Air Quality Report - Oakville

October 2016

PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT OF GLEN ABBEY GOLF CLUB

Air Quality Report

RE

PO

RT

Report Number: 1547245

Distribution:

One e-copy - ClubLink Corporation ULC and ClubLink Holdings Limited One copy - Golder Associates Ltd.

Submitted to:

ClubLink Corporation ULC and ClubLink Holdings Limited 15675 Dufferin Street King City, Ontario L7B 1K5

AIR QUALITY REPORT - PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT OF GLEN ABBEY GOLF CLUB

October 2016 Report No. 1547245 i

Table of Contents

1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................... 1

2.0 METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................................................... 2

3.0 REVIEW OF BACKGROUND AIR QUALITY ........................................................................................................ 3

3.1 Contaminants............................................................................................................................................ 3

3.2 Ambient Air Quality Criteria ...................................................................................................................... 3

3.3 Monitoring Data ........................................................................................................................................ 4

3.3.1 Particulate Matter (SPM, PM10 and PM2.5) .......................................................................................... 5

3.3.2 NOX and NO2 Concentrations ............................................................................................................. 6

4.0 IDENTIFICATION OF EXISTING AIR QUALITY SOURCES ................................................................................ 8

5.0 LAND USE COMPATIBILITY ASSESSMENT .................................................................................................... 13

5.1 D-Series Guidelines ................................................................................................................................ 13

5.1.1 Guideline D-1 – Land Use Compatibility ........................................................................................... 13

5.1.2 Guideline D-6 Compatibility between Industrial Facilities and Sensitive Land Uses ......................... 13

5.2 Application of D-6 Guidelines.................................................................................................................. 15

6.0 CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................................................... 16

TABLES

Table 1: Ontario and Canadian Regulatory Air Quality Objectives and Criteria .............................................................. 4

Table 2: Ambient Monitoring Parameters ........................................................................................................................ 4

Table 3: Air Quality Monitoring from Oakville Station (61603) ......................................................................................... 5

Table 4: NPRI Emission Totals for Industry within 5 km of the Property ......................................................................... 9

Table 5: Summary of facilities with ECAs within 1.5 km of the Proposed Development ................................................ 11

Table 6: Guideline D-6 - Summary of MOECC Identified Areas of Influence and Recommended Separation Distances ..................................................................................................................................................... 15

FIGURES

Figure 1: Monitored Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) from Oakville Station ...................................................................... 6

Figure 2: Monitored Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) from Oakville Station .................................................................................. 7


October 2016 Report No. 1547245 ii

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A Master Concept Plan I


October 2016 Report No. 1547245 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

ClubLink Corporation ULC and ClubLink Holdings Ltd. (Clublink) owns the Glen Abbey Golf Club, which is a 92.72

hectare property located in the south east quadrant of Dorval Drive and Upper Middle Road in the Town of Oakville,

Ontario (the Property). Clublink is filing applications to redevelop the Property for a mix of residential, commercial

and open space uses.

As part of the land use planning process, an understanding of whether or not proposed land uses, changes to land

uses and/or amendments to land uses will introduce a potential for issues related to land use compatibility is

required. As a result, The Town of Oakville (the Town) has developed a series of Guidelines, including specific

requirements for an Air Quality Report to address the following:

determine if a proposed land use is suitable for a site;

determine if a proposal meets human health and air quality criteria, including the Town’s Health Protection

Air Quality By-Law 2010-35; and

assist Town staff with their analysis and report preparation.

This scope of work has been prepared to fulfil the requirements of the Air Quality Report required as per The

Town’s Guidelines, and as documented in The Region of Halton Air Quality Guidelines (The Region of Halton

2014).



2.0 METHODOLOGY

The proposed redevelopment plans for The Property include low and mid-rise residential use, offices, retail and

open spaces. A detailed “Master Concept Plan” is included in Appendix A. The redevelopment will not include

any industrial land use and Golder understands that there will be no significant sources of emission to air from the

proposed new land uses. As such, this Air Quality Report focuses on the suitability of introducing sensitive land

use to the area.

The air quality assessment includes three main tasks:

review of Background Air Quality;

identification of Existing Air Quality Sources; and

Land Use Compatibility Assessment.

Each of these tasks is described in more detail in the following sections.



3.0 REVIEW OF BACKGROUND AIR QUALITY

3.1 Contaminants

The assessment of background air quality is focused on criteria air contaminants (CACs), in particular:

particulate matter, including suspended particulate matter (SPM), particles nominally smaller than 10

micrometres (µm) in diameter (PM10), and particles nominally smaller than 2.5 µm in diameter (PM2.5);

nitrogen dioxides (NOx) (expressed as nitrogen dioxide [NO2]);

sulphur dioxide (SO2);

carbon monoxide (CO); and

volatile organic compounds (VOCs).

3.2 Ambient Air Quality Criteria

The air quality criteria used for assessing the air quality effects on the Property include provincial criteria or federal

standards and objectives where provincial guidelines are not available. The Ministry of the Environment and

Climate Change (MOECC) has issued guidelines related to ambient air concentrations, which are summarized in

Ontario’s Ambient Air Quality Criteria (MOECC 2012). There are two sets of federal objectives and criteria: the

Canadian Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQSs) (formerly National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)),

and the National Ambient Air Quality Objectives (NAAQOs).

The NAAQOs are benchmarks that can be used to facilitate air quality management on a regional scale, and

provide goals for outdoor air quality that protect public health, the environment, or aesthetic properties of the

environment (CCME 1999b). The federal government has established the following levels of NAAQOs (Health

Canada 1994):

the maximum Desirable level defines the long-term goal for air quality and provides a basis for an

anti-degradation policy for unpolluted parts of the country and for the continuing development of control

technology; and

the maximum Acceptable level is intended to provide adequate protection against adverse effects on soil,

water, vegetation, materials, animals, visibility, personal comfort, and well-being.

The CAAQSs have been developed under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, and include standards for

PM2.5 and ozone that must be achieved by 2020. There are two phase-in dates, the first set of standards were

phased in during 2015 and the second set will be phased in during 2020 (Government of Canada 2013).

A summary of the applicable Ontario and federal standards, objectives and criteria are listed in Table 1.



Table 1: Ontario and Canadian Regulatory Air Quality Objectives and Criteria

Substance Averaging

Period

Ontario Ambient Air

Quality Criteria(a)

Canadian Ambient

Air Quality Standards(b)

National Ambient Air Quality Standards and Objectives(c)

Desirable Acceptable

SPM(d) (µg/m3) 24-Hour 120 — — 120

Annual 60(e) — 60 70

PM10 (µg/m3) 24-Hour 50(f) — — —

PM2.5 (µg/m3) 24-Hour 30(g) 28/27 — —

Annual — 10/8.8 — —

NO2 (µg/m3)

1-Hour 400 — — 400

24-Hour 200 — — 200

Annual — — 60 100

CO (µg/m3) 1-Hour 36,200 — 15,000 35,000

8-Hour 15,700 — 6,000 15,000

SO2

1-hour 690 — 450 900

24-hour 275 — 150 300

Annual 55 — 30 60

(a) MOECC 2012.

(b) CAAQS published in the Canada Gazette Volume 147, No. 21 - May 25, 2013. The standards will be phased in in 2015 and 2020, with both numbers shown in the table. The larger (first) value represents the CAAQS for 2015.

(c) CCME 1999

(d) SPM in Ontario is defined as Suspended Particulate Matter (<44 µm diameter).

(e) Geometric Mean Value.

(f) Interim Ambient Air Quality Criteria (AAQC).

(g) Compliance is based on the 98th percentile of the annual monitored data averaged over three years of measurements.

— = No guideline available.

3.3 Monitoring Data

In Ontario, regional air quality is monitored through a network of air quality monitoring stations operated by the

MOECC and Environment Canada National Air Pollution Surveillance Network (NAPS). Existing air quality around

the Property was characterized using background air concentrations from monitoring data sources located close

to the Property. The station identified as being most relevant to the Property is located in Oakville. This air

monitoring data represent the combined effect of emissions from sources near the monitoring station, as well as

the effect of emissions transported into the region. Details of this station are provided in Table 2.

Table 2: Ambient Monitoring Parameters

Station Name

NAPS Station ID

Monitoring Period Available Distance from Property

NO NO2 PM2.5 CO SO2 VOC

8th Line/ Glenashton Drive, Halton Reserve

61603 2009-2014

2009-2014

2009-2014

N/A N/A N/A 3.5 kilometres North



There are no stations within 10 km of the proposed development for which CO, SO2 or VOC data was available.

The next closest station is Etobicoke South at over 20 km away. This station was not considered appropriate as

it lies in a much more industrial location, close to major highways and within the City of Toronto boundary and the

monitored values are not anticipated to be representative of the Oakville area.

The 90th percentile of the available monitoring data is typically considered a conservative estimate of background

air quality. The mean of the 90th percentile of the measured concentrations were used to represent background

air quality for parameters with shorter averaging periods (i.e., 1-hour and 24-hour). The overall annual background

values were based on the average of the available data. For all compounds, the background concentrations are

below the relevant criteria (Table 3).

Table 3: Air Quality Monitoring from Oakville Station (61603)

Criteria Air Contaminant

Averaging Period Background

Concentration [µg/m³]

Regulatory Criteria

[µg/m³]

% of AAQC

SPM 24-Hour 49.0 120 41%

Annual 25.2 60 42%

PM10 24-Hour 24.5 50 49%

PM2.5 24-Hour 12.3 27 45%

Annual 6.3 8.8 71%

NOX

(reported as NO2)

1-Hour 39.5 400 10%

24-Hour 33.5 200 17%

Annual 18.4 60 31%

Note: All values, with the exception of annual averages, are based on 90th percentile.

3.3.1 Particulate Matter (SPM, PM10 and PM2.5)

Particulate emissions occur due to anthropogenic activities, such as agricultural, industrial and transportation

sources, as well as natural sources. Particulate matter is classified based on its aerodynamic particle size,

primarily due to the different health effects that can be associated with the particles of different diameters. Fine

particulate matter (PM2.5) is of primary concern as they can penetrate deep into the respiratory system and cause

health impacts (MOECC 2015). In Ontario, these emissions have been demonstrating a steady decline since

2003 (MOECC 2015).

For the Property, there are no monitoring data available for SPM and PM10. However, an estimate of the

background SPM and PM10 concentrations can be determined from the available PM2.5 monitoring data. Fine

particulate matter (i.e., PM2.5) is a subset of PM10, and PM10 is a subset of SPM. Therefore, it is reasonable to

assume that the ambient concentrations of SPM will be greater than corresponding PM10 levels, and PM10

concentrations will be greater than the corresponding levels of PM2.5. The overall levels of PM2.5 in Canada were

found to be about 50% of the PM10 concentrations and about 25% of the SPM concentrations (Canadian

Environmental Protection Act/FPAC 1988). By applying this ratio it was possible to estimate the background SPM

and PM10 concentrations for the region.

For 24-hour PM2.5, measurements meet the pending CAAQS values of 27 µg/m³ (2020 phase in date). The annual

average PM2.5 values are below the pending CAAQS of 8.8 µg/m³ (2020 phase in date).



Larger particles (i.e., SPM) can result in nuisance effects, such as soiling or visibility and, therefore, must be taken

into consideration as part of the study. All derived SPM and PM10 values are below the relevant Ontario ambient

air quality criteria and NAAQOs.

Figure 1: Monitored Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) from Oakville Station

3.3.2 NOX and NO2 Concentrations

NOX is emitted in two primary forms: nitric oxide (NO) and NO2. NO reacts with ozone in the atmosphere to create

NO2. The primary source of NOX in the region is the combustion of fossil fuels. Emissions of NOX result from the

operation of stationary equipment such as incinerators, boilers, and generators, as well as the operation of mobile

sources such as vehicles, haul trucks, and other equipment.

The presence of NO2 in the atmosphere has known health effects (e.g., lung irritation) and environmental effects

(e.g., acid precipitation, ground-level ozone formation) (MOECC 2015). As a result, regulatory guideline levels are

based on NO2 emissions and concentrations. Emissions of NO2 in Ontario have shown a steady decline from

2002 (MOECC 2015). Over the monitored period, no exceedances of the 1-hour or 24-hour Ambient Air Quality

Criteria (AAQC) for NO2 were recorded (Figure 2 and Figure 3).

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Oakville

Mo

nit

ori

ng

Dat

a [µ

g/m

³]

24-Hour PM2.5 Monitoring ValuesAvg Avg 98th %ile CAAQS



Figure 2: Monitored Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) from Oakville Station

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

Oakville

Mo

nit

ori

ng

Dat

a [µ

g/m

³]

1-Hour NO2 Monitoring ValuesAvg 90th %ile Ontario AAQC

0

50

100

150

200

250

Oakville

Mo

nit

ori

ng

Dat

a [µ

g/m

³]

24-Hour NO2 Monitoring ValuesAvg 90th %ile Ontario AAQC



4.0 IDENTIFICATION OF EXISTING AIR QUALITY SOURCES

Within 5 km of the Property, there are three industrial facilities from various sectors that reported to the National

Pollutant Release Inventory (NPRI) for emissions of the indicator compounds released to air in 2014 (Environment

Canada 2015). These emissions contribute to the local air quality and the consideration of cumulative effects.

These sources are minor contributors of indicator compounds when compared to provincial totals (Table 4).



Table 4: NPRI Emission Totals for Industry within 5 km of the Property

Company Name Distance from Property

NOX PM PM10 PM2.5 CO SO2 VOC

Greif Bros Canada Inc. - Oakville 1.3 km — — — — — — 25.9

Goodrich Aerospace Canada Ltd. – Goodrich Landing Gear

2.5 km — — — — — — 10.3

Ford Motor Company of Canada, Limited – Oakville Assembly Plant

4.6 km 70.6 — 14.6 4.0 61.1 — 638.6

Study Area Total Emissions 70.6 — 14.6 4.0 61.1 — 674.8

Ontario Total Emissions 63642 33922 18722 9727 67879 250276 41794

% of Local Emissions to Ontario Total <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% 2%

Note: “—“ indicates the substance was not reported for that facility



Reporting to the NPRI is only required for facilities that have annual emissions above relevant thresholds set by

Environment Canada. As a result, there may be additional industrial facilities in the vicinity of the Property that do

not trigger NPRI reporting but have air quality emission sources with the potential to impact sensitive receptors

introduced by the Property.

In Ontario, the Environmental Protection Act, R.S.O 1990 Chapter E.19 (EPA) regulates the discharge of

contaminants into the natural environment and is administered by the Ontario Ministry of Environment and Climate

Change (MOECC). Section 20.2 of Part II.1 of the EPA, for activities that fall under Section 9 of the EPA, requires

that an approval must be obtained before installation or modification of all atmospheric emission sources (i.e., air,

odour, noise and vibration). Depending on the equipment at a facility, approval for the atmospheric emission

sources is granted through the Environmental Activity and Sector Registry (EASR) or by obtaining an

Environmental Compliance Approval (ECA) for the equipment by submitting an application to the MOECC in

accordance with EPA Section 9.

Golder conducted a review of existing ECAs for facilities located within a 1.5 km radius of the Property using the

MOECC Access Environment or Environmental Registry websites. The purpose of reviewing existing ECAs is to

help identify the main sources of emission to air within the surrounding area based on the descriptions of facilities

that have already been permitted by the MOECC.

Copies of ECAs are publicly available on the MOECC website. Golder has obtained copies of the ECAs for the

facilities identified within 1.5 km and completed a preliminary review of the sources of air emissions. Table 5,

below, summarises the ECAs identified and the sources of interest.

There are no facilities permitted to operate sources of emissions within 1 km of the Property. Of the facilities that

were identified within 1.5 km, the majority of these exhaust emissions through short stacks or low level sources of

emissions. In general, low level sources are not buoyant and stay at low elevations. As a result, air quality impacts

diminish as the distance from the source increases. For this reason, the highest predicted concentrations from

these sources are most likely to occur at or close to the source’s property or fenceline at ground level and are

unlikely to result in significant concentrations at the Property, due to the large separation distance. Only two

facilities were identified as having stacks greater than 5m above either the ground or roof height. These facilities

include an asphalt plant and a concrete batching plant, however the relevant stacks are both less than 15 m in

height and located over 1.4 km away from the Property. As such, they are also unlikely to result in elevated

concentrations at the Property.



Table 5: Summary of facilities with ECAs within 1.5 km of the Proposed Development

Distance from Property

Facility/ Company Name

Address ECA Reference (Date Issued)

Sources of Interest as presented in the ECA

Comment

1.2 km SICPA North America, Incorporated

373 Wyecroft Road

5795-5HFQ68 (January 14, 2003)

Drum exhausts Four short stacks (less than 5m above roof height)

1.4 km

Corporation of the Town of Oakville Transit Maintenance Garage

480 Wyecroft Road

1604-4NJJ8N (August 25, 2000)

EPG One short stack

1.4 km Commercial MFG & Forming Supply Inc.

346 Wycroft Road 5200-63PJJD

(August 10, 2004)

Potential sources include natural gas fired equipment and paint spray booth

One short stack

1.4 km Lawrason's, Inc. 460 Wyecroft Road

8562-8QZSQQ (March 21, 2012)

Potential sources include natural gas fired equipment, process exhausts

1.4 km Backrack Inc. 475 Wyecroft Road

1685-6WQLJK (March 26, 2008)

Exhaust ovens , washer tanks Six short stacks

1.4 km Oakville Transit - Bus Storage Facility

430 Wyecroft Rd 1544-8AWNFF (March 14, 2013)


Four short stacks

1.4 km Abrex Paint & Chemical Ltd.

280 Wyecroft Road

3344-7TKQBQ (August 4, 2009)


Four short stacks

1.4 km BCS Inc. 735 Weller Court 8817-7VWLPV (September 30, 2009)

Wet scrubber, chemical treatment

One short stack

1.4 km Holcim (Canada) Inc 690 Dorval Dr 1421-8YFP7K (October 23, 2012)

Asphalt Plant Dryer, hot oil heater, asphalt storage tanks

Two stacks, one 13.1 m tall, one 1.2 m tall

1.4 km Fin-Ex, Inc. 324 Wyecroft Road, Block 1, Plan 1192

2449-576SK4 (February 12, 2002)


Four short stacks



Distance from Property

Facility/ Company Name

Address ECA Reference (Date Issued)

Sources of Interest as presented in the ECA

Comment

1.5 km Can Crete Ltd. 740 Weller Court Unit D

1734-7NZSZ4 (February 9, 2009)

Concrete Batching Plant One 7.9 m stack

1.5 km SM Cyclo of Canada Ltd.

1045 South Service Road West

4094-8JAPCB (October 25, 2011)


Two short stacks

1.5 km Clean Harbors Canada Inc.

861 Redwood Square

2385-7SDQEU (June 19, 2009)

Waste Disposal Site Oil Decontamination

1.5 km Tumblers & Trays Inc. 872 Cranberry Court

9766-84WS49 (April 30, 2010)

Injection Moulding, screen printing

Five short stacks



5.0 LAND USE COMPATIBILITY ASSESSMENT

5.1 D-Series Guidelines

During the land use planning process for proposed future land uses, the MOECC has recommendations described

in a set of D-Series Guidelines developed in July 1995. The D-Series Guidelines are intended to assist in

minimizing potential problems due to encroachment of sensitive land uses and industrial land uses on one another.

5.1.1 Guideline D-1 – Land Use Compatibility

The MOECC’s Guideline D-1 – Land Use Compatibility (Guideline D-1) provides recommended separation

distances and other control measures for land use planning proposals, which have the potential to involve

encroachment of incompatible land uses. These recommendations seek to prevent or minimize potential adverse

effects for an existing or proposed facility, and apply only under circumstances of changes in land use proposals

(i.e., future proposals).

Adverse effects considered under Guideline D-1 may include:

noise and vibration;

visual impact;

odour and other air emissions;

litter, dust and other particulates; and

other contaminants.

5.1.2 Guideline D-6 Compatibility between Industrial Facilities and Sensitive Land Uses

Guideline D-6 Compatibility between Industrial Facilities and Sensitive Land Uses (Guideline D-6) discusses the

applicability of Guideline D-1 for industrial facilities. The purpose of Guideline D-6 is to prevent or minimize land

use incompatibility between sensitive and industrial land uses through encroachment and the possibility of

potential adverse effects due to normal operations of industrial facilities. This purpose is achieved by the

suggestion of separation distances; however, Guideline D-6 also notes that detailed studies should be conducted

to determine site-specific separation distances.

Guideline D-6 applies to proposed, committed and/or existing industrial land uses that have the potential to

generate point and/or fugitive atmospheric emissions (noise, vibration, odour, dust and others) through normal

operations, procedures, maintenance or storage activities, and/or from associated traffic/transportation. Guideline

D-6 does not apply to non-stationary industrial facilities (e.g., mobile asphalt plant), roadways and railways (except

ancillary facilities), agricultural operations, airports, or pits and quarries.



Guideline D-6 provides potential influence areas for three different classes of industrial land uses if an actual

influence area is not available. The three different classes of industrial land uses are:

Class I – Small scale business that is a self-contained plant or building which produces/stores a product

contained to a package and has a low probability of fugitive emissions. Infrequent movement of products

and/or heavy trucks. No outside storage. The facility only operates during the daytime period.

Class II – Medium scale processing and manufacturing with occasional outputs of either point of fugitive

emissions. Frequent movement of products and/or heavy trucks during the daytime hours. Outside storage

of wastes or materials exists. The facility is permitted to have shift operations.

Class III – Large scale processing or manufacturing. Frequent outputs of major annoyance with a high

probability of fugitive emissions. Continuous movement of products. Outside storage of raw and finished

product exists. The facility is permitted to have shift operations.

The MOECC has identified the following areas of potential influence for each of the industrial facility classes:

Class I: 70 metres;

Class II: 300 metres; and

Class III: 1,000 metres.

Actual influence areas refer to overall ranges within which a potential adverse effect would occur or is experienced.

These areas are site-specific for facilities. They may be defined within or beyond the potential area of influence

before or after buffers have been implemented as the approach to prevent or minimize potential adverse effects.

Industrial facilities have the possibility of lowering their category classification by applying mitigative measures at

the source of emissions, which would allow the reduction in the recommended minimum separation distance.

The following suggested minimum separation distances for each of the industrial facility classes are based on

MOECC studies and historical complaint data:

Class I: 20 metres;

Class II: 70 metres; and

Class III: 300 metres.

Guideline D-6 recommends that there should not be incompatible land uses within the range of the minimum

separation distance. The minimum separation distance is the distance between the designation, zoning or

property lines of closest proposed or existing sensitive and industrial land uses.



Table 6 below summarizes the recommended actual, potential and minimum separation distances according to

Guideline D-6 for each of the industrial facility classes.

Table 6: Guideline D-6 - Summary of MOECC Identified Areas of Influence and Recommended Separation Distances

Designation Actual Influence Areas

Separation Distance (m) Potential Influence Areas Separation Distance (m)

Minimum Separation Distance (m)

Class I

(Light Industrial) Site Specific 70 20

Class II

(Medium Industrial)

Site Specific 300 70

Class III

(Heavy Industrial) Site Specific 1000 300

According to Guideline D-6, when a change in land use is proposed within an actual or potential influence area of

one of the three classes of an industrial land use, a sensitive land use should not be permitted unless evidence

can prove absence of compatibility issues due to possibility of adverse effects. In cases where a sensitive land

use is proposed beyond an industrial facility’s influence area (potential or actual), there should be no objection to

a change in land use.

It also should be noted that even where facilities meet the recommended separation distances specified in

Guideline D-6, an air, odour, noise and/or vibration assessment may still be required to ensure that the facility

meets the applicable guidelines and regulations. Therefore, it is possible for the MOECC to recommend separation

distances greater that those outlined in this guideline. When industrial activities cannot be mitigated (reduction or

minimization of potential adverse effects), the development of a new industrial facility or sensitive land use should

not be permitted.

5.2 Application of D-6 Guidelines

Industrial facilities located within the vicinity of the proposed development were identified through the use of NPRI

reporting data and Environmental Compliance Approval permits as part of Section 4. The results of this

assessment indicate that the closest existing industrial facility is greater than 1 km from the Property, i.e., the

Property does not lie within the largest potential influence area identified in Guideline D-6 of any industrial facilities.

Additionally, there are no facilities located within 2 km which have tall stacks likely to significantly impact the

Property. As such, the Property would be considered a compatible land use under the Guideline D-6 Assessment.



6.0 CONCLUSIONS

Golder was retained by Clublink to carry out an Air Quality assessment to address the Town of Oakville’s Air

Quality Guidelines for the proposed redevelopment at Glen Abbey Golf Club:

determine if a proposed land use is suitable for a site;

determine if the proposal meets human health and air quality criteria, including the Town’s Health Protection

Air Quality By-Law 2010-35; and

assist Town staff with their analysis and report preparation

The proposed redevelopment plans for the Property include low and mid-rise residential use, offices, retail and

open space. The redevelopment will not include any industrial land use and Golder understands that there will be

no significant sources of emission to air from the proposed new land uses. As such, the proposal does not require

an application under the Town’s Health Protection Air Quality By-Law 2010-35 and is anticipated to meet relevant

human health and air quality criteria.

Existing monitoring data indicates that levels of criteria air contaminants within the vicinity of the Property are

shown to be within the current standards and guidelines and no industrial facilities were identified within a 1km

distance of the proposed redevelopment. Therefore, it is concluded that the proposed redevelopment is

considered a compatible land use as per MOECC Guideline D-6.


October 2016 Report No. 1547245

Report Signature Page

GOLDER ASSOCIATES LTD.

Katherine Armstrong, M.Sc. Anthony Ciccone, Ph.D.

Air Quality Specialist Principal

KSA/ADC/ng/wlm

Golder, Golder Associates and the GA globe design are trademarks of Golder Associates Corporation.

n:\active\2015\3 proj\1547245 clublink_air quality study_oakville\report\final\1547245 rpt oct 2016 clublink air quality assessment.docx



REFERENCES

Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME). 1999. Canadian National Ambient Air Quality

Objectives: Process and Status. Available at ceqg-rcqe.ccme.ca/download/en/133/. Retrieved

November 6, 2014.

CEPA/FPAC Working Group on Air Quality Objectives and Guidelines. 1998. National Ambient Air Quality

Objectives for Particulate Matter. Part 1: Science Assessment Document, ISBN 0-662-63486-1

Environment Canada. 2015. NPRI Online Data Search. Available at

http://open.canada.ca/data/en/dataset/1fb7d8d4-7713-4ec6-b957-4a882a84fed3. Retrieved April 30,

2016.

Government of Canada. 2013. Canada Gazette Vol 147, 21. Available at http://ec.gc.ca/lcpe-

cepa/eng/orders/OrderDetail.cfm?intOrder=532. Retrieved November 6, 2014.

Health Canada. 1994. Canadian National Ambient Air Quality Objectives: Process and Status

MOECC (Ministry of Environment and Climate Change). 2012. Ontario’s Ambient Air Quality Criteria, PIBS

#6570e01. Standards Development Branch, Ontario Ministry of the Environment.

MOECC. 2015. Air Quality Ontario - Report for 2014. Available at

http://www.airqualityontario.com/press/publications.php. Retrieved May 11, 2016.

The Region of Halton. 2014. Air Quality Guidelines – Regional Official Plan Guidelines



APPENDIX A Master Concept Plan I

D

O

R

V

A

L

D

R

I

V

E

U

P

P

E

R

M

I

D

D

L

E

R

O

A

D

S

T

R

E

E

T

'A

'

S

T

R

E

E

T

'

B

'

S

T

R

E

E

T

'

C

'

S

T

R

E

E

T

'

D

'

S

T

. 'E

'

S

T

R

E

E

T

'F

'

S

T

. 'G

'

S

T

R

E

E

T

'H

'

S

T

R

E

E

T

'

I

'

S

T

R

E

E

T

'

J

'

S

T

R

E

E

T

'

J

'

S

T

.

'

K

'

S

T

.

'

M

'

S

T

.

'

N

'

S

T

.

'

O

'

S

T

.

'

P

'

S

T

R

E

E

T

'

Q

'

S

T

.

'

R

'

S

T

R

E

E

T

'

S

'

S

T

R

E

E

T

'

S

'

S

T

R

E

E

T

'T

'

S

T

R

E

E

T

'T

'

S

T

. 'V

'

S

T

R

E

E

T

'U

'

S

T

R

E

E

T

'X

'

S

TR

E

E

T 'W

'

B

L

O

C

K

1

9

1

S

W

M

P

O

N

D

1

.

2

7

h

a

(

3

.

1

4

a

c

)

BLOCK 190

SWM POND

1.62ha (4.00ac)

B

L

O

C

K

1

7

1

G

R

E

E

N

W

A

Y

P

A

R

K

0

.

1

8

h

a

(

0

.

4

4

a

c

)

B

L

O

C

K

1

7

0

G

R

E

E

N

W

A

Y

P

A

R

K

0

.

2

2

h

a

(

0

.

5

4

a

c

)

B

L

O

C

K

1

7

3

G

R

E

E

N

W

A

Y

P

A

R

K

0

.4

6

h

a

(1

.1

4

a

c

)

B

L

O

C

K

1

7

2

G

R

E

E

N

W

A

Y

P

A

R

K

0

.

4

4

h

a

(

1

.

0

9

a

c

)

B

L

O

C

K

1

6

9

G

R

E

E

N

W

A

Y

P

A

R

K

0

.

9

0

h

a

(

2

.

2

2

a

c

)

BLOCK 168

CENTRAL

PARK

5.10ha (12.60ac)

BLOCK 182

NHS

(SIXTEEN MILE CREEK VALLEY)

31.39ha (77.57ac)

B

L

O

C

K

1

7

4

G

R

E

E

N

W

A

Y

P

A

R

K

1

.

9

3

h

a

(

4

.

7

7

a

c

)

BLOCK 183

NHS

(WOODLOT)

0.76ha (1.88ac)

L

A

N

E

'

B

'

L

A

N

E

'

C

'

L

N

.

'

D

'

L

A

N

E

'

E

'

L

A

N

E

'

F

'

L

A

N

E

'

G

'

BLOCK 142

TOWNHOUSES &

APARTMENTS

125 UNITS

1.33ha (3.29ac)

B

L

O

C

K

1

4

3

A

P

A

R

T

M

E

N

T

S

1

7

3

U

N

I

T

S

0

.

5

3

h

a

(

1

.

3

1

a

c

)

BLOCK 146

MIXED USE

APARTMENTS

132 UNITS

0.70ha (1.73ac)

B

L

O

C

K

1

6

7

C

O

M

M

U

N

I

T

Y

A

M

E

N

I

T

Y

0

.

5

0

h

a

(

1

.

2

4

a

c

)

BLOCK 144

MIXED USE

APARTMENTS

119 UNITS

0.68ha (1.68ac)

1

BLOCK 189

SWM POND

1.43ha (3.53ac)

2

BLOCK 181

ENBRIDGE

EASEMENT

0.17ha (0.42ac)

BLOCK 180

ENBRIDGE

EASEMENT

0.40ha (0.99ac)

B

L

O

C

K

1

4

5

M

I

X

E

D

U

S

E

A

P

A

R

T

M

E

N

T

S

2

7

U

N

I

T

S

0

.

2

3

h

a

(

0

.

5

7

a

c

)

BLOCK 147

MIXED USE

APARTMENTS

191 UNITS

0.96ha (2.37ac)

B

L

O

C

K

1

4

8

A

P

A

R

T

M

E

N

T

S

1

1

9

U

N

I

T

S

0

.

5

3

h

a

(

1

.

3

1

a

c

)

BLOCK 149

TOWNHOUSES &

APARTMENTS

195 UNITS

1.10ha (2.72ac)

BLOCK 150

APARTMENTS

232 UNITS

0.86ha (2.13ac)

BLOCK 151

TOWNHOUSES

36 UNITS

0.88ha (2.17ac)

BLOCK 152

TOWNHOUSES

22 UNITS

0.59ha

(1.46ac)

BLOCK 153

APARTMENTS

223 UNITS

0.89ha (2.20ac)

BLOCK 154

APARTMENTS

68 UNITS

0.51ha (1.26ac)

B

L

O

C

K

1

5

5

T

O

W

N

H

O

U

S

E

S

&

A

P

A

R

T

M

E

N

T

S

1

0

2

U

N

I

T

S

0

.

6

1

h

a

(

1

.

5

1

a

c

)

BLOCK 156

TOWNHOUSES &

APARTMENTS

143 UNITS

0.78ha (1.93ac)

BLOCK 157

APARTMENTS

170 UNITS

0.89ha (2.20ac)

B

L

O

C

K

1

5

8

T

O

W

N

H

O

U

S

E

S

4

4

U

N

I

T

S

0

.

6

2

h

a

(

1

.

5

3

a

c

)

BLOCK 159

TOWNHOUSES &

APARTMENTS

121 UNITS

0.86ha (2.13ac)

BLOCK 160

MIXED USE

TOWNHOUSES &

APARTMENTS

120 UNITS

0.81ha (2.00ac)

BLOCK 161

TOWNHOUSES &

APARTMENTS

194 UNITS

0.83ha (2.05ac)

BLOCK 162

APARTMENTS

127 UNITS

0.71ha (1.75ac)

BLOCK

175

EAST

PARK

1.18ha

(2.92ac)

BLOCK 184

NHS (WOODLOT)

0.32ha (0.79ac)

BLOCK 163

TOWNHOUSES &

APARTMENTS

129 UNITS

0.88ha (2.17ac)

BLOCK 188

NHS BUFFER

0.69ha (1.71ac)

BLOCK 185

NHS BUFFER

0.47ha (1.16ac)

EXISTING PADDOCK BUILDING

(RETENTION TO BE DETERMINED)

GOVERNING LIMIT OF DEVELOPMENT

BASED ON GREATER OF:

- 15m TOP OF BANK BUFFER

- 10m STABLE TOP OF SLOPE BUFFER

- 10m DRIP LINE BUFFER

NHS BUFFER LIMIT


- TOP OF BANK

- STABLE TOP OF SLOPE

- DRIP LINE

R

O

U

N

D

A

B

O

U

T

R

O

U

N

D

A

B

O

U

T

L

A

N

D

S

C

A

P

E

D

I

S

L

A

N

D

LA

N

D

S

C

A

P

E

D

IS

LA

N

D

S

EXISTING

RAYDOR ESTATE

(TO BE RETAINED)

(NOT A PART OF APPLICATION)

G

O

L

F

V

I

E

W

C

T

.

A

B

B

E

Y

D

A

L

E

C

T

.

M

A

S

T

E

R

S

G

R

E

E

N

M

A

S

T

E

R

S

G

R

E

E

N

T

H

E

L

I

N

K

S

D

R

.

F

A

I

R

W

A

Y

H

I

L

L

S

B

L

V

D

.

G

R

E

E

N

E

A

G

L

E

D

R

.

G

A

L

L

E

R

Y

H

I

L

L

G

R

E

E

N

E

A

G

L

E

D

R

.

O

L

D

A

B

B

E

Y

L

A

N

E

R

O

Y

A

L

O

A

K

C

T

.

R

A

M

B

L

E

R

C

T

.

R

O

Y

A

L

A

L

B

E

R

T

C

T

.

EXISTING

RESIDENTIAL

EXISTING

RESIDENTIAL

EXISTING

RESIDENTIAL

EXISTING

RESIDENTIAL

EXISTING

RESIDENTIAL

EXISTING

RESIDENTIAL

EXISTING

RESIDENTIAL

EXISTING

VALLEY

EXISTING

VALLEY

BLOCK 187

NHS BUFFER

0.49ha (1.21ac)

EXISTING

RESIDENTIAL

L

E

E

W

O

O

D

D

R

I

V

E

R

I

C

H

A

R

D

S

C

R

E

S

C

E

N

T

O

D

E

S

S

A

C

R

E

S

C

E

N

T

M

cC

RA

NE

RY

ST

RE

ET

W

B

L

O

C

K

1

7

4

G

R

E

E

N

W

A

Y

P

A

R

K

BLOCK 164

TOWNHOUSES &

APARTMENTS

132 UNITS

0.77ha (1.90ac)

BLOCK 165

TOWNHOUSES &

APARTMENTS

72 UNITS

0.78ha (1.93ac)

B

LO

C

K

166

A

P

A

R

T

M

E

N

T

S

65 U

N

IT

S

0.27ha (0.67ac)

S

T

.

'

L

'

L

A

N

E

'

H

'

BLOCK 179

OPEN SPACE

(TRAILWAY)

0.04ha (0.10ac)

BLOCK 178

OPEN SPACE

(TRAILWAY)

0.14ha (0.35ac)

BLOCK 177

OPEN SPACE

(TRAILWAY)

0.03ha (0.07ac)

R

O

U

N

D

A

B

O

U

T

S

T

R

E

E

T

'F

'

L

A

N

E

'

A

'

L

A

N

E

'

H

'

GOVERNING LIMIT OF DEVELOPMENT


- 15m TOP OF BANK BUFFER

- 10m STABLE TOP OF SLOPE BUFFER

- 10m DRIP LINE BUFFER

PROPOSED GREAT

BELVEDERE VISTA

(Specific location

to be determined

in consultation with

relevant authorities)

BLOCK 186

NHS BUFFER

0.14ha (0.35ac)

D

O

R

V

A

L

D

R

I

V

E

U

P

P

E

RM

I

D

D

L

ER

O

A

D

N

E

Y

A

G

A

W

A

B

L

V

D

.

N

O

R

T

H

S

E

R

V

I

C

E

R

O

A

D

Q

E

W

W

Y

E

C

R

O

F

T

R

O

A

D

S

I

X

T

H

L

I

N

E

LAND USE LOTS / BLOCKS

AREA

(ha)

AREA

(ac)

UNITS

DETACHED - 9.20m (30')48-66,83,86-107,131,132,134-141

2.02 4.99 52

DETACHED - 9.75m (32')119,120

0.06 0.15 2

DETACHED - 12.20m (40')

44-47,67,68,71-73,75-79,84,85,108-110,

116-118,121,123,124,127,129

1.19 2.94 27

DETACHED - 13.10m (43') 40-43,69,82,111-115,128,130,1330.84 2.08 14

DETACHED - 15.20m (50') 70,74,122,125,1260.32 0.79 5

DETACHED - 18.20m (60') 1-39,80,813.94 9.74 41

TOWNHOUSE & APARTMENTS142,143,148-159,161-166

15.21 37.59 2492

MIXED USE TOWNHOUSE / APARTMENTS144-147,160

3.38 8.35 589

COMMUNITY AMENITY 167 0.50 1.24

PARK 168-175 10.41 25.72

REMNANT WOODED AREA 176 0.34 0.84

OPEN SPACE 177-179 0.21 0.52

ENBRIDGE EASEMENT180,181

0.57 1.41

NATURAL HERITAGE SYSTEM (NHS)

182-184 32.47 80.24

NHS BUFFER 185-188 1.79 4.42

SWM POND 189-191 4.32 10.67

7.5m LANE ROW (589m)

0.46 1.14

11.5m LANE (289m)

0.38 0.94

17.0m ROW (4,110m)

7.00 17.29

22.0m ROW (723m)

1.65 4.08

26.0m ROW (410m)

1.12 2.77

27.5m ROW (72m)

0.22 0.54

34.0m ROW (90m)

0.33 0.81

36.0m ROW (1,095m)

3.99 9.86

Subdivision TOTAL 191 92.72 229.12 3222

Existing Raydor Estate (not a part of application)

1.25 3.09

TOTAL 93.97 232.21

GLEN SCHNARR & ASSOCIATES INC.

SUBJECT

LANDS

KEY PLAN

DRAFT PLAN OF SUBDIVISION

CLUBLINK CORPORATION ULC &

CLUBLINK HOLDINGS LIMITED

FILE # 24T-______

PART OF LOTS 17,18,19 & 20

CONCESSION 2, S.D.S.,

TOWN OF OAKVILLE

REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF HALTON

OWNERS CERTIFICATE

I HEREBY AUTHORIZE GLEN SCHNARR & ASSOCIATES INC. TO PREPARE AND SUBMIT

THIS DRAFT PLAN OF SUBDIVISION TO THE TOWN OF OAKVILLE FOR APPROVAL.

SIGNED _________________________ DATE: DATE, 2016

ROBERT VISENTIN, A.S.O.

CLUBLINK CORPORATION ULC & CLUBLINK HOLDINGS LIMITED

SURVEYORS CERTIFICATE

I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE BOUNDARIES OF THE LANDS TO BE SUBDIVIDED AS

SHOWN ON THIS PLAN AND THEIR RELATIONSHIP TO ADJACENT LANDS ARE

CORRECTLY AND ACCURATELY SHOWN.

SIGNED _________________________ DATE: DATE, 2016

ZACHARY FIDDES, OLS, B.ENG

FIDDES CLIPSHAM INC.

CONSULTING ENGINEERING & LAND SURVEYING

16 MOUNTAINVIEW ROAD SOUTH, SUITE 101

HALTON HILLS ON, L7G 4K1

PHONE: 905-877-2211

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

(UNDER SECTION 51(17) OF THE PLANNING ACT) INFORMATION REQUIRED BY

CLAUSES A,B,C,D,E,F,G,J & L ARE SHOWN ON THE DRAFT AND KEY PLANS.

H) MUNICIPAL AND PIPED WATER TO BE PROVIDED

I) SANDY LOAM AND CLAY LOAM

K) SANITARY AND STORM SEWERS TO BE PROVIDED

LAND USE SCHEDULE

Scale 1:2500

(24 x 36)

October 4, 2016

NOTES

- Laneway-Local/Collector daylight triangle = 3.5m x 3.5m

- Local-Local daylight rounding = 3.25m

- Local/Collector-Collector daylight triangle = 7.5m x 7.5m

- Local/Collector-Arterial daylight triangle = 15.0m x 15.0m

Golder Associates Ltd.

6925 Century Avenue, Suite #100

Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 7K2

Canada

T: +1 (905) 567 4444

Caption Text

Documents

Air Quality Report - Oakville