Pickering council hears plans for Seaton neighbourhoods

Three neighbourhoods proposed for development

Moya Dillon – Pickering News Advertiser

Three neighbourhoods planned for Pickering’s Seaton lands are expected to draw nearly 30,000 residents to the area by 2031.

At a planning and development committee meeting on June 6, Pickering councillors heard proposals for three of six neighbourhoods planned for the proposed Seaton development in the city’s north end.

Neighbourhoods 17 and 20 would include mixed-use residential and employment lands, along with the natural green spaces of the Seaton Natural Heritage System.

“The plan is to have mixed residential with commercial and retail, with a GO Transit route link from the Duffins Heights community and a link to neighbourhood 20 through an internal road system,” said John van Nostrand of the provincial planning alliance.

Located at the intersection of Brock and Taunton roads, neighbourhood 17 is expected to house a population of 6,773 by 2031, and offer 591 jobs. The estimate for neighbourhood 20, which is bisected by Brock Road and includes lands north and south of Hwy. 407 where it links up to Hwy. 7, includes 8,134 residents and 9,807 jobs by 2031.

“We expect that uses will intensify and build up along the 407 corridor and become denser, so in the long run we’re looking to get 11,000 jobs altogether,” Mr. van Nostrand said.

“This is the most unusual neighbourhood in the community as a whole in that it has the most diverse mix of uses you’ll find in any of the neighbourhoods.”

In addition to residential and commercial, neighbourhood 20 will also offer institutional uses in its centre and will have a green road system, designed for pedestrians, linking two elementary schools and one high school.

The proposed neighbourhood 21 would house most of the jobs for the community as part of the planned Pickering Innovation Centre.

“This would be considered generally as employment lands for the other neighbourhoods,” Mr. van Nostrand said.

“There will be another transit station proposed right in the middle of this employment area. We expect 14,374 jobs to be accommodated when that area is built out by 2031 and further density should lead to an increase of about 600 jobs.”

Councillor Peter Rodrigues questioned the veracity of the planner’s employment estimates.

“I know we’ve called a number of these lands ‘employment lands’ and that’s great, but what ensures that these jobs will actually materialize?”

Mr. van Nostrand said planners felt confident the estimated targets could be reached, and noted the bordering 407 corridor would be an attractive asset for employers.

“With the 407 extension this is a major new corridor through the city, there are great sites here with great access to transit and connectivity with the south, and we’re going to market it that way,” he explained.

“It’s not going to happen overnight, but this is an attractive area. We are fairly confident we can achieve these targets from an employment point of view and believe these numbers will happen over time.”

Mr. van Nostrand also explained that both employment and residential build-up would be sequenced to align with each other, and that planners had learned much about the process from past density build-up along the existing 401 corridor.

“We can certainly tie residential development with employment development so both are in sync,” he explained.

“There’s never been a case where either has stopped in the province, and I don’t expect it will, but both will be slowing down and speeding up. We learned a lot from the development of the 401 corridor, because there was nothing there at the time that corridor was built in the 1970s. I think we have a reasonable approach and we are very aware of the need to balance population with job growth.”

The presentation was provided to councillors for information. The proposal will come back to committee for approval at a future meeting.

————————————————————————————————————–

Contact the Jeffrey Team for more information  -  416-388-1960

————————————————————————————————————–

Roof-top solar providers on hold in Durham

Companies, potential clients temporarily powerless

Crystal Crimi – DurhamRegion.com

Dean Lindsay was pumped about the idea of producing solar energy and making money from it, but months later, he’s still not generating income.

His and about 150 other Durham rooftops are still without the solar panels people signed up for through Pure Energies, due to an ongoing and open-ended review by the Ontario Power Authority, which has left aggregators and their prospective clients powerless to move forward in making green energy.

Comment: I am another of those waiting for my solar panels. I have been on PURE Energies list since February now. Come on McGuinty, get this done!

“So here I am in limbo,” said Mr. Lindsay, an Oshawa Kingsway Loop resident who signed up for Pure Energies’ rooftop solar system profit-sharing lease.

The OPA review began in August 2010 to look at the role of aggregators in the Green Energy Act’s microFIT (feed-in-tariff) program, including that of Pure Energies, but 10 months later, it’s still not complete.

“We built our business model based on this program,” said Chris Stern, vice president and co-founder of Pure Energies.

Pure Energies began specifically to offer the profit-sharing lease program, and explained in great detail its business plan to both the OPA and the Ministry of Energy, Mr. Stern said.

“They told us unequivocally that they loved it,” he said.

Through the Pure Energies profit-sharing lease, people sign up for a 20-year contract in which the company installs, maintains and assumes any risks related to the rooftop solar panel systems. Pure Energies sells that electricity back to the grid and splits the profit with the homeowner, who also gets to keep the solar system at the end of the contract.

Under the microFIT program, people producing solar energy would receive 80 cents per kilowatt hour produced, a little less, 71.3 cents, if they did so through an aggregator, Mr. Stern said.

The system Mr. Lindsay signed up for would produce 10 kw and make him $60 a month. But the lengthy review has put all that on hold for Pure Energies and its potential clients. As a result, Pure Energies has 10 Durham households actively participating in its program right now and 150 who want to join.

If the Pure Energy houses in limbo were hooked up, they would create approximately 750 megawatt hours of clean electricity every year for 20 years, enough to power 150 houses, according to Mr. Stern.

Under the microFIT program, there are 48 contracts executed in Durham Region, totalling 321.172 kW (or 0.32 MW) of renewable energy capacity, according to the OPA’s Tim Butters. The majority of those projects are solar photo voltaic projects, anticipated to produce approximately 360 MWh of electricity over a year, he said.

For Mr. Lindsay, the long-lasting review puts doubts into his mind about the seriousness of Green Energy Act and its programs.

“Without hearing from (the Ministry), it makes me feel it was the flavour of the day,” Mr. Lindsay said. “They’re not serious or committed to making it work … you don’t just stop the program.”

According to the OPA, the review is to ensure the microFIT program is focused on its original purpose.

“Encouraging homeowners, farmers, farm co-operative, aboriginal communities, small businesses and institutions such as schools, to own and develop small renewable projects,” said Mary Bernard, OPA corporate communications, through an e-mail response to questions regarding the removal of aggregators from the microFIT program.

A micro-FIT advisory panel was also created to make recommendations about contract provisions for aggregators and their commercial micro projects.

When asked why no deadline was in place for the review, her response was: “The review of the CFIT program is still underway and we will announce the next step when we have completed our detailed review.”

A subsequent request for answers received the response: “The program is under review, I don’t have any more information to offer.”

People think they’re following the rules and each time they do, the rules change or a review happens, “through the OPA of course,” said John Yakabuski, Ontario Conservative energy critic, adding the Ministry works through the OPA to deflect criticism.

“It looks like they’re just stalling,” Mr. Yakabuski said.

The high rate of return offered through the FIT programs created a gold rush and now there are too many applications coming in, Mr. Yakabuski said.

“As the number of applications grew, they started to look at, oh boy, what are we going to do,” he continued.

If the government was going to buy eggs for $7 a dozen, people would go buy laying hens, he added.

“It’s called poor government,” Mr. Yakabuski said. “Trying to create the image of being the green government without doing your homework.”

Even some people in Durham who have bought their own systems with their own money can’t get connected to the grid, said John O’Toole, MPP Durham.

The review is an example of how poorly thought out the Green Energy Act and its FIT and micro-FIT programs are, he said,

Under a Conservative government, the FIT program would be cancelled, Mr. Yakabuski said.

Andrew Block, senior communications advisor and press secretary for Minister of Energy Brad Duguid, said a review was always built into the program.

“I want to clarify, there is a general review of the feed-in tariff program that was built into the program when we first designed it,” Mr. Block said.

“In terms of the Conservative position, they don’t even support the FIT program to begin with,” Mr. Block said. “There would be no opportunities for those people under a Conservative government.”

In the case of the microFIT review, the initial target for completion was mid-March, Mr. Block said.

“In this case there was still work that needed to be done,” he said.

There is no new projected date for completion.

When asked what they would say to companies such as Pure Energies who have been in limbo because of the review, he said they do appreciate their objectives.

“And our objective here as well is to make sure we’re striking the right balance between good value for ratepayers and protecting ratepayers, but also ensuring the sustainability of the program,” he said.

“We do want as many people as possible to participate but we don’t want to rush out a program like that before we’ve made sure we’ve done our due diligence on it,” he continued. “We’re not saying no, we’re trying to make sure we’re getting the balance we’re looking for.”

The initial objective of the program was to pay a high price for the energy in recognition of the investment being made — an investment which would be reduced for an aggregator because of purchasing power and such, he said, and added the government wants to ensure a consistent rate of return.

For Mr. Stern, the delay has him losing hope.

“It just seems like it’s not going to happen — very depressing,” he said, and added he doesn’t know how long Pure Energies can hang in there.

By keeping his company out, it’s just going to keep prices for solar equipment high and keep people subsidizing carbon, he said.

“People are just going to be I don’t want this, I can’t afford this… it’s going to hurt the solar industry,” Mr. Stern said.

————————————————————————————————————–

Contact the Jeffrey Team for more information  -  416-388-1960

————————————————————————————————————–

Residents oppose smaller subdivision lots in Pickering

Woodview Avenue neighbours unhappy with severance plan

Moya Dillon – Pickering News Advertiser

Residents of a Pickering subdivision are banding together to oppose a proposal for new lots with smaller side yards.

On June 6, the City’s planning and development committee heard a proposal to create five new building lots on Pine Grove Avenue with minimum frontages of 12 metres, and four lots on Woodview Avenue with side yard widths of 1.2 metres. Current zoning requires minimum frontages of 15 metres, and side yard widths of 1.5 metres. The lots would be created from the division of a larger estate.

“We have an interesting situation in this area because if you look along Pine Grove most lots have frontages of 12 metres,” said Grant Morris, representative for the applicant.

“When we looked at side yard setbacks we looked at types within newer developments in the neighbourhood and many are 1.2 metre setbacks, so we feel this would fit with the neighbourhood. There are also a number of trees on the property that could be preserved, with the balance being scrub and brush.”

Neighbours along Woodview Avenue objected to the proposal, stating that a reduction in the side yard widths would change the overall look and feel of the community. Resident Tony Accardi presented a petition signed by 14 of the neighbouring homeowners objecting to the zoning amendment.

“These lots on Woodview are premium-sized lots, they’re large enough to build what’s required,” Mr. Accardi said.

“I’d just like to enjoy what everyone else on Woodview is enjoying, namely 1.5 metre setbacks. When I purchased my home I purchased it because I liked the character of the street. The fact that now someone is trying to build four lots not in accordance with zoning bylaws upsets me. I want to preserve what is already on that street.”

Another key concern for residents was the preservation of trees.

“For 17 years I’ve been lucky enough to look out on a beautiful forest,” said Carolyne Pascoe, a neighbouring resident.

“I know we can’t leave trees where houses are going but I don’t want to see them all mowed over. This is not just scrub and brush, this is a forest and I always hoped the municipality would keep some trees there since this street is called Woodview.”

Although the presentation on the zoning amendment was just for councillors’ information, the committee did vote to approve a separate request from the applicant to develop through land severance rather than a plan of subdivision.

“A plan of subdivision is needed if you’re doing a larger development including interior roads and parks, things like that,” said Neil Carroll, director of planning and development for the City of Pickering.

“In this case all the roads and services are already there, it’s a much simpler development proposal. We still see land severance and would require this developer to enter into a development agreement with us, so we can still keep the same level of control.”

The separate zoning amendment request will be brought back to the committee for consideration at a future meeting.

————————————————————————————————————–

Contact the Jeffrey Team for more information  -  416-388-1960

————————————————————————————————————–