typically issue an approval within one
week of the receipt of the application, except for Heritage Properties. All buildings considered historically
significant still require Council approval of the demolition, and Heritage
areas are subject to site plan approval.
The Infill
By-laws
In response to the trend of larger homes, the Town of
Markham passed four separate infill by-laws, in the early 1990’s, to deal with
concerns about individuals buying lots within certain established
neighbourhoods, tearing down the existing home and replacing it with a much
larger home. As most of the homes built
in neighbourhoods between the 1940’s and 1960’s were generally smaller than
typical dwellings built since that time, many municipalities in the Greater
Toronto Area passed similar by-laws, in this time period, in response to this
trend.
These infill By-laws were passed in an effort to ensure
that redevelopment was compatible with existing development, and to ensure that
the impact of redevelopment on the character of the neighbourhood was
minimized. According to the Ontario
Municipal Board, land use compatibility does not mean being the same as, nor does
it mean being similar to. Being
compatible with implies nothing more than being capable of existing together in
harmony.
Markham currently has four separate infill by-laws
containing four sets of similar zoning provisions for infill housing. Mapping showing the location of the lands
affected by these By-laws is attached as Figure 1. A listing of all of the provisions in these By-laws
is contained in Appendix A. The current
zoning provisions for infill housing vary only slightly between the four
standard sets of provisions.
Maximum Building
Height and Maximum Number of Stories
In terms of height regulations, the main variation within
the infill by-laws occurs between various zones. All four infill By-laws differentiate between
pitched roof and flat roof dwellings. However
only By-laws 1229 (Markham) and 122-72 (Unionville) as amended, provide a
height restriction of 9.8 metres for pitched roof dwellings and 8.0 metes for
flat roof dwellings.
Other variations on the height regulations include 8.6
metres for pitched roof dwellings in the R4 and R4S Zones under By-law 2237 (Thornhill)
as amended; and 11.3 metres for pitched roof dwellings in the SR1 and GR (larger
lot) Zones under By-law 1767 (Thornhill) as amended. The maximum number of storeys remains the
same under all By-laws, being a maximum of 2 storeys within a single vertical
plane. Consequently, there are three
height standards in the Town's four infilling by-laws.
(Height is measured between the level of the crown (i.e.
high point) of the street at the mid-point of the front lot line, and either:
in the case of a flat roof, the highest point of the roof surface or the
parapet (whichever is the greater); or in the case of a pitched roof, the
highest point of the ridge of a gable, hip, gambrel or other type of pitched
roof.)
Prior to the Infill By-laws, Building Height was typically
measured from established grade to the mid-point between the eves and the
ridge. The typical maximum height in
Thornhill was 25 feet (7.62 metres) and in Markham 35 feet (10.67 metres), and
there was no control on the maximum number of stories.
Maximum Garage
Projection
The maximum garage projection provision contained in all
By-laws requires garages to be no closer to the front lot line than 2.1 metres
(7 feet) beyond the point of the main building closest to the front lot line,
except for the Thornhill – Markham Heritage Conservation District where the
maximum garage projection is 1.0 metres.
The maximum garage width is also the same under all By-laws (with the
exception of By-law 122-72 as amended which does not contain this provision),
being 7.7 metres for any lot having a frontage of less than 18.3 metres.
Prior to the Infill By-laws there were no general
provisions related to Maximum Garage Projection.
Maximum Floor
Area Ratio
The maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) permitted in the four
infilling by-laws range between 42% and 50% for various residential zones, with
the exception of properties in the Historic Core Area of the Thornhill Heritage
Conservation District that limits the floor area ratio to 33%. As set out in
the definitions contained within the infilling by-laws, the FAR is calculated
by taking the gross floor area of a one family detached dwelling, which is then
expressed as a percentage of the net lot area.
Net lot area equals the sum of the minimum lot area, plus 50% of the
difference between the actual lot area and the minimum lot area.
Prior to the Infill By-laws there were no general
provisions related to Maximum Floor Area Ratio. House size was primarily regulated by maximum
lot coverage (ground floor area), which typically ranged from 25% to 35%. Based on a two storey dwelling, such lot
coverage permission would equate to some 50% to 70% Floor Area Ratio. This restriction on Floor Area Ratio and the
associated lot coverage and gross floor area is the key determining factor of
the Infill By-laws in restricting the size of dwellings.
Maximum
Building Depth
Most of the infilling by-laws restrict the depth of a
dwelling on a lot to 16.8 metres.
However, they also provide for an increase in the depth of a dwelling to
18.9 metres (from the initial 16.8 metres) by extension to the rear of the
dwelling provided that the extension does not exceed 1 storey and 4.6 metres in
height, and also provided that the extension is not wider than one-half (˝) the
width of the dwelling at its widest point.
The intent of this provision is to generally ensure that the rear walls
of homes are consistently located in relation to the rear lot line. The effect of the provision is that windows
in the side walls of the back part of a home are not facing into adjacent
backyards. This ensures that neighbours retain some privacy. A further intent
is to control the length of the side wall so that neighbours on adjacent lots
do not feel “walled-in”.
Prior to the Infill By-laws there were no general
provisions related to Maximum Building Depth.
Maximum Floor Area Cap
Subsequent to the passing of the original Infill By-laws, a
maximum floor area cap for the Heritage area in Thornhill was added by By-law
223-94, which amended By-law 2237 (see Figure 1). In this regard, the maximum floor area in some
by-laws is 278.7 square metres (exclusive of garage) for single detached
dwellings, and 41.8 square metres for garages.
Infill provisions
in other municipalities
A detailed review of the provisions relating to infill
housing in North York, Oakville, Burlington, Oshawa, Vaughan and Richmond Hill
was recently carried out and compared against the provisions described above in
Markham. Given that the provisions
reviewed in Markham are particularly applicable to older residential
neighbourhoods with large lots and smaller homes, the zoning provisions for
similar areas in the other municipalities were reviewed. Markham’s Infill By-laws are consistent with,
and in some cases contain some of the most restrictive provisions of, the
municipalities surveyed.
A summary of these provisions is outlined below. A complete list of the provisions is
contained in Appendix B.
Maximum Height
Aside from the Town of Markham, only the North York
provisions differentiate between a sloped roof and a flat roof. The restriction
depends on the zone, and ranges from 8.0 metres for flat roofs to 9.8 metres
for sloped roofs. Provisions in the Town
of Oakville, North York, the City of Vaughan, and the City of Oshawa Zoning
By-laws contain height restrictions generally within the above range, generally
being 9.0 or 9.5 metres. In contrast,
the City of Burlington provides a two and a half (2 ˝) storey maximum height
restriction rather than a measurement.
In terms of the infill housing provisions found in the Town of Richmond
Hill By-laws, the zoning provisions for the older residential neighbourhoods
provide for a maximum height allowable for residential zones of either 6.0 or
8.5 metres.
Maximum Number
of Storeys
Markham's infill By-laws include a maximum number of
storeys, as does the City of Burlington.
The maximum number of storeys permitted under the Markham zoning
provisions is two (2) storeys, whereas in the City of Burlington, a maximum of
two and a half (2˝) storeys is allowed. All other municipalities maintain only
a maximum height measurement, as described above. However, the effect of the maximum height
provision when measured in metres is to provide the permission for a maximum of
two storeys.
Maximum Depth
of Dwelling
Only the Town of Markham, the former City of North York
and the Town of Oakville include restrictions on dwelling unit depth. Markham controls this with a maximum of 16.8
metres for one family detached dwellings, except that
the depth may be increased to 18.9 metres by an extension to the rear of the
dwelling. The extension must not exceed
one storey and 4.6 metres in height, and is to be set back a minimum of 3.0
metres from all lot lines, or the minimum required setback (whichever is the
greater). Further, the extension must
not be wider than one-half (˝) the width of the dwelling at its widest point.
As a contrast, dwellings in the older residential
neighbourhoods in the Town of Oakville are permitted to have a maximum depth of
20 metres, except that a single storey structure may extend into a rear yard a
further 3 metres provided the single storey extension maintains a 9 metre side
yard setback. The former City of North
York also has a restriction for the maximum length of a dwelling. These are either 15.3 metres or 16.8 metres,
depending on the zone.
Maximum Garage
Projection
The maximum garage projection is another regulation
present in only the Town of Markham, the Town of Oakville, and the Town of
Richmond Hill Zoning By-laws.
Markham provides that a garage cannot project any closer
to the front lot line than 2.1 metres beyond the point of the main building
closest to the front lot line. The Town
of Oakville regulates this item in their older residential neighbourhoods. The restriction provides that a garage cannot
project more than 1.8 metres (R10 Zone) or 2.0 metres (R01 Zone) beyond the
wall adjacent to the portion of the floor area of the dwelling closest to the
street. The Town of Richmond Hill
provides a standard maximum garage projection for their older residential
neighbourhoods. In this regard, no
garage is to project toward the front yard more than 2.1 metres (6.9 ft) beyond
the main wall.
Maximum Garage
Width
Markham and the Town of Richmond Hill are the only
municipalities from those municipal provisions reviewed that regulate the
garage width. For the Town of Markham,
the maximum garage width is to be 7.7 metres for any lot having a frontage of
less than 18.3 metres. In the Town of
Richmond Hill infill housing provisions, the maximum garage width is to be 6.5
metres for any lot having a frontage of less than 18.3 metres. For those lots having a lot frontage of 18.3
metres or greater, the maximum garage width is set at 9.7 metres.
Maximum Floor
Area Ratio
Only the Town of Markham and the Town of Oakville provide
controls on the maximum floor area ratio.
The intent of the Floor Area Ratio provision is to control the gross
floor area of a building, as distinct from ground floor area only (lot
coverage), in order to address issues of overall mass or bulk. However, it is noted that the FAR calculation,
as currently defined, is based on floor area and not volume. In other words, only the ground floor area of
a two or three storey atrium or court in the centre of a dwelling would be
counted, for example. The maximum floor
area ratio (FAR) permitted in Markham's infill By-laws ranges between 42% and
50% for various residential zones, with the exception of properties in the
Historic Core Area of the Thornhill Heritage Conservation District that limits
the floor area ratio at 33%. The Town of
Oakville’s current provisions for floor area ratios vary according to lot
sizes. These range from between 26% for
lots over 1300 m2 and 41% for lots less than 300 m2. None of the other municipalities surveyed
provide regulations on floor area ratios.
Lot Coverage
Although not included within the infill housing provisions
set out in the Markham By-laws, the four parent By-laws discussed throughout
this report provide for lot coverage requirements of between 25% and 35%. It is noted that the lot area used for the
purposes of calculating lot coverage is the lot area within the residential
zone. However, in certain older established areas of
Town there are lands below the top of banks of valleylands which were included
in the residential zone, and not placed in a separate open space category. This is addressed under ‘Net lot area
definition’ on page 10.
In terms of other municipalities, the lot coverage
regulations vary considerably. Where
North York caps a maximum of 25% for older residential neighbourhoods, the Town
of Oakville sets a maximum of 30%, and both the City of Burlington and the City
of Oshawa provide ranges of between 20% and 40%. In contrast, the City of Vaughan provides
maximum coverage requirements of between 35% and 50%. However in the R1V zone
this is limited to 20%. In the Town of
Richmond Hill, the maximum lot coverage ranges between 30% and 40%, depending
on the zone.
Only the Town of Markham and the Town of Oakville Zoning
By-laws contain both Lot Coverage and Floor Area Ratio regulations. All other municipal By-laws provide controls
on only lot coverage.
The objective of the this review of Infill Housing
standards is to ascertain if refinements to the existing provisions will give
added protection to the character of older established areas, while still
allowing residential redevelopment that is desirable for today’s housing market
and lifestyles. Planning and Urban
Design Department staff are of the opinion that most of the Infill Housing
zoning By-law provisions are appropriate and strike a balance between existing
and new. Consequently, only a few possible
changes are being suggested for further review and possible refinement. While the current review stems from concerns
identified by Thornhill residents and Councillors, any refinements to the
Infill Housing By-laws could also be considered for the Town’s other Infill
By-law areas.
Staff recommend that four provisions be reviewed for
possible refinement. These include:
1. Net Lot Area
Definition:
It may be appropriate to amend the definition of Net Lot
Area to exclude any land area below top of bank from the calculation of the
maximum house size;
1.
2. Maximum
Garage Projection:
It may be appropriate to reduce the Maximum Garage
Projection from 2.1 metres (6.9 feet) to 1.5 metres (4.9 feet).
(The 1.5 metre maximum garage projection is consistent
with the maximum garage projection allowed in the Town’s Urban Expansion
area.);
3. Maximum
Garage Width (the garage opening for motor vehicles):
It may be appropriate to amend the Maximum Garage Width
from 7.7 metres (25.26 feet) for lots having a frontage of less than 18.3
metres (60 feet) to:
- 3.5 metres (11.5 feet) when the lot frontage is less
than 11.6 metres (38 feet);
- 6.1 metres (20 feet) when the lot frontage is 11.6
metres (38 feet) or greater.
(These provisions are consistent with the provisions in
the Town’s Urban Expansion area.)
A consequence of reducing the garage width is a reduced
driveway width. The Town’s Parking
By-law links the maximum driveway width to the width of the garage door
opening;
4. Reverse
Sloped Driveways:
It may be appropriate to prohibit reverse slope driveways
and basement garages. The Urban Design
group has expressed some concerns regarding the built form associated with
reverse slope driveways and garages in basements. The Gross Floor Area of garages in basements aren’t included in the total Gross Floor Area of the house
for the purpose of calculating the maximum Floor Area Ratio. Allowing the
garage in the basement creates more above ground habitable living space,
resulting in the potential for a larger overall building.
Should Committee decide, through the course of its review,
that it wishes to further limit the size of new homes, or additions to existing
homes, refinements to some of the other Infill By-law provisions may also be considered. For
example, the maximum lot coverage, Maximum Floor Area Ratio, and/or the Maximum
Building Depth could also be considered by Committee or Council for possible
adjustments to be considered through the Public Meeting process.
Further review of these provisions will be required prior
to staff making a final recommendation. (The additional provisions that apply to the
Heritage areas of Thornhill are not recommended to be changed.) An essential element of staff formulating a recommendation
is consultation and consideration of public and stakeholder input. Staff anticipate that there will be a wide
range of opinions regarding any proposed changes, and recognize that interested
stakeholders will likely suggest other provisions that could be added or
changed, in order to make the Infill By-law provisions more or less restrictive. Consequently, staff are
seeking direction, as outlined below, regarding the process to address the
residents and Councillors concerns.
The Thornhill
Sub-committee could guide the Infill By-law review in the same manner that the
Unionville Sub-committee will determine if there is merit in an Infill By-law
for the Varley Village area of Unionville
At the June 1st, 2010 Development Services
Committee meeting there was some discussion regarding the merits of an Infill
By-law for the Varley Village area of Unionville. This discussion was initiated by submissions
from representatives of area residents. At
that meeting Committee resolved that the Unionville Sub-committee and Town
staff should establish a process of consultation with representatives of the
Unionville Ratepayers Association and other stakeholders to consider the scope
and possible merit of an Infill Housing By-law for the Varley Village area of
Unionville. It is intended that the
Unionville Sub-committee will report back to Development Services Committee in
the fall of 2010. At which time
Development Services Committee can provide direction regarding the contents of
a possible amendment and scheduling a public meeting.
Staff recommend that a
similar process be followed for the review of the Thornhill Infill By-law
provisions, with the work being directed by the Thornhill sub-committee. Staff anticipate
that these two process will run parallel and could potentially merge. Any proposed refinements to the Thornhill Infill
By-law provisions could, potentially be applied to other areas subject to the
Town’s Infill By-laws.
Refinements to the Infill Housing By-laws won’t protect
homes or neighbourhoods from future flooding
Development Services Commission staff are of the
opinion that refinements to the Infill Housing By-laws won’t protect homes or
neighbourhoods from future flooding.
Refinements to the Infill Housing By-law development standards will only
apply on a go forward basis, and implementation of the amended provisions will
only occur incrementally as new homes are built or existing homes are added to. Consequently, refined provisions to reduce the
size of future homes and/or impermeable surface area,
will not likely have any significant impact on storm related flooding.
Consequently, it is staff’s opinion that the solution
to mitigating impacts from flooding or prevent future flooding, will come from
engineering solutions related to storm water management. (The Town’s efforts in this
regard is outlined below.)
West Thornhill Stormwater Flood Remediation
Class Environmental Assessment Study
To mitigate the impacts from flooding in Thornhill the
Town of Markham has initiated a Class Environmental Assessment study to assess
the existing stormwater system conditions and the alternative solutions to improve
the stormwater system performance in West Thornhill. After two Public Information sessions with
residents, staff presented the recommended solution to General
Committee/Council for consideration in November 2009.
The Town of Markham has completed the Class
Environmental Assessment (EA) study to assess the existing stormwater system
conditions and the alternative solutions to improve the stormwater system
performance in West Thornhill to an acceptable level of protection. However, the Ministry of the Environment
(MOE) has been asked by a resident, to issue a Part II Order (bump up) for the
EA. The Town has submitted a response to
the Part II Order request to the MOE and is waiting for their decision. Once the EA study is approved by MOE, the Town
will retain a consultant to carry out preliminary/detail designs. Implementation will be carried out in stages
over a number of years, subject to funding.
Homeowners
can take immediate action to minimize impacts from stormwater flooding
Homeowners can take a number of steps to minimize impacts
from stormwater flooding. This includes:
- Disconnecting
downspouts and ensuring water drains away from foundation walls;
- Protecting
basement window wells and basement doors;
- Clearing
catch basins in backyards and on the road;
- Keeping
backyard and front yard drainage ditches accessible;
- Planting
trees and shrubs;
- Installing
rain barrel on downspouts.
CONCLUSION
The Thornhill Sub-committee should
provide input and direction regarding possible refinements to the Town’s Infill
By-laws
Staff are recommending that the Thornhill
Sub-committee and staff establish a process of consultation with the ratepayer
representatives and other stakeholders in Thornhill to consider the scope and
possible merit of any amendments to the Town’s Infill Housing By-laws. This process would result in a report to
Development Services Committee in the Fall of 2010, at
which time Committee may provide direction regarding next steps, which may
include authorizing staff to prepare a draft By-law and schedule a Public
Meeting.
Not applicable
Not applicable
The zoning by-law refinements suggested for review
will align with Council’s Growth Management and Environmental strategic focus
areas.
The Engineering, Environmental Engineering and
Capital Asset Departments were consulted in the preparation of this report.
RECOMMENDED BY:
Figure 1 –
Location of Infill By-laws
Appendix ‘A’ - Markham Infill
Housing Controls
Appendix ‘B’
– Other Municipal Infill By-law Provisions
File path:
Amanda\File 10 118360\Documents\Recommendation Report
\\markham.ca\apps\amandadocs\planning\savepath\16982474008.doc