The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutFebruary 22, 2021Council Meeting Agenda February 22, 2021 Electronic Meeting 7:00 pm Due to COVID-19 and the Premier’s Emergency Orders to limit gatherings and maintain physical distancing, the City of Pickering continues to hold electronic Council and Committee Meetings. Members of the public may observe the meeting proceedings by viewing the livestream. A recording of the meeting will also be available on the City’s website following the meeting. Page 1. Roll Call 2. Invocation Mayor Ryan will call the meeting to order and lead Council in the saying of the Invocation. 3. Indigenous Land Acknowledgment Statement Mayor Ryan will read the Indigenous Land Acknowledgment Statement. 4. Disclosure of Interest 5. Adoption of Minutes In Camera Council Minutes, January 25, 2021 Under Separate Cover Council Minutes, January 25, 2021 1 Special Council Minutes, January 26, 2021 24 (Confidential Special Council Minutes, January 26, 2021, provided under separate cover) Special Council Minutes, January 28, 2021 27 (Confidential Special Council Minutes, January 28, 2021, provided under separate cover) Executive Committee Minutes, February 1, 2021 30 Planning & Development Committee Minutes, February 1, 2021 33 6. Presentations 7. Delegations Due to COVID-19 and the Premier’s Emergency Orders to limit gatherings and maintain physical distancing, members of the public may provide a verbal delegation to Members of Council via electronic participation. To register as a delegate, visit www.pickering.ca/delegation, and complete the on-line delegation form or email For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca Council Meeting Agenda February 22, 2021 Electronic Meeting 7:00 pm clerks@pickering.ca. Delegation requests must be received by noon on the last business day before the scheduled meeting. All delegations for items not listed on the agenda shall register ten (10) days prior to the meeting date. The list of delegates who have registered to speak will be called upon one by one by the Chair and invited to join the meeting via audio connection. A maximum of 10 minutes shall be allotted for each delegation. Please ensure you provide the phone number that you wish to be contacted on. Please be advised that your name and address will appear in the public record and will be posted on the City’s website as part of the meeting minutes. 7.1 Jackie Flowers, CEO & Director of Public Libraries Sarah Sheehy, Board Chair Pickering Public Library Re: 2021 Annual Update 7.2 Andrew Simanovskis Re: Request for City Endorsement of Land Division Application - LD 175/17 Lot 27, Concession 1 8. Correspondence 8.1 Corr. 06-21 42 Alexander Harras, Manager of Legislative Services/Deputy Clerk Town of Ajax Re: Funding Sick Leave Recommendation: 1. That Corr. 06-21, from Alexander Harras, Manager of Legislative Services/Deputy Clerk, Town of Ajax, dated January 28, 2021, regarding Funding Sick Leave, be endorsed; and, 2. That a copy of this Resolution be forwarded to Jennifer O’Connell, MP, Pickering-Uxbridge, and the Hon. Peter Bethlenfalvy, MPP, Pickering-Uxbridge. 8.2 Corr. 07-21 44 Corey Bridges, Manager of Finance / Treasurer Perth County For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca Council Meeting Agenda February 22, 2021 Electronic Meeting 7:00 pm Re: Significant Negative Impacts of Current Value Assessments in Perth County Recommendation: 1. That Corr. 07-21, from Corey Bridges, Manager of Finance/Treasurer, Perth County, dated February 2, 2021, regarding Significant Negative Impacts of Current Value Assessments in Perth County, be received; and, 2. That Corr. 07-21 be referred to the Director, Finance & Treasurer, for review and comment and a report back to Council on the associated impacts specific to the City of Pickering no later than the May 25, 2021 Council Meeting. 8.3 Corr. 08-21 47 Mayor Dan Carter City of Oshawa Re: City of Oshawa – COVID-19 Economic Recovery and Provincial Occupancy Restrictions Recommendation: 1. That Corr. 08-21, from Mayor Dan Carter, City of Oshawa, dated February 2, 2021, regarding the City of Oshawa – COVID-19 Economic Recovery and Provincial Occupancy Restrictions, be endorsed; and, 2. That a copy of this Resolution be forwarded to all Durham Region MPPs and the Council of the Regional Municipality of Durham. 8.4 Corr. 09-21 51 Ralph Walton, Regional Clerk/Director of Legislative Services The Regional Municipality of Durham Re: Request from the Region of Durham that the Region of York affirm by Resolution its support for the Lake Simcoe Solution as Documented in the Upper York Sewage Solutions (UYSS) Environmental Assessment Erin Mahoney, Commissioner of Environmental Services The Regional Municipality of York For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca Council Meeting Agenda February 22, 2021 Electronic Meeting 7:00 pm Upper York Sewage Solutions Individual Environmental Assessment Approval Status Update Recommendation: 1. That Corr. 09-21, from Ralph Walton, Regional Clerk/Director of Legislative Services, the Regional Municipality of Durham, dated February 5, 2021, and from Erin Mahoney, Commissioner of Environmental Services, the Regional Municipality of York, dated January 14, 2021, regarding the Upper York Sewage Solutions (UYSS) Environmental Assessment, be endorsed; and, 2. That a copy of this Resolution be forwarded to the Hon. Doug Ford, Premier of Ontario, the Hon. Peter Bethlenfalvy, MPP, Pickering- Uxbridge, Rod Phillips, MPP, Ajax, and the Council of the Regional Municipality of Durham. 8.5 Corr. 10-21 59 Gary Muller, Director of Planning The Regional Municipality of Durham Re: Bill 229, Protect, Support and Recover from COVID-19 Act (Budget Measures) – Changes to the Conservation Authorities Act and Planning Act Recommendation: 1. That Corr. 10-21, from Gary Muller, Director of Planning, the Regional Municipality of Durham, dated January 22, 2021, regarding Bill 229, Protect, Support and Recover from COVID-19 Act (Budget Measures) – Changes to the Conservation Authorities Act and Planning Act, be received; and, 2. That Corr. 10-21 be referred to the Director, City Development & CBO, for review and a report back to Council on the associated impacts to the City of Pickering no later than the April 26, 2021 Council Meeting. 8.6 Corr. 11-21 65 Keley Katona, Director, Conservation and Source Protection Branch Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca Council Meeting Agenda February 22, 2021 Electronic Meeting 7:00 pm Re: Implications of Proclamation of Various Provisions of the C onservation Authorities Act: Frequently Asked Questions Recommendation: That Corr. 11-21, from Keley Katona, Director, Conservation and Source Protection Branch, Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks, dated February 5, 2021, regarding the Implications of Proclamation of Various Provisions of the Conservation Authorities Act: Frequently Asked Questions, be received for information. 8.7 Corr. 12-21 70 Jennifer O’Connell, Member of Parliament, Pickering-Uxbridge Re: Funding Streams under the Ministry of Environment and Climate Change - Grants and Contribution Currently Open to Apply Recommendation: 1. That Corr. 12-21, from Jennifer O’Connell, Member of Parliament, Pickering-Uxbridge, dated February 9, 2021, regarding Funding Streams under the Ministry of Environment and Climate Change - Grants and Contribution Currently Open to Apply, be received; and, 2. That Corr. 12-21 be referred to the CAO to direct City Staff to initiate actions to apply for specific grants that may be relevant to the City’s work in Storm Water Management and its impact on the Great Lakes and shore land restoration damage to the City’s Waterfront. 8.8 Corr. 13-21 73 Nicole Gibson, Executive Director Ajax-Pickering Board of Trade Re: Ajax-Pickering B oard of Trade Pre-Budget Submission Recommendation: 1. That Corr. 13-21, from Nicole Gibson, Executive Director Ajax-Pickering Board of Trade, dated February 10, 2021, regarding the Ajax-Pickering Board of Trade Pre-Budget Submission, be endorsed; and, For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca Council Meeting Agenda February 22, 2021 Electronic Meeting 7:00 pm 2. That a copy of this Resolution be forwarded to the Hon. Doug Ford, Premier of Ontario , and the Hon. Peter Bethlenfalvy, Minister of Finance. 8.9 Corr. 14-21 76 The Honourable Steve Clark, Minister Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing Re: Consulting on Growing the Size of the Greenbelt Recommendation: 1. That Corr. 14-21, from the Hon. Steve Clark, Minister, Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, dated February 17, 2021, regarding Consulting on Growing the Size of the Greenbelt, be received; and, 2. That Corr. 14-21 be referred to the CAO to direct City Staff to review, with an emphasis on expanding and further protecting Urban River Valleys, and report back to Council on the City of Pickering’s response, prior to the April 19, 2021 deadline. 9. Report EC 02-21 of the Executive Committee held on Refer to Executive February 1, 2021 Committee Agenda pages: 9.1 Director, Engineering Services, Report ENG 02-21 1 Kinsale Road - Speed Limit Reduction Recommendation: 1. That the draft by-law, as set out in Attachment 2, be enacted to amend Schedule “9”, Speed Limits, to By-law 6604/05 to provide for the regulation of parking and speed on highways or parts of highways under the jurisdiction of The Corporation of the City of Pickering. The amendment specifically provides for the reduction of the speed limit on Kinsale Road, from 1000 metres north of Highway 7 to Seventh Concession Road, from 50 km/h to 40 km/h, which will create a uniform speed limit of 40 km/h on the entire length of Kinsale Road; and, For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca Council Meeting Agenda February 22, 2021 Electronic Meeting 7:00 pm 2. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. 9.2 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 04-21 7 Annual Update on Corporate Waste Initiatives Recommendation: 1. That Report PLN 04-21 of the Director, City Development & CBO regarding corporate waste initiatives be received for information; and, 2. That City staff continue to report annually to Council the results of corporate waste initiatives. 10. Report PD 02-21 of the Planning & Development Refer to Planning & Committee held on February 1, 2021 Development Agenda pages: 10.1 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 05-21 40 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 14/18 2184107 Ontario Inc. Part of Lot 18, Concession 3; Now Part 2, 40R-6962 (East side of Brock Road, north of Rex Heath Drive) Recommendation: That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 14/18, submitted by 2184107 Ontario Inc., to permit a 6-storey apartment building containing 44 dwelling units, on lands located on the east side of Brock Road, north of Rex Heath Drive, be endorsed subject to the provisions contained in Appendix I to Report PLN 05-21, and that staff be authorized to finalize and forward an implementing Zoning By-law Amendment to Council for enactment. 11. Reports – New and Unfinished Business 11.1 (Acting) Director, Community Services, Report CS 14-21 77 Public Works Winter Activities update - Information Report For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca Council Meeting Agenda February 22, 2021 Electronic Meeting 7:00 pm Recommendation: That Council receive Report CS 14-21 regarding Public Works Winter Activities for information. 11.2 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 10-21 86 The Municipal Comprehensive Review of the Durham Regional Official Plan: Major Transit Station Areas Proposed Policy Directions, December 2020, and the Framework for a new Regional Official Plan Recommendation: 1. That Council support the Region of Durham’s Major Transit Station Areas Proposed Policy Directions and endorse staff comments contained in Table 1 of Appendix I to Report PLN 10-21; 2. That Council welcome the proposed restructuring of the new Regional Official Plan, and congratulate the Region on this new approach; and, 3. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. 12. Motions and Notice of Motions 12.1 Full Traffic Signalization of Intersection of Usman Road and Brock Road (Regional Road #1) Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Butt WHEREAS, in the Brock Ridge Neighbourhood, the Duffins Precinct is located on the east side of Brock Road (RR#1), and that part of the Duffins Precinct located opposite Major Oaks Road has 146 existing homes and a population of 425 individuals, with a very busy place of worship/school/community centre; And Whereas, there is presently an application under consideration for an additional 380 homes with a projected population of 765 individuals; For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca Council Meeting Agenda February 22, 2021 Electronic Meeting 7:00 pm And Whereas, the only access to southbound Brock Road, the most frequent turning movement from the neighbourhood, is on the north side of the neighbourhood at the signalized intersection of Brock Road and the northern leg of Usman Road, opposite Major Oaks Road; And Whereas, the place of worship and proposed new development is at the south end of the neighbourhood with no immediate point of access to southbound Brock Road, as the existing southern leg of Usman Road and Brock Road is restricted to left in, right in and right out only; And Whereas, the Region of Durham is requiring the closure of the direct access laneway from the Pickering Islamic Centre to Brock Road which will further exacerbate traffic concerns in the neighbourhood; And Whereas, the major community park for the area is on the west side of Brock Road with no direct access across Brock Road, requiring park goers to walk to signalized intersections at Major Oaks Road or Finch Avenue, a distance of up to 600 metres for pedestrians. Access to the park is important given the number of young families and expected new population growth; Now therefore be it resolved that the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering requests: 1. That the Region of Durham consider the expedited approval and installation of full traffic and pedestrian signals at the intersection of Brock Road (RR#1) and the southern leg of Usman Road in place of the existing left in, right in and right out only access; 2. That the installation of signals be completed prior to the beginning of construction of the new development in order to address construction traffic from having to drive through the existing neighbourhood; and, 3. That a copy of this motion be sent to the Region of Durham Commissioner of Works and Chair of the Works Committee. 12.2 Municipal Heritage Register – 450 F inch Avenue Moved by Councillor McLean Seconded by Councillor Brenner For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca Council Meeting Agenda February 22, 2021 Electronic Meeting 7:00 pm WHEREAS, applications for Draft Plan of Subdivision (SP-2020-20) and Zoning By-law Amendment (A 10/20) have been submitted by Medallion Developments (Pickering Finch) Ltd. proposing to demolish a 2-storey stone building located at 450 Finch Avenue; And Whereas, the Rouge Park Neighbourhood Development Guidelines (Section N1.10.1) identifies the building at 450 Finch Avenue as one of four dwelling having significant cultural heritage resource within this neighbourhood; And Whereas, the Rouge Park Neighbourhood Development Guidelines states that prior to development oc curring on the subject lands, an assessment of the architectural and heritage significance of the structure should be undertaken by the applicant, and strategies to retain the structure on the site should be explored, if appropriate; And Whereas, the Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee met on November 25, 2020 and made the following recommendations: • Council list the subject property on the Municipal Heritage Register under Section 27 of the Ontario Heritage Act; • The Heritage Impact Assessment be revised as per the recommendations of Branch Architecture; and, • Once the revised Heritage Impact Assessment resubmission is received by the City of Pickering, that it is circulated to Heritage Pickering to consider future designation and conservation of the property. And Whereas, the Council for The Corporation of City of Pickering believes that the 2-storey stone building at 450 Finch Avenue has cultural heritage value; Now therefore be it resolved that the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering endorses the recommendations of the Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee pertaining to 450 Finch Avenue and directs staff to list 450 Finch Avenue on the Municipal Heritage Register forthwith. For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca Council Meeting Agenda February 22, 2021 Electronic Meeting 7:00 pm 13. By-laws 13.1 By-law 7817/21 Being a by-law to amend By-law 6604/05 providing for the regulating of traffic and parking, standing and stopping on highways or parts of highways under the jurisdiction of the City of Pickering and on private and municipal property. [Refer to ENG 02-21 and page 5 of the Executive Committee Agenda] 13.2 By-law 7818/21 169 Being a by-law to establish certain roads within the City of Pickering, Regional Municipality of Durham as public highways. (Kubota Drive and Sideline 24) 13.3 By-law 7819/21 172 Being a by-law to assume Block 21, Plan 40-2565, Pickering (Fairport Road) as public highway. 13.4 By-law 7820/21 175 Being a by-law to appoint Marisa Carpino as the Chief Administrative Officer for The Corporation of the City of Pickering. 14. Other Business 15. Confirmation By-law 16. Adjournment For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca -Cift;of p](KERJNG Council Meeting Minutes January 25, 2021 Electronic Meeting 7:00 pm Present: Mayor David Ryan Councillors: K. Ashe M. Brenner S. Butt I. Cumming B. McLean D. Pickles Also Present: M. Carpino -Interim Chief Administrative Officer K. Bentley -Director, City Development & CBO P. Bigioni -Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor B. Duffield -(Acting) Director, Community Services J. Eddy -Director, Human Resources J. Hagg -Fire Chief J. Flowers -CEO & Director of Public Libraries, Pickering Public Library R. Holborn -Director, Engineering Services F. Jadoon -Director, Economic Development & Strategic Projects S. Karwowski - Director, Finance & Treasurer S. Cassel -City Clerk C. Rose -Chief Planner V. Plouffe -Manager, Facilities Capital Projects R. Perera -Committee Coordinator 1.Roll Call The City Clerk certified that all Members of Council were present and participating electronically in accordance with By-law 7771/20. 2.Invocation Mayor Ryan called the meeting to order and led Council in the saying of the Invocation. 3.Indigenous Land Acknowledgment Statement Mayor Ryan read the Indigenous Land Acknowledgment Statement. 4.Disclosure of Interest - 1 - -Cift;of p](KERJNG Council Meeting Minutes January 25, 2021 Electronic Meeting 7:00 pm No disclosures of interest were noted. 5.Adoption of Minutes Resolution # 495/21 Moved by Councillor Brenner Seconded by Councillor McLean Special Council Minutes, December 14, 2020 Council Minutes, December 14, 2020 Executive Committee Minutes, January 4, 2021 Special Council Minutes, January 4, 2021 Planning & Development Committee Minutes, January 4, 2021 Carried 6.Presentations There were no presentations. 7.Delegations 7.1 John Henry, Regional Chair, The Regional Municipality of Durham Re: Annual Update on Durham Region’s Progress John Henry, Regional Chair, The Regional Municipality of Durham, joined the electronic meeting via audio connection to provide the Region’s annual update. Chair Henry noted a number of key accomplishments within Durham including the Ontario Power Generation’s Small Modular Reactor development and the Centre for Canadian Nuclear Sustainability. He further added that the Province’s decision to support the Durham Live development would be a good economic driver for Durham Region, as it would bring approximately 10,000 jobs, intersection improvements, traffic studies for future improvements, and affordable hous ing components to Durham Region once completed. Chair Henry stated that the Pickering Airport and the surrounding federal lands were another future economic development growth opportunity, adding that 11 major Durham Region Transit (DRT) projects were underway, which included the Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) System that would connect Oshawa to Scarborough along Highway 2. He noted that both the Federal and Provincial governments had announced significant funding for broadband, adding that the Region is looking forward to securing the funding necessary to achieve a vision of a fully connected Durham. He advised that Durham Region and York Region have undertaken a joint study to identify the preferred method of addressing future capacity limitations of the existing outfall at the Duffin Creek Water Pollution Control Plant. Chair Henry also noted that several road widenings are underway, in design or construction phases, to - 2 - -Cift;of p](KERJNG Council Meeting Minutes January 25, 2021 Electronic Meeting 7:00 pm continue to address the City of Pickering’s growing traffic capacity. Chair Henry concluded his delegation through a video presentation of the work being undertaken and the priorities of the Region. A question and answer period ensued between Members of Council and Chair Henry regarding: •whether all long-term care facilities had received the COVID-19 vaccination; •the COVID-19 Vaccination roll out schedule for Police, Fire, and Ambulance workers; •the status of the Metrolinx Bus Rapid Transit plans; •opposition to the development of a rail service line through the middle of Kingston Road and clarification that the Kingston Road transit corridor was intended for buses; and, •the status of extending Whites Road from Taunton to Highway 407, and the status of the widening of Brock Road from Taunton Road to Whitevale Road. 7.2 Clint Scott, Community Outreach Officer Pickering Auxiliary Rescue Association (PARA) Marine Search and Rescue Re: 2020 Year in Review & 2021 Strategic Plan Clint Scott, Community Outreach Officer, PARA Marine Search and Rescue, joined the electronic meeting via audio connection to provide an annual update on PARA Marine Search & Rescue through the aid of a PDF presentation. Highlights of the presentation included: •timelines of the 50 plus years of service and the organization’s new branding; •an overview of the four pillars of the 2021-2025 Strategic & Business Plan which include strengthening the organization, developing crews, ensuring SAR readiness, and planning for the future; •the increased number of calls that PARA Marine Search & Rescue had received originating from local fire and police; •key performance indicators, noting that the response time was 23.18 minutes; •the 2020 mandate to change the brand from Pickering Auxiliary Rescue Association to PARA Marine Search & Rescue t o be more inclusive of the three communities they serve which include Whitby, Ajax, and Pickering; •replacing the current vessel between 2025 and 2030 and leveraging the most current technologies including more near shore operating capabilities; and, - 3 - -Cift;of p](KERJNG Council Meeting Minutes January 25, 2021 Electronic Meeting 7:00 pm •funding framework for the organization, noting that the mission is to raise $1.5 million to $2 million for a new replacement vessel. A question and answer period ensued between Members of Council and Clint Scott, regarding: •whether PARA Marine Search & Rescue had been affected by the milfoil weeds located in the Frenchman’s Bay and possible partnerships or suggestions that PARA may have to address the issue with Council requesting that Staff follow up with Mr. Scott after the meeting for further discussion; •the process to become a volunteer member for PARA Marine Search & Rescue; •the impact of ice in the Frenchman’s Bay on operations and current safety measures in place; •the number of search and rescue incidents reported in Pickering; and, •when a new vessel would be needed and the status of the fundraising for the new vessel. 7.3 Eileen Higdon Re: Report CLK 01-21 Ward Boundary Review -Interim Report – Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. Eileen Higdon withdrew her delegation and did not connect to the electronic Council Meeting. 7.4 Eileen Higdon Re: Report LEG 01-21 Broadband Service for Whitevale and Green River - ICON Grant Funding Stage 2 Eileen Higdon withdrew her delegation and did not connect to the electronic Council Meeting. 7.5 David Grey Eagle, Special envoy for Grand Chief Wabiska Mukwa Metis Nation of Ontario Re: Per United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) Simple Signature Protocol – Seaton Lands and All Lands in Pickering David Grey Eagle, Special Envoy for Grand Chief Wabiska Mukwa, Metis Nation of Ontario, joined the electronic meeting via audio connection. He provided a message from Grand Chief Wabiska Mukwa which spoke to the Supreme Court recognizing the Metis of Eastern Canada in 2016 in its landmark case Daniels v. Canada, noting that the Metis had filed a land claim and trespass in the Ontario - 4 - -Cift;of p](KERJNG Council Meeting Minutes January 25, 2021 Electronic Meeting 7:00 pm Superior Court in 2020. Mr. Grey Eagle further commented on the United Nations declaration of the rights of Indigenous Peoples which is referred to as UNDRIP. Mr. Grey Eagle concluded his delegation by asking that the Metis Nation of Ontario be consulted on the Seaton lands and other lands in the City of Pickering. 7.6 Jennifer O’Connell, MP, Pickering-Uxbridge Re: Federal government Update on the COVID-19 Pandemic, the Universal Broadband Fund, and other issues Jennifer O’Connell, MP, Pickering –Uxbridge, joined the electronic meeting via audio connection and outlined initiatives undertaken by the Federal Government pertaining to the COVID-19 pandemic, the COVID-19 vaccination, and long-term care facilities. Ms. O’Connell noted that while there is a delay in receiving vaccinations from Pfizer, they expect to meet their timelines to deliver vaccines to all Canadians by September 2021. Ms. O’Connell expressed her disappointment in the Province’s decision to not support the projects from Pickering or Uxbridge under the Canada Infrastructure Plan, adding that she would continue to work towards diversifying infrastructure in the region. She further noted that the Infrastructure Minister had announced a $1. 5 billion for a t hree year period for Green and Inclusive Community buildings. She stated that the Universal Broadband Fund (UBF) would strive to connect 98% of Canadian households with high speed internet by 2026, outlining the different streams of the UBF. Ms. O’Connell concluded her delegation by noting the Federal Government’s commitment to providing an d improving broadband service. A question and answer period ensued between Members of Council and Jennifer O’Connell, regarding: •whether the UBF would apply to upgrading copper wires in Pickering; •the distribution plan of the COVID-19 Vaccinations, once received by provinces and territories, being the responsibility of the individual jurisdictions; •the availability of federal funding for broadband services as it relates to the ICON program underway for broadband in Whitevale and Green River; •possible grant programs for capital infrastructure projects; •the status of the high frequency rail and moving the project forward with the new Minister of Infrastructure; •funding for the removal of milfoil weeds in the Frenchman’s bay and maintaining and expanding t he Pickering w aterfront; and, •whether there would be a national investigation and a national strategy for long-term care facilities. 8.Correspondence - 5 - -Cift;of p](KERJNG Council Meeting Minutes January 25, 2021 Electronic Meeting 7:00 pm 8.1 Corr. 01-21 Ralph Walton, Regional Clerk The Regional Municipality of Durham Re: Response to November 25, 2020 Notice of Motion regarding Minister’s Zoning Orders (2020-P-30) Resolution # 496/21 Moved by Councillor McLean Seconded by Councillor Brenner That Corr. 01-21, from Ralph Walton, Regional Clerk, the Regional Municipality of Durham, dated December 17, 2020, regarding the Response to November 25, 2020 Notice of Motion regarding Minister’s Zoning Orders (2020-P-30), be endorsed. Carried Unanimously on a Recorded Vote 8.2 Corr. 02-21 Sylvia Jones, Solicitor General Office of the Solicitor General Re: The Deadline for the Completion and Adoption of a Community Safety and Well-Being (CSWB) Plan Resolution # 497/21 Moved by Councillor Brenner Seconded by Councillor Butt 1.That Corr. 02-21, from Sylvia Jones, Solicitor General, Office o f the Solicitor General, dated December 24, 2020, regarding the deadline for the completion and adoption of a Community Safety and Well-Being (CSWB) Plan, be received for information; and, 2.That Corr. 02-21, be referred to the (Acting) Director, Community Services, for inclusion in the City of Pickering 2021 Community Safety Well-Being work plan with a report back no later than the June 2021 Council Meeting. Carried 8.3 Corr. 03-21 Jennifer O'Connell Member of Parliament, Pickering-Uxbridge Re: Universal Broadband Fund (UBF) - 6 - -Cift;of p](KERJNG Council Meeting Minutes January 25, 2021 Electronic Meeting 7:00 pm Resolution # 498/21 Moved by Councillor Brenner Seconded by Councillor Butt That Corr. 03-21, from Jennifer O'Connell, Member of Parliament, dated January 7, 2021, regarding the Universal Broadband Fund (UBF), be received for information. Carried 8.4 Corr. 04-21 Ralph Walton, Regional Clerk The Regional Municipality of Durham Re: Request from the Region of Durham that the Region of York affirm by Resolution its support for the Lake Simcoe Solution as Documented in the Upper York Sewage Solutions (UYSS) Environmental Assessment Discussion ensued between Members of Council regarding their opposition to the Province’s decision to direct sewage to Pickering, noting that the sewage should go to Lake Simcoe as outlined in the studies. Resolution # 499/21 Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Brenner That Corr. 04-21, from Ralph Walton, Regional Clerk, the Regional Municipality of Durham, dated January 6, 2021, regarding the Request from the Region of Durham that the Region of York affirm by Resolution its support for the Lake Simcoe Solution as Documented in the Upper York Sewage Solutions (UYSS) Environmental Assessment, be endorsed. Carried Unanimously on a Recorded Vote 8.5 Corr. 05-21 Nicole Gibson, Executive Director Ajax-Pickering Board of Trade Re: Evidence Based Decision Making Critical to the Survival of Small Business Resolution # 500/21 Moved by Councillor Butt Seconded by Councillor Pickles - 7 - -Cift;of p](KERJNG Council Meeting Minutes January 25, 2021 Electronic Meeting 7:00 pm 1.That Corr. 05-21, from Nicole Gibson, Executive Director, Ajax-Pickering Board of Trade, dated January 11, 2021, regarding t he Evidence Based Decision Making Critical to the Survival of Small Business, be endorsed; and, 2.That a copy of this Resolution be forwarded to the Hon. Doug Ford, Premier of Ontario, the H on. Peter Bethlenfalvy, MPP, Pickering- Uxbridge, and, Rod Phillips, MPP, Ajax. Carried 9.Report EC 01-21 of the Executive Committee held on January 4, 2021 9.1 Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor, Report CLK 01-21 Ward Boundary Review -Interim Report – Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. Council Decision: That Report CLK 01-21, regarding the Ward Boundary Review Interim Report, from Watson & Associates Economist Ltd., be received for information. 9.2 Director, Engineering Services, Report ENG 01-21 Municipal Bridge Maximum Gross Vehicle Weight Restrictions -By-law to establish a load limit for certain bridges under the jurisdiction of the City of Pickering Council Decision: 1.That the attached draft By-law limiting the gross vehicle weight of any vehicle or any class thereof, passing over certain bridges, under the jurisdiction of The Corporation of the City of Pickering be enacted; and, 2.That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. 9.3 Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor, Report LEG 01-21 Broadband Service for Whitevale and Green River - ICON Grant Funding Stage 2 Members of Council requested that Staff follow up with Jennifer O’Connell to inquire about the applicability of the project to Federal funding programs. Council Decision: - 8 - -Cift;of p](KERJNG Council Meeting Minutes January 25, 2021 Electronic Meeting 7:00 pm 1.That Council approve payment by the City of $150,000.00 towards the project to deliver broadband services to the residents and businesses of Green River and Whitevale, which payment will be made by the City upon receipt of the written commitment of Vianet Inc. to proceed with and complete construction of the project; 2.That staff be directed to continue working w ith Vianet Inc. to complete its submission of an application for grant funding from the Province’s Improving Connectivity for Ontario (ICON) Program by January 27, 2021; and, 3.That appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the actions necessary to implement the recommendations in this report. 9.4 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 01-21 Pickering Environmental Schools Grant -Results of the First Year of Funding Council Decision: 1.That Report PLN 01-21 of the Director, City Development & CBO on the results of the Pickering Environmental Schools Grant be received for information; and, 2.That a copy of Report PLN 01-21 be forwarded to the Durham Catholic District School Board (DCDSB) and Durham District School Board (DDSB) Trustees for City of Pickering, DCDSB and DDSB Directors of Education, DCDSB Superintendent of Facilities Services, DDSB EcoSchools Facilitator, DDSB Education Officer (Curriculum Grades 7-12) and eLearning Administrator, DDSB, Administrative Assistant, Student Achievement & Curriculum Department. Resolution # 501/21 Moved by Councillor Brenner Seconded by Councillor Cumming That Report EC 01-21 of the Executive Committee Meeting held on January 4, 2021 be adopted. Carried 10.Report PD 01-21 of the Planning & Development Committee held on January 4, 2021 - 9 - -Cift;of p](KERJNG Council Meeting Minutes January 25, 2021 Electronic Meeting 7:00 pm 10.1 Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor, Report LEG 02-21 2364722 Ontario Inc. – Plan of Subdivision 40M-2565 -Final Assumption of Plan of Subdivision -Lots 1 to 14, Blocks 15 to 21, Plan 40M-2565 -Blocks 110 t o 116, Plan 40M-1390 -File: 40M-2565 Council Decision: 1.That Gablehurst Crescent within Plan 40M-2565 be assumed for public use; 2.That works and services required by the Subdivision Agreement within Plan 40M-2565 and Blocks 110 to 116, Plan 40M-1390, which are constructed, installed or located on lands dedicated to, or owned by the City, or on lands lying immediately adjacent thereto, including lands that are subject to easements transferred to the City, be accepted and assumed for maintenance; 3.That 2364722 Ontario Inc. be released from the provisions of the Subdivision Agreement and any amendments thereto relating to Plan 40M- 2565; and, 4.That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the actions necessary to implement the recommendations in this report. 10.2 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 02-21 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 04/20 Ann Harbour Estates Ltd. Part Lot 22, Range 3 B.F.C.; Now Part 1, 40R-20148 (631 Liverpool Road) Council Decision: That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 04/20, submitted by Ann Harbour Estates Ltd., to permit a permanent private school use and four apartment dwelling units on lands municipally known as 631 Liverpool Road, be approved, and that the draft Zoning By-law Amendment set out in Appendix I to Report PLN 02-21 be finalized and forwarded to Council. Resolution # 502/21 Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Butt - 10 - -Cift;of p](KERJNG Council Meeting Minutes January 25, 2021 Electronic Meeting 7:00 pm That Report PD 01-21 of the Planning & Development Committee Meeting held on January 4, 2021 be adopted. Carried 11.Reports – New and Unfinished Business 11.1 Director, Economic Development & Strategic Projects, Report CAO 01-21 2021 Pre-Budget Approval – Study of the Financial, Economic, and Social Impacts of the Retirement of the Pickering Nuclear Generating Station -Request for Proposal No. RFP2020-9 A question and answer period ensued between Members of Council and Fiaz Jadoon, Director, Economic Development & Strategic Projects, regarding: •the total cost of the project and the funding that would be provided from the City; •the social impact of the initiative and when the study would take place; •ensuring that an interim update from the consultant is provided to Council; and, •assurance that the study would not affect the timing and the manner of Ontario Power Generation’s decommissioning. Mr. Jadoon was requested to provide periodic matrix updates to Council as it pertains to the status and process of the Study. Resolution # 503/21 Moved by Councillor Butt Seconded by Councillor Cumming 1.That Proposal No. RFP2020-9 submitted by AECOM Canada Ltd., dated October 20, 2020, to undertake a study on the financial, economic and social impacts on the retirement of the Pickering Nuclear Generation Station in the amount of $280,148.67 (HST included) be accepted; 2.That Council authorize the Director, Finance & Treasurer to finance the net project cost of $252,282.00 as follows: a)The sum of $84,094.00 to be funded from property taxes; b)The sum of $84,094.00 to be funded by The Regional Municipality of Durham; and, - 11 - -Cift;of p](KERJNG Council Meeting Minutes January 25, 2021 Electronic Meeting 7:00 pm c)The sum of $84,094.00 to be funded by the Ontario Power Generation’s Centre for Canadian Nuclear Sustainability; 3.That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report; and, 4.The City Clerk forward a copy of Report Number CAO 01-21 t o The Regional Municipality of Durham and Ontario Power Generation. Carried 11.2 (Acting) Director, Community Services, Report CS 10-21 Facilities Asset Management System -Renewal of VFA Software Subscription and Services A brief question and answer period ensued between Members of Council and Brian Duffield, (Acting) Director, Community Services, regarding whether the VFA software was new, whether regular upgrades were made by the vendor to keep the software current and whether the database was stored on City servers. Resolution # 504/21 Moved by Councillor Butt Seconded by Councillor Brenner 1.That Quote #Q-194376-1 for the VFA Facilities Asset Management System software subscription for a five year period, submitted by Accruent in the amount of $200,828 (HST included) be accepted; 2.That the total gross project cost of $200,828.00 (HST included), and the total net project cost of $180,852.00 (net of HST rebate), be approved; 3.That Council authorize the Director, Finance & Treasurer to finance Year 1 subscription fees for net cost of $34,065.00, and five year sum of $180,852 (net HST rebate) be provided for in the 2021 Current Budget, to be funded from property taxes; and, 4.That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the necessary action to give effect hereto. Carried 11.3 (Acting) Director, Community Services, Report CS 11-21 Pre-budget Approval - Don Beer Arena, Rink 3 Refrigeration Plant Upgrades (Phase 1) - 12 - -Cift;of p](KERJNG Council Meeting Minutes January 25, 2021 Electronic Meeting 7:00 pm A question and answer period ensued between Members of Council and Staff regarding: •impacts to the project due to the removal of the ice in the Arena caused by the lockdown; •whether the removal of the ice would enable the project to move forward more effectively and efficiently; and, •using the shutdown time advantageously so that the work could be completed prior to August and the next ice season. Resolution # 505/21 Moved by Councillor Brenner Seconded by Councillor Pickles 1.That Report CS 11-21 from the (Acting) Director, Community Services for pre-budget approval of the Rink 3 Refrigeration Plant Rebuild at Don Beer Arena be received; 2.That Council grant pre-2021 Capital Budget approval and authorize the Director, Finance & Treasurer to fund the sum of $240,000.00 from Federal Gas Tax (FGT) Reserve Fund; and, 3.That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the necessary action to give effect hereto. Carried 11.4 Director, Finance & Treasurer, Report FIN 01-21 Council Budget Meeting Dates A question and answer period ensued between Members of Council and Stan Karwowski, Director, Finance & Treasurer, regarding: •whether the revised dates were for the current and the capital budget; •whether the new financial software had been implemented or deferred; •the accessibility of the budget documentation for members of the public; and, •the timeline for posting the budget documentation for public access and public notification of the meeting dates. Resolution # 506/21 - 13 - -Cift;of p](KERJNG Council Meeting Minutes January 25, 2021 Electronic Meeting 7:00 pm Moved by Councillor Cumming Seconded by Councillor McLean 1.That Report FIN 01-21 of the Director, Finance & Treasurer be received; 2.That the 2021 Budget Meeting Dates, previously approved through Resolution #442/20, be changed to March 4 and 5, 2021; and, 3.That the City Clerk be directed to give notice of the new meeting dates on the City’s website. Carried 11.5 Director, Finance & Treasurer, Report FIN 02-21 Property Tax Deferral Program Stan Karwowski, Director, Finance & Treasurer, provided an overview of the tax deferral program noting that interested taxpayers would complete an application on the City’s website and i f eligible, would have the late payment fees (penalty and interest) waived for the months of March, April and May. Mr. Karwowski further outlined the communication strategy in place to notify the public of the program. Resolution # 507/21 Moved by Councillor Brenner Seconded by Councillor Cumming 1.That Report FIN 02-21 of the Director, Finance & Treasurer be received; 2.That the Director, Finance & Treasurer be authorized to develop a 2021 Property Tax Deferral Program for the residential property tax class and that the property tax payments be deferred and interest and penalty be waived for up to ninety days for those that meet the criteria; and, 3.That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. Carried 11.6 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 06-21 Environmental Registry Posting 019-2811 Comments on the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing’s authority to address site plan matters and apply inclusionary zoning as part of a ministerial zoning order - 14 - -Cift;of p](KERJNG Council Meeting Minutes January 25, 2021 Electronic Meeting 7:00 pm Members of Council expressed their support for Report PLN 06-21, noting their opposition to the Province dictating the site plan approval process. Resolution # 508/21 Moved by Councillor Brenner Seconded by Councillor Cumming 1.That the comments in Report PLN 06-21 on Environmental Registry Posting (ERO) 019-2811 regarding certain legislative provisions in the Planning Act that enable the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing to address site plan matters and apply inclusionary zoning as part of a ministerial zoning order, be endorsed; 2.That the Province repeal recent changes through Bill 197 which provide enhanced powers that enable the Province to address site plan matters as part of a ministerial zoning order on the basis that: a.municipalities are better positioned to carry out this function; b.the site plan control process administered by the local municipality provides the best and only mechanism for ensuring the public and community interest is maintained and upheld where the land use zoning for a development is approved through a ministerial zoning order; c.the Province does not have the local or technical expertise (engineering, urban design, landscaping, transportation, and fire), processes, or the same established working relationships to replace or fulfill these functions, which may result in delays or longer processes; and, d.exemption from or uploading of these functions may also result in many practical challenges in terms of how detailed conditions will be formulated, finalized, and implemented in co-ordination with local municipal planning staff and various service agencies; 3.That the Province repeal recent changes through Bill 197 which provide enhanced powers that enable the Province to apply inclusionary zoning as part of a ministerial zoning order on the basis that: a.municipalities are better positioned to administer inclusionary zoning; - 15 - -Cift;of p](KERJNG Council Meeting Minutes January 25, 2021 Electronic Meeting 7:00 pm b.inclusionary zoning should not be arbitrarily administered in the absence of a required analysis and where associated municipal planning policies and regulations are not in place; and, c.requiring the provision of affordable housing without the necessary supportive tools, financing, policy, and regulatory framework, may result in projects not being viable or appropriately located or sized, among other issues; 4.That should these enhanced powers around site plans and inclusionary zoning be maintained: a.consideration be given to scoping these powers to certain areas of the province or jurisdictions that are not well equipped to handle these functions in an expeditious manner; b.municipalities be consulted extensively when the Province is considering exempting a project from site plan approval and/or assuming oversight for the process and when implementing inclusionary zoning requirements; c.stringent criteria be developed in consultation with municipalities as to which specific projects qualify to be exempt from local site plan control; d.details be provided on how these procedural and logistical matters would be addressed; in particular, clarification should be provided around who will be responsible for handling ongoing implementation matters after the approvals are in place such as necessary changes and inspections; e.the proponent be required to complete and/or satisfactorily address the necessary technical studies, agreements, and matters of interest that are ordinarily addressed through the City’s site plan control process to ensure there will not be any unacceptable impacts on or off the site or to the municipality as a result of the development; and, f.provision be made for financial compensation to municipalities and, where applicable, conservation authorities, by the proponent or the Province for time spent by staff on reviewing and commenting functions on these applications to offset the foregone planning application/review fee revenue that would otherwise have been collected by the municipality; - 16 - -Cift;of p](KERJNG Council Meeting Minutes January 25, 2021 Electronic Meeting 7:00 pm 5.That the Province provide further clarification on how exactly the enhancements related to site plan matters and inclusionary zoning support: a.the delivery of transit station infrastructure; b.optimization of surplus lands and what is meant by the term “surplus lands” in this context; and, c.what constitutes a strategic project in this context; 6.That staff be directed to respond to ERO posting 019-2811 with a copy of Report PLN 06-21 and Council’s resolution thereon, and that a copy of Report PLN 06-21 be forwarded to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, MPP Peter Bethlenfalvy, the Regional Municipality of Durham, and other Durham Area Municipalities. Carried Unanimously on a Recorded Vote Resolution # 509/21 Moved by Councillor Brenner Seconded By Councillor Butt That the rules of procedure be suspended to allow the introduction of a motion regarding a Submission on Long-Term Care due to its urgent nature. Carried on a Two-Thirds Vote 11.7 Submission on Long-Term Care Discussion ensued between Members of Council regarding the motion addressing the concerns expressed by residents regarding long-term care facilities. Resolution # 510 /21 Moved by Councillor Brenner Seconded By Councillor McLean Whereas the neglect, underfunding and overcrowding of Ontario’s long-term-care facilities and its impacts has worsened with the COVID-19 pandemic; And Whereas these conditions have struck residents living in these facilities the hardest, resulting in thousands of needless deaths; - 17 - -Cift;of p](KERJNG Council Meeting Minutes January 25, 2021 Electronic Meeting 7:00 pm And Whereas immediate measurable action is required to address this crisis and save the lives of our vulnerable seniors and their caregivers; And Whereas while there have been steps taken to prioritize vaccinations that will ultimately help to prevent the spread of COVID-19 in long-term care facilities, steps must be taken to focus on several longer-term systemic initiatives that will fundamentally change the relationships among government, businesses and our elders and related health-care staff; And Whereas we believe that the residents of the City of Pickering and across Ontario want immediate action on these above-noted items and we urge our political leaders to take these actions to heart and move with haste to save lives; And Whereas the Commission will receive written submissions from the public prior to the deadline of January 31, 2021; Now therefore be it resolved that the Council of the Corporation of the City of Pickering make the following submission of recommendations to Ontario’s Long- Term Care COVID-19 Commission: 1.The Province of Ontario immediately reinstate the mandatory inspection regime and introduce mandatory public reporting of all long-term care facilities, focus on infections, medical supply and long-term care staff availability, and appropriate access to local hospitalization and specialized care. And that provincial and municipal inspectors be deployed to assist this program; 2.The Province of Ontario and the Government of Canada provide the immediate emergency funds to hire additional full-time long-term care staff and raise the wages for all long-term care workers as the Government of Quebec has recently instituted; 3.The Province of Ontario establish an emergency rapid response task force comprised of trained infection-control health-care workers available to act immediately as emergencies are identified; 4.The Government of Canada and the Province of Ontario appoint independent federal and provincial ombuds respectively, with a national regulatory authority attached to Health Canada to receive and review all complaints and i nvestigations from long-term care residents, their families and long-term care staff to oversee strict new long-term care standards related to ensuring humane care and residents’ rights, staffing, and pay levels, building designs and usage of funds; and, - 18 - -Cift;of p](KERJNG Council Meeting Minutes January 25, 2021 Electronic Meeting 7:00 pm 5.That the Clerk, on behalf of the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering, forward this resolution in advance of the January 31, 2021 deadline to Ontario’s Long-Term Care COVID-19 Commission, and copies be sent to the Prime Minister, Durham MPs, Premier of Ontario, Durham MPPs and Region of Durham Council. Carried Unanimously on a Recorded Vote 12.Motions and Notice of Motions 12.1 City of Pickering Trade Centre Discussion ensued between Members of Council regarding: •finding a new location for the Pickering Markets and a stimulating location for a Trade Centre which would assist small business and attract new businesses to the City; •an alternative site for Pickering Markets not being a suitable location for a Trade Centre due to its operational days; •ensuring that the proposed Trade Centre does not affect the future Durham Live Convention Centre; •ensuring that the City would not be spending money to support businesses outside of Pickering noting that many of the vendors at the Pickering Markets were from outside of Pickering; and, •the motion providing an op portunity for City Staff to explore possibilities and report back to Council on the associated impacts. Resolution # 511/21 Moved by Councillor Brenner Seconded by Councillor McLean Whereas, the Pickering Markets has been an integral part of our business and community landscape for nearly half a century; And Whereas, as Ontario’s largest m arket, it was a vibrant, eclectic, and multicultural destination for residents in Pickering, and across the GTA; And Whereas, the COVID-19 restrictions and shutdowns have resulted in the permanent c losure of the Pickering Markets, housing over 400 small businesses; And Whereas, the City of Pickering recognizes the important role that the Pickering Markets has played in supporting entrepreneurs and small businesses over the past four decades; - 19 - -Cift;of p](KERJNG Council Meeting Minutes January 25, 2021 Electronic Meeting 7:00 pm And Whereas, buying local provides much-needed support to local businesses, and aides in Ontario's economic and social recovery from the pandemic; And Whereas, there is an opportunity to support the vendors displaced by the closure of the Pickering Markets, by launching a new iteration at a different location, t hereby achieving Provincial objectives set out in the ‘Support Loc al’ campaign; Now Therefore be it resolved that the Council for The Corporation of the City of Pickering recognizes the importance of supporting local businesses, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the need to assist displaced vendors from the Pickering Market closure, and: 1.Directs through the Office of the Interim CAO, the Director of Economic Development & Strategic Projects to undertake research to identify an appropriate site location for a City of Pickering Trade Centre; a nd, 2.That staff work with appropriate community stakeholders to facilitate discussions between various parties that may be interested in leasing space, relocating or investing towards a potential trade centre in Pickering, and provide a status report to Council no later than the end of June 2021. Carried Unanimously on a Recorded Vote 13.By-laws 13.1 By-law 7807/21 Being a by-law to limit the gross vehicle weight of any vehicle or any class thereof passing over a bridge under the jurisdiction of the Corporation of the City of Pickering pursuant to the Highway Traffic Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.H.8, as amended. 13.2 By-law 7808/21 Being a By-law to amend Restricted Area (Zoning) By-law 2511, as amended, to implement the Official Plan of the City of Pickering, Region of Durham, in Rotary Frenchman’s Bay West Park (A 10/18) 13.3 By-law 7809/21 Being a By-law to adopt Amendment 41 to the Official Plan for the City of Pickering (OPA 19-004/P) - 20 - -Cift;of p](KERJNG Council Meeting Minutes January 25, 2021 Electronic Meeting 7:00 pm 13.4 By-law 7810/21 Being a By-law to amend Zoning By-law 7553/17, as amended, to implement the Official of the City of Pickering, Region of Durham, Part of Lot 21, Concession 1 South, Now Part 2, 40R-18785 in the City of Pickering (A 01/20) 13.5 By-law 7811/21 Being a by-law to amend Zoning Restricted Area (Zoning) By-law 2520, as amended, to implement the Official Plan of the City of Pickering, Region of Durham, on Part Lot 22, Range 3 B.F.C.; Now Part 1, 40R-20148, in the City of Pickering. (A 04/20) 13.6 By-law 7812/21 Being a by-law to exempt Part of Lots 196 and 197, Plan 40M-2631, being Parts 1, 2, 3 and 4, Plan 40R-31202, Pickering from the part lot control provisions of the Planning Act. 13.7 By-law 7813/21 Being a by-law to appoint Catalina Blumenberg as the Deputy Clerk for The Corporation of the City of Pickering Resolution # 512/21 Moved by Councillor Ashe Seconded by Councillor Cumming That By-law Nos. 7807/21 through 7813/21 be approved. Carried 14.Confidential Council – Public Report Mayor Ryan stated that prior to the Regular Council Meeting, an In-camera session was held at 6:00 p.m. in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Act and Procedure By-law 7665/18 to consider personal matters about identifiable individuals as it relates to appointments to the Pickering Anti-Black Racism Taskforce. 14.1 (Acting) Director, Community Services, Confidential Report CS 12-21 Carried Recommended Community Appointments to the Pickering Anti-Black Racism Taskforce - 21 - -Cift;of p](KERJNG Council Meeting Minutes January 25, 2021 Electronic Meeting 7:00 pm Resolution # 513/21 Moved by Councillor Cumming Seconded by Councillor McLean 1.That the following individuals be appointed to the Pickering Anti-Black Racism Taskforce (PABRT), for a term ending November 14, 2022 or until a successor is appointed: Suzanne Charles Jennifer Smith Angela Graham Nikosa Holland Claudia Farinha Angella Vincent Zhora Adatia Romina Diaz-Matus Gena Chang-Campbell Heather Douglas Floyd Heath Odessa Grignon Norman Sinclair Dennis Governor Catherine Mosca Andrea Davis Andre Laylor Karla Noronha Temitope Olanbiwonnu Michelle Francis; and, 2.That Council provide staff the authority to take actions deemed necessary to advise the appointees and initiate regularly scheduled meetings of the taskforce, consistent with PABRT Terms of Reference. Carried 15.Other Business 15.1 Councillor Pickles gave notice that he would be bringing forward a Notice of Motion regarding a signalized intersection at South Usman Road and Brock Road. 16.Confirmation By-law By-law Number 7814/21 - 22 - -Cift;of p](KERJNG Council Meeting Minutes January 25, 2021 Electronic Meeting 7:00 pm Councillor Ashe, seconded by Councillor Butt moved for leave to introduce a By-law of the City of Pickering to confirm the proceedings of January 25, 2021. Carried 17.Adjournment Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Ashe That the meeting be adjourned. Carried The meeting adjourned at 9:18 pm. Dated this 25th of January, 2021. David Ryan, Mayor Susan Cassel, City Clerk - 23 - Special Council Meeting Minutes January 26, 2021 Electronic Meeting 10:00 am Present: Mayor David Ryan Councillors: K. Ashe M. Brenner S. Butt I. Cumming B. McLean D. Pickles Also Present: K.Kumar -Legacy Partners Executive Search ( Present for Item 3.2) J.Eddy -Director, Human Resources S. Cassel -City Clerk 1.Roll Call The City Clerk certified that all Members of Council were present and participating electronically in accordance with By-law 7771/20. 2.Disclosure of Interest No disclosures of interest were noted. 3.In Camera Matters Resolution # 514/21 Moved by Councillor Cumming Seconded by Councillor McLean That Council move into closed session in accordance with the provisions of Section 239 (2) of the Municipal Act and Procedural By-law 7665/18, in that the matters to be discussed relate to: b)personal matters about an identifiable individual, including municipal or local board employees (Items 3.1 and 3.2); and, d)labour relations or employee negotiations (Items 3.1 and 3.2). Carried - 24 - Special Council Meeting Minutes January 26, 2021 Electronic Meeting 10:00 am 3.1 Confidential Memorandum from the Director, Human Resources Re: Personal Matter This portion of the meeting was closed to the public. Refer to the In Camera meeting m inutes for further information. [City Clerk has custody and control of the In Camera minutes.] 3.2 Director, Human Resources, Confidential Report HUR 01-21 Re: Recruitment and Selection for the Position of CAO This portion of the meeting was closed to the public. Refer to the In Camera meeting minutes for further information. [City Clerk has custody and control of the In Camera minutes.] Resolution # 515/21 Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Brenner That Council rise from the closed session. Carried Resolution # 516/21 Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Ashe That Council ratify the recommendations from the closed session. Carried Mayor Ryan stated that during the closed portion of the meeting, Council considered two matters pertaining to personal matters about identifiable individuals and l abour relations or employee negotiations, and provided direction to staff. 4.Confirmation By-law By-law Number 7815/21 - 25 - Special Council Meeting Minutes January 26, 2021 Electronic Meeting 10:00 am Councillor Ashe, seconded by Councillor Brenner moved for leave to introduce a by-law of the City of Pickering to confirm the proceedings of January 26, 2021. Carried 5.. Adjournment Moved by Councillor McLean Seconded by Councillor Butt That the meeting be adjourned. Carried The meeting adjourned at 11:38 a.m. Dated this 26th of January, 2021. David Ryan, Mayor Susan Cassel, City Clerk - 26 - -Cift;of Special Council Meeting Minutes p](KERJNG January 28, 2021 Electronic Meeting 3:00 pm Present: Mayor David Ryan Councillors: K. Ashe M. Brenner S. Butt I. Cumming B. McLean D. Pickles - arrived at 3:02 p.m. Also Present: M. Carpino - Interim Chief Administrative Officer K. Bentley - Director, City Development & CBO P. Bigioni - Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor S. Cassel - City Clerk C. Rose - Chief Planner N. Surti - Manager, Development Review & Urban Design C. Celebre - Principle Planner, Development Review Q. Annibale - Partner, Loopstra Nixon Barristers & Solicitors 1. Roll Call The City Clerk certified that all Members of Council were present, save and except Councillor Pickles, and that all Members present were participating electronically in accordance with By-law 7771/20. Councillor Pickles joined the meeting at 3:02 p.m. 2. Disclosure of Interest No disclosures of interest were noted. 3. In Camera Matters Resolution # 517/21 Moved by Councillor Brenner Seconded by Councillor McLean - 27 - -Cift;ofMeeting Minutes p](KERJNG January 28, 2021 Electronic Meeting 3:00 pm That Council move into closed session in accordance with the provisions of Section 239 (2) of the Municipal Act and Procedural By-law 7665/18, in that the matters to be discussed relate to: e) litigation or potential litigation, including matters before administrative tribunals, affecting the municipality or local board; f) advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose. Carried 3.1 Director, City Development & CBO, Confidential Report PLN 07-21 Pickering Harbour Company Ltd. - Appeals to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal Case No. PL200388 - Files: Official Plan Amendment OPA 19-001/P and Zoning By-law Amendment A 05/19 This portion of the meeting was closed to the public. Refer to the In Camera meeting minutes for further information. [City Clerk has custody and control of the In Camera minutes.] Resolution # 518/21 Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Cumming That Council rise and ratify the recommendations from the closed session. Carried Mayor Ryan stated that during the closed portion of the meeting, Council discussed matters pertaining to litigation or potential litigation, received advice subject to solicitor-client privilege, and provided direction to Staff. 4. Confirmation By-law By-law 7816/21 Councillor Butt, seconded by Councillor Brenner moved for leave to introduce a by-law of the City of Pickering to confirm the proceedings of January 28, 2021. Carried Unanimously on a Recorded Vote Special Council - 28 - -Cift;of Special Council Meeting Minutes p](KERJNG January 28, 2021 Electronic Meeting 3:00 pm 5. Adjournment Moved by Councillor McLean Seconded by Councillor Cumming That the meeting be adjourned. Carried The meeting adjourned at 3:18 p.m. Dated this 28th of January, 2021. David Ryan, Mayor Susan Cassel, City Clerk - 29 - Executive Committee Meeting Minutes February 1, 2021 Electronic Meeting – 2:00 pm Chair: Councillor Butt Present: Mayor David Ryan Councillors: K. Ashe M. Brenner S. Butt I. Cumming B. McLean D. Pickles Also Present: M. Carpino - Chief Administrative Officer K. Bentley - Director, City Development & CBO P. Bigioni - Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor B. Duffield - (Acting) Director, Community Services J. Eddy - Director, Human Resources J. Hagg - Fire Chief J. Flowers - CEO & Director of Public Libraries, Pickering Public Library R. Holborn - Director, Engineering Services S. Karwowski - Director, Finance & Treasurer S. Cassel - City Clerk C. Whitaker - Supervisor, Sustainability C. Blumenberg - Deputy Clerk R. Perera - Committee Coordinator 1. Roll Call The City Clerk certified that all Members of Council were present and participating electronically in accordance with By-law 7771/20. 2. Disclosure of Interest No disclosures of interest were noted. 3. Delegations There were no delegations. 4. Matters for Consideration 1 - 30 - Executive Committee Meeting Minutes February 1, 2021 Electronic Meeting – 2:00 pm Chair: Councillor Butt 4.1 Director, Engineering Services, Report ENG 02-21 Kinsale Road - Speed Limit Reduction Recommendation: Moved by Mayor Ryan Seconded by Councillor Pickles 1. That the draft by-law, as set out in Attachment 2, be enacted to amend Schedule “9”, Speed Limits, to By-law 6604/05 to provide for the regulation of parking and speed on highways or parts of highways under the jurisdiction of The Corporation of the City of Pickering. The amendment specifically provides for the reduction of the speed limit on Kinsale Road, from 1000 metres north of Highway 7 to Seventh Concession Road, from 50 km/h to 40 km/h, which will create a uniform speed limit of 40 km/h on the entire length of Kinsale Road; and, 2. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. Carried 4.2 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 04-21 Annual Update on Corporate Waste Initiatives Recommendation: Moved by Mayor Ryan Seconded by Councillor Pickles 1. That Report PLN 04-21 of the Director, City Development & CBO regarding corporate waste initiatives be received for information; and, 2. That City staff continue to report annually to Council the results of corporate waste initiatives. Carried 5. Other Business 5.1 Councillor McLean inquired about an update on the Case Management Conference (CMC), held earlier in the day, by the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal 2 - 31 - Executive Committee Meeting Minutes February 1, 2021 Electronic Meeting – 2:00 pm Chair: Councillor Butt (LPAT), regarding t he Pickering Harbour Company Ltd. appeal. He further inquired about next steps moving forward and whether there were any differences in process between LPAT and the former Ontario Municipal Board (OMB). Paul Bigioni, Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor, advised that there was no material difference between the LPAT and t he OMB and that it was anticipated that the landowners would provide a new or amended application in and around June of this year. He further advised that a second CMC could possibly be scheduled for October 2021, where a defined list of issues, witness statements, and the date of the hearing would be confirmed by the LPAT. A question and answer period ensued between Members of the Committee and Mr. Bigioni regarding: • the possible submission of a revised application by the Pickering Harbour Company Ltd., and the LPAT being the approval authority for the possible revised application with the City having no impact in the decision; • the decision to regard any revised application by the Pickering Harbour Company Ltd. as a revised application rather than a new application being a subjective decision of the LPAT and not the City; • ensuring that the public is kept informed regarding the appeal and whether members of the public would be able to participate in the next CMC, with Mr. Bigioni advising that he would provide this information to Council once he had spoken with outside legal counsel; and, • affirmation that the City had not changed its position in refusing the original application by the Pickering Harbour Company Ltd., with Mr. Bigioni confirming that the City stands behind the direction provided by Council in refusing the application. 6. Adjournment Moved by Councillor Ashe Seconded by Councillor Brenner That the meeting be adjourned. Carried The meeting adjourned at 2:08 pm. 3 - 32 - February 1, 2021 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Councillor Cumming Present: Mayor David Ryan Councillors: K. Ashe M. Brenner S. Butt I. Cumming B. McLean D. Pickles – arrived at 7:02 pm Also Present: M. Carpino - Chief Administrative Officer K.Bentley - Director, City Development & CBO P. Bigioni - Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor F. Jadoon - Director, Economic Development & Strategic Projects S. Cassel - City Clerk C. Rose - Chief Planner N. Surti - Manager, Development Review & Urban Design C. Blumenberg - Deputy Clerk T. Bal - Planner ll E. Martelluzzi - Planner ll – Heritage C. Morrison - Planner ll R. Perera - Committee Coordinator 1. Roll Call The City Clerk certified that all Members of Council were present, save and except Councillor Pickles, and that all Members present were participating electronically in accordance with By-law 7771/20. Councillor Pickles joined the meeting at 7:02 p.m. 2. Disclosure of Interest No disclosures of interest were noted. 3. Statutory Public Meetings Councillor Cumming, Chair, gave an outline of the requirements for a Statutory Public Meeting under the Planning Act. He outlined the notification process procedures and also 1 Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes - 33 - February 1, 2021 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Councillor Cumming noted that if a person or public body does not make oral or written submissions to the City before the By-law is passed, that person or public body are not entitled to appeal the decision of City Council to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT), and may not be entitled to be added as a party to the hearing unless, in the opinion of LPAT, there are reasonable grounds to do so. Catherine Rose, Chief Planner, appeared before the Committee to act as facilitator for the Statutory Public Meeting portion of the meeting, explaining t he process for discussion purposes as well as the order of speakers. 3.1 Information Report No. 04-21 Official Plan Amendment Application OPA 20-007/P Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 12/20 Draft Plan of Subdivision Application 18T-99011(R20) Centreville Homes (Pickering) Inc. Part of Lots 28 to 30, Plan 350, Now Parts 1 to 6 40R-20403 (313 Toynevale Road) A statutory public meeting was held under the Planning Act, for the purpose of informing the public with respect to the above-noted application. Tanjot Bal, Planner II, provided the Committee with an overview of Official Plan Amendment Application OPA 20-007/P, Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 12/20, and Draft Plan of Subdivision Application 18T-99011(R20). Through the aid of a PowerPoint presentation, Ms. Bal outlined the subject lands, the previously approved draft plan, the revised proposals, and the planning policy framework, noting that the applications propose to construct 14 residential lots for detached dwelling fronting a new public road extending south from Toynevale Road terminating in a cul-de-sac. Ms. Bal outlined the comments received for further review and consideration, and the next steps in the applications. Adam Layton, Partner, Evans Planning Inc., joined the electronic meeting via audio connection to present an overview of the applications on behalf of the applicant, Centreville Homes (Pickering) Inc. Through the aid of a PowerPoint presentation, Mr. Layton outlined the subject property, conceptual site plans, previously approved draft plan of subdivision, and the proposed draft plan of subdivision. Dana Saccoccio, 417 Woodgrange Avenue¸ joined the electronic meeting via audio connection and noted her objection to the proposed development and outlined several statements in the Planning Justification Report prepared by Evans Planning Inc., adding that the statements were contradictory to the City’s proposed Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments for Infill and Replacement 2 Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes - 34 - Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes February 1, 2021 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Councillor Cumming Housing in Established Neighbourhoods. Ms. Saccoccio noted that the proposed development was not in an effort towards an efficient use of land and affordable housing, adding that the applicant would economically benefit should the amendments be granted. Through the aid of drawings, Ms.Saccoccio compared the proposal to an individual Rosebank property within the established neighbourhood precinct. She concluded her delegation by noting that it is not justifiable for the City to grant such significant variances to developers while proposing to limit allowable lot coverage for individual property owners in Rosebank and other neighbourhoods in Pickering. Tony Harold, 1023 Lytton Court, joined the electronic meeting via audio connection and provided an overview of the proposed development adding that there are two options that are projected to deliver the same or greater profit, while maintaining the 15.24 metre minimum lot requirement for the South Rosebank neighbourhood. Through the aid of a PowerPoint presentation, Mr. Harold advised that the first option would be to require the applicant to purchase approximately 8 metres by 25 metres of land on the w est side of proposed Street A and remove one house from the east side of proposed Street A, which would then enable the proposed houses to be spaced out and achieve the 15.24 metre minimum lot coverage. He further added that the second option would be to remove two houses from the proposal, one on the east side and one on the west side of proposed street A, which would then enable the proposed houses to be spaced out and achieve the 15.24 metre minimum lot coverage resulting in larger houses that could include in-law suites. Mr. Harold referred to the Oak Hill Developments Ltd. and the White Pine General Contractors Ltd. planning applications noting that these applications had reduced the number of houses noted in their original submissions and that Centreville Homes should be required to follow this precedent. Mr. Harold concluded his delegation by noting that the two options he had outlined in his presentation would be both beneficial to the City and the applicant. Paul Weppler, 417 Woodgrange Avenue, joined the electronic meeting via audio connection and noted that the applicant was not being held to the same standards that individual property owners in the community would be held to under the proposed City Initiated Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhood Precincts Official Plan and Zoning By-Law amendments. Mr. Weppler raised concerns regarding the reduction in the front yard depth, abutting side yards, width of the dwellings, building depth, and lot coverage. He further added that the report prepared by Evans Planning Inc. is contradictory to the report prepared by SGL Planning and Design for the Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhood Study which would say that the Centerville Homes development is not in keeping with the character of the existing neighbourhood due to the increased lot coverages, reduced side yard and front 3 - 35 - Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes February 1, 2021 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Councillor Cumming yard depths and questioned which of these planning firms were correct. Mr. Weppler concluded his delegation by noting the unfair position individual property owners would be placed in stating there should be one set of rules for both developers and individuals. Mr. Weppler requested that should Council support the Centreville Homes Proposal that they also reject the Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhood Zoning By-law and Official Plan amendments in support of non-discriminatory policies and inclusiveness for all of their constituents. Nick Dimovski, 1923 Spruce Hill Road, joined the electronic meeting via audio connection and noted that he had found in the Evans Planning Inc. Report and the Land Division meeting minutes that there had been two severances of land from the original property at 317 Toynevale Road. He added that the second severance from 317 Toynevale was completed in 2018 and sold to Centreville Homes in March of 2019 by Margaret Kish, and as ked whether Margaret Kish as identified in the Land Division meeting minutes was the City Planner for Policy who was assigned to the pr oposed Zoning and By-Law Amendments for Infill and Replacement Housing in established Neighbourhoods. Mr. Dimovski concluded his delegation by asking w hy the City was permitting 45 percent lot coverage for Centreville Homes and concurrently proposing to reduce lot coverages for Pickering property owners to 30 per cent. Mr. Layton, Evans Planning, was invited to provide comment on the delegations and concerns raised. Mr. Layton stated that as a planning consultant, they were obliged to provide comments that are consistent with the planning processes and not for profits and that the proposed development was in keeping with current policies. He further stated that the proposed plans provided at the statutory public meeting would continue to be reviewed and that discussions with staff and the public would continue to ensure what is built contributes to the community in a positive manner. A question and answer period ensued between Members of the Committee, Adam Layton, and Staff, regarding: • the proposed new stormwater management system and the rationale for the statement made by Evans Planning Inc. that the new system would correct 90 per cent of the existing stormwater management issues; • whether the applicant was flexible to amend the application to address the concerns raised by residents; • providing a summary of comments received from the public to the applicant prior to the Staff Recommendation report to Committee; and, • whether there would be another open house prior to the Staff recommendation report. 4 - 36 - Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes February 1, 2021 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Councillor Cumming 3.2 Information Report No. 05-21 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 08/20 Steele Valley Developments Ltd., 334979 Ontario Ltd., Pickering Square Inc., and Pickering Square (1986) Inc. (1300, 1360, 1450 and 1550 Kingston Road) A statutory public meeting was held under the Planning Act, for the purpose of informing the public with respect to the above-noted application. Elizabeth Martelluzzi, Planner ll – Heritage, provided the Committee with an overview of Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 08/20. Through the aid of a PowerPoint presentation, Ms. Martelluzzi outlined the subject lands, submitted conceptual Massing Model, and the planning policy framework, noting that the application is requesting various site-specific exceptions to the City Centre Zoning By-law to facilitate the future redevelopment of the subject lands for multiple mixed-use buildings and townhouses. Ms. Martelluzzi outlined the comments received for further review and consideration, and the next steps in the applications. Michael Testaguzza, The Biglieri Group Ltd., joined the electronic meeting via audio connection and noted that public comments would be addressed during the resubmission phase of the application process. Through the aid of a PowerPoint presentation, Mr Testaguzza provided an overview of the proposal and the required amendments and noted that he w as available for questions from the Committee. Dave Hart, 1936 Glenview Road, joined the electronic meeting via audio connection and raised concerns regarding traffic and the proposed access from Glenview Road, noting that he had submitted a letter to the City outlining his comments. He further questioned whether there would be a delay in building the proposed development due t o the oversupply of condominiums, and whether there was a plan in place to address the t raffic concerns generating from Brock Road and Kingston Road. Nabeel Patel, 1903 Valley Farm Road, joined the electronic meeting via audio connection and noted the proposed development and ang ular planes would have negative impacts on shadowing, privacy, integrity of properties, traffic, and that the proposed development would generate noise and vibration from the construction. Alan Jeffs, 1995 Royal Road, joined the electronic meeting via audio connection in opposition to the proposed application. Through the aid of a PowerPoint presentation, Mr. Jeffs outlined the requested amendments noting that the 5 - 37 - Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes February 1, 2021 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Councillor Cumming amendments would benefit the revenue of the applicant. Mr. Jeffs added that the projected population growth from the proposed development would not be accommodated by the existing infrastructure, and raised concerns regarding traffic, shadow and overlook impacts. Mr. Jeffs noted that any new resubmissions must present a road design that would address traffic issues. He further noted that there were potential sanitary sewer capacity issues in the vicinity of the Pickering Town Centre development that are currently being addressed and that the Environment Assessment Study submitted by the applicant was outdated. Mr. Jeffs concluded his delegation by advising that there was a compelling case for Council to refuse the proposed application. Brandi Ferreira, 1901 Valley Farm Road, joined the electronic meeting via audio connection in place of her spouse Brent O’Brien, and raised concerns regarding negative impacts to sunlight, privacy, traffic, and that the construction of the proposed development would bring excessive noise to the area which would be disruptive to young families. Patrick Dunnill, 1880 Glengrove Road, joined the electronic meeting via audio connection to present concerns regarding t he pr oposed access from Glenview Road. Mr. Dunnill noted that he was speaking as an elected representative of the Residents of the VIVA Pickering Retirement Home. Mr. Dunnill noted that the proposed access would generate excessive traffic in a currently quiet neighbourhood, adding that the primary concern of the Residents of the VIVA Pickering Retirement Home was the corner of Kingston Road, Glengrove Road, and Glenview Road. He further added that there were no s idewalks on Glenview Road and that the proposed access would only add to the safety concerns of seniors who use this road. Mr. Dunnill concluded his delegation by asking Council to rethink the proposed access, as this would negatively affect the lives of those living in the area. Bernard Yoong, 1899A Valley Farm Road, joined the electronic meeting via audio connection and stated that he strongly opposed to the application and raised concerns regarding the negative impacts to privacy, sunlight, and traffic. Michael Testaguzza, The Biglieri Group Ltd., was invited to provide comment on the delegations and concerns raised. Mr. Testaguzza noted that all public comments would be taken under consideration and that the applicant would be discussing a Kingston Road access with the Durham Region as opposed to the Glenview Road access. Mr. Testaguzza further responded to comments received from the delegations and noted that he was available to answer questions from the Committee. 6 - 38 - Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes February 1, 2021 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Councillor Cumming A question and answer period ensued between Members of the Committee Michael Testaguzza, and Staff, regarding: • the timeframe for the p roposed development and the ph ased approach that would be taken before the full development was realized; • concerns regarding the loss of commercial space and whether there would be possibility for employment and commercial retail space within the proposed development; • providing information to the Committee regarding the planned improvements to Kingston Road as it relates to Durham Region Transit and the potential centre median along this corridor; • the need to ensure that sanitary sewers and storm water management systems were sufficient to accommodate the proposed development; • providing more realistic renderings of the proposed development to the public; • access to Highway 2 and Valley Farm being preferred as opposed to access to Glenview Road for the 1450 Kingston Road development; • whether a hotel type boutique could be incorporated into the development in light of the fact that the zoning uses were supported and that this amenity was not part of the City Centre project across from City Hall; • providing Council with information pertaining to the tax ratios as part of the review in order to track how the tax base would be affected; • providing creative ways to accommodate seniors in the area; • whether business owners who are in long term leases on the subject lands would be given preference over new tenants; • the number of parking spaces that would be provided above and below grade level; and, • the importance of future developments ensuring that the subject lands are accessible and w alkable. 4. Delegations 4.1 Brayden Libawski, The Biglieri Group Ltd. Re: Report PLN 05-21 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 14/18 2184107 Ontario Inc. Part of Lot 18, Concession 3; Now Part 2, 40R-6962 (East side of Brock Road, north of Rex Heath Drive) Brayden Libawski, The Biglieri Group Ltd., was heard under Item 5.1, Report PLN 05-21. 7 - 39 - Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes February 1, 2021 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Councillor Cumming 5. Planning & Development Reports 5.1 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 05-21 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 14/18 2184107 Ontario Inc. Part of Lot 18, Concession 3; Now Part 2, 40R-6962 (East side of Brock Road, north of Rex Heath Drive) Brayden Libawski, The Biglieri Group Ltd., joined the electronic meeting via audio connection and noted that he was available to answer questions pertaining to the Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 14/18. A question and answer period ensued between Members of the Committee and Brayden Libawski regarding: • confirmation that the revised proposal does not contain commercial space or access from Brock Road; • the number of parking s paces and w hether any were underground; • the findings of the traffic count study pertaining to the internal road within the proposed development; and, • whether there was sufficient parkland in the proposed development. Recommendation: Moved by Councillor Ashe Seconded by Councillor McLean That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 14/18, submitted by 2184107 Ontario Inc., to permit a 6-storey apartment building containing 44 dwelling units, on lands located on the east side of Brock Road, north of Rex Heath Drive, be endorsed subject to the provisions contained in Appendix I to Report PLN 05-21, and that staff be authorized to finalize and forward an implementing Zoning By-law Amendment to Council for enactment. Carried 6. Other Business There was no other business. 7. Adjournment Moved by Councillor McLean 8 - 40 - Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes February 1, 2021 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Councillor Cumming Seconded by Councillor Pickles That the meeting be adjourned. Carried The meeting adjourned at 9:48 pm. 9 - 41 - TOWN OF AJAX 65 Harwood Avenue South Ajax ON L1S 3S9 www.ajax.ca _______________________________________________________________________________ Hon. Mark Holland, MP 100 Old Kingston Road Suite 1 Ajax, Ontario L1T 2Z9 Mark.Holland@parl.gc.ca Sent by E-Mail January 28, 2021 Re: Funding Sick Leave The following resolution was passed by Ajax Town Council at its meeting held January 25, 2021: WHEREAS COVID-19 infections continue to climb, and it remains critical that all levels of government identify and fill gaps in containment measures in order to curb the spread; AND WHEREAS while current lockdown measures have been successful in helping to reduce the number of infections across the province, but many in essential workplaces are still unable to choose not to go to work when sick, a known barrier to COVID-19 reduction; AND WHEREAS the Federal Government’s Canada Recovery Sickness Benefit provides after-tax support of $450 per week for those who are sick or need to self-isolate due to COVID- 19, but the fund takes time to access and doesn’t cover many workers’ full wages; AND WHEREAS the Provincial Government has extended the Infectious Disease Emergency Leave for the first half of 2021, which makes it easier for employees to take the necessary time off, but does not assist with compensation; AND W HEREAS a primary or sole income earner in a household may not enjoy the privilege of being able to reduce their salary and/or wait for support; AND WHEREAS the Ontario’s Big City Mayors has requested that the Governments of Canada and Ontario move swiftly to provide longer, better funded sick leave to help address the ongoing spread of COVID-19; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT: Ajax Council request that the Governments of Canada and Ontario work collaboratively to increase current support programs to provide longer and funded sick leave for those who do not already have access through their employer; and That this motion be distributed to the Hon. Mark Holland, MP, Rod Phillips, MPP, the Region of Durham, Durham Region municipalities, Ontario’s Big City Mayors, and the Association of Municipalities of Ontario. Corr. 06-21 - 42 - If you require further information please contact me at 905-619-2529 ext. 3342 or alexander.harras@ajax.ca. Sincerely, Alexander Harras Manager of Legislative Services/Deputy Clerk Copy: Regional Councillor S. Lee Regional Councillor M. Crawford MPP R. Phillips Region of Durham All Durham Region municipalities Ontario’s Big City Mayors Association of Municipalities of Ontario - 43 - Corporate Services Department Finance Division Honourable Doug Ford, Premier of Ontario doug.fordco@pc.ola.org February 2, 2021 RE: Significant Negative Impacts of Current Value Assessments in Perth County Dear Premier Ford, During the January 28th, 2021 Perth County Council meeting a resolution was passed directing staff to write a letter to the Province highlighting the concerns of assessment delays. The motion reads: WHEREAS the property tax system is based on current value assessment; AND WHEREAS the current delay in assessment does not utilize the Province’s model of CVA, THEREFORE, County Council direct staff to correspond with the Premier, the Finance Minister, the Minister of Municipal Affairs, Minister of Agriculture, Perth’s MPP to move forward with implementing reassessment based on CVA, and that copies of the correspondence be sent to all Ontario municipalities. Primary Concerns:  The 2016 assessment valuation does not use the property tax model of Current Value Assessment (CVA). The assessment valuations in use are 5 years old.  Assessment delays do not benefit all tax classes equally by shifting the assessment disproportionately between residential and farmland.  Assessment delays create skepticism in the overarching framework of CVA and this skepticism causes citizens to question the Provincial model and process of CVAs.  Current legislation restricts the ability for local government flexibility, as the ratio for residential tax class cannot be changed from a ratio of 1.00. A further delay in reassessment continues to create challenges in how local government, along with tax policy, is ensuring the appropriate assessment values pay for their appropriate allotment of taxation levies. Local tax levies are developed within the constraints of the boundaries that provide the services to their communities. With property assessment valuations being 5 years past due, it causes citizens to question the validity of the system of property taxes that the Province of Ontario adheres to. Corporation of the County of Perth 1 Huron Street, Stratford, Ontario, Canada N5A 5S4 t. 519‐271‐0531 f. 519‐271‐6265 www.perthcounty.ca Corr. 07-21 - 44 - This is particularly exacerbated in a community such as Perth County that is a mix of urban and rural. The 2016 assessment valuation significantly shifted property taxes to the farmland class, which was phased in over the past 4 years. The shift was significant enough that the residential class has seen decreases in their portion of the overall municipal burden while the burden on farmland is disproportionately increasing. Natural assessment valuation shifts do impact the tax policies of local governments with an urban‐ rural mix and more directly follow the overall property tax model of CVA. Equipping municipalities with the knowledge of the set dates related to reassessment and new valuation dates, provides the ability for key financial municipal departments to better plan for these assessment shifts that cannot be alleviated through tax ratio changes. Below is some further information that outlines the significant impact on Perth County in particular:  The overall tax burden on Perth County farmland increased from 21% in 2016 to 29% in 2020 of the overall levy. These percentages do include growth from 2017 to 2020. The amount of farmland would be higher in relation to phase in assessment amounts only. Based on 2020 without growth the percentage burden would have been higher than the 29%.  The geography of Perth County is unique as it includes two urban center single tiers: The City of Stratford and The Town of St. Marys. This pushes the amount of farmland within the two‐ tiered structure of Perth County to greater than 90% of the total area covered by farmland.  As they are single tier municipalities, The City of Stratford and The Town of St. Marys do not assist in subsidizing farmland as they would if they were part of a true two tiered structure. All of the Perth County’s OMPF allocations are categorized as transitional, which is soon to be phased out completely. As of 2021, $1,020,400 still remains to be phased out of the County’s budget In summary, Perth County is asking the province to update the CVA calculations to bring them in line with current property valuations and further to consider the impacts of the urban‐rural mix of the region and the resultant impact causing residents to disproportionately carry the tax burden over citizens in neighbouring regions without the inclusion of single tier municipalities in their borders. We look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, Corey Bridges, Manager of Finance / Treasurer On behalf of Perth County Council Cc: Minister of Finance – Peter Bethlenfalvy Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing – Steve Clark Minister of Agriculture – Ernie Hardeman - 45 - Perth Wellington MPP – Randy Pettapiece All Ontario Municipalities - 46 - OFFICE OF THE MAYOR CITY OF OSHAWA 50 CENTRE STREET SOUTH OSHAWA, ONTARIO L1H 3Z7 TELEPHONE (905) 436-5611 OSHAWA FAX (905) 436-5642 ONTARIO, CANADA E-MAIL: mayor@oshawa.ca MAYOR DAN CARTER February 2, 2021 Honourable Doug Ford Premier of Ontario Legislative Building Queen’s Park Toronto ON M7A 1A1 Re: City of Oshawa – COVID-19 Economic Recovery and Provincial Occupancy Restrictions Dear Premier Ford, These are uncertain times and our businesses have experienced unprecedented economic hardships. Despite the government and community support offered to our businesses, the local business community still faces continuing challenges. In the past six weeks of the lockdown, businesses are tackling severe uncertainty and questioning their ability to continue operations if current conditions continue. As the Province of Ontario transitions into a re-opening phase, we believe that it would be more expedient and effective for the indoor patron capacity to be based on the occupancy level of the business establishment rather than a maximum single number of customers no matter the size of the business establishment. Current public health measures restrict capacity to a limit of 10 patrons and 50 patrons in zones “Red” and “Orange”, respectively. We request a review of the above-mentioned guidelines and the consideration of indoor capacity to be a percentage of a business’ Ontario Building Code Occupant Load, AGCO Occupant Load, and/ or Fire Code Occupant Load. Corr. 08-21 - 47 - Local businesses are incurring significant operating costs in order to accommodate only ten persons, while providing an experience authentic to their establishment. Larger businesses are able to serve a significantly higher occupancy and maintain compliance with all safety regulations and social distancing requirements. Businesses that invested heavily in communities through real estate are now losing money every time t hey open their doors and are considering downsizing or closure. Percentage based occupancy will allow businesses to utilize their square footage more effectively and continue investing in their communities and employees. In light of the sensitivity of the situation, we implore provincial government act as expeditiously as possible to move this forward before more businesses close their doors permanently. This is something that would greatly benefit not just our community but communities across the province. Thank you for your time and consideration of this critical concern. Mayor Dan Carter City of Oshawa Cc: Elaine Baxter-Trahair, CAO Region of Durham Clerks Department Jennifer French, MPP of Oshawa Town of Whitby Clerks Department Lorne Coe, MPP of Whitby Town of Ajax Clerks Department Rod Phillips, MPP of Ajax City of Pickering Clerks Department Peter Bethlenfalvy, MPP of Pickering- Uxbridge Municipality of Clarington C lerks Department David Piccini, MPP of Northumberland Peterborough South Township of Scugog Clerks Department Township of Uxbridge Clerks Department Laurie Scott, MPP of Haliburton – Kawartha Lakes – Brock Township of Brock Clerks Department Nancy Shaw, Greater Oshawa Chamber of Commerce Enclosure - 48 - Attention: Development Services Ac tion Taken: DS-21-13 Provincial Occupancy Restrictions on local Businesses during the COVID-19 Pandemic Moved by Mayor Carter, “That the Development Services Committee recommend to City Council: Whereas, the Provincial restrictions placed on businesses during the COVID-19 Pandemic have had a significant economic impact on local businesses across Ontario, including Oshawa; and, Whereas, the maximum occupancy restrictions when businesses are open to the public appear to be arbitrarily based on a single number of customers no matter what the size and capacity of the business establishment; and, Whereas, the Mayor’s Task Force on Economic Recovery heard from a local restaurant business owner and their first hand experiences with the restrictions placed on local businesses; and, Whereas, on January 8, 2021 the Task Force recommended that the City ask the Province to review and revise the maximum occupancy restrictions when businesses are open to the public such that the restrictions are based on the capacity/occupancy level of the business establishment with appropriate social distancing measures in place; and, Whereas, it is important for the City to appropriately advocate for local businesses during t he pandemic; Therefore be it resolved: 1. That the Province be requested to appropriately review and revise the maximum occupancy restrictions when businesses are open to the public during the COVID19 Pandemic such that the restrictions are based on the capacity/occupancy level of the business establishment with appropriate social distancing measures in place rather than - 49 - a maximum single number of customers no matter the size of the business establishment; and, 2. That a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Premier of Ontario, Durham Region MPP’s, the Region of Durham, all local Durham area municipalities and the Greater Oshawa Chamber of Commerce.” - 50 - If you require this information in an accessible format, please contact 1-800-372-1102 extension 2097. February 5, 2021 Honourable Premier Doug Ford Premier's Office Room 281 Legislative Building, Queen's Park Toronto, ON M7A 1A1 Dear Premier Ford: RE: Request from the Region of Durham that the Region of York affirm by Resolution its support for the Lake Simcoe Solution as Documented in the Upper York Sewage Solutions (UYSS) Environmental Assessment, Our File: 011 Council of the Region of Durham, at its meeting held on December 16, 2020, adopted the following resolution: “That the following resolution be endorsed: Whereas the Council of the Region of Durham supports the Lake Simcoe Solution for the proposed servicing solution for the Upper York Sewage Solutions (UYSS) Environmental Assessment; Now therefore be it resolved that the Region of Durham request that the Council of the Region of York affirm by resolution its support for the Lake Simcoe Solution as documented in the Upper York Sewage Solutions (UYSS) Environmental Assessment, and that the resolutions from York and Durham be circulated to the Premier, all MPPs in the Region of Durham and York Region, to the leaders of the opposition, and to the local municipalities in the Region of Durham”. On January 28, 2021 the Council of the Region of York received the above noted correspondence dated December 16, 2020 and made the following decision: 1.That Regional staff continue discussions with the Province of Ontario and Durham Region related to a potential Provincially preferred southern solution as an alternative to the preferred solution identified in the Upper York Sewage Solutions Environmental Assessment and report back on the status of discussions in February 2021; The Regional Municipality of Durham Corporate Services Department Legislative Services 605 Rossland Rd. E. Level 1 PO Box 623 Whitby, ON L1N 6A3 Canada 905-668-7711 1-800-372-1102 Fax: 905-668-9963 durham.ca Don Beaton, BCom, M.P.A. Commissioner of Corporate Services Corr. 09-21 - 51 - Page 2 of 2 2.That Council affirm its support for the Lake Simcoe Solution as documented in the Upper York Sewage Solutions Environmental Assessment per the resolution approved by Durham Council on December 16, 2020; and 3.The Regional Clerk circulate this report to the Premier, all Members of Provincial Parliament in Durham and York Regions, and the Clerks of the local municipalities in the Region of Durham and York Region. Ralph Walton Ralph Walton, Regional Clerk/Director of Legislative Services RW/sg c: Peter Bethlenfalvy, MPP, Pickering-Uxbridge Lorne Coe, MPP, Whitby Jennifer French, MPP, Oshawa Lindsay Park, MPP, Durham Rod Phillips, MPP, Ajax Caroline Mulroney, MPP, York-Simcoe Stephen Lecce, MPP, King-Vaughan Christine Elliot, MPP, Newmarket-Aurora Paul Calandra, MPP, Markham-Stouffville Michael Parsa, MPP, Aurora-Oak Ridges-Richmond Hill Billy Pang, MPP, Markham-Unionville Logan Kanapathi, MPP, Markham-Thornhill Michael Tibollo, MPP, Vaughan-Woodbridge Gila Martow, MPP, Thornhill Daisy Wai, MPP, Richmond Hill Andrea Horwath, MPP – New Democratic Party, Leader of the Official Opposition Steven Del Duca, MPP – Ontario Liberal Party, Leader Mike Schreiner, MPP – Ontario Green Party, Leader N. Cooper, Clerk, Town of Ajax B. Jamieson, Clerk, Township of Brock J. Gallagher, Clerk, Municipality of Clarington M.Medeiros, Clerk, City of Oshawa S. Cassel, Clerk, City of Pickering L. Fleury, Acting Clerk, Township of Scugog D. Leroux, Clerk, Township of Uxbridge C. Harris, Clerk, Town of Whitby E.Baxter-Trahair, Chief Administrative Officer S. Siopis, Commissioner of Works - 52 - 1 The Regional Municipality of York Committee of the Whole Environmental Services January 14, 2021 Report of the Commissioner of Environmental Services Upper York Sewage Solutions Individual Environmental Assessment Approval Status Update 1.Recommendations 1. That Regional staff continue discussions with the Province of Ontario and Durham Region related to a potential Provincially preferred southern solution as an alternative to the preferred solution identified in the Upper York Sewage Solutions Environmental Assessment and report back on the status of discussions in February 2021. 2.That Council affirm its support for the Lake Simcoe Solution as documented in the Upper York Sewage Solutions Environmental Assessment per the resolution approved by Durham Council on December 16, 2020. 3.The Regional Clerk circulate this report to the Premier, all Members of Provincial Parliament in Durham and York Regions, and the Clerks of the local municipalities in the Region of Durham and York Region. 2. Summary The purpose of this report is to provide an update on the Upper York Sewage Solutions (UYSS) Environmental Assessment file and subsequent information related to an alternative solution proposed by the Province. With continuing uncertainty for wastewater servicing in the three impacted communities (Towns of Aurora, Newmarket and East Gwillimbury), this report summarizes the current state of the project. Key Points: •The UYSS project was developed to provide wastewater servicing capacity to accommodate Provincially approved growth for 153,000 people (residents and workers) in the Towns of Aurora, Newmarket, and East Gwillimbury •In July 2014, the UYSS Environmental Assessment was submitted to the Province for approval •In January 2016, the then Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change published its positive review of the Environmental Assessment and the identified Corr. 09-21 - 53 - Upper York Sewage Solutions Individual Environmental Assessment Approval Status Update 2 preferred alternative (Ministry Review) • In December 2016, the Region was informed that the Province had to complete the Crown’s Duty to Consult obligation with Indigenous peoples • In July 2020, the Chippewas of Georgina Island First Nation completed their Peer Review of the Environmental Assessment. The Peer Review did not contain any new information that would alter the findings of the Ministry Review • On July 17, 2020, the Minister of Environment Conservation and Parks (Minister Yurek) sent a letter to Chairman Emmerson advising the Region that the Province is considering options, including a potential southern trunk sewer, as an alternative to the preferred alternative identified by the UYSS Environmental Assessment • On December 2, 2020 Durham Works Committee approved the following resolution “Request from the Region of Durham that the Region of York affirm by Resolution its support for the Lake Simcoe Solution as Documented in the Upper York Sewage Solutions (UYSS) Environmental Assessmentadd resolution” 3. Background Upper York Sewage Solutions Environmental Assessment was completed in July 2014 The UYSS project was developed to provide wastewater servicing capacity to accommodate Provincially approved growth for 153,000 people (residents and workers) in the Towns of Aurora, Newmarket, and East Gwillimbury. The proposed project includes a world-class Water Reclamation Centre in the Town of East Gwillimbury and a project-specific total phosphorus off-set program that would significantly reduce phosphorus levels in the Lake Simcoe watershed. In July 2014, the UYSS Environmental Assessment was submitted to the Province for approval after completion of more than five years of extensive scientific study and consultation with the public, stakeholders and Indigenous peoples, including the Chippewas of Georgina Island First Nation. Following expected timelines, a decision on the approval was anticipated in February 2015. In January 2016, the then Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change published its positive review of the Environmental Assessment and the identified preferred alternative. The Ministry Review stated that Ministry staff were satisfied that the Region properly completed the Environmental Assessment process and complied with the Environmental Assessment Act. In December 2016, the Region was informed that the Province had to complete the Crown’s Duty to Consult obligation with Indigenous peoples, advising that this process would delay project approval. At the time, senior Ministry staff advised this process would be completed by Summer 2017. Upon the Ministry’s request in March 2017, the Region completed a voluntary Health Impact Assessment in consultation with the Chippewas of Georgina Island - 54 - Upper York Sewage Solutions Individual Environmental Assessment Approval Status Update 3 First Nation in November 2018. The independent Health Impact Assessment found positive results in support of the Environmental Assessment and preferred alternative. Communications and meetings among the Province, Region and the Chippewas of Georgina Island First Nation related to the Duty to Consult occurred and led to creation of a transfer payment agreement between the Province and the First Nation for review of the Environmental Assessment. This agreement was signed in October 2019. The Chippewas of Georgina Island First Nation completed their Peer Review of the Environmental Assessment and provided no new information Since October 2019, the Chippewas of Georgina Island First Nation undertook their peer review of the UYSS Environmental Assessment, fully funded by the Province. The Chippewas of Georgina Island First Nation peer review was completed and submitted to the Province on June 30, 2020. The Region received a copy of the Chippewas of Georgina Island First Nation peer review in September 2020 and responded to the points raised. After the Region’s review of the Chippewas of Georgina Island First Nation submission, no new information was identified that would change the positive conclusions of the Ministry Review of the UYSS Environmental Assessment released in 2016. Provincial staff have also confirmed this separately. The Region submitted its response to the Chippewas of Georgina Island First Nation peer review to the Ministry of Environment Conservation and Parks in November 2020. Approval in principle for Disaster Mitigation and Adaptation (DMAF) Funding In 2018, the Region and the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority (LSRCA) submitted an expression of interest to the Federal Government for a potential treatment facility on the Holland River designed to remove phosphorus generated in the Holland Marsh. The principle of the submission was that it would potentially serve as an alternative to the stormwater retrofits proposed in the UYSS and use DMAF and UYSS project funding to build the facility. With the federal funding, the resulting treatment facility would cost approximately the same as the proposed stormwater retrofits for the UYSS project but would beneficially remove many times more phosphorus (approximately several tonnes compared to a projected 500 kg). Leveraging Federal funding provides a significant benefit to UYSS project, the Region and Lake Simcoe. During the spring of 2020, the Federal Government contacted the Region and requested submission of a full application for the Holland Marsh treatment facility in conjunction with a further funding round as part of the broader COVID-19 response and potential economic stimulus. The Region and LSRCA submitted a full application with the caveat that the Region could not fund their portion of the project without approval of the UYSS and the approved change from stormwater retrofits to the Holland Marsh treatment facility as part of the proposed Phosphorus off-set program. The Federal Government informed York Region and subsequently publicly announced in November 2020 that the DMAF submission was approved in principle. Further discussions would need to ensue on the balance of the funding. - 55 - Upper York Sewage Solutions Individual Environmental Assessment Approval Status Update 4 July 17, 2020 letter from the Minister signals the Province is re-examining all options which may result in a southern sewer route Minister Yurek’s letter to Chairman Emmerson advised the Region that the Province is considering all options, including a potential southern trunk sewer, as an alternative to the UYSS project. At this time, the Minister’s letter and discussions with the Province have not provided the detail necessary to inform Council of the specific scope and impact of the Province’s intentions for an alternate wastewater servicing solution or the means for implementing such a concept by 2026, the targeted in-service date. Currently, Region staff are seeking clarity on the Provincial approach to implement any alternative solution and a Provincial decision on the UYSS Environmental Assessment is still pending. 4.Analysis Region continues to advance discussions with the Province York Region continues to support and stand-by the UYSS Environmental Assessment and the identified preferred solution. The Region concluded that it is the best solution and a great opportunity for the Lake Simcoe watershed by providing several benefits. A Provincial staff review has supported these conclusions. Despite having a world class solution, rigorously determined through the UYSS Environmental Assessment process, the Region has engaged in discussions with the Province with the ultimate goal of establishing a viable servicing solution for the affected communities. Regional staff have endeavored to advance discussions with the Province to obtain details on the Province’s positions and plans to explore an expedited alternative wastewater servicing solution involving a potential southern (Lake Ontario) alternative. Province has engaged Durham Region given implications of a potential southern servicing solution The Province has communicated with Durham Region, who along with York Region, co-own Duffin Creek Plant and York Durham Sanitary Sewer Primary System, including the Primary Trunk Sewer. Provincial staff, at the Region’s urging, have advised Durham Region of this Provincial initiative because of the co-ownership implications of a potential southern solution. Details of these discussions were provided to Durham Region Council in a staff report on November 25, 2020. Durham Region Council provided authority to Durham Region staff to engage in further discussions with the Province to determine impacts and mitigating factors related to the Provincial proposal. York Regional staff will continue to work with the Province, Durham Region, and affected Indigenous communities to determine an implementable solution to long-term servicing needs for the Towns of Aurora, Newmarket and East Gwillimbury. York Region continues to support the Environmental Assessment submitted to the Province in 2014. The Water Reclamation Centre meets the Province’s imposed condition to include an “Innovative Wastewater Treatment Technologies (Innovative Alternative) such as development and use of a wastewater purification system and water recycling facilities to be located in The - 56 - Upper York Sewage Solutions Individual Environmental Assessment Approval Status Update 5 Regional Municipality of York”. The Region fully assessed and inventoried the potentially affected natural, built, social, economic and cultural environments as defined by the Environmental Assessment Act and established a solution that will provide a lasting benefit to the watershed. The Region still awaits a Provincial decision on the Individual Environmental Assessment. In accordance with the request from Durham Council it is recommended that Regional Council affirm its support for the Lake Simcoe Solution as documented in the Upper York Sewage Solutions (UYSS) Environmental Assessment. 5. Financial The 2020 Capital Program carries a total project cost for the UYSS project of $628 million. Approximately $100M has been spent to the end of 2020, $475M remains in the 10-year plan for the proposed project. With an Environmental Assessment approval in early 2021, the project could have been ready for operation by the end of 2028. A Provincial southern alternative has not been advanced through design or subjected to a rigorous cost analysis due to the early stages of work underway in response to the province’s inquiry. Progressing with a large complex trunk sewer has not been contemplated in detail to date. A potential southern Lake Ontario alternative servicing solution was screened out during the comparison of the benefits and challenges of potential alternative servicing solutions during the UYSS Environmental Assessment process. 6.Local Impact Region is advancing Interim Solutions to mitigate approval delays The UYSS project remains critical for servicing Provincially mandated growth in the Towns of Aurora, Newmarket and East Gwillimbury. To support continued growth in these communities, on June 28, 2018, Council authorized an assignment of capacity for 10,500 persons due to the completion of two interim solutions: •modifications to the Aurora Pumping Station Equalization Tank •construction of a new Henderson Pumping Station An additional capacity of 1,000 persons is reserved for Centres and Corridors in these three municipalities once the capacity provided by the interim solutions is complete. The Region remains committed to monitor system performance and investigate additional interim solutions. To assist local municipalities in managing and planning for long-term growth, staff will provide Council with a capacity monitoring report in 2021. Further discussions are on-going with the three affected municipalities to consider feasible options to generate short-term wastewater capacity. Concepts include wastewater attenuation of peak flows, local private servicing, inflow and infiltration reduction and other infra-stretching options. These are being considered and advanced by Regional staff. - 57 - Region is implementing modifications to the existing York Durham Sewage System in the Town of Newmarket On March 7, 2018, the Province issued a Declaration Order to exempt modifications to the York Durham Sewage System, which was a component of the UYSS project, from the requirements of the Environmental Assessment Act. With the Declaration Order, the Region has proceeded to implement this infrastructure in the Town of Newmarket (twinning of the forcemain and alterations to the Newmarket Sewage Pumping Station and the Bogart Creek Sewage Pumping Station). Construction started in June 2019 and commissioning is expected in 2021. Commissioning of the new forcemain will unlock capacity for 1,500 persons in the Town of Newmarket in accordance with the 2016 capacity assignment. 7. Conclusion It is recommended that Regional staff continue discussions with the Province of Ontario and Durham Region related to a potential provincially preferred southern solution as an alternative to the preferred solution identified in the UYSS Environmental Assessment with the ultimate goal of establishing sewage servicing for the affected communities. It is also recommended that Council affirm its support for the Lake Simcoe Solution as documented in the UYSS Environmental Assessment. For more information on this report, please contact Mike Rabeau, Director, Capital Planning and Delivery at 1-877-464-9675 ext. 75157. Accessible formats or communication supports are available upon request. Recommended by: Erin Mahoney, M. Eng. Commissioner of Environmental Services Approved for Submission: Bruce Macgregor Chief Administrative Officer Private Attachments: (1) December 17, 2020 #12009775 Upper York Sewage Solutions Individual Environmental Assessment Approval Status Update 6 - 58 - January 22, 2021 Ms. S. Cassel City Clerk City of Pickering One The Esplanade The Regional Pickering, ON L 1V 6K7 Municipality of Durham Planning and Economic Re: . Bill 229, Protect, Support and Recover from COVID-19 Act Development Department (Budget Measures) -Changes to the Conservation Planning Division Authorities �et and Planning Act, File: L 14-45 605 Rossland Rd. E. Level4 Ms. Cassel, enclosed for your information is a copy of Commissioner's PO Box623 Report #2021-INFO-1 that was provided to Regional Councillors on Whitby, ON L 1 N 6A3 Canada January 8, 2021. 905-668-7711 Should you have any questions or wish to discuss the report, please 1-800-372-11 02 Fax: 905-666-6208 contact Colleen Goodchild, Manager Policy Planning and Special planning@durham.ca Studies, at 905-668-7711 ext. 2580. durham.ca Yours truly, Brian Bridgeman, MCIP, RPP Commissioner of Planning and Economic Development Ciary Muller Gary Muller, MCIP, RPP Director of Planning GM/mr Encl. 100% Post Consume Corr. 10-21 - 59 - If this information is required in an accessible format, please contact 1-800-372-1102 ext. 2564 The Regional Municipality of Durham Information Report From : Commissioner of Planning and Economic Development Report: #2021-INFO-1 Date: January 8, 2021 Subject: Bill 229, Protect, Support and Recover from COVID-19 Act (Budget Measures) - Changes to the Conservation Authorities Act and Planning Act, File: L 14-45 Recommendation: Receive for information. Report: 1. Purpose 1.1 On December 8, 2020, Bill 229, Support and Recover from COVID-19 Act (Budget Measures) received Royal Assent. The purpose of this report is to provide an update on the final version of Bill 229 , in particular Schedule 6 related to the Conservation Authorities Act and Planning Act. 2. Previous Reports and Decisions 2.1 The following Regional staff reports related to conservation authority matters have been provided to Council over the last three years: • Bill 139, Building Better Communities and Conserving Watersheds Act, 2017, and associated supportive documents, Report #2017-INFO-79 . • Proposed amendments to the Conservation Authorities Act and associated regulations, Report #2019-P-27 . · • Durham 's Response to Bill 108, Ontario's Housing Supply Action Plan, 2019 and related Regulatory Proposal Changes, Report #2019-A-22 . - 60 - Page 2 of 5 • Bill 229 , Protect, Support and Recover from COVID-19 Act (Budget Measures) -Changes to the Conservation Authorities Act and Planning Act, Report #2020-P-26 . • In relation to the above report , Regional Council at its meeting on November 25 , 2020 passed a resolution requesting that Schedule 6 to Bill 229 be removed. 3. Overview of Changes 3.1 Changes were made to Bill 229 during its review by the Standing Committee of Economic and Financial Affairs in early December , prior to the legislation passing third reading and Royal Assent. The following sections provide highlights of the changes made to Schedule 6 -Conservation Authorities Act (CA Act) and consequential amendments to the Planning Act. 3.2 Section 14 of the CA Act was amended to ensure that at least 70 per cent of the members of a conservation authority (CA) board that are municipal councillors . 3.3 Section 14 was also amended to provide the Minister with authority to exempt CAs from the 70 per cent rule. 3.4 While the first version of Schedule 6 of Bill 229 included the ability for the Minister to appoint an additional member to a conservation authority Board from the agricultural sector, the final version of Bill 229 included restrictions of voting power for the agricultural representative. They will not be able to vote on matters related to : • enlarging an authority's area of jurisdiction ; • a decision to amalgamate a CA with another CA; • a resolution to dissolve a CA; and • budgetary matters. 3 .5 The final version of Bill 229 removed the proposed clause that directed municipal representatives on CA Boards to act on behalf of their municipalities, and not on behalf of the CA. Concerns had been raised regarding the implications of such a clause , that such a clause would severely limit a Board member's fiduciary responsibility to the authority . 3 .6 Section 17 of the CA Act has seen further amendments related to the appointment of chairs and vice-chairs and rotating amongst municipalities. The amendment - 61 - Page 3 of 5 ensures that a member appointed to the CA Board by a particular participating municipality cannot be appointed to succeed an outgoing chair or vice-chair appointed to the CA Board by the same participating municipality. The Minister now has the ability to grant permission to the CA/municipality to allow a Chair or Vice-Chair to hold office for more than two consecutive terms, and for the rotation to be augmented. 3.7 Section 28 (Permits) of the CA Act was further revised to add a provision related to permits issued where there is a Minister's Zoning Order (outside of the Greenbelt Plan Area). The change requires a CA to grant permission to an applicant to carry out a development project if a Minister's Zoning Order has authorized the development. As revised, the CA's permission may be granted subject to conditions specified by the CA, to mitigate effects on control of flooding, erosion, dynamic beaches or pollution or conservation of land, health and safety as a result of the damage or destruction of property. The conditions may be subject to a review by the Minister, or they may be appealed to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal. Where CA permission is granted, the permit holder must enter into an agreement with the CA, where circumstances warrant, in order to compensate for ecological and other impacts that may result from the development project. 3.8 The "Entry Without Warrant" sections of the CA Act were revised to clarify wording related to notices and conditions; however, the changes further restrict when CA officials can enter a property without a warrant to check for compliance. The restriction requires reasonable grounds that the contravention is causing, or is likely to cause, significant damage in addition to the other conditions that were being imposed. 3.9 The permissions in the CA Act related to issuance of Stop Work Orders and enforcement tools were re-introduced through Bill 229, including penalties for offences under Section 28 of the Act. These changes still require supporting regulations that have yet to be released. 3.10 Additional regulations to be developed under the CA Act were added, including but not limited to: • prescribing budgetary matters; • respecting the process CAs must follow when preparing a budget and the consultations that are required; - 62 - Page 4 of 5 • providing for rules and procedures governing meetings at which budgetary matters are discussed, including the quorum for such meetings and the rules respecting voting on budgetary matters; • governing transitional matters related to Bill 229 itself, particularly related to permits for development projects enacted by MZOs; and • governing Minister's reviews and appeals to LPAT of Section 28 permits and specifying circumstances in which a review may not be requested, or an appeal may not be made. 3.11 Section 26 of the Planning Act was further amended to allow for CAs to continue to participate in LPAT proceedings when an appeal is related to a prescribed natural hazard risk, or if the CA is an applicant for land division {consent) in a matter under appeal. A transition policy was also introduced that permits CAs to continue as a party to an appeal until the appeal is disposed of. 4. Relationship to Strategic Plan 4.1 This report aligns with/addresses the following strategic goals and priorities in the Durham Region Strategic Plan: a. Under the goal of Environmental Sustainability, Priority 1.3: to protect, preserve and restore the natural environment, including greenspaces, waterways, parks, trails, and farmlands; b. Under the goal of Environmental Sustainability, Priority 1.4: demonstrate leadership in sustainability and addressing climate change. 4.2 This report also aligns with/addresses the Durham Community Climate Adaptation Plan, which focuses on building resilience to climate change impacts. 5. Conclusion 5.1 On December 8, 2020 Schedule 6 to Bill 229 was approved by the province despite a request by Regional Council that it be removed from the Bill. Upon review, a number of the new changes to the Conservation Authorities Act are fair improvements. However, the changes that are of concern are related to those that allow the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry to assume control over the CA's permit granting function and the ability to appeal permit decisions to the Local Planning Appeals Tribunal. It is too early to know how these changes will impact development in Durham Region. Staff will continue to monitor and report back as may be necessary. - 63 - Page 5 of 5 5.2 Regional staff will also work with the Region's five conservation authorities to determine changes to current practice as a result of the changes to the CA Act under Bill 229. 5.3 A copy of this report will be provided to the Area Municipalities for their information. 5.4 This report has been prepared in consultation with Corporate Services -Legal Services. Respectfully submitted, Original signed by Brian Bridgeman, MCIP, RPP Commissioner of Planning and Economic Development - 64 - From: ca.office (MECP) <ca.office@ontario.ca> Sent: Friday, February 5, 2021 10:49 AM Subject: Proclamation of Provisions of the Conservation Authorities Act Good morning, With the amendments to the Conservation Authorities Act (“CAA”) in Bill 229, the Protect, Support and Recover from COVID-19 Act (Budget Measures), 2020, now passed by the Legislature, the government has made a series of substantive amendments to the CAA in 2017, 2019 and in 2020, resulting in a number of un- proclaimed provisions in the CAA. On February 2, 2021, some specific provisions in the CAA were proclaimed to initiate changes to conservation authority governance, for consistency in administration, transparency and financial accountability, as well as increased municipal and provincial oversight of conservation authority operations. These provisions are not tied to any specific regulations, and relate only to provisions from the 2019 and 2020 CAA amendments. Specifically, these include: •Government requirements (e.g. Non-derogation provision clarifying that nothing in the CAA is intended to affect constitutionally protected Aboriginal and treaty rights); •Provisions related to conservation authority governance (e.g. changes to the conservation authority municipal membership); •Minister’s powers (e.g., enabling the Minister to issue a binding directive to a conservation authority following an investigation); and •Housekeeping amendments. Please refer to the CAA on e-Laws for a complete list of the provisions that are now in force. We are proposing that the remaining un-proclaimed provisions be proclaimed in two further stages over the coming months to align with the roll out of proposed regulations and policy. These include: i)Provisions related to natural hazard management, mandatory programs and services, community advisory boards, the agreements and transition period, and fees. ii)Provisions related to municipal levies, and standards and requirements for non-mandatory programs and services. We have received a number of questions about the implications of certain provisions coming into force, and particularly those related to the composition of conservation authority membership. I can assure you that we are moving forward with a smooth transition to the new framework. Please refer to the attached FAQ for critical information on the implementation of these new measures. My team in the Conservation Authority Office are available to answer any questions that you may have about the provisions that are now in effect as a result of the stage 1 proclamation. Please do not hesitate to contact us at ca.office@ontario.ca. The Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks will be in touch at a future date to notify you of the proclamation of the remaining provisions. Corr. 11-21 - 65 - I look forward to continuing to work with you through our upcoming consultations on the new regulatory proposals under the CAA to ensure we put conservation authorities in the best position possible to be able to deliver on their core mandate. Sincerely, Keley Katona Director, Conservation and Source Protection Branch Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks - 66 - Implications of Proclamation of Various Provisions: Frequently Asked Questions 1 Updated: 2021/02/08 Implications of Proclamation of Various Provisions: Frequently Asked Questions 1.Do participating municipalities have to appoint new members to conservation authorities now in order to meet the 70% requirement? Immediate action is not required on the part of conservation authorities or by municipalities related to the provision requiring 70% of municipally appointed members be elected officials. Current members should complete the remaining duration of their appointments. As new members are appointed, participating municipalities should be appointing members in a way that complies with this new requirement. A participating municipality may also apply to the Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks requesting an exception to this 70% requirement. The request should include the rationale for the request, and what proportion of members the municipality is proposing to be elected officials. Requests should be sent to minister.mecp@ontario.ca. 2.Does a conservation authority need to immediately initiate the term limits of chair/vice-chairs and rotate amongst participating municipalities? Immediate action is not necessarily required. Implementation of this provision could begin at the first meeting held this year (following the proclamation date of February 2, 2021), or at such other meeting as may be specified by the authority’s by-laws. A participating municipality or conservation authority may also apply to the Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks requesting an exception to the term limit or rotation. The request should include the alternative approach being proposed, and the rationale for the request. Requests should be sent to minister.mecp@ontario.ca. 3.When should conservation authorities transition to the use of generally accepted accounting principles? If not already the practice, conservation authorities will transition to the use of generally accepted accounting principles for local government and ensure that key conservation authority documents are made available to the public (i.e., minutes of authority or executive committee meetings, auditor reports) following proclamation of these provisions on February 2, 2021. - 67 - Attachment #1 to Corr. 11-21 Implications of Proclamation of Various Provisions: Frequently Asked Questions 2 Updated: 2021/02/08 4.When do copies of municipal member agreements need to be sent to the Minister and made public? Please submit any existing agreements (on the number of total conservation authority members and number of members per participating municipality in a conservation authority) to the Minister within 60 days of February 2, 2021 (i.e., by April 3, 2021). If no such agreement is in place as of February 2, 2021, but such an agreement is entered into at a future date, please provide it to the Minister within 60 days of executing the agreement. These agreements should also be made available to the public through the conservation authority’s website or other appropriate means within these same timelines. 5.Which provisions of the Conservation Authorities Act (CAA) are you proclaiming in this first phase? Provisions in the CAA that come into effect February 2, 2021, as part of this first phase include: Housekeeping Amendments •Clarifying “Minister” means the Minister of the of the Environment, Conservation and Parks (rather than the Minister of the Natural Resources and Forestry) (Bill 108, 2019). •Administrative change by striking out “of the Environment” from “Minister of the Environment” (in the section on CA dissolutions – clause 13.1(6)(c)) (Bill 108, 2019). •Remove a legislative date (now stale) for a past transition period for conservation authorities (CAs) to up-date administrative by-laws (Bill 229, 2020). Government Requirements •Non-derogation provision to recognize existing Aboriginal or treaty rights (Bill 229, 2020). •Enable the Minister to delegate his or her powers to an employee of the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks (Bill 229, 2020). Governance •Changes to the CA municipal membership provisions including requiring 70 per cent of municipally appointed members to be elected officials with provision for the Minister to permit less than 70 per cent on application by a participating municipality (Bill 229, 2020). •Requiring copies of municipal member agreements on number of total CA members agreed upon and numbers per participating municipality in a CA agreed upon, to be made public and provided to the Minister (Bill 229, 2020). •Removal of the regulation making authority regarding the composition of the CA (Bill 229, 2020). - 68 - Implications of Proclamation of Various Provisions: Frequently Asked Questions 3 Updated: 2021/02/08 •Minister’s power to appoint a member from the agricultural sector with limitations added to the member’s voting rights (Bill 229, 2020). •Limiting the term of the chair/vice-chair and rotating of the chair/vice-chair among a CA’s participating municipalities with provision for the Minister to permit an exception to these requirements upon application of the CA or participating municipality. If an exception is granted, this would allow a chair/vice-chair to hold office for more than one year or two terms, or a member to succeed an outgoing chair, vice-chair, appointed from the same participating municipality (Bill 229, 2020). •Minor amendments to the ‘powers of authorities’: integrating the CA power to “cause research to be done” with the CA power to “study and investigate the watershed” in order to support the programs and services the CA delivers; to require consent of the occupant or owner of the land before a CA staff can enter the land for the purpose of a CA project (such as land surveying); and to remove the power of a CA to expropriate land (Bill 229, 2020). •Require CAs to follow generally accepted accounting principles for local governments, make key documents (annual audit, meeting agendas and minutes and member agreements) available to the public (Bill 229, 2020). Minister’s Power •Enable the Minister to issue a binding directive to a CA following an investigation (Bill 229, 2020). •Enable the province, upon recommendation by the Minister, to appoint a temporary administrator to assume control of a CA’s operations following an investigation or the issuance of a binding directive, if the directive is not followed. Immunity is provided for the administrator (Bill 229, 2020). - 69 - From: Jennifer.OConnell@parl.gc.ca <Jennifer.OConnell@parl.gc.ca> Sent: Tuesday, February 9, 2021 5:20 PM To: Mayor Web Email <mayor@pickering.ca>; Council Web Email <council@pickering.ca> Cc: Clerks Web Email <clerks@pickering.ca> Subject: Funding streams under the Ministry of Environment and Climate Change Dear Mayor R yan and Members of Council, Please find attached a list of funding streams under the Ministry of Environment and Climate Change that are now open for applications. Some of these funds are specific to various regions, however there are funds such as the EcoAction Community funding program and the Great Lakes protection initiative which both support water quality projects which I know was of particular interest to Councillor Brenner. The application deadlines for each program are noted in the attachment. If you have any additional questions please do not hesitate to reach out to me or my office for assistance. Sincerely, Jennifer Corr. 12-21 - 70 - Grants and Contribution currently open to apply 1.Aboriginal fund for species at risk The Aboriginal Fund for Species at Risk (AFSAR) was established in 2004 and supports the development of Indigenous capacity to participate actively in the implementation of the Species at Risk Act (SARA). The Act recognizes the important role that Indigenous Peoples play in wildlife conservation and the need to consider Aboriginal Traditional Knowledge (ATK) in the assessment of which species may be at risk, as well as in the development and implementation of protection and recovery measures. Additionally, AFSAR supports projects that will proactively prevent species, other than species at risk, from becoming a conservation concern. Deadline to apply: March 2, 2021, 15:00 EST Link: https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/environmental-funding/programs.html 2.Atlantic ecosystems initiative The Atlantic Ecosystems Initiatives (AEI) funding program aims to improve the health, productivity and long-term sustainability of ecosystems in Atlantic Canada. It supports projects that use an ecosystem- based approach that includes broad partnerships and collaborative action leading to positive environmental results. Deadline to apply: February 25, 2021, 15:00 EST Link: https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/environmental-funding/programs.html 3.Canada nature fund - priority places Community-Nominated Priority Places (CNPP) for Species at Risk is part of Canada’s Nature Fund. CNPP will support multi-partner initiatives in priority places where there are opportunities to protect and recover species at risk and their habitat through multi-species and ecosystem-based conservation action. Deadline to apply: April 15, 2021, 15:00 EST Link: https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/environmental-funding/programs.html 4.EcoAction community funding program The EcoAction Community Funding Program funds projects across Canada to encourage Canadians to take action to address Clean Water, and to build the capacity of communities to sustain these activities into the future. Your organization may be eligible to receive financial support from Environment and Climate Change Canada's EcoAction Community Funding Program to address environmental issues of importance in your community. Your project must have measurable, positive environmental results and promote community participation. Deadline to apply: March 3, 2021, 15:00 EST Link: https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/environmental-funding/programs.html 5.Environmental Damages Fund The Environmental Damages Fund (EDF) is administered by Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) to provide a mechanism for directing funds received as a result of fines, court orders, and voluntary payments to priority projects that will benefit Canada’s natural environment. The EDF helps to ensure that environmental good follows environmental harm by supporting projects with measurable outcomes in Canadian communities. Deadline to apply: February 24, 2021, 15:00 EST Link: https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/environmental-funding/programs.html 6.Great Lakes protection initiative This initiative addresses the most significant environmental challenges affecting Great Lakes water quality and ecosystem health. The projects we fund help us deliver on Canada’s commitments under the Canada- - 71 - Attachment #1 to Corr. 12-21 United States Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement. This includes projects that restore the water quality and aquatic ecosystem health of Canadian Areas of Concern (AOCs). Deadline to apply: March 3, 2021, 23:59 EST Link: https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/environmental-funding/programs.html 7. Habitat stewardship program The Habitat Stewardship Program (HSP) is an application-based funding program that provides funding for projects submitted by Canadians that contribute directly to the recovery objectives and population goals of species at risk listed on Schedule 1 of the Species at Risk Act (SARA) and that prevent others from becoming a conservation concern. Deadline to apply: March 2, 2021, 15:00 EST Link: https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/environmental-funding/programs.html 8. Lake Winnipeg basin program The Government of Canada is taking action to improve the ecological health of Lake Winnipeg and its basin, which is experiencing large and frequent algal blooms due to high nutrient levels from multiple transboundary sources including agriculture, industry, municipal wastewater and surface run-off. In order to address freshwater issues in the basin, Environment and Climate Change Canada's Lake Winnipeg Basin Program provides financial support for projects that are aimed at reducing nutrients, enhancing collaboration and supporting the engagement of Indigenous Peoples. Deadline to apply: March 19, 2021, 00:59 EST Link: https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/environmental-funding/programs.html 9. Salish Sea Marine vessel Emissions Reductions program The Salish Sea Marine Emission Reductions Fund (SSMERF) will help reduce air pollutant and greenhouse gas emissions from domestic marine vessels or fleets operating in the Canadian portion of the Salish Sea. The Salish Sea is located in the Pacific Northwest waters of British Columbia in Canada. See the Publications and Resources section for a map of the boundary of the Salish Sea Canadian marine waters. There are two streams for funding applicants, and applicants can combine streams. • Stream 1: Study – To fund studies to investigate methods for Canadian marine vessels or fleets operating in the Salish Sea to reduce air pollutant and GHG emissions. This stream helps applicants determine how to reduce emissions from their operations. It is also suitable for applicants requiring more information before implementing a technology or operational method. • Stream 2: Investment and Installation of Emission Reduction Technology – To help purchase and install technology, if the applicants know how to reduce its air pollutant and GHG emissions from their operation. Deadline to apply: March 31, 2021, 15:59 EST Link: https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/environmental-funding/programs.html - 72 - 3-144 Old Kingston Road Ajax, ON L1T 2Z9 905-686-0883 | www.apboardoftrade.com February 10 , 2021 VIA EMAIL The Honourable Peter Bethlenfalvy Minister of Finance c/o Budget Secretariat Frost Building North, 3rd Floor 95 Grosvenor Street Toronto, Ontar io M7A 1Z1 Dear Minister Bethlenfalvy, RE: Ajax-Pickering Board of Trade Pre-Budget Submission The Ajax-Pickering Board of Trade would like to thank you for the opportunity to participate in the 2021 pre-budget consultation. I am proud to represent nearly 600 member businesses and organizations, the vast majority of whom are small businesses. In support of pandemic recovery, the Board of Trade asks that the Government of Ontario: 1. Accelerate investments in broadband and cellular infrastructure. As businesses seek to innovate and fully participate in the digital economy, many are restricted by insufficient access to high-speed internet. The province has already made significant investments in broadband expansion and should augment and accelerate these investments, and coordinate its programs with telecommunications providers more strategically to ensure public investments are complementing (not competing with) private dollars. We would ask the province to continue to work with, and encourage the federal government to invest in a backbone network of broadband. 2. Give restaurants temporary wholesale pricing through the Liquor Control Board of Ontario (LCBO). We applaud the province’s numerous supports for restaurants and the hospitality sector, including permanently including liquor delivery as part of take out, and pausing increases to beer and wine taxes. Another deeply impactful request from restaurant owners is to give even temporary access to wholesale pricing on beer, wine, and spirits. 3. Support not-for-profits. Some of our not-for-profit members have come to us, concerned for the year ahead and for the loss of program funding. This includes Community Justice Alternatives of Durham Region who were told not only of funding cuts, but also funding claw backs. We urge your continued support of the important work of our local not-for-profits, but also warn against any sudden Corr. 13-21 - 73 - 3-144 Old Kingston Road Ajax, ON L1T 2Z9 905-686-0883 | www.apboardoftrade.com and impactful funding changes without giving organizations time to plan and adapt. 4. Accelerate post-pandemic reskilling. Post -pandemic reskilling will be essential to the rapid re-employment of workers that have been displaced, particularly given the permanent restructuring expected in hard-hit sectors such as retail, hospitality, and tourism. We celebrate investments t hrough the redesigned Second Career grant program and focus on micro-credentials and hope to see more promotion and investments in support of displaced workers. 5. Provide a centralized support mechanism where businesses could easily access sample HR policies, programs, and training where it is statutorily required. The pandemic has highlighted how little assistance is available to small business owners when trying to navigate the lengthy list of health and safety policies, programs, and training that must be developed and implemented. The province can better support business with the development of an online portal. 6. Support business through the second wave by providing the following: • A step-by-step reopening readiness plan to help employers properly prepare. • Advanced notice to schedule employees, fill stock, and anything else they may need to get back to work. • Clear guidelines, so that businesses understand the rules and how they will be enforced. • Rapid testing to avoid employees taking unnecessary and considerable time off work to get tested and await their results, harming productivity and putting unnecessary strain on families. • Evidence-based decision making. It is important that we know where and how the virus is spreading. Otherwise, efforts to target restrictions are merely best guesses that are often perceived as inequitable. • Continued and reactive supports for those who need it most. We thank you for the opportunity to represent the voice and needs of our members and stakeholders and look forward to working with all levels of government to support the businesses and organizations of Ajax, Pickering, and beyond. Sincerely, Nicole Gibson Executive Director Ajax-Pickering Board of Trade - 74 - 3-144 Old Kingston Road Ajax, ON L1T 2Z9 905-686-0883 | www.apboardoftrade.com CC: Analiese St. Aubin, President, Ajax-Pickering Board of Trade Rocco Rossi, President, Ontario Chamber of Commerce The Honourable Rod Phillips, MPP, Ajax John Henry, Chair and CEO, Regional Municipality of Durham Dave Ryan, Mayor, City of Pickering Shaun Collier, Mayor, Town of Ajax - 75 - Ministry of Ministère des Municipal Affairs Affaires municipales and Housing et du Logement Office of the Minister Bureau du ministre 777 Bay Street, 17th Floor 777, rue Bay, 17e étage Toronto ON M5G 2E5 Toronto ON M5G 2E5 Tel.: 416 585-7000 Tél. : 416 585-7000 234-2021-813 February 17, 2021 Dear Head of Council, RE: Consulting on growing the size of the Greenbelt I am writing today to announce that my ministry is launching a consultation on growing the size of the Greenbelt. The government has been clear that we are protecting the Greenbelt for future generations. We are committed to growing the Greenbelt and will not consider any proposals to remove any lands or changes to the existing Greenbelt Plan policies. The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing is seeking feedback on ways to grow the size and further enhance the quality of the Greenbelt, with a priority of: i. A study area of lands focused on the Paris Galt Moraine, which is home to critical groundwater resources. ii. Ideas for adding, expanding and further protecting Urban River Valleys. The maps available for this consultation are for discussion purposes only and do not represent a proposed boundary. For more information on this consultation, please visit https://ero.ontario.ca/notice/019-3136 where you will find information about growing the Greenbelt:  Proposed principles for growing the Greenbelt  Discussion questions for consideration  Context map of the Paris Galt Moraine area The consultation is open for 61 days and ends on April 19th, 2021. I look forward to receiving your input on this proposal. If you have any questions about the consultation, please contact the ministry at greenbeltconsultation@ontario.ca. Sincerely, Steve Clark Minister c: Planning Head and/or Clerks Corr. 14-21 - 76 - Report to Council Report Number: CS 14-21 Date: February 22, 2021 From: Brian Duffield (Acting) Director, Community Services Subject: Public Works Winter Activities update - Information Report - File: A-1440-21 Recommendation: 1. That Council receive Report CS 14-21 regarding Public Works Winter Activities for information. Executive Summary: Community Services Department staff submitted Report to Council CS 31-19 on December 16, 2019 which described winter activities provided by Public Works and recommended service level increases. Report CS 31-19, which was approved by Council through Resolution #194/19, recommended that additional staff, vehicles, equipment and material resources be phased in over 2020 and 2021 in order to provide an enhanced level of service with respect to winter maintenance. To that end, the 2020 Capital and Current Budgets included the associated costs for the first year of implementation. At this time, staff are presenting this update report on year one activities prior the submission of the 2021 Current and Capital Budgets which will complete the implementation of the Public Works winter level of services enhancements. Financial Implications: The equipment and vehicle costs reflected in the 2020 Capital Budget were funded from the vehicle replacement reserve or other funding sources. By employing this strategy, the City avoids debt interest costs. Last April, financial report (FIN 05-20) provided a financial update on the impact of COVID-19 on City operations. Under the direction of the previous CAO, senior staff implemented a cost containment exercise that included delayed hiring of new budgeted staff as a cost saving strategy. The effects of this cost containment strategy is reflected in the body of this report through cost savings. All cost figures shown in this report are Net of HST. Please see the description below for a summary of the costs incurred in 2020 to implement Public Works winter level of service enhancements in year one. Discussion: Staff were prepared and intended to implement the recommendations of Report CS 31-19 phased in over 2020, and 2021, as detailed in the report. However, the City’s response to COVID in 2020 changed these plans and staff deferred the start dates of new staff to - 77 - CS 14-21 February 22, 2021 Subject: Public Works Winter Activities update Page 2 November 2020, where possible. Some positions were deferred to 2021. The intent was to have staff, vehicles and equipment in place for the November 2020/2021 winter control season. As detailed in the charts below, this goal was achieved for the successful delivery of the new levels of service for winter control. Report CS 31-19 also addressed growth in the City and detailed the additional resources needed to meet the maintenance and winter control increases in service, related to growth. Growth in Seaton slowed during COVID and therefore staff also deferred, where possible, the planned increases in staff, vehicles and equipment for 2020 and 2021 that are related to Seaton growth. The supply chain was severely impacted in 2020 and resulted in higher prices for vehicles and equipment and extended delivery dates. For this reason, staff chose to defer and re-budget growth related vehicles and equipment that were tendered in 2020 but closed at a cost not consistent with past purchases. The following charts represent the original Level of Service and Growth related additions to the 2020 and 2021 Current and Capital Budgets, with the actual costs and status to date. 2020 Level of Service: Item Budget Actual Cost Rationale Status Front Plow Attachment $30,000 $33,580 For existing loader to clear Pickering Soccer Club parking lot and other infrastructure Front Plow in service November 1, 2020 One ½ Ton Pickup Truck $45,000 $45,165 New Lead Hand, Parks & Property to conduct winter control inspections, deploy and support staff Truck in service November 16, 2020 Total $75,000 $78,745 2020 Growth: Item Budget Actual Cost Rationale Status 2 One Ton Salter with Plows $140,000 For all narrow roads and laneways included in Seaton (new 14th snowplow route) Re-budgeted in 2021 Capital Budget to $200,000 14th route to commence in 2021/2022 winter season Front Plow & Wing Attachment $20,000 To install on existing One Ton Salter for new laneways in Seaton Re-budgeted in 2021 Capital Budget to $40,000 Sidewalk Plow with Attachment $175,000 Increase in sidewalk and multi-use paths (MUP) inventory (new 8th sidewalk plow route) COVID deferral, funds carried over to 2021, to be tendered in Q2 2021 - 78 - CS 14-21 February 22, 2021 Subject: Public Works Winter Activities update Page 3 Item Budget Actual Cost Rationale Status One Ton Truck $70,000 $68,823 For 2nd crew on manual clearing of walkways and crosswalks north of Taunton Road as 1st crew completes same, south of Taunton creating a significant time lag Truck in service November 1,2020 Total $485,000 $68,823 2021 Level of Service: Item Budget Actual Cost Rationale Status Half Ton Pick Up Truck $45,000 Utility Cut Inspector (also performing winter patrols) To be tendered in 2021 for an April start Total $45,000 Growth: Item Budget Actual Cost Rationale Status Five Ton Dump Truck with Plow & Wing $300,000 For 18 centre line-km of new roads in Seaton (new 15th snow plow route) Project deferred and to be re- submitted in 2022 Capital Budget 2 Brine Four or Five Ton Trucks $560,000 For anti-icing and can also be used as spare salters/plows Project deferred and to be re- submitted in 2022 Capital Budget Total $860,000 2020 Level of Service: Item Budget Actual 2020 Cost Rationale Status On Call Staff - Roads $26,500 $8,750 (Nov – Dec 2020 cost) For standby during the winter months including Loader Operator for Pickering Soccer Club parking lot Expanded roster of on-call Roads staff from 9 to 15 for improved response 24/7 - 79 - CS 14-21 February 22, 2021 Subject: Public Works Winter Activities update Page 4 Item Budget Actual 2020 Cost Rationale Status 1 New Supervisor, Public Works Operations $139,496 To coordinate winter communications, weather forecast, Road Weather Information Systems, Public Facing Winter Portal and GPS/AVL monitoring and exception/stop reporting Position deferred in 2020 as COVID response. Position to be filled in February 2021 1 New Lead Hand, Parks & Property $111,187 $13,900 (Nov – Dec 2020 cost) To provide proper oversight of staff during winter events Position delayed in 2020 as COVID response. Position filled in November 2020 On Call Staff Parks $8,500 $2,830 (Nov – Dec 2020 cost) Increase the number of existing staff to be on call in order to provide winter control during winter events exceeding 13 hours in duration Expanded roster of on-call Parks staff from 7 to 11 for improved response time On Call Staff Property $7,000 $2,350 (Nov – Dec 2020 cost) Increase the number of existing staff to be on call in order to provide winter control during winter events exceeding 13 hrs. in duration Expanded roster of on-call Property staff as noted above 1 New Lead Hand, Municipal Garage $111,187 To introduce an afternoon shift that ensures service vehicles are on the road. Position will schedule staff, assign/oversee work and assist with repairs. Position delayed in 2020 as COVID response. Position filled January 12, 2021 1 New Mechanic, Municipal Garage $106,950 $66,850 (Aug – Dec 2020 cost) To introduce an afternoon shift that ensures service vehicles are on the road. Staff will perform non- scheduled repairs and prepare vehicles to on the road asap. Position delayed in 2020 as COVID response. Position filled in August 2020 Total $510,820 $94,680 - 80 - CS 14-21 February 22, 2021 Subject: Public Works Winter Activities update Page 5 2020 Growth: Item Budget Actual 2020 Cost Rationale Status 1 New Maintenance Worker, Roads $65,938 $8,240 (Nov – Dec 2020 cost) For narrow roads in Seaton and others Position delayed in 2020 as COVID response. Position filled in November 2020 Brine Program $45,000 No 2020 increase. Brine supply costs taken from salt budget. For the purchase of salt and salt brine for additional road/sidewalk/MUP inventory as noted above Brine supply has been increased to $45,000 in the 2021 Current Budget. 2020 Brine consumption was taken from the Salt budget. 2 New Maintenance Workers, Parks & Property $87,917 $10,990 (Nov – Dec 2020 cost) For snow clearing in Seaton and manual snow clearing north of Taunton Positions delayed in 2020 as COVID response. Positions filled in November 2020 1 New Maintenance Worker, Parks & Property $43,959 $5,500 For snow clearing in Seaton and manual snow clearing north of Taunton and, in part, for enhanced winter trail maintenance (as per CS 33-19) Position delayed in 2020 as COVID response. Position filled in November 2020 Total $242,814 $24,730 2021 Level of Service: Item Budget Actual 2020 Cost Rationale Status 1 New Utility Cut Inspector $66,000 To conduct utility cut inspections, as well as bridge inspection/repairs, sidewalk inspections, and winter patrol duties To be posted In April 2021 1 New Mechanic, Municipal Garage $45,000 To expand an afternoon shift that ensures service vehicles are on the road. Staff will perform non- scheduled repairs and prepare vehicles to get on the road asap New position has been deferred to 2022 Current Budget as COVID response Total $111,000 - 81 - CS 14-21 February 22, 2021 Subject: Public Works Winter Activities update Page 6 2021 Growth: Item Budget Actual 2020 Cost Rationale Status Contracted Snow Removal $50,000 For additional contracted snow removal on narrow roads in Seaton & others To be implemented in the 2021/2022 winter season Total $50,000 Enhanced Level of Service Staff have implemented new levels of service based on measured snow depths and Commercial Vehicle Operator’s Registration (CVOR) and the Highway Traffic Act Hours of Service requirements of driving consecutively for no more than 13 hours with a minimum 8 hour rest period. The following chart details the changes to level of service in 2020. a) Salting, Sanding and Plowing: Proposed Level of Service Measure Previous Level of Service New Level of Service Up to 2” of snow • urban roads salted within 6 hours, icy roads salted within 8 hours • rural roads sanded within 24 hours after the snow has stopped, if necessary for traction, icy conditions within 12 hours • urban roads salted, icy roads salted within 6 hours • rural roads sanded within 15 hours after the snow has stopped, if necessary for traction, icy conditions within 12 hours 2” to 4” of snow and stopped • urban roads salted and plowed within 13 hours (unless drivers time out and no back-ups are available or there is a lack of mechanics to return trucks onto the road) • rural roads plowed and sanded if necessary within 24-30 hours • urban roads salted and plowed within 13 hours (due to the introduction of enhanced on call schedule and new afternoon shift for mechanics) • rural roads plowed and sanded if necessary within 20 hours 4” to 8” of snow and stopped • urban roads salted and plowed within 30 hours • rural roads plowed and sanded within 36 hours • urban roads salted and plowed within 24 hours • rural roads plowed and sanded within 30 hours Beyond 8” of snow and stopped • urban roads salted and plowed within 36 hours • rural roads plowed and sanded within 36-40 hours • urban roads salted and plowed within 30 hours • rural roads plowed and sanded within 36 hours Although staff made deferrals in 2020 as a response to COVID, the focus on levels of service (LOS) over growth has had a significant effect on the performance of winter control activities. In all cases the levels of service (LOS) goals were met or exceeded during 2020/2021 winter events to date. - 82 - CS 14-21 February 22, 2021 Subject: Public Works Winter Activities update Page 7 Staff have tracked actual performance and the levels of service (LOS) achieved during the first 40 winter control events of the 2020/2021 winter control season, up to and including February 9, 2021. Of the 40 events, all have been in compliance with the new LOS. Of those events, 33 were less than 2” of snow, all of which were salted within 6 hours or sanded within 12 to 15 hours. Only 4 winter events were in the 2” to 4” range of snow and these were salted and plowed within 13 hours or plowed and sanded within 20 hours. Finally, 3 winter events that ranged from 4” to 8” in depth were salted and plowed within 24 hours and plowed and sanded within 30 hours. No events exceeding 8” in snow depth have been experienced this winter season to date. Public Works compliance with the proposed LOS is a result of an increase in the number of Roads staff on standby which ensures that one operator for each of the 13 urban and rural heavy truck paved routes reports to their route within 1 hour of notification. This has eliminated the past practice of sequencing completion of 6 heavy trucks on southern Collector Roads only (south of Concession 3) followed by northern Collector roads only. In many cases, as a result of this sequencing, local paved and unpaved (gravel) roads would receive delayed service. By having 13 Operators respond quickly to a call out, Collector and Local paved roads in each route are completed in priority with the first 7 finished immediately proceeding into a sanding operation on the 7 unpaved (gravel) to provide traction. This further enables Public Works to be in compliance of both the Highway Traffic Act Hours of Service for maximum of 13 hours of driving as per CVOR requirements and the Employment Standards Act for maximum 70 hours of work in a 7 day cycle. Of the 40 winter events to date, 32, or 80%, required the use of 1 or 2 spare salters in the Fleet. This highlights the importance of the Fleet garage as integral to the success of winter operations and 2 mechanics are on standby throughout the winter season to provide the support needed to keep vehicles & equipment on the road. Currently, Public Works maintains 3 spare standby salters and this is achieved by delaying the disposal date of vehicles that have been replaced as a life cycle replacement. One of the new Maintenance Worker positions has allowed Roads to address narrow roads, laneways and mews with a small 1 Ton combination salter and plow which is particularly important where daytime on-street parking is permitted. With the expansion of the brine program, 9 applications prior to forecasted snow and/or ice have been undertaken to date and provided safe road conditions as a 1 hour buffer while awaiting call-in staff on standby to arrive at the Operations Centre. Other Enhancements to Public Works Activities: As a result of hiring additional staff and equipment that can be effectively utilized 12 months a year, Public Works has also been able to: 1. Provide effective winter control to un-assumed roads including Enterprise Gateway in the Innovation Corridor as of February 3, 2021; 2. Provide effective winter control to un-assumed sidewalks including those found within parks such as Foxridge Trail as an outcome of intensification in the Seaton community; 3. As of April 2021, Public Works will monitor road allowances for utility cuts to ensure enhanced permanent repairs of the road infrastructure. Ensure other right-of-way permits have been taken to maintain the integrity of infrastructure, including those on Durham Regional roads that impact City of Pickering sidewalks, MUP and lighting; and, - 83 - CS 14-21 February 22, 2021 Subject: Public Works Winter Activities update Page 8 4. Provide continuance of garbage collection in parks and on roadsides from Monday to Friday 5 days/ week which had to stop previously during winter control response. Next Steps: Through the 2021 and 2022 Capital and Current Budget processes, Public Works is continuing with year 2 of its implementation plan, as detailed in the table above to: 1. Provide an overnight winter patrol shift outside of normal business hours (3:00 pm to 11:30 pm Monday to Friday) for a more timely and customer oriented response to Customer Care calls and allow the on-call Foreperson to be freed up to supervise their call-in Operators for 13 hours, removing the necessity of overlap by additional Foreperson(s); 2. Provide an expanded anti-icing program based on road classification, i.e. all Arterial (posted speed of 60 km/hr) and Collector roads as well as other priority areas such as steep inclines, bridges and curves within regular working hours; 3. Provide an afternoon Fleet garage shift from 3:00 pm to 11:00 pm Monday to Friday to address repairs at the end of the normal workday in preparedness for overnight or next day utilization; 4. Improve salt & pickled sand usage on roads and sidewalks, multi-use paths and multi-use trails based on pre-approved application rates for frost/bridges, normal and heavy snowfalls; 5. Extend winter road and sidewalk services rationally to newly developing communities in Seaton and North East Pickering; and, 6. Provide additional snow removal where required on narrow roads, cul-de-sacs, laneways, streets with layby parking and sightline issues that are created over the winter season by snow windrows. Attachments: 1. None. - 84 - CS 14-21 February 22, 2021 Subject: Public Works Winter Activities update Page 9 Approved/Endorsed By: Original Signed By: Brian Duffield (Acting) Director, Community Services Original Signed By: Stan Karwowski, MBA, CPA, CMA Director, Finance & Treasurer Prepared By: Original Signed By: Brian Duffield for: Rob Burlie, P. Eng. Manager, Public W orks BD:rb Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Original Signed By: Marisa Carpino, MA Chief Administrative Officer - 85 - Report to Council Report Number: PLN 10-21 Date: February 22, 2021 From: Kyle Bentley Director, City Development & CBO Subject: The Municipal Comprehensive Review of the Durham Regional Official Plan: Major Transit Station Areas Proposed Policy Directions, December 2020, and the Framework for a new Regional Official Plan File: A-2100-020 Recommendation: 1. That Council support the Region of Durham’s Major Transit Station Areas Proposed Policy Directions and endorse staff comments contained in Table 1 of Appendix I to Report PLN 10-21; 2. That Council welcome the proposed restructuring of the new Regional Official Plan, and congratulate the Region on this new approach; and 3. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. Executive Summary: On December 1, 2020, the Regional Municipality of Durham released the report on “Major Transit Station Areas Proposed Policy Directions”, the first in a series of policy directions reports released as part of Envision Durham, the Municipal Comprehensive Review of the Durham Regional Official Plan (see Report of the Regional Commissioner of Planning and Economic Development 2020-P-27 and its Attachment #1 – Major Transit Station Areas Proposed Policy Directions, Attachment #1 to this report). City staff recommend that the comments in Appendix I to this report be endorsed as the City comments. In addition, this report responds to Council’s direction to the Director, City Development & CBO to review the Envision Durham – Framework for a New Regional Official Plan as per Regional Report 2020-P-24, as it pertains to the City of Pickering, and report back with comments as requested by Council at its meeting in December 2020. Financial Implications: The recommendations of this report do not present any financial implications to the City of Pickering. - 86 - Report PLN 10-21 February 22, 2021 Subject: The Municipal Comprehensive Review Page 2 of the Durham Regional Official Plan Discussion: 1. Purpose The purpose of this report is: a. to obtain Council’s endorsement of staff’s comments on the Region of Durham’s Major Transit Station Areas Proposed Policy Directions (see Attachment #1 to this report). Appendix l to this report contains staff’s comments and recommendations on the Major Transit Station Areas Proposed Policy Directions (MTSA Report). b. to report back to Council on the Envision Durham – Framework for a New Regional Official Plan, as per Regional Report 2020-P-24, as it pertains to the City of Pickering, in accordance with Resolution #479/20 (see Attachment #2). 2. Background 2.1 “Envision Durham” – The Municipal Comprehensive Review of the Durham Regional Official Plan The Region of Durham is in the midst of reviewing its Official Plan. An official plan provides a vision for the future orderly development of a municipality through a set of policies and maps. The Planning Act, which is provincial legislation governing land use planning in Ontario, requires that a municipality regularly review and update its Official Plan. Once the Region has completed its Official Plan review, the City will be in a position to review the Pickering Official Plan. The first stage of the Region’s Official Plan Review was titled “Discover”, and focused on public consultation. The second stage, titled “Discuss”, focused on the preparation of a series of discussion papers, addressing the following major areas: agriculture and rural systems; climate change and sustainability; growth management; the environment; transportation; and housing. The City provided comments on each of these discussion papers through 2019 and 2020. The release of the proposed Policy Directions report ushers in the third phase of the Region’s Municipal Comprehensive Review process, titled “Direct”. Based on the review of best practices, stakeholder and public feedback, the proposed Policy Directions will provide guidance for draft policies to be incorporated into the Regional Official Plan (ROP). 3. The Major Transit Station Areas Policy Directions (MTSA Report) The Region’s release of the MTSA Report is the first in a series of proposed policy directions. The MTSA Report provides an overview of the proposed MTSAs in Durham, addresses trends, development guidelines and best practices, and presents proposed policies on MTSAs for review and comment. The Provincial Growth Plan defines a MTSA as the area including and around any existing or planned high order transit station within a settlement area, and are generally defined as the area within a 500 to 800 metre radius of a transit station, representing a 10 minute walk. - 87 - Report PLN 10-21 February 22, 2021 Subject: The Municipal Comprehensive Review Page 3 of the Durham Regional Official Plan Durham’s current ROP provides policy direction for transportation hubs and commuter station areas to be at higher densities and optimize walkability to transit facilities. The Province has committed to investment in rapid transit infrastructure, and the Growth Plan stipulates that public transit will be the first priority for transportation infrastructure planning and major transportation investment. The Growth Plan has elevated the significance of MTSAs to prioritizing intensification and increased densities in these areas. There are currently four MTSAs within Durham Region – the Lakeshore GO Transit stations located in Pickering, Ajax, Whitby, and Oshawa, and four planned MTSAs at future GO Transit station stops along Oshawa to Downtown Bowmanville. These MTSAs represent significant opportunities to direct intensification and growth that maximizes the benefits of being within proximity to higher-order transit. The proposed policy directions that are addressed in the MTSA Report include: • A Vision for MTSAs; • Land Use policies; • Urban Design and Built Form; • Public Realm and Open Space; • Mobility and Active Transportation; • Rail Corridors; • Implementation; • Inclusionary Zoning; and • Monitoring. The MTSA Report can be found online at: https://www.durham.ca/en/regional- government/resources/Documents/Council/Reports/2020-Committee-Reports/Planning- and-Economic-Development/2020-P-27.pdf City Development staff has undertaken a detailed review of the MTSA Report (see Appendix I), and the recommendations of Report PLN 10-21 seek Council’s endorsement of staff’s review and responses to the proposed policy directions for MTSAs. 4. The Proposed New Framework of the Regional Official Plan The framework of the current ROP dates back to the early 1990s, which has its roots in the structure of the 1976 ROP. The Region is introducing a new framework and structure for the new ROP based on the following guiding principles: being progressive, streamlined, and accessible. The new ROP will also establish the need to anticipate change, focus on results, have a strong online presence, and articulate meaningful Regional priorities. The current ROP will be repealed and replaced with the new ROP that will consist of a framework that will support a well-defined structure of urban areas and rural settlements, a system of connected environmental features, extensive agricultural areas, a variety of open spaces and an integrated and multi-modal transportation network. A Public Opinion Survey which was completed in early 2019 indicated that residents supported the values of this framework which would foster building a complete community where residents want to live, work, play, grow and invest. - 88 - Report PLN 10-21 February 22, 2021 Subject: The Municipal Comprehensive Review Page 4 of the Durham Regional Official Plan The Regional Report regarding the proposed Framework for the New Regional Official Plan can be found online at: https://www.durham.ca/en/regional- government/resources/Documents/Council/Reports/2020-Committee-Reports/Planning-and- Economic-Development/2020-P-24.pdf 4.1 Proposed Framework The new ROP will be based on a proposed framework that consists of: • A Regional Vision – presenting Durham as a “community of communities” – diverse, distinct and connected. • Strategic Directions – Seven Strategic Directions will serve as chapters in the new ROP consisting of outcome-oriented themes and reflective of the Region’s diverse characteristics in land use, the economy, communities, infrastructure, and transportation. • Goals, objectives, and policies – will be introduced through proposed policy directions to be released for comments throughout 2021. The new ROP is also planned to incorporate language that will present the proposed objectives in a consistent and clear structure and to convey a stronger policy direction. 4.2 Staff Comments Staff welcome the proposed restructuring of the ROP to focus on being more progressive, streamlined, and accessible. The new ROP will be an essential planning document anticipated to provide stronger policy direction to area municipalities and to meaningfully articulate how Durham Region will grow to 2051. Staff acknowledges that not only will a conformity exercise be undertaken to update the Pickering Official Plan with new Regional policies, but there may also be an opportunity to incorporate an approach similar to the Region’s Official Plan restructuring proposal, or elements thereof, to improve the Pickering Official Plan. More details regarding the proposed timing of the comprehensive review of the Pickering Official Plan will be provided when staff bring forward a report to Council later this year or early next year. Planning staff currently serve on the Envision Durham Municipal Working Group and continue to provide staff-to-staff feedback on the various policy matters that are brought forward for discussion as part of the Region’s Municipal Comprehensive Review process. Appendix Appendix l Staff Review of the Envision Durham Major Transit Station Areas Proposed Policy Directions - 89 - Report PLN 10-21 February 22, 2021 Subject: The Municipal Comprehensive Review Page 5 of the Durham Regional Official Plan Attachments: 1.Report of the Regional Commissioner of Planning and Economic Development 2020-P-27 and its Attachment #1 – Major Transit Station Areas Proposed Policy Directions 2. Council Directive – Resolution #479/20, dated December 14, 2020 Kyle Bentley, P. Eng. Director, City Development & CBO Approved/Endorsed By: Original Signed By: Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Chief Planner Prepared By: Original Signed By: Doris Ho, MCIP, RPP Planner I Original Signed By: Déan Jacobs, MCIP, RPP Manager, Policy & Geomatics DH:DJ:ld Original Signed By: Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Original Signed By: Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer - 90 - Appendix I to Report No. PLN 10-21 Staff Review of the Envision Durham Major Transit Station Areas Proposed Policy Directions - 91 - Staff Review of the Region of Durham’s Major Transit Station Areas – Proposed Policy Directions 1. Major Transit Station Areas – Proposed Policy Directions On December 1, 2020, Durham Region, as part of the third stage (“Direct”) of their public engagement program, released the Major Transit Station Areas – Proposed Policy Directions (MTSA Report), the first in a series of policy directions to be released as part of “Envision Durham”. The MTSA Report builds upon the Urban System Growth Management Discussion paper released in June 2019 through Envision Durham. The MTSA Report provides an overview of the proposed MTSAs, summarizes best practices, trends and guidelines for MTSA development, refines certain delineations, and presents a set of draft policies for review and comment. The report was released to stakeholders and the public for review and comment. In October 2020, Pickering staff provided comments to Durham Planning staff on the Draft MTSA Report. The following section provides a high level overview of the MTSA Report, followed by a table providing additional staff comments and responses to the proposed policy directions that should be considered through the Region’s Municipal Comprehensive Review. 2. MTSA Report Overview As part of Envision Durham and the topic area of Growth Management, the review and development of policies for MTSAs are required to address the significant future growth opportunities in these areas. The Province has identified eight MTSAs along the Lakeshore East GO Rail within Durham: four existing MTSAs at Pickering, Ajax, Whitby, and Oshawa GO Stations, and four planned MTSAs along the future GO Transit rail line extension to Bowmanville – Thornton’s Corners, Central Oshawa, Courtice, and Bowmanville. 2.1 Policy Context There are various provincial and regional land use and policy frameworks to guide the development of identified lands within MTSAs in Durham. The Provincial Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshow (Growth Plan), Metrolinx’s Regional Transportation Plan, Durham Regional Strategic Plan, Durham Regional Official Plan (ROP), and Durham Transportation Master Plan supports the establishment of MTSAs and the incorporation of land uses and infrastructure that are conducive for transit-oriented communities. Key policy directions that inform the development and redevelopment of MTSAs include the following: • MTSAs shall be planned to achieve a minimum density target of 150 residents and jobs combined per hectare for those served by GO Transit rail network (a place to Grow – Growth Plan). In case where a MTSA and designated Urban Growth Centre or Regional Centre overlap, the higher density requirements shall apply. - 92 - • Land use and built form that would adversely affect the achievement of transit supportive densities in MTSAs are prohibited (A Place to Grow – Growth Plan); • The official plan of an upper tier municipality may include policies that identify the area surrounding and including an existing or planned higher order transit station as a protected MTSA and delineate the area’s boundaries, as well as related policies that require lower-tier municipalities to include policies pertaining to minimum development densities and permitted uses within delineated MTSAs (The Planning Act); • The implementation of Inclusionary Zoning is limited to protected MTSAs (Bill 108 – More Homes, More Choices Act). In Durham, the existing GO stations would be considered protected MTSAs. The current ROP provides broad policies which support the establishment of MTSAs, and development adjacent to transportation hubs, commuter stations and transit spines designated on the transit priority network in accordance with transit supportive provisions (ROP Policy 11.3.19). Through Envision Durham, the update to these policies are required to conform to the Growth Plan policies regarding MTSAs, and to advance the Region’s direction for transit oriented development. The Region undertook a Best Practices review to examine other Canadian municipalities with respect to how density typologies, tools and program, and incentives and regulations are being applied within these municipalities to achieve transit oriented development. A detailed summary of the Best Practices Review is contained in Appendix A of the MTSA Report. Feedback from area municipal staff, local agencies, members of the public and stakeholders were also received to help inform and shape the proposed MTSA policy directions. 2.2 Importance of Transit Oriented Development The Region referenced research findings from the firm N. Barry Lyon Consulting, which presented findings that higher order transit (i.e., heavy rail such as GO Rail) and light rail transit (LRT) stations, generate more development on surrounding lands compared with surface transit stops. Heavy rail and LRT stations attract high capital investments, allow permanent transit service for stronger ridership potential, and serve as transit hubs for other transportation connections. Transit oriented development (TOD) provides opportunities for high density, compact and mixed use development close to higher order transit. The benefits of TOD includes a wider range of housing options, enhancing active transportation, pedestrian oriented streets and spaces, optimizing transit and infrastructure while reducing automobile dependency. In order to enable TOD, a number of factors influence positive outcomes, including reliable transit service, strong economic fundamentals, supportive planning frameworks, adequate infrastructure, and available land to support development. - 93 - The development of the MTSAs will rely on adopting TOD planning and design principles to optimize the economic, social, and environmental benefits to the surrounding community. 2.3 Delineation of MTSAs The Region proposed delineation of MTSAs within the Urban Systems Discussion Paper for Envision Durham in June 2019. The delineation of MTSAs were determined through a refined approach developed by the Region and a preferred recommendation by Metrolinx. The delineation approach that was followed included criteria such as: • A 500- and 800-metre radius from the centre of the rail platform was applied, to identify a generalized walking distance of approximately 10 minutes. • Non-developable areas were avoided, where appropriate (such as natural areas, highways, utilities, rail corridors, etc.) to form the outer boundaries of the MTSA. • Areas unsuitable and unplanned for significant intensification, such as stable neighbourhoods intended to remain as low density, were identified and excluded. The Region’s methodology of delineating MTSAs and the resultant proposed boundary of Pickering’s MTSA, as reflected in Figure 2 of Appendix B to the MTSA Report (see Attachment #1 to this report), was supported by Council through Resolution #205-19 (Report PLN 32-19, dated December 16, 2019). 2.4 Proposed Policy Directions The proposed policy directions are intended to serve as a guide for the planning and development of MTSAs in Durham Region. A future Regional Official Plan Amendment will establish the land use and policy framework for MTSAs based on principles of Transit Oriented Development (TOD). MTSAs represent significant opportunities to create TOD in proximity to rapid transit stations, consisting of a wide range of housing options, mixed uses, street-oriented commercial uses, and a range of public amenities to support an active pedestrian streetscape. Since each MTSA has unique characteristics, scope and context, the proposed policy directions are broad in nature to account for these variations. The Region has outlined general policy directions for the MTSAs, followed by specific directions pertaining to: • land use; • urban design and built form; • public realm and open space; • mobility and active transportation; and • rail corridors. The proposed policies and recommendations for MTSAs are based on TOD principles and best practices to ensure the vision of the MTSAs is achieved through area municipal planning processes. - 94 - 2.5 Implementation and Monitoring The Region will provide area municipalities with policy guidance to help achieve the objectives of each MTSA within their respective Official Plan updates and conformity exercises, and through development application reviews. The Region is considering other planning tools to assist in achieving the vision for MTSAs. A Regional Community Improvement Plan is being considered to establish incentives to support the principles and policies of the ROP, such as affordable housing, high density mixed use development, and sustainability measures, as permissible under the Planning Act. Inclusionary zoning may also enable area municipalities to include affordable housing units in new residential developments. Recent changes to the More Homes, More Choices Act have also enabled municipalities to implement inclusionary zoning in Protected MTSAs, Development Permit System Areas, or an area ordered by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Finally, the effect of the new policies applicable to MTSAs will be monitored by the Region in consultation with area municipalities. 2.6 Next Steps The above provides a synopsis of the Region’s Major Transit Station Areas Policy Directions Report. Staff comments, specifically to the proposed policy directions, is contained in the following Table 1, for consideration through the Region’s Municipal Comprehensive Review process. - 95 - Table 1: Pickering Staff Comments on the Region of Durham’s MTSA Proposed Policy Directions # MTSA Report Section MTSA Policy Direction Staff Comments 1. 8.3 General Policy Directions 6. The Region will require area municipalities to complete secondary plans and/or block plans to include detailed land use designations and policies consistent with the policies of the Durham Regional Official Plan that help to achieve the objectives of Transit Oriented Development. A master planning exercise was fairly recently completed for the Pickering City Centre (Urban Growth Centre), through the adoption of Amendment 26 to the Pickering Official Plan, a City Centre Zoning By-law, and Urban Design Guidelines, which addresses most of the lands within the Pickering MTSA. Staff acknowledge that the City will be updating the Official Plan in the context of the new Growth Plan and Regional Official Plan. Staff request the Region to revise the policy direction to allow completion of Secondary Plans, block plans or equivalent. 2. 8.3 General Policy Directions 5. The Region will encourage the provision of alternative development standards to support TOD, including reduced minimum parking requirements and the establishment maximum parking requirements for both privately-initiated development applications and area municipal zoning by-laws. This policy direction is consistent with the approach that was followed for the Pickering City Centre Zoning By-law in which reduced parking standards, shared parking arrangements and required bicycle parking requirements have been introduced. Although the notion of maximum parking requirements is supported, it may still be challenging to implement it, since many of the services offered in the Pickering MTSA are offered at a Citywide and Regional scale, and predominantly accessed by private vehicle. - 96 - # MTSA Report Section MTSA Policy Direction Staff Comments 3. 8.3.1 Land Use Policies: Permitted Uses 4. Commercial uses including retail, both convenience retail and small scale retail uses, restaurants, personal and professional service shops, and day care uses. It is recommended that, for greater clarity, the Region include free standing “offices” in addition to permitting them as part of a mixed use development in MTSAs. 4. 8.3.1 Land Use Policies: Permitted Uses 8. Public uses including infrastructure, parks, libraries, recreation/community centres, urban squares, trails and conservation uses. It is recommended that the Region confirm that “infrastructure” includes district energy systems. 5. 8.3.1 Land Use Policies: Prohibited Uses Automobile-oriented uses, including drive- through establishments, service stations, land extensive vehicle-oriented uses, car washes, warehousing, public self-storage facilities, similar uses and lower density and land extensive uses are not permitted. The prohibition of drive-through establishments may be too restrictive. There are various banks and restaurants with drive-through facilities that are operating compatibly within the Pickering’s MTSA. It is recommended that the Region forego the prohibition of drive-through establishments within MTSAs and allow the ancillary use to be addressed by area municipalities through area municipal policy or site-specific zoning by-law provisions. 6. 8.3.1 Land Use Policies Prohibited Uses Despite prohibiting warehousing, self-storage, and similar uses, it is requested that the Region clarify that self-serve parcel storage lockers/kiosks for ground-based parcel deliveries that are part of last mile delivery networks, be permitted as an accessory use to the main development. 7. 8.3.2 Urban Design & Built Form 3. Buildings will frame streets, with frequent pedestrian entrances; Please clarify whether the reference to “streets” is only to public streets, or both public and private streets. On large redevelopment sites, some buildings will front private streets or aisles. - 97 - # MTSA Report Section MTSA Policy Direction Staff Comments 8. 8.3.2 Urban Design & Built Form 8. Developments within MTSAs will conform to the land use designations and the Urban Design requirements specified within area municipal official plans and urban design guidelines. In view of the fact that urban design guidelines are non-mandatory, it is recommended that the Region consider revising the policy direction in Section 8.3.2.8 of the MTSA Report to require developments to meet the intent and principles of municipal urban design guidelines. 9. 8.3.3 Public Realm & Open Space 3. Encourage area municipal policies to require high quality, compact streetscape design form with suitable pedestrian and cycling amenities that complement the establishment of Transit Oriented Communities, including sidewalks or multi-use paths on both sides of all roads, appropriate landscaping, the provision of cycling lanes where appropriate, pedestrian- scaled lighting, and consideration for pedestrian amenities. It is recommended that the Region consider including the provision for public art in the public realm. 10. 8.3.3 Public Realm & Open Space It is recommended that the Region consider a policy direction encouraging station areas and public spaces to be designed according to Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles where those principles are complementary to the urban design principles and guidelines. 11. 8.3.3 Public Realm & Open Space 8.3.4 Mobility & Active Transportation It is recommended that the Region consider a policy direction ensuring public spaces and pedestrian networks/connections are designed to be accessible and barrier-free. - 98 - # MTSA Report Section MTSA Policy Direction Staff Comments 12. 8.3.4 Mobility & Active Transportation 8. Pedestrian areas will be designed to ensure that wind and thermal comfort conditions are not adversely affected. Since there is no guarantee that the design of pedestrian areas could ensure comfort for all users under all circumstances, it is recommended that the Region consider revising the policy direction to maximize wind and thermal comfort conditions to the extent feasible. 13. 8.3.6 Implementation 1. Approval of development will be contingent on the availability of services and transportation facilities. The Region and the area municipalities may require phasing of development on the basis of the capacity of the transportation system and/or servicing availability, and/or the timing of required infrastructure. The Region and the area municipalities may require the coordination of development applications through measures such as Master Development Agreements or other similar approaches, to ensure an orderly, coordinated and phased approach to the provision of transportation, servicing and other infrastructure requirements are provided prior to or coincident with development. In terms of syntax, it is recommended that the words “are provided”, which appear in the 2nd and 3rd last line in the proposed policy, be deleted. - 99 - # MTSA Report Section MTSA Policy Direction Staff Comments 14. 8.3.7 Inclusionary Zoning The Policy Directions Reports identifies an opportunity to develop an inclusionary zoning approach for MTSAs in Durham, and states that subject to the interest of the area municipalities on such an approach, the Region could prepare the required assessment report and enabling policies for implementation by the local area municipalities, outside of the MTSA ROPA process. Inclusionary zoning could be helpful tool to facilitate affordable housing within MTSAs. Staff strongly support the preparation of a housing assessment report by the Region. 15. 8.3.8 Monitoring The effect of new policies, implementing by- laws and projects within MTSAs will be monitored in consultation with the area municipalities based on the following metrics: a. the amount, type and pace of development; b. the mix and diversity of land uses in the area; c. the re-use and demolition of existing buildings, including heritage buildings; d. the amount and type of employment; e. the overall population; f. the unit count and mix of unit types; g. the population to job ratio; and h. parking spaces, loading facilities, transit improvements and active transportation infrastructure. It is recommended that the Region elaborate if targets and timelines for the proposed monitoring metrics will be established and reported on, and how the data will be used to ensure the vision, goals, and objectives of MTSAs are achieved. - 100 - Attachment #1 to Report #PLN 10-21 If this information is required in an accessible format, please contact 1-800-372-1102 ext. 2564 The Regional Municipality of Durham Report To: Planning and Economic Development Committee From: Commissioner of Planning and Economic Development Report: #2020-P-27 Date: December 1, 2020 Subject: Major Transit Station Areas – Proposed Policy Directions, File: D12-01 Recommendation: That the Planning and Economic Development Committee recommends: That this report be received for information. Report: 1. Purpose 1.1 The purpose of this report is to advise Committee members that the Proposed Policy Directions for Major Transit Station Areas (MTSAs) are being released for public comment. The proposed policy directions are contained within the MTSA Policy Directions Report, (see Attachment #1). These MTSA policy directions are a key component of Envision Durham, the Municipal Comprehensive Review (MCR) of the Regional Official Plan (ROP). 1.2 Comments on the Proposed Policy Directions are being requested by March 1, 2021 (a 90-day commenting period). 1.3 Staff will provide an overview of the proposed MTSA delineations and policy directions at the December 1st Planning and Economic Development Committee meeting. - 101 - Report #2020-P-27 Page 2 of 4 1.4 MTSAs are defined in the Provincial Growth Plan as “The area including and around any existing or planned higher order transit station or stop within a settlement area; or the area including and around a major bus depot in an urban core. Major transit station areas generally are defined as the area within an approximate 500 to 800 metre radius of a transit station, representing about a 10- minute walk.” There are eight MTSAs proposed within Durham, four of which will be established along the future GO East extension to Bowmanville at Thornton’s Corners, Central Oshawa, Courtice, and Bowmanville. The four existing MTSAs are located around the Pickering, Ajax, Whitby and Oshawa GO train stations. 2. Previous Reports and Decisions 2.1 In November 2019, Council directed Regional Planning staff to accelerate the development of MTSA policies, including delineations and density targets as part of the Envision Durham process (See Report #2019-COW-26). 3. Background 3.1 In 2019, Metrolinx announced that it would be proceeding with further planning for the extension of all day GO Train service along Lakeshore East line with a connection to the CP Rail Line, including new stations at Thornton’s Corners, Central Oshawa, Courtice and Central Bowmanville. 3.2 In June 2019, draft delineations for MTSAs were presented by Regional staff within the Urban System – Growth Management Discussion Paper. These draft delineations were based on extensive consultation with area municipal planning staff. When planned and executed properly, MTSAs will provide significant opportunities to direct intensification and growth in a manner that maximizes the benefits of being within proximity of higher-order transit. This approach to development is generally referred to as “transit-oriented development”. 4. Overview of MTSA Proposed Policy Directions 4.1 The MTSA Proposed Policy Directions Report provides an overview of the proposed MTSAs, summarizes best practices, trends and guidelines, refines certain delineations, and presents a set of draft policies for review and comment. 4.2 While policies for commuter stations are provided in the current Regional Official Plan, the profile of MTSAs as premier locations for mixed use, transit-oriented development have been amplified through provincial investment in rapid transit infrastructure and stronger Provincial policy direction. - 102 - Report #2020-P-27 Page 3 of 4 4.3 The proposed policies for MTSAs would: • Establish the vision, goals and objectives for MTSAs; • Implement provincial policy as appropriate; • Delineate the geographic extent of MTSAs; • Update definitions (and associated policies) to reflect provincial plans; • Identify housing types and built form that support intensification within MTSAs; • Recognize best practices for Transit-Oriented Development (TOD); • Enable a variety of transit-oriented land uses; • Prioritize active transportation; • Optimize parking; • Promote an inviting and pedestrian oriented public realm, to enhance connectivity, generate employment and guide residential growth; and • Provide clear policy guidance to local area municipalities for inclusion within their respective official plan updates. 4.4 The policy principles and recommendations for MTSAs will enable the development of transit supportive communities that meet the future needs of the Region. 5. Relationship to Strategic Plan 5.1 This report aligns with/addresses the following strategic goals and priorities in the Durham Region Strategic Plan: a. Under the goal of Community Vitality, 2.1, Revitalize existing neighbourhoods and build complete communities that are walkable, well- connected, and have a mix of attainable housing; and b. Under the goal of Economic Prosperity, 3.3, Enhance communication and transportation networks to better connect people and move goods more effectively. 6. Next Steps 6.1 Following a 90-day consultation period, Regional staff will prepare and release a draft Regional Official Plan Amendment. A statutory public open house and public meeting process is anticipated in the Spring of 2021. - 103 - Report #2020-P-27 Page 4 of 4 6.2 Following Council’s consideration and adoption of the Regional Official Plan Amendment, it will be submitted to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing for approval. 6.3 A copy of this report and the MTSA Proposed Policy Directions will be forwarded to Durham’s area municipalities; the Ministry of Transportation, Ministry of Economic Development, Job Creation and Trade, Metrolinx, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, and the Envision Durham Interested Parties contact list for review and comment. 7. Attachments Attachment #1: Major Transit Station Areas - Proposed Policy Directions Respectfully submitted, Original signed by Brian Bridgeman, MCIP, RPP Commissioner of Planning and Economic Development Recommended for Presentation to Committee Original signed by Elaine C. Baxter-Trahair Chief Administrative Officer - 104 - DURHAMENVISION December 2020 Durham Region Planning and Economic Development Department Major Transit Station Areas Proposed Policy Directions - 105 - 1 | Envision Durham Table of Contents Executive Summary .............................................. 2 1. Introduction .................................................. 3 2. Provincial Planning Policy Context ................... 5 2.1 Growth Plan ................................................ 5 2.2 Metrolinx Regional Transportation Plan, 2041 .................................................................. 6 3. Regional Policy Context .................................... 7 3.1 Durham Region Strategic Plan .................... 7 3.2 Current Durham Regional Official Plan ....... 9 3.3 Transportation Master Plan ........................ 9 3.4 Long Term Transit Strategy and Transit Oriented Development Study ......................... 10 4. The Importance of Transit Oriented Development ...................................................... 11 5. Best Practices Review ..................................... 12 6. Delineation Approach ..................................... 12 7. What we have Heard ...................................... 13 8. Proposed Policy Directions ............................. 14 8.1 Purpose ..................................................... 14 8.2 Vision ........................................................ 14 8.3 General Policy Directions .......................... 15 8.3.1 LAND USE POLICIES ............................ 16 8.3.2 URBAN DESIGN AND BUILT FORM ..... 17 8.3.3 PUBLIC REALM & OPEN SPACE .......... 17 8.3.4 MOBILITY AND ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION ...................................... 18 8.3.5 RAIL CORRIDORS ................................ 18 8.3.6 IMPLEMENTATION ............................. 19 8.3.7 INCLUSIONARY ZONING ..................... 19 8.3.8 MONITORING ..................................... 20 9. Next Steps ....................................................... 20 List of Acronyms ................................................. 21 Appendices Appendix A – Best Practices Review Appendix B – Overview of MTSAs and Proposed Delineations Appendix C – What We Heard - 106 - Envision Durham| 2 Executive Summary Regional Council has directed staff to accelerate the review and development of policies, for Major Transit Station Areas (MTSAs) through Envision Durham - The Municipal Comprehensive Review (MCR) of the Regional Official Plan (ROP). This document builds on the Urban System- Growth Management Discussion Paper released in June, 2019 through Envision Durham, by providing an overview of the proposed MTSAs, summarizing best practices, trends and guidelines for MTSA development and by introducing a set of draft policies for review and comment. Commuter Stations and permissions for higher density mixed-use development within proximity of stations are provided for in the current Regional Official Plan. However, the significance of MTSAs and related intensification and densities around transit stations has increased in recent years, not only due to improved service along the GO East Rail line in Durham but also through enhanced Provincial policy direction on MTSAs. MTSAs represent significant opportunities to curb sprawl and direct intensification and growth in a manner that maximizes the benefits of being within proximity to higher- order transit. There are eight MTSAs identified within Durham. There are four existing MTSAs in Durham, and include: • Pickering GO Station; • Ajax GO Station; • Whitby GO Station; and • Existing Oshawa GO Station. Four of the proposed MTSAs are located along the committed GO Transit rail line extension to Bowmanville, and include: • Thornton’s Corners; • Central Oshawa; • Courtice; and • Bowmanville. Several factors affect planning for the MTSA areas, including, density, proximity to transit and ability to improve access to transit, mixed-use development, provincial direction and changes to policies and Provincial Plans. The Region has proposed a new set of policies for MTSAs to: • Establish the vision, goals and objectives for MTSA areas; • Implement provincial policy as appropriate; • Delineate the geographic extent of MTSAs; • Update definitions in the ROP (and associated policies) to reflect provincial plans; • Identify housing types and built form that support intensification within MTSA areas; • Accelerate market-driven development of the stations; • Encourage and promote best practices for Transit-Oriented Development (TOD); • Enable a variety of transit-oriented land uses; • Prioritize active transportation; • Optimize parking; - 107 - 3 | Envision Durham • Promote an inviting and pedestrian oriented public realm, to encourage place-making, enhance connectivity and generate employment and residential growth; and, • Provide clear policy guidance to local area municipalities for inclusion within their respective official plan updates. A Best Practices review was undertaken to identify strategies that have been adopted by comparable municipalities. The results from this review helped to inform specific policy recommendations and principles for MTSAs in Durham. Themes identified from the best practices review include: Land Use The importance of developing an appropriate mix of higher density, transit-oriented land uses is a key principle to help foster transit demand and supporting transit-oriented development. Connections and Accessibility Attractive transportation connections that are clear, direct and accessible by people of all ages, abilities and modes of travel must be provided. Urban Design and Built Form It is vital that attractive and functional environments be developed based on compact built form to help encourage active transportation connectivity across the MTSA. Healthy Economy Providing economic development support in these areas will help to increase employment and housing options. The policy principles and recommendations for MTSAs will enable the development of transit supportive communities that are tailored to the current and future needs of the Region. 1. Introduction The Region is currently undertaking “Envision Durham” - the Municipal Comprehensive Review of the Durham Regional Official Plan. Over the course of 2019, Regional staff prepared and released a series of theme- based Discussion Papers. Policy proposals will be developed in early 2021 following the receipt of public and stakeholder input. One of the subject areas being addressed through Envision Durham is Growth Management, which deals with a broad suite of issues and requirements affecting growth that the Region must consider, including identifying and delineating and prescribing policies for Major Transit Station Areas (MTSAs). The intent of MTSAs is to cluster a mix of high density, compact, pedestrian oriented development in proximity to rapid transit infrastructure. Major transit infrastructure such as the Lakeshore East GO Rail line attracts and supports high density urban development around station locations. - 108 - Envision Durham| 4 MTSAs are planned to have a mix of uses such as office, residential, institutional/ community uses, retail, services and other amenities. MTSAs leverage capital investment in transit infrastructure and strong ridership potential. To support transit ridership and place making, MTSAs will have good quality pedestrian-oriented streetscapes, public spaces and buildings. For the most part, MTSAs build upon the Region’s planned urban structure, and introduce focal points for high density mixed- use development. MTSAs are intended to: • support viable transit; • allow the Region to grow more sustainably; • expand opportunities for the Region to be more economically competitive; • help the Region provide a range of housing choice to adapt to Durham’s changing demographics; and • improve the quality of life for Durham’s residents and workforce To proactively implement land use and fiscal planning with infrastructure planning and place-making, Regional Council directed Regional Planning staff to accelerate the review and development of policies, delineations and density targets for all eight MTSAs. Since the adoption of the current Regional Official Plan (ROP), the significance of MTSAs and related intensification and densities around transit stations has increased, in part due to enhanced direction from Provincial planning policy. Provincial policy directs the identification of priority transit corridors (PTCs) and development of specific density requirements for MTSAs located along a PTC. The identification of PTCs and density requirements for MTSAs located along a PTC only apply to existing GO Transit Stations in Durham Region. Figure 1 - Context Map of Major Transit Station Area - 109 - 5 | Envision Durham The Lakeshore East GO Rail line to the existing Oshawa Station is the only PTC located within Durham Region. There are four existing MTSAs along the PTC in Durham. The four existing MTSAs include: • Pickering GO Station; • Ajax GO Station; • Whitby GO Station; and • Existing Oshawa GO Station. Four proposed MTSA delineated boundaries, located along the committed GO Transit rail line extension to Bowmanville, as well as the four existing MTSAs represent significant opportunities to direct intensification and growth in a manner that maximizes the benefits of being within proximity to higher- order transit. The four future MTSAs identified include: • Thornton’s Corners; • Central Oshawa; • Courtice; and • Bowmanville. 2. Provincial Planning Policy Context The following provincial policy documents apply to MTSAs. 2.1 Growth Plan The Provincial Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (Growth Plan) provides policies for MTSAs which are defined as “the area including and around any existing or planned high order transit station within a settlement area…MTSAs generally are defined as the area within a 500 to 800 metre radius of a transit station, representing a 10- minute walk”. Section 3.2.3 (“Moving People”) of the Provincial Growth Plan indicates that: 1. Public transit will be the first priority for transportation infrastructure planning and major transportation investments. 2. All decisions on transit planning and investment will be made according to the following criteria: a. How they align with, and support, the priorities identified in Schedule 5 (Moving People – Transit) of the Plan. b. Prioritizing areas with existing or planned higher residential or employment densities to optimize return on investment and the efficiency and viability of existing and planned transit service levels. c. Increasing the capacity of existing transit systems to support strategic growth areas (SGA). d. Expanding transit service to areas that have achieved, or will be planned to achieve, transit- supportive densities and provide a mix of residential, office, institutional, and commercial development, wherever possible. e. Facilitating improved linkages between and within municipalities from nearby neighbourhoods to urban growth centres, MTSAs, and other strategic growth areas. f. Increasing the modal share of transit. - 110 - Envision Durham| 6 g. Contributing towards the provincial greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets. The Growth Plan requires that MTSAs on priority transit corridors (Pickering, Ajax, Whitby, and Existing Oshawa) be planned for a minimum density target of 150 residents and jobs combined per hectare for those that are served by the GO Transit rail network. The Growth Plan indicates that within all MTSAs, development will be supported, where appropriate, by: a. Planning for a diverse mix of uses, including second units and affordable housing, to support existing and planned transit service levels. b. Fostering collaboration between public and private sectors, such as joint development projects. c. Providing alternative development standards, such as reduced parking standards. d. Prohibiting land uses and built form that would adversely affect the achievement of transit- supportive densities. The Growth Plan also indicates that all MTSAs will be planned and designed to be transit- supportive and to achieve multimodal access to stations and connections to nearby major trip generators by providing, where appropriate: a. Connections to local and regional transit services to support transit service integration. b. Infrastructure to support active transportation, including sidewalks, bicycle lanes, and secure bicycle parking. c. Commuter pick-up/drop-off areas. Subsection 16 (16) of the Planning Act indicates that the official plan of an upper- tier municipality may include policies that identify the area surrounding and including an existing or planned higher order transit station or stop as a protected MTSA and delineate the area’s boundaries, and if the official plan includes such policies it must also contain policies that: a. identify the minimum number of residents and jobs, collectively, per hectare that are planned to be accommodated within the area; and b. require official plans of the relevant lower-tier municipality or municipalities to include policies that, (i) identify the authorized uses of land in the area and of buildings or structures on lands in the area; and (ii) identify the minimum densities that are authorized with respect to buildings and structures on lands in the area. 2.2 Metrolinx Regional Transportation Plan, 2041 In March 2018, the Metrolinx Board adopted the 2041 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) for the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA). The RTP is a strategy centred on creating an integrated, multimodal regional - 111 - 7 | Envision Durham transportation system that will serve the needs of residents, businesses and institutions. It sets out a broad vision for where and how the region will grow and identifies policies on transportation planning in the GTHA and supports the Provincial Growth Plan. The Goals of the RTP are to achieve strong connections, complete travel experiences, and sustainable and healthy communities. The RTP contains actions to better integrate transportation planning and land use, especially around transit stations and Mobility Hubs. The RTP recognizes that sufficient land use density at stations is important to ensure significant two-way, all- day ridership on GO Regional Express Rail (RER). The RTP recognizes that MTSAs can be attractive locations for new employment, public institutions and regionally significant services, as well as prime opportunities for collaboration by public and private sectors to create transit-oriented developments that enhance transit service. MTSAs are intended to create important transit network connections, integrate various modes of transportation and accommodate an intensive concentration of places to live, work, shop or play. They are particularly significant because of their combination of existing or planned frequent rapid transit service with an elevated development potential. 3. Regional Policy Context The Region has a suite of policies and initiatives that support the establishment and development of MTSAs. 3.1 Durham Region Strategic Plan On June 24, 2020 Regional Council adopted the Durham Region Strategic Plan 2020-2024 and endorsed five broad strategic goals and twenty-three supporting priorities. Durham Region’s Strategic Plan identifies five Strategic Goals to help guide and achieve its vision of a healthy, prosperous community for all. It is important that MTSA policies align with the strategic goals. The information below describes how MTSAs and TOD policy research aligns with each Strategic Plan goal. Goal #1: Environmental Sustainability Objective: To protect the environment for the future by demonstrating leadership in sustainability and addressing climate change. This includes accelerating the transition to a clean energy economy through collaborations that optimize the economic, environmental, health and social benefits for our community. Applicability of MTSA policies: Promoting sustainable transportation options within new and existing development areas around MTSAs can help support and encourage more people to use active modes of transportation which helps to reduce pollution, energy consumption and costs. Emerging technologies should also be taken into consideration to support environmental sustainability in these areas. - 112 - Envision Durham| 8 Goal #2: Community Vitality Objective: To foster an exceptional quality of life with services that contribute to strong neighbourhoods, vibrant and diverse communities, and influence our safety and well-being. Focuses on building complete communities that are walkable, well- connected and have a mix of attainable housing. Applicability of MTSA policies: Through the promotion and integration of mixed-use developments within MTSAs, new community and cultural amenities, housing, and employment opportunities can be provided for people to live, work and play. Enhancement of existing cultural amenities in MTSAs is also supported. MTSAs that prioritize active modes of transportation over parking and car trips support the achievement of this goal. Goal #3: Economic Prosperity Objective: To build a strong and resilient economy that maximizes opportunities for business and employment growth, innovation and partnership. This includes ensuring an adequate supply of serviced employment land is available in the right place, at the right time, to attract new investment and help existing businesses grow. Applicability of MTSA policies: Encouraging mixed used development within MTSAs can help attract new businesses and people to these areas to generate new employment. New development interest contributes to higher returns on investment. Goal #4: Social Investment Objective: To ensure a range of programs, services and supports are available and accessible to those in need, so that no individual is left behind. This includes improving housing choice, affordability and sustainability. Applicability of MTSAs policies: By providing a range of housing choices near transit including a mix of residential housing types and tenures, new development can accommodate a diverse range of ages, incomes, household sizes and stages of life. Goal #5: Service Excellence Objective: To provide exceptional value to Durham taxpayers through responsive, effective and fiscally sustainable service delivery. This includes efficient use of resources through coordinated service delivery and partnerships and the continuation of providing critical infrastructure services for current and future generations. Applicability of MTSA policies: This goal is more indirectly supported than explicitly supported through MTSA and TOD guidelines and policies. Utilizing different tools and programs that can be leveraged to help implement the desired development around MTSAs, such as public private partnerships, is one way that this goal is supported through MTSAs and TOD. - 113 - 9 | Envision Durham 3.2 Current Durham Regional Official Plan The current Durham Regional Official Plan provides high level policies which support the establishment of MTSAs. Policy 11.3.18 indicates that in support of existing and future transit services, development adjacent to Transportation Hubs, Commuter Stations and Transit Spines designated on Schedule 'C' – Map 'C3', Transit Priority Network, shall provide for: a) complementary higher density and mixed uses at an appropriate scale and context in accordance with Policy 8A.2.2 for Transportation Hubs and Commuter Stations and Policy 8A.2.9, where transit spines are within Regional Corridors; b) buildings oriented towards the street, to reduce walking distances to transit facilities; c) facilities which support non-auto modes including: drop off facilities, bus bays, bus loops, bus shelters, walkways, trails and other pedestrian and cycling facilities; and d) limited surface parking and the potential redevelopment of existing surface parking. 3.3 Transportation Master Plan The Durham Transportation Master Plan (TMP) was endorsed by Regional Council in December 2017 and is a strategic planning document that defines the policies and programs needed to manage anticipated transportation demands. The TMP is a multi- modal plan focusing on walking, cycling, public transit, autos and goods movement. The establishment and implementation of MTSA policies addresses, a number of key Directions in the TMP including: • Strengthening the bond between land use and transportation; • Elevating the role of integrated public transit including Rapid Transit; • Making walking and cycling more practical and attractive; • Promoting sustainable travel choices; • Investing strategically in the transportation system. It also supports key actions recommended in the TMP including: • Working with area municipalities to adopt Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Guidelines and applying TOD principles in the planning and design of new developments in MTSAs; • Promoting transit-supportive development in areas served by the Higher-Order Transit network; • Supporting planning and design for walking and cycling through the development review process and the implementation of design and policy documents; • Enhancing promotion to improve awareness and use of sustainable travel modes. • Create a travel demand management (TDM)-supportive development strategy to help ensure that new developments are planned and designed to support transit, active transportation and carpooling. - 114 - Envision Durham| 10 3.4 Long Term Transit Strategy and Transit Oriented Development Study In 2012, the Region of Durham endorsed a Long-Term Transit Strategy (LTTS) which looked at rapid transit as a component of sustainable transportation options, to help the Region address anticipated transportation demands and the role of rapid transit to 2031 and beyond. The LTTS indicated that investments in rapid transit can act as a catalyst for future land use development, can attract business and accommodate future employment growth in the Region. It noted that investments in transit can improve the quality of life by reducing automobile dependency and use which can lead to a reduction in harmful emissions and improve air quality. As part of the LTTS, the Region developed a TOD Strategy to help inform an integrated approach to transit, land use planning and transit supportive urban form. Generally, the TOD Strategy identified the following components for successful TOD areas: • pedestrian priority areas that surround stations, where people can move from transit vehicles to pedestrian infrastructure, and where the safe and comfortable movement of pedestrians and cyclists warrant special design treatment; • pedestrian and cycling routes where essential connections to home, work, parks and other key destinations are provided; • integrating transit-supportive land uses by establishing a critical mass of people and an intensive transit- supportive mix of land uses including residential, commercial, institutional, civic, employment and community amenities; • creating urban and inspiring built form, where attractive pedestrian- friendly street-oriented buildings exhibit transit-supportive urban design characteristics; • managing and carefully designing parking facilities so that they do not undermine efforts to provide higher density, walkable urban places; • ensuring that transit station design contributes to the place-making, as the transit station will be a strong focal point for the community, must promote positive transit user experience, be easily accessible, particularly by active modes of transportation (e.g. walking and cycling). The station should also be more than mobility infrastructure, but a place where people feel comfortable and safe, and want to be; • recognizing the distinct character of each place in light of their location, surrounding context and potential future character. While the Regional Official Plan already includes policies related to higher intensity development in the vicinity of commuter stations, an update to these policies is required to conform to the Growth Plan policies regarding MTSAs and advance the Region’s direction for Transit Oriented Development TOD. - 115 - 11 | Envision Durham 4. The Importance of Transit Oriented Development In December 2019, the firm of N. Barry Lyon Consulting (NBLC) presented its findings regarding how Higher Order Transit (such as heavy rail [GO Rail]) and Light Rail Transit (LRT) stations tend to generate greater interest for developing surrounding lands than typical surface transit stops, as they represent high capital investments, permanent commitments to service, stronger transit ridership potential, and can serve as focal points for other transit routes and modes of transportation. NBLC found that TOD provides high density, compact development close to Higher Order Transit stations, and includes an integrated mix of uses such as office, residential, retail, community uses, and other uses that support transit ridership. The benefits of TOD include: • Building on the significant place- making opportunities surrounding transit stations, where pedestrian- oriented streets, parks, squares and buildings become comfortable and desirable gathering places. • Enhancing housing choice and affordability through higher density housing types, where seniors, students and lower-income earners can benefit from access to transit as a priority mode of travel. • Providing focal points for density, where there is a reduced need to drive, and where parking requirements for new developments can be lessened so they may develop more efficiently. • Providing opportunities for strong connections to local transit service and supporting their evolution into major transit hubs. • Providing opportunities for developing focal points for bicycle and active transportation, with facilities and amenities that support these non-automobile forms of travel. • Optimizing the value of transit and infrastructure investment around transit nodes. Several attributes are required for transit to have a positive impact: • There must be frequent, reliable and affordable transit service. • There must be strong market fundamentals, including strong population growth potential and a positive economic context, including a favourable debt and job environment. • There must be a positive market context (i.e. the type and quality of community and the associated commercial and public amenities), such as employment opportunities, retail, parks, community centres and schools will affect the marketability of an area to different market segments. • There must be positive development economics, such that the costs of development are in line with market pricing. • There must be a supportive planning framework, such that official plan policies and supportive zoning requirements remove unnecessary - 116 - Envision Durham| 12 obstacles and provide greater certainty regarding acceptable built form and densities. • Adequate infrastructure and development fees (parkland, development charges, etc.) that must not be prohibitive. • There must be available vacant or underutilized development sites. Transit can improve market demand and positively impact residential, office, and retail/service uses through: • Increasing the value of existing land uses. • Stimulating land use changes and capturing associated market demand. • Creating market demand to support land uses that may otherwise not occur (i.e. office uses). 5. Best Practices Review In support of the principles and policy recommendations that shape growth and development around Durham’s proposed MTSAs, a Best Practices review was undertaken. Five municipalities were examined: 1. York Region – Transit Oriented Development Guidelines 2. City of Hamilton – Transit Oriented Development Guidelines 3. Region of Waterloo – Regional Official Plan 4. City of Coquitlam – Transit-Oriented Development Strategy 5. City of Winnipeg – Transit Oriented Development Handbook Three key themes emerged from the review. These include: • Density Typologies; • Tools and Programs; and • Incentives and Regulations. Appendix A includes a detailed summary of the Best Practices Review. 6. Delineation Approach In June 2019, proposed delineations of MTSAs were presented within the Urban Systems Discussion Paper for Envision Durham, based on extensive consultation with area municipal planning staff. The following approach was taken: • A 500- and 800-metre radius from the centre of the rail platform was applied, to identify a generalized walking distance of approximately 10 minutes. • An actual walking distance was mapped, based on applying existing and planned pedestrian infrastructure to identify a true walking distance. • Other planning boundaries (such as other SGAs and Secondary Plans) were identified. Wherever possible, MTSA boundaries were aligned with boundaries within area municipal planning documents (including Official Plans and Secondary Plans). • Non-developable areas were avoided, where appropriate (such as natural areas, highways, utilities, rail corridors, etc.) to form the outer boundaries of the MTSA. - 117 - 13 | Envision Durham • Existing and/or planned pedestrian connections across non-developable areas were identified. If a connection does not exist or is not planned, the area beyond the non-developable area was not included. • Areas unsuitable and unplanned for significant intensification, such as stable neighbourhoods intended to remain as low density, were identified. Areas not intended to be redeveloped were excluded. • Employment Areas were identified, and a determination was made as to (re)development potential. o If development potential exists, it was included in the MTSA. o If development potential does not exist, a determination of impact on the density target would inform whether an alternative target should be requested from the Province. • Boundaries were adjusted, and in some cases extended beyond the 800-metre walkshed to include underutilized or vacant lands viewed as ideal for redevelopment and/or intensification. • Logical planning boundaries were used (such as property lines, centrelines of roads, natural features, etc.) to delineate the MTSA boundary. A subsequent delineation exercise was completed taking into account input received through the Urban Systems Discussion Paper, additional information and research undertaken by the projects’ consultants, discussions with area municipal staff and public and agency input. In addition, due to the February 2020 Metrolinx announcement that “Option 2” was preferred (utilizing the existing CP Rail [CPR] spur over Highway 401) and that it would would proceed to the Preliminary Design Business Case process, the station location and the associated MTSA delineation area for Thornton’s Corners has been shifted eastward. The proposed delineations and underlying land use assumptions for each proposed MTSA is included in Appendix B. 7. What we have Heard Comments have been received from area municipal staff, local agencies, as well as members of the public pertaining to MTSA delineations and potential policies. Stakeholders are generally supportive of the proposed delineations and overall densities. Specific requests were received for additions to the MTSA boundaries, some of which have been accommodated, as well as considerations for phasing of development within MTSAs. Input was also received on how certain stakeholders believe MTSA conversions should be treated. A summary of the stakeholder input is provided in Appendix C. The input received from various stakeholders has informed and shaped the refinements to - 118 - Envision Durham| 14 the MTSA delineations first proposed in June 2019 through the Urban Systems Discussion Paper, and the proposed policies directions detailed below. 8. Proposed Policy Directions The following policy directions are proposed for discussion to serve as a guide for the planning and development of MTSAs in Durham Region. 8.1 Purpose The purpose of a future Regional Official Plan Amendment for MTSAs will be to establish the land use and policy framework to guide the development of identified lands within MTSAs along the Lakeshore East GO Rail line, and the approved easterly extension within the Region of Durham. The amendment would: • delineate MTSAs; • establish general land use, infrastructure and implementation policies; • guide their development as Transit Oriented Communities (TOC). The foundations of the Amendment include the Growth Plan, the Durham Transportation Master Plan Update 2017, the Durham Region Strategic Plan 2020-2024, area municipal official plans and studies, a review of best practices as well as public, agency, landowner and stakeholder submissions through Envision Durham. The amendment will establish a vision for MTSAs based on the principles of TOD. 8.2 Vision MTSAs represent unparalleled opportunities to create TOCs anchored by a Rapid Transit Stations, each with its own identity, containing a wide range of housing opportunities, including affordable housing, office uses, street-oriented commercial uses, institutional uses, a wide range of recreational uses and public amenities so as to establish new destinations and introduce a sense of place. MTSAs will be areas to support and foster innovation and entrepreneurship. MTSAs will be integrated mixed-use development offering convenient, direct, sheltered pedestrian access from high- density development sites to Station amenities and access points. Development within MTSAs will require new road improvements, pedestrian and cycling connections to Rapid Transit Stations, and other improvements to the surrounding Regional and/or local road infrastructure to support their development as TOCs. Access from MTSAs to their respective GO Stations will be planned and developed to prioritize pedestrians and cyclists. MTSAs will accommodate a variety of transportation modes, developed with active streetscapes and built form that places priority on pedestrian comfort and connectivity, well connected cycling facilities and amenities, and the establishment of destinations for people to live, work, shop and play. Policies are intended to ensure that densities are appropriately transitioned to - 119 - 15 | Envision Durham neighbouring lower density areas to ensure compatibility. Generally, the highest densities within MTSAs are intended to be concentrated on the station property and in close proximity to GO Stations to integrate the stations with development. Densities will transition to lower density areas in a manner appropriate to the context of each site. Policies will ensure that required transportation, servicing and other infrastructure is in place prior to, or coincident with new development within MTSAs. It is intended that area municipal official plans will provide detailed policies, land use designations and Urban Design Guidelines to guide the desired land use, density, built form and the pedestrian oriented public realm within MTSAs. New development will be substantially based on the provision of structured parking and encouragement of new technologies and approaches to shared parking. Since each of the MTSAs have unique characteristics, policies account for their unique character, scope and context. 8.3 General Policy Directions 1. MTSAs will be delineated on the applicable Schedules of the Durham Regional Official Plan and area municipal official plans. 2. Each MTSA will be planned to achieve a minimum density of 150 people and jobs per hectare. This will be a minimum density requirement that will be measured within all of the lands in each MTSA. The Region and the applicable area municipalities will monitor the achievement of required densities over time. However, the existing Oshawa GO Rail/VIA Rail station will require an alternative density target, due to the lack of opportunity for TOD and the built context of this station. 3. In cases where an MTSA and a designated Urban Growth Centre or Regional Centre overlap, the higher density requirements shall apply. 4. The Region will encourage area municipalities to establish minimum job requirements in MTSA’s within their respective Official Plans. 5. The Region will encourage the provision of alternative development standards to support TOD, including reduced minimum parking requirements and the establishment maximum parking requirements for both privately-initiated development applications and area municipal zoning by-laws. 6. The Region will require area municipalities to complete secondary plans and/or block plans to included detailed land use designations and policies consistent with the policies of the Durham Regional Official Plan that help to achieve the objectives of Transit Oriented Development. 7. Boundaries to MTSAs may be refined by the area municipality, in consultation with the Region, without the need for an amendment to the Regional Official Plan, except where such boundaries coincide with roads, rail corridors or defined - 120 - Envision Durham| 16 environmental features. Minor refinements may include the addition of additional parcels adjacent to an MTSA boundary, or to account for refinement of environmental features as a result of detailed study. 8. MTSAs will consist of both higher intensity employment uses and residential uses that support the use of transit and achieve the strategic growth objectives of the Regional Official Plan. 9. Development within MTSAs will be based on the principle of complete communities, informed by innovation, technology and entrepreneurship, where compact mixed-use development is provided, and active modes of transportation are developed, so people can live, work, shop and have access to a wide range of services. 10. The Region, in consultation with the Province and applicable area municipalities, may designate additional MTSAs coincident with planning for future rapid transit facilities or stations. 8.3.1 LAND USE POLICIES MTSAs will support a broad mix of compatible uses at high densities, so that vibrant, active places are created and emerge as focal points within their respective communities. MTSAs will be planned on the basis of providing active places and streetscapes, allowing a wide range and mix of high-density transit-oriented uses, based on pedestrian oriented built form. The following land uses will be permitted within MTSAs: 1. Higher density residential uses including mid-rise and high-rise apartments, stacked townhouses, and live-work units; 2. Compatible employment uses, institutional uses, educational facilities and post-secondary institutions; 3. Places of worship within mixed-use buildings rather than in freestanding buildings; 4. Commercial uses including retail, both convenience retail and small-scale retail uses, restaurants, personal and professional service shops, and day care uses; 5. Cultural, art and entertainment uses; 6. Mixed use buildings that integrate community and commercial uses with upper-storey apartment and/or office uses to ensure amenities are provided in close proximity population and employment growth within MTSAs; 7. Home occupations; 8. Public uses including infrastructure, parks, libraries, recreation/community centres, urban squares, trails and conservation uses. Automobile-oriented uses, including drive- through establishments, service stations, land extensive vehicle-oriented uses, car washes, warehousing, public self-storage facilities, similar uses and lower density and land extensive uses are not permitted. - 121 - 17 | Envision Durham 8.3.2 URBAN DESIGN AND BUILT FORM Within MTSAs, the following urban design and built form policies will apply: 1. Areas within, adjacent, and in close proximity to Commuter Stations and Transportation Hubs, will be reserved for the highest development densities that showcase building heights to create focal points within the MTSAs; 2. All development will be designed to be compact in form and pedestrian- oriented; 3. Buildings will frame streets, with frequent pedestrian entrances; 4. Vehicular access to private property will generally be along local roads; 5. Rear lanes will be encouraged in MTSAs to serve development loading, servicing and vehicular parking access rather than along streets, where appropriate; 6. Vehicular parking will be located below grade or located in a manner to minimize the visual impact on streets, parks, open spaces, pedestrian walkways and other land uses. With the exception of bus parking, surface parking will be minimized. 7. Higher density buildings will be designed in manner to be compatible with its local context. Design approaches will be applied to support appropriate transitions to surrounding areas and public spaces; 8. Developments within the MTSAs will conform to the land use designations and the Urban Design requirements specified within area municipal official plans and urban design guidelines. 9. Local road and private access spacing and access to Regional arterial roads will be addressed on a case-by-case basis. 10. Requiring the incorporation of design elements to assist with wayfinding within and defining gateways/ entrances into MTSAs. 11. Connections to the station area will be provided to enhance the customer experience, including weather protection and station way-finding. 8.3.3 PUBLIC REALM & OPEN SPACE Within MTSAs, the Region will: 1. Encourage place-making that provides active gathering spaces and a destination within the MTSAs. 2. Encourage and support an integrated trail system and park system for various levels of use year-round; 3. Encourage area municipal policies to require high quality, compact streetscape design form with suitable pedestrian and cycling amenities that complement the establishment of TOCs, including sidewalks or multi-use paths on both sides of all roads, appropriate landscaping, the provision of cycling lanes where appropriate, pedestrian-scaled lighting, and consideration for pedestrian amenities. 4. Encourage streets and boulevards to be designed to allow for patios, sitting areas, adequate space for pedestrians and streetscape plantings for shade and beautification. 5. Encourage sustainable technologies, permeable pavers, low impact - 122 - Envision Durham| 18 development techniques, and designs which support the use of renewable energy in the design of new development, the public realm and streetscapes. 8.3.4 MOBILITY AND ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION Future residents and workers will be provided with convenient, safe and comfortable pedestrian and cycling access to facilitate an approximate 10-minute walk from anywhere in an MTSA to the rapid transit station. Within MTSAs: 1. Road networks will be designed to support transit use, pedestrian travel, and cycling while accommodating automobile travel. 2. Planning and development will be based on the principle of establishing transit-oriented places, where active transportation is supported through safe, well-designed and direct connections between and amongst component uses and transit stations. 3. Trail networks will be planned and developed to facilitate direct connections while creating recreational opportunities. 4. Adequate and secure long-term and short-term bicycle parking and end- of-trip facilities will be provided; 5. A highly permeable road network with shorter blocks and frequent controlled crossings will be provided to optimize opportunities for safe and flexible pedestrian travel options. 6. The provision of appropriate pedestrian, cycling and vehicular connections will be included as a condition of development approval as appropriate. 7. The design of roadways will include measures to control traffic speeds while promoting safe, attractive environments for pedestrians and cyclists. Measures such as best practice geometric design standards, enhanced streetscaping, on-street parking, and other features are encouraged. 8. Pedestrian areas will be designed to ensure that wind and thermal comfort conditions are not adversely affected. 8.3.5 RAIL CORRIDORS Rail Corridors provide passenger rail services, regional commuter rail services and freight rail services. New development must be compatible with rail services. In this respect, within MTSAs: 1. By-laws may be passed to permit development, in accordance with the policies for the MTSA, involving decking over a Rail Corridor, provided that all appropriate technical studies have been undertaken and only in accordance with the policies for the MTSA, to the satisfaction of the applicable railway authority, provided: a. existing and future capacity and safety of train operations in the Rail Corridor would not be compromised; b. flexibility for future expansion to rail operations and modifications and improvements to the track and signal system will not be reduced; - 123 - 19 | Envision Durham c. all environmental, safety and mitigation concerns associated with such development, including noise, vibration, air quality, parking, snow and ice accumulation, servicing, pedestrian access and vehicle access, and the capacity of the transportation system serving such development have been satisfactorily addressed to the satisfaction of the rail authority, the Region and the applicable area municipality. 8.3.6 IMPLEMENTATION The Region will ensure conformity to the policies of this Plan. Through the review of development applications, the Region will identify complete application requirements, and may require agreements and/or development approval conditions as appropriate and as authorized under the Planning Act. The Region is considering the appropriateness and suitability of a Regional Community Improvement Plan to establish incentives or otherwise utilize the powers under Part IV of the Planning Act, to support the principles and policies of the ROP, including measures to support affordable housing, high-density mixed-use development, sustainability, and energy efficiency, as permissible under the Planning Act. Within MTSAs: 1. Approval of development will be contingent on the availability of services and transportation facilities. The Region and the area municipalities may require phasing of development on the basis of the capacity of the transportation system and/or servicing availability, and/or the timing of required infrastructure. The Region and the area municipalities may require the coordination of development applications through measures such as Master Development Agreements or other similar approaches, to ensure an orderly, coordinated and phased approach to the provision of transportation, servicing and other infrastructure requirements are provided prior to or coincident with development. 2. Prior to approval of development, the Region may require cost-sharing agreements, front-ending agreements or other measures as appropriate to ensure the timely delivery of infrastructure and the equitable distribution of development and infrastructure costs. 3. Area municipal official plans will include land use designations, minimum density requirements, built form and urban design policies, and implementation policies, consistent with this plan for implementation through zoning by-laws and/or conditions of development approval. 8.3.7 INCLUSIONARY ZONING Inclusionary zoning is a land-use planning tool that enables municipalities to require through the passage of a zoning by-law, affordable housing units be included in new residential developments. - 124 - Envision Durham| 20 Ontario Regulation 232/18 enables municipalities to implement inclusionary zoning. Prior to the passage of an inclusionary zoning by-law, an assessment report is required as part of the development of Official Plan policies. The assessment report must include an analysis of demographics, income, housing supply, and housing need and demand; current average market prices and rents; and analysis of the potential impacts of inclusionary zoning on the housing market. On September 3, 2019, the Province of Ontario made changes to the legislation for inclusionary zoning through Bill 108 (More Homes, More Choice Act). The changes limit where municipalities can implement inclusionary zoning to Protected Major Transit Station Areas (areas surrounding and including an existing or planned higher order transit station that have a detailed implementation framework in accordance with Section 16(15) of the Planning Act), a Development Permit System Are, or areas as ordered by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. In Durham, the existing GO Stations would be considered Protected MTSAs. To extend inclusionary zoning to the four MTSAs along the GO East Extension to Bowmanville, an Order from the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing would be required. There is an opportunity to develop an inclusionary zoning approach for MTSAs in Durham. Subject to the interest of the area municipalities on such an approach, the Region could prepare the required assessment report and enabling policies for implementation by the local area municipalities, outside of the MTSA ROPA process. 8.3.8 MONITORING The effect of new policies, implementing by- laws and projects within MTSAs will be monitored in consultation with the area municipalities, based on the following metrics: a. the amount, type and pace of development; b. the mix and diversity of land uses in the area; c. the re-use and demolition of existing buildings, including heritage buildings; d. the amount and type of employment; e. the overall population; f. the unit count and mix of unit types; g. the population to job ratio; and h. parking spaces, loading facilities, transit improvements and active transportation infrastructure. 9. Next Steps This Paper provides policy proposals and delineations for proposed Major Transit Station Areas along the Lakeshore East GO Rail line in Durham, from Pickering to Bowmanville. Proposed MTSA delineations and policies within this Paper have been developed by Regional staff as a result of staff to staff discussions, public and agency input, best practices research, and detailed analysis undertaken by the Envision Durham project consultants. - 125 - 21 | Envision Durham This paper will be circulated for public and agency comment and to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing for its review, for a 90-day period. Following this review period, a recommended Regional Official Plan Amendment will be presented for consideration by Regional Council. This amendment will then require the approval of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing in accordance with the Planning Act. List of Acronyms CPR – Canadian Pacific Rail LRT – Light Rail Transit LTTS – Long-Term Transit Strategy MCR – Municipal Comprehensive Review MTSA – Major Transit Station Areas PTC – Priority Transit Corridors RER – Regional Express Rail ROP – Regional Official Plan ROPA – Regional Official Plan Amendment SGA – Strategic Growth Area TDM – Travel Demand Management TOC – Transit Oriented Communities TOD – Transit-Oriented Development TMP – Transportation Master Plan - 126 - 1 | Envision Durham Appendix A: Best Practices Review In support of the principles and policy recommendations that shape growth and development around Durham’s proposed MTSAs, a Best Practices review was undertaken. Five municipalities were examined: 1. York Region – Transit Oriented Development Guidelines 2. City of Hamilton – Transit Oriented Development Guidelines 3. Region of Waterloo – Regional Official Plan 4. City of Coquitlam – Transit-Oriented Development Strategy 5. City of Winnipeg – Transit Oriented Development Handbook Three key themes emerged from the review. These include: • Density Typologies; • Tools and Programs; and • Incentives and Regulations. A description of these themes demonstrate how various TOD elements and characteristics are applied in these municipalities. DENSITY TYPOLOGIES Different typologies that illustrate how TOD guidelines and principles can be applied in different contexts were examined through these municipalities. These typologies offer insights into context specific standards pertaining to each area in order to implement TOD. The typologies include guidelines specific to different intensities and proximity to transit stations and stops. They offer a range of densities with highest densities and land use mix located in the urban centres and immediate proximity to MTSAs. TOOLS & PROGRAMS Each document identifies different tools and programs that can be leveraged to help implement the desired development around MTSAs. These tools can include: • Recommendations from Corridor Studies • Station Area Plans • Tax Increment Financing (TIF) • Site Plan Guidelines • The promotion of partnerships such Public / Private Partnerships to help maximize the benefits of TOD in MTSAs. Other tools such as TOD Assessment tools and checklists are also identified and can be implemented following the approval of the Regional Official Plan Amendment to help achieve desired development outcomes. - 127 - 2 | Envision Durham INCENTIVES & REGULATIONS Several documents recognize and identify existing regulations such as policies and zoning bylaws as well as incentives to encourage successful outcomes of TOD around MTSAs. Some jurisdictions, including the City of Winnipeg, have developed specific TOD zoning while others have ensured that zoning applied to TOD areas is consistent with the principles and design features identified in the TOD guidelines and other related planning and policy documents. Examples of incentives include waiving development charges on certain lands that include affordable housing or community benefits, incentives for reducing automobile parking on site and using zoning bylaws to help support the desired growth, development and character of MTSAs. Common Elements and Principles: The documents identify TOD policies that contribute to successful implementation and outcomes. Land Use It is important to encourage transit supportive land uses around transit station areas. All the documents reviewed identify land use as a key principle and provide different ranges and intensities of density and mixed use as land use characteristics to help generate the highest transit trip generation for these areas. Density The scale and intensity of density varies between documents based on the proximity to transit stations and stops. The majority of the documents identify a range of residential, commercial and employment densities for lands around MTSAs based on proximity to each MTSA. Generally, medium and higher density residential, retail and employment growth ranges are identified around areas immediately adjacent to transit stations and stops to support investment in transportation infrastructure and increase ridership in these areas. Lower density ranges and mix of use are identified in areas farther away from station areas or areas such as suburban neighbourhoods. Mix of Uses The documents emphasize the importance of providing a mix of land uses like residential, commercial services, employment and public uses around transit station areas to help support transit trip generation. Servicing Development is to be adequately serviced with water, sanitary sewer, and stormwater management. Servicing strategies are helpful in identifying how servicing will be accommodated and potential impacts and capacity implications to the area of the development. Equitable financial contributions towards infrastructure improvements is also a key consideration for ensuring adequate servicing of developments in proximity to MTSAs. - 128 - 3 | Envision Durham Connections and Accessibility It is critical to provide attractive connections that offer clear, direct connections that are accessible by people of all ages, abilities and modes of travel when developing and designing areas around MTSAs. Sustainable Transportation Providing safe, direct and convenient ways for all users to navigate around MTSAs is identified in majority of the documents reviewed. There is a strong emphasis on prominent connections to public transit and provision of pedestrian and cycling access around MTSAs. Parking Reducing vehicular traffic and parking around MTSAs to help ensure an appropriate balance between automobiles and other modes of transportation. Pedestrian-friendly priority Prioritizing pedestrian activity over other less sustainable options to encourage higher volumes of pedestrian foot traffic around MTSAs. Urban Design and Built Form Developing attractive and functional environments that support compact built form and encourage easy pedestrian connectivity within and between developments is discussed in each document. Public Realm The majority of the documents address the importance of designing the public realm to establish direct and seamless connections to station entrances and areas and enhance building design and the connection between surrounding streets and stations. Open Spaces Including additional public open spaces that provide access to community amenities around MTSAs. These guidelines and strategies emphasize the integration of open spaces and greenspaces can help achieve more equitable access to the public realm. Mix of Housing Type and Tenure: Providing increased and more affordable housing choices near transit including a mix of residential housing types to support both rental and home ownership for a diverse range of ages, incomes, household sizes and stages of life. Healthy Economy Providing economic development support in these areas will help increase employment and housing options. . MTSA policies can help encourage revitalization of main streets and mature neighbourhoods through increased employment opportunities and housing options in these areas. Employment Development around MTSAs can help attract new businesses and people to these areas to help generate population-serving employment. - 129 - 4 | Envision Durham 5.3 Best Practices Summary The table below summarizes elements in selected Best Practices documents, broken down into five broad categories as a way of identifying common approaches the Region could adopt. Table 1: Best Practices Summary Elements BEST PRACTICES York Region City of Hamilton Region of Waterloo City of Coquitlam City of Winnipeg LAND USE General • Concentrate new employment opportunities within 200 metres of transit stops • Locate within 400 metres of transit in TOD areas and urban areas • Creation of complete communities with development patterns, densities and an appropriate mix of land uses that encourage the use of transit. • Promote mixed-use high- residential and midrise development. • Locate highest densities and uses adjacent to stations. • Concentrate land use mix in core areas with reduced mix further away from transit stations. Mixed Use Mix of: • Residential • Office • Retail Mix of: • Residential • Commercial • Employment • Retail Mix of: • Residential • Non-residential • Employment • Institutional • Recreational opportunities Mix of: • Residential • Commercial • Employment Mix of: • Residential • Office • Retail • Entertainment Affordable Housing Not specified • Support increased supply and diversity in housing types/tenures around transit, specifically in urban areas and those with higher density targets. • Promotes the provision of a full and diverse range and mix of permanent housing that is safe, affordable, of adequate size and meets the accessibility requirements • Recognizes that affordable housing plays a key role in • Promotes increase in affordable housing choices in close proximity to transit. • Encourages density bonusing for development that provides affordable housing. • Supports greater affordable housing options and choice including type and tenure. - 130 - 5 | Envision Durham Elements BEST PRACTICES York Region City of Hamilton Region of Waterloo City of Coquitlam City of Winnipeg attracting and supporting a diversified and stable business environment. DENSITY General • Concentrates highest densities around transit stations • Clusters highest density within 400m of the transit station • Concentrates increased densities 600 to 800 m from rapid transit station to support and ensure the viability of existing and planned rapid transit service levels. • 2.5x lot area in urban areas, decreases density as distance from transit station increases • Concentrates highest densities around transit stations in the core/urban areas Residential Not specified Low: < 60 units per hectare Medium: 60-100 units per hectare High: 100 -200 units per hectare Not specified. • Area municipalities to develop station area plans. Not specified Low: 24-49 units per hectare Medium: 62-247 units per hectare High: 99-371 units per hectare Commercial Long term goal of 2.5 Floor Space Index (FSI) 0.5-1.5 Floor Area Ratio (FAR) Not specified. Not specified Not specified Employment • Concentrates new employment within 200 metres of transit hubs • 120-150 people and jobs per hectare in Urban Areas • Compact urban form around transit stations with a greater mix of employment, housing and services in close proximity to each other. Not specified Not specified - 131 - 6 | Envision Durham Elements BEST PRACTICES York Region City of Hamilton Region of Waterloo City of Coquitlam City of Winnipeg BUILT FORM Scale Not specified Suburban and Urban Corridors: 2-6 storeys Urban: 6-12 storeys Not specified. Not specified Low to medium density areas: 2-5 storeys Urban neighbourhoods: 3 to 12 storeys Urban Centre: 4 - 30 storeys CONNECTIVITY Walking distance to transit station or stop • 200 to 500 metres (about a 5 to 10-minute walk) • 150-300 metres walking distance to access work and 400-800 metres for residential areas 600 to 800 m metres radius of a rapid transit station. • 400 metres to 800 metres of transit area • 400 metres of transit stations PARKING General • Reduced parking standards, provide priority parking for carpooling, shared parking etc. • Discourages new auto related uses within 400m of a transit station area. • Discourage surface lots, preference for underground or structure parking, where feasible. • Encourages the minimization of surface parking areas and reduced parking standards through completion of a parking management strategy. • Surface parking is to be minimized. • On site parking stalls in the core areas shall be in the form of structured parking. • Structured parking integrated into development. Parking ratio minimums based on proximity to station. Parking Standards & Strategies  Includes: •Locating parking areas in rear or side yards • Provision of carpool priority parking spaces • Discourages on- street parking adjacent to major transit station  Includes: • Controlling the amount and location of parking • Ensuring appropriate balance between automobiles and other modes of transportation. • Inclusion of  Includes: • Encouraging van and carpooling, preferential parking for car and van pools, shared parking • Encourages reduced parking standards where TDM Strategies  Includes: • Parking on site should be concealed or below grade. • Limit the provision of on street parking in Transit-Oriented Development study areas and  Includes: • Parking should be integrated into development and below grade or behind development. • Reduce on- street parking around urban areas and high - 132 - 7 | Envision Durham Elements BEST PRACTICES York Region City of Hamilton Region of Waterloo City of Coquitlam City of Winnipeg areas or corridors. • Site plan and building placement should discourage surface parking and allow for them to be phased out over time. • Parking facilities shared with adjoining properties. • Supports cash- in-lieu of parking. use of shared parking area spaces, offer transit passes, allow for carpool parking, promote car- sharing programs, and restricted parking hours. • Provide park and ride areas to encourage • Does not permit on-street parking on TOD corridors and limit parking on streets adjacent to TOD stations. • Supports cash- in-lieu of parking Residential: Urban Areas: • 0.75-1.2 /300 m2 Suburban: • 1-2 per unit Commercial/Ret ail: Urban Areas: •1-2/300m2 Suburban Areas: • 1-4/100m2 are incorporated into development application. • Area Municipal parking strategies encouraged to support existing and planned transit service levels and Transit Oriented Development. core station areas. • Reductions to on-street parking requirements within core and shoulder station areas will be considered if a TDM plan and strategy is developed. • Supports cash- in-lieu of parking. • Encourages development to provide EV charging stations • Supports cash- in-lieu of parking • Encourages use of parking time limits, pricing and other management strategies to encourage parking turnover. transit frequency areas. • Encourages shared parking within a TOD area instead of per building. • Encourages paid parking or time-limited to discourage automobile use. - 133 - 1 | Envision Durham Appendix B: Overview of MTSAs and Proposed Delineations There are four existing stations within Durham. These include: • Pickering GO Station; • Ajax GO Station; • Whitby GO Station; and • Existing Oshawa GO Station. These station areas (except Existing Oshawa GO Station)are expected meet the requirements of the Growth Plan, which emphasizes the significance of MTSAs and the prioritization of intensification and increased densities within these areas which are located along Priority Transit Corridors (PTC). In order to support the expansion of the GO Lakeshore line to Bowmanville, four additional MTSAs have been proposed along the CP Rail line. These include: • Thornton’s Corners; • Central Oshawa; • Courtice; and • Bowmanville. Figure 1 illustrates all eight of the MTSAs. Figure 1 - Context Map of Major Transit Station Areas - 134 - Envision Durham| 2 Pickering GO Station MTSA The Pickering GO Station MTSA is meant to provide a foundation for urbanization of the downtown area in Pickering to support a range of uses and enhances connectivity within the area. The Downtown Pickering UGC aims to decrease reliance on the automobile by making it easier for people to use more active and sustainable modes of transportation through compact street network and sustainable development patterns. Figure 2 – Proposed Delineation – Pickering GO Station MTSA. - 135 - 3 | Envision Durham Ajax GO Station MTSA The Ajax GO Station MTSA aims to provide a mix of uses to take advantage of transit accessibility and to the surrounding employment lands. A portion of this area is identified in the Town’s Official Plan as an area that will facilitate high density mixed use that supports commuters while also providing places to live and work in proximity to transit while minimizing car use and promoting pedestrian connectivity. Figure 3 – Proposed Delineation – Ajax GO Station MTSA - 136 - Envision Durham| 4 Whitby GO Station MTSA The Whitby GO Station area is located on Brock Street just south of the 401. This area is a key hub for transportation that supports medium to high density development and better transit, cycling and pedestrian connections to major transit stations and surrounding neighbourhoods and the waterfront. It seeks to maximize the potential of the GO Station lands for mixed use development to support a variety of amenities and activities. Figure 4 – Proposed Delineation – Whitby GO Station MTSA. - 137 - 5 | Envision Durham Existing Oshawa GO Station MTSA The existing Oshawa GO station is located at the southwest corner of Thornton Road South and Bloor Street West within employment lands. This area supports and encourages the enhancement of connectivity within this area to support more sustainable modes of transportation. The existing Oshawa GO Station is currently not an area of focus for growth and TOD. Figure 5 – Proposed Delineation – Existing Oshawa GO Station MTSA. - 138 - Envision Durham| 6 Thornton’s Corners GO Station MTSA Thornton’s Corners is located is an area that is currently designated for employment and commercial uses. The Thornton’s Corners GO Station site location was shifted to its proposed location along the CP Rail spur through the February 2020 Bowmanville Rail Service Extension: Initial Business Case Update’. The MTSA includes lands in both Oshawa and Whitby, is in close proximity to Durham College and Trent University Durham, and presents the opportunity to bring mixed use to the area. The transit station has the potential to act as a catalyst for growth, investment, and future market demand. Figure 6 – Proposed Delineation – Thornton’s Corners GO Station MTSA. - 139 - 7 | Envision Durham Central Oshawa The Central Oshawa MTSA is located south of Downtown Oshawa, at the Central Oshawa GO Station north of Highway 401. The MTSA abuts the Downtown Oshawa Regional Centre/Urban Growth Centre. The proposed MTSA delineation includes a variety of uses, including low and high- density residential uses, commercial uses along Simcoe Street and Ritson Road, and access to greenspace and trails like the Michael Starr Trail. Simcoe Street is planned as a future rapid transit corridor, with a terminus at the Central Oshawa station, with the intent to improve connections between the GO station, Downtown, and North Oshawa. Connectivity and proximity to Higher Order Transit, as well as opportunities to redevelop existing underutilized areas, advances provincial planning policy for TOD in this location. Figure 7 – Proposed Delineation – Central Oshawa GO Station MTSA - 140 - Envision Durham| 8 Courtice The Courtice MTSA is currently designated as industrial / employment lands. The vision for the area is a mixed-use TOD community. The station area would support an array of residential uses, standalone and ground floor retail space, and major office development, in addition to parks and other community uses. There may also be opportunities to provide affordable housing around this station area by creating policy requirements early in the planning process. Further, the greenfield land provides a blank canvas to create a new mixed-use community with focus on TOD principles. The Courtice MTSA has the potential to be a unique, intensified centre. Figure 8 – Proposed Delineation – Courtice GO Station MTSA. - 141 - 9 | Envision Durham Bowmanville GO Station MTSA The Bowmanville MTSA is the eastern terminus of the GO East Rail extension and is located within the Bowmanville West Regional Centre. The MTSA is located within an already established market area, a short distance west of Downtown Bowmanville. The vision for the area is to grow its potential as a TOD community. This area has seen increased densities and intensification and the existing plazas and big box sites, located in proximity the proposed station area, present an opportunity for more urban style mixed-use development that retains the retail and commercial uses, which could generate employment and economic growth for the community. Figure 9 – Proposed Delineation – Bowmanville MTSA - 142 - Envision Durham| 1 Appendix C: What we have Heard A summary of the stakeholder input on the proposed MTSA delineations and policies is provided below. Input was provided by area municipal staff, agencies, as well as members of the public. Two questions were identified in the Municipal Comprehensive Review (MCR) Urban System Discussion Paper related to MTSAs. A comprehensive list of all questions is provided at the end of this document. MTSA Specific Questions: Question 11: Is the proposed approach for delineating and assigning density targets to existing and future Major Transit Station Areas appropriate? Question 12: Do you have any feedback or input on the propose draft Major Transit Station Area delineations? - 143 - Envision Durham| 2 Envision Durham| 2 Table 1: MCR Urban Systems Discussion Paper MTSA Comments Comment # Municipal / Public / Agency Comment or Description Response Question # 1 Municipal (Clarington) • Yes (they agree) Comment noted. The response confirms that Clarington staff agree with the proposed approach. 11 2 Municipal (Ajax) • Agree with the proposed approach as presented in the discussion paper. Comment noted. The Response confirms that Ajax staff agrees with the proposed approach. 11 3 Municipal (Oshawa) • The proposed approach for delineating existing and proposed Major Transit Station Areas (MTSAs) is appropriate. • The proposed approach for assigning density targets to both existing and proposed MTSAs is not appropriate. Further analysis is required to determine if employment areas within MTSAs should be protected, or alternatively, allowed to convert to permit residential uses. Comment noted. Response confirms that Oshawa staff agrees with the proposed delineation approach. The MTSA density targets are consistent with those identified in the Growth Plan and are meant to encourage and support the use of transit and achieve strategic growth 11 - 144 - Envision Durham| 3 Comment # Municipal / Public / Agency Comment or Description Response Question # • An alternative density target may be required for MTSAs that are located wholly within Provincially Significant Employment Areas. Further assessment should be conducted as part of the Region’s Land Needs Assessment. objectives of the Regional Official Plan. Regarding MTSAs located in Employment Areas, Employment Areas were identified, and a determination was made as to (re)development potential. • If development potential exists, it was included in the MTSA. • If development potential does not exist, a determination of impact on the density target would inform whether an alternative target should be requested from the Province. A key principle for development within MTSAs is to enhance connectivity and - 145 - Envision Durham| 4 Envision Durham| 4 Comment # Municipal / Public / Agency Comment or Description Response Question # generate employment and residential growth that supports transit use. Development within MTSA areas is also expected to help achieve the strategic growth objectives of the Regional Official Plan (ROP). It should also be noted that an alternative density target for the Existing Oshawa Station along the CN Rail line is being proposed, due to the lack of opportunity for TOD and the built context of this station. 4 Municipal (Whitby) • The proposed approach to MTSAs is appropriate, provided certain flexibility for lower-tier implementation is maintained. Comment noted. Response confirms that Whitby staff agrees with the proposed approach. 11 5 Municipal (Pickering) • The approach developed by the Region, in consultation with each of the local municipalities is appropriate, Comment noted. Response confirms that Pickering staff 11 & 12 - 146 - Envision Durham| 5 Comment # Municipal / Public / Agency Comment or Description Response Question # providing defensible and rational boundaries for these Major Transit Station Areas, as opposed to an arbitrary 500 metre or 800 metre radius from the centre of a station. • The proposed boundaries of the MTSA in Pickering, shown in Attachment #1 of Appendix D of the Region’s Growth Management – Urban System Discussion Paper, are consistent with those discussed with Regional staff. agree with the proposed approach. 6 Municipal (Brock) • No comment. • No MTSAs are identified in Brock. Comment noted. 11 7 Agency (Oshawa Environmental Advisory Committee) • The proposed approach seems appropriate. Comment noted. Response confirms that the Oshawa Environmental Advisory Committee agrees with the proposed approach. 11 8 Municipal (Ajax) • Town staff have and will continue to work closely with Regional staff on the delineation of the Ajax Major Transit Station Area. Comment noted. Response confirms that Ajax is supportive of working with the Region on confirming delineation of MTSAs and 12 - 147 - Envision Durham| 6 Envision Durham| 6 Comment # Municipal / Public / Agency Comment or Description Response Question # generally supportive of their proposed delineation. 9 Municipal (Clarington) • No - no further input on the draft Major Transit Station Area delineations is noted. Comment noted. Response confirms that Clarington agrees with the proposed delineations. 12 10 Municipal (Oshawa) • Staff support the proposed draft Major Transit Station Area delineations. Comment noted. Response confirms that Oshawa staff support the proposed MTSA delineations. 12 11 Municipal (Brock) • An assessment of connectivity between Brock Township and MTSAs would be helpful for future transit planning. • Response: On Demand transit is available in Brock Township. This service connects with scheduled transit routes that connect into the urban area, including to MTSAs. Comment noted. This comment has been shared with Durham Region Transit to examine future connections between existing and potential transit and MTSAs within Brock Township. 12 12 Municipal (Whitby) • Discussion will be needed at a later date (i.e. draft policy direction stage) regarding inclusion of ROP designated Employment Areas within MTSA’s. Comment noted. Employment Areas within MTSAs is a key consideration within this work. The proposed policy directions note that MTSAs 12 - 148 - Envision Durham| 7 Comment # Municipal / Public / Agency Comment or Description Response Question # will consist of both employment uses and residential uses (as defined in the area municipal official plan) that support the use of transit and achieve the strategic growth objectives of the Regional Official Plan. 13 Municipal (Ajax) • The ROP should require a five year supply of serviced land at all times to meet market needs for population and employment growth within Major Transit Station Areas. Comment noted. As part of the proposed implementation policies, specific policy directions have been drafted which state that “Approval of development would be contingent on the availability of services and transportation facilities. The Region may require the phasing of development on the basis of servicing availability or timing of infrastructure.” 4 14 Municipal (Oshawa) • Further guidance is required within MTSAs where the lands are designated as Provincially Significant The proposed policy directions for MTSAs acknowledge that the existing 6 - 149 - Envision Durham| 8 Envision Durham| 8 Comment # Municipal / Public / Agency Comment or Description Response Question # Employment Zones, yet also required to achieve a density target of 150 residents and jobs per gross hectare. Oshawa GO Rail/VIA Rail station will require an alternative density target, due to the lack of opportunity for TOD and the built context of this station. The draft policy directions also identify that if development potential does not exist [within a specific employment area], a determination of impact on the density target would inform whether an alternative target should be requested from the Province. 15 Municipal (City of Pickering) • The methodology for delineating Major Transit Station Areas (MTSA), and the resultant draft boundary delineation for Pickering’s MTSA, are supported Comment noted. Response confirms that Pickering supports the proposed MTSA delineations. 16 Municipal (Oshawa) • The Region, in consultation with area municipal staff, should consider a go- forward approach to assessing A key goal of the ROP is to delineate the MTSAs; establish general land use, - 150 - Envision Durham| 9 Comment # Municipal / Public / Agency Comment or Description Response Question # employment area conversions within Major Transit Station Areas that would then necessitate a settlement area boundary expansion. infrastructure and implementation policies. A Settlement Area boundary expansion would not automatically occur through the MTSA ROPA to offset any lands that were previously designated Employment Area and are now proposed to a part an MTSA delineation . Any expansion to the settlement area boundary will be considered through the Land Needs Assessment as part of the overall Growth Management Study/Envision Durham process. 17 Agency Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Staff • Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Staff • Achieving density targets within MTSAs must account for natural hazards, natural heritage features, and Comment noted. Through the delineation process non- developable areas were avoided, where appropriate (such as natural areas, 11 - 151 - Envision Durham| 10 Envision Durham| 10 Comment # Municipal / Public / Agency Comment or Description Response Question # stormwater management, whether identified outside or inside of an MCR process. • Amendments to the DROP should specify policy requirements for natural hazards, stormwater management and natural heritage to inform the delineation of MTSAs. highways, utilities, rail corridors, etc.) to form the outer boundaries of the MTSA. 18 Agency Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Staff • It is critical that MTSA boundaries be subject to meeting criteria for addressing natural hazard management, natural heritage and water resource protection. Comment noted. Through the delineation process non- developable areas were avoided, where appropriate (such as natural areas, highways, utilities, rail corridors, etc.) to form the outer boundaries of the MTSA. 12 19 Agency Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Staff • Should adopt policies to promote the use of, and develop a terms of reference for an “urban master environmental servicing plan” (Urban MESP) to coordinate major The Region may require the coordination of development applications through measures such as Master Development Agreements and Block Plans, to ensure an - 152 - Envision Durham| 11 Comment # Municipal / Public / Agency Comment or Description Response Question # redevelopment proposals within the urban envelop. • Response: Consider Secondary Plan and MESP for MTSAs. orderly, coordinated and phased approach to the provision of transportation, servicing and other requirements. 20 Public Weston Consulting regarding subject lands of 275 Westney Road South • Request to consider the subject lands (275 Westney Road South, Town of Ajax) for conversion through the Municipal Comprehensive Review process in accordance with Section 2.2.5.9 of the Growth Plan to permit residential mixed-use development. • A follow-up letter was received on January 14, 2020 to acknowledge that the subject property has been included in the Major Transit Station Areas (MTSAs); and the Westney Developments Inc. has completed the preparation of an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-Law Amendment for submission to the Town of Ajax The Ajax GO Station area site aims to provide a mix of uses to take advantage of transit accessibility and to the surrounding employment lands. This area is identified in the Town’s Official Plan as an area that will facilitate high density mixed use that supports commuters while also providing places to live and work in proximity to transit while minimizing car use and promoting pedestrian connectivity. The subject property falls within the proposed MTSA boundary. - 153 - Envision Durham| 12 Envision Durham| 12 Comment # Municipal / Public / Agency Comment or Description Response Question # The desire for the subject property to provide residential mixed-use seems to support and align with the overall vision for the MTSA area. 21 Public GHD on behalf of Halloway Developments and the 21st Company Inc. • Agree that the Region’s MCR should delineate and assign boundaries to Major Transit Station Areas (MTSAs). MTSAs should also permit a wide range of mixed uses. • Agree with the methodology used by Regional and Area Municipal staff in delineating the Draft Boundary of the proposed MTSAs. • Request reconsideration of boundary where environmental features may not actually exist (lands abutting Canadian Pacific Railway, parcels abutting Stellar Drive near Corbett Creek) The draft delineation of the Thornton’s Corners MTSA has been released. The delineations currently take into account a variety of factors including mixed-use development proximity to transit and other considerations of highest and best use for these areas. 22 Public • The vision for Northeast Pickering of 60,000 residents and 45,000 jobs Comment noted. MTSAs are currently being considered - 154 - Envision Durham| 13 Comment # Municipal / Public / Agency Comment or Description Response Question # Dorsay Development Corporation would support a Major Transit Station Area. This will be elaborated on further in a future submission. along the PTC and future PTC (GO Lakeshore) at this time. However, policy directions have included for future consideration of new MTSAs are being included. 23 Public Ledim Development Ltd. Lands south of CP rail and North of Stellar Drive • In accordance with A Place to Grow, 2019, density targets for Urban Growth Centres and Major Transit Station Areas should be considered as minimum targets. • Policies that reference Growth Plan intensification and density targets should include the word minimum where appropriate. • The Thornton’s Corners Major Transit Station Area Boundary should be expanded to the northwest to include lands that are currently outside (specifically lands at Laval Drive and Stevenson Road South in Oshawa). • The lands located adjacent to the Canadian Pacific Railway just beyond Comment noted. The MTSA density targets have been identified as minimum targets and are consistent with those identified in the Growth Plan. The delineation of the Thornton’s Corners GO Station MTSA has been updated to reflect the revised station location along the CP Rail spur. Please see Appendix B for details. - 155 - Envision Durham| 14 Envision Durham| 14 Comment # Municipal / Public / Agency Comment or Description Response Question # the north west limit of the proposed Major Transit Station Area Boundary should be included within the delineated MTSA area. 24 Public IBI Group on behalf of David and Steve Lovisek for 0 Courtice Road, Clarington • Request that the subject lands (0 Courtice Road, Clarington) be included within the Urban Area Boundary and the MTSA. • Support the recommendation by the Municipality of Clarington to extend the MTSA/Urban Area Boundary to include the subject land and requests clarification position on Clarington’s request to include the subject lands into the urban boundary and the Courtice MTSA. • The future Courtice GO Station is an opportunity to accommodate growth and create a complete community in the surrounding area. The Courtice MTSA should include conversion of employment lands to ensure a true Comment noted. While the request for an expansion of the MTSA /settlement area boundary may be recognized through this process, the MTSA ROPA will not be formalizing any settlement area boundary expansions. Consideration of this request will be in the context of the future Land Needs Assessment through the overall Growth Management Study/Envision Durham process. MTSAs will be delineated in the ROP and detailed land use designations are directed to - 156 - Envision Durham| 15 Comment # Municipal / Public / Agency Comment or Description Response Question # mixed-use complete community is achieved. be included in the area municipal OPs. 25 Public IBI Group on behalf of David and Steve Lovisek for 0 Courtice Road, Clarington • MTSAs should maximize the size of the area and number of potential transit users that are within walking distance to the station. • Areas that include natural features should not be precluded from Settlement Area Boundary Expansion should be considered if natural features and areas are protected. Prime agricultural areas should similarly be considered for expansion. The delineation of MTSAs was informed by other planning boundaries such as SGAs and Secondary Plans, and those identified in local area municipal plans. Non- developable areas such as natural areas were avoided and generally fit within the 500 to 800 metre radius of a transit station. A subsequent delineation exercise was completed taking into account input received through the Urban Systems Discussion Paper, additional information and research undertaken by the projects consultants, discussions with area - 157 - Envision Durham| 16 Envision Durham| 16 Comment # Municipal / Public / Agency Comment or Description Response Question # municipal staff and public and agency input. Delineation of MTSAs has taken into account potential transit users and walkshed. Refer to delineation process and Appendix B – Overview of MTSAs for more details as well as Section 6 – Delineation Approach. 26 Public IBI Group on behalf of David and Steve Lovisek for 0 Courtice Road, Clarington • Is the Region considering an alternative density target for the Courtice MTSA? • Is the Region going to develop a phasing plan or Secondary Plan for the MTSA? The Region is aiming for at least the minimum density target of 150 people and jobs/ha for the Courtice MTSA. Areas where development potential does not exist, a determination of impact on the density target would inform whether an alternative target should be requested from the Province. The Region may require phasing of development on - 158 - Envision Durham| 17 Comment # Municipal / Public / Agency Comment or Description Response Question # the basis of transportation or servicing availability, and/or the timing of required infrastructure. 27 Public IBI Group on behalf of 1766 Baseline Road, Clarington • Request the subject lands (1766 Baseline Road, Clarington) be redesignated from Employment Areas to Living Areas / Courtice Major Transit Station Area to allow for a development concept that includes a mix of residential and employment uses (office, retail, commercial, personal service). • The subject site is also located within a PSEZ (Zone 1) and proposed MTSA boundary. The proponent is supportive of Clarington’s recommendation to remove the GO Station MTSA from the PSEZ. The subject lands are included in the proposed MTSA boundary. Detailed land use designations will be proposed through area municipal OPs. Comment noted. The delineation and density requirements for MTSAs has taken into account potential transit users and walkshed. The MTSA designation can be overlaid on the identification of the PSEZ. For more information on the delineation process/rationale refer to Section 6 – Delineation Approach and Appendix B - Overview of MTSAs. - 159 - Envision Durham| 18 Envision Durham| 18 Comment # Municipal / Public / Agency Comment or Description Response Question # 28 Public Brookfield Residential Whitby Harbour site • Intensification boundaries around proposed MTSAs are useful, but final delineation should involve local stakeholder engagement. • Brookfield would like to be engaged in final delineation of the MTSA boundary at Whitby Harbour. The proposed delineation for the Whitby MTSA has been provided in this Paper, and input is welcomed prior to the finalization of the ROPA. The Brookfield site is over 1 km away from the station platform. For more information on the delineation process/rationale refer to Section 6 – Delineation Approach and Appendix B – Overview of MTSAs. 29 Public Optus Capital Corporation • The draft Major Transit Station Area Boundary for Ajax should be extended 1,000 metres eastbound along Fairall Street to Harwood Avenue South to allow for greater intensification and increased density. The MTSA boundary has been proposed. The area in question is part of the Regional Centre and subject to another set of policies in the ROP, however, it is acknowledged the need for linkages easterly to the Regional Centre. - 160 - Envision Durham| 19 Comment # Municipal / Public / Agency Comment or Description Response Question # For more information on the delineation process/rationale refer to Section 6 – Delineation Approach and Appendix B. A 1 km easterly extension of the MTSA boundary would not meet the Provincial definition of a 10 min walk to the station. 30 Public Bousfields Inc. on behalf of Nordeagle Developments Inc. • Request to include the entirety of the Nordeagle Lands within the proposed Major Transit Station Area. The Whitby GO MTSA seeks to maximize the potential of the GO Station lands for mixed use development to support a variety of amenities and activities. The MTSA delineation has been revised to include a portion of the Nordeagle property subject to Policy 8C.3.1 in the current ROP. Please refer to Section 6 – Delineation Approach and - 161 - Envision Durham| 20 Envision Durham| 20 Comment # Municipal / Public / Agency Comment or Description Response Question # Appendix B for the delineation process in more detail 31 Public Bousfields Inc. on behalf of Nordeagle Developments Inc. • Recommended that gross density be used as the measurement for intensification and for major transit station areas as a minimum target. Each MTSA will be planned to achieve a minimum density of 150 people and jobs per hectare. This will be a minimum density requirement that will be measured within all of the lands in each MTSA (measured as gross density). Legend of Discussion Questions Question Number Discussion Question 1. Is the Urban System achieving the Regional Official Plan vision of creating distinct Urban Areas, balancing population and employment growth, and achieving health and complete communities? 2. Are there any additional goals for the Urban System that should be included in the Regional Official Plan? - 162 - Envision Durham| 21 Question Number Discussion Question 3. How can Regional Official Plan Policies support the needs of an aging population? 4. Are there specific policies or other measures that are needed to enable the achievement of employment forecasts and/or the Regional Council target of one job for every two persons? 5. How can Regional Official Plan policies recognize and support the changing pattern of where and how people work? 6. What Regional policies and approaches could assist in achieving the Regional Official Plan target that 50 per cent of all jobs be in designated Employment Areas? 7. How should density (gross or net) be measured in the Regional Official Plan? 8. Should the Region delineate only those corridors with significant intensification potential that are also within the Higher Order Transit Network? 9. Should Regional Corridors that are intended to be priority areas for the highest level of transit service (Highway 2 and Simcoe Street) be delineated in the ROP and assigned an increased minimum density target? 10. Should Waterfront Places be specifically designated in the Regional Official Plan? 11. In the proposed approach for delineating and assigning density targets to existing and future Major Transit Station Areas appropriate? 12. Do you have any feedback or input on the proposed draft Major Transit Station Area delineations? - 163 - Envision Durham| 22 Envision Durham| 22 Question Number Discussion Question 13. Are there any other criteria that should be considered when evaluating Settlement Boundary Expansions? 14. Are there other criteria that should be considered when evaluating Employment Area conversions? 15. Are there additional strategies or solutions required to support development in Strategic Growth Areas? 16. Should a Regional structure, consisting of appropriate Regional land use designations be applied to lands located within the Central Pickering Development Plan Area? 17. What type of Regional Official Plan policies should be provided to support the deployment of broadband infrastructure? 18. How can Regional Official Plan policies support the achievement of strong, vibrant, and healthy downtowns? 19. Should places of worship be permitted in Employment Areas? 20. Are there any other trends or topics you feel should be reviewed and considered as part of the review of the Urban System and the Growth Management Study component of the MCR? - 164 - The Regional Municipality of Durham 605 Rossland Road East, Whitby, Ontario L1N 6A3 905-668-7711 or 1-800-372-1102 www.durham.ca- 165 - Legislative Services Division Attachment #2 to Report #PLN 10-21 Clerk’s Office Directive Memorandum December 18, 2020 To: Kyle Bentley Director, City Development & CBO From: Susan Cassel City Clerk Subject: Direction as per Minutes of the Meeting of City Council held on December 14, 2020 Corr. 60-20 Ralph Walton, Regional Clerk The Regional Municipality of Durham Re: Envision Durham – Framework for a New Regional Official Plan (2020-P-24) Council Decision Resolution #479/20 Please take any action deemed necessary. A copy of the original correspondence is attached for your reference. Susan Cassel Copy: Interim Chief Administrative Officer 1.That Corr. 60-20, from Ralph Walton, Regional Clerk, the Regional Municipality of Durham, dated November 26, 2020, regarding the Envision Durham – Framework for a New Regional Official Plan (2020-P-24), be received for information; and, 2.That Corr. 60-20 be referred to the Director, City Development & CBO, for a review, as it pertains to the City of Pickering, and report back, with their comments, no later than the February Council Meeting. - 166 - If you require this information in an accessible format, please contact 1-800-372-1102 extension 2097. November 26, 2020 The Honourable Steve Clark Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing 777 Bay Street, 17th Floor Toronto, ON M5G 2E5 Dear Minister Clark: RE: Envision Durham – Framework for a New Regional Official Plan (2020-P-24), Our File: D12 Council of the Region of Durham, at its meeting held on November 25, 2020, adopted the following recommendations of the Planning & Economic Development Committee: “A) That Regional Council endorse the framework for the new Regional Official Plan as outlined in Report #2020-P-24 of the Commissioner of Planning and Economic Development; and B)That a copy of Report #2020-P-24 be forwarded to Durham’s area municipalities, conservation authorities, the Envision Durham Interested Parties List and the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing.” Please find enclosed a copy of Report #2020-P-24 for your information. Ralph Walton Ralph Walton, Regional Clerk/Director of Legislative Services RW/tf c: Please see attached list The Regional Municipality of Durham Corporate Services Department Legislative Services 605 Rossland Rd. E. Level 1 PO Box 623 Whitby, ON L1N 6A3 Canada 905-668-7711 1-800-372-1102 Fax: 905-668-9963 durham.ca Don Beaton, BCom, M.P.A. Commissioner of Corporate Services - 167 - Page 2 of 2 c: M. Harris, Acting Manager, Community Planning and Development, Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing A. Harras, Acting Clerk, Town of Ajax B. Jamieson, Clerk, Township of Brock A. Greentree, Clerk, Municipality of Clarington M. Medeiros, Clerk, City of Oshawa S. Cassel, Clerk, City of Pickering J.P. Newman, Clerk, Township of Scugog D. Leroux, Clerk, Township of Uxbridge C. Harris, Clerk, Town of Whitby C. Darling, Chief Administrative Officer, Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority L. Laliberte, CAO/Secretary-Treasurer, Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority M. Majchrowski, Chief Administrative Officer, Kawartha Conservation M. Walters, Chief Administrative Officer, Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority J. MacKenzie, Chief Executive Officer, Toronto & Region Conservation Authority Envision Durham Interested Parties B. Bridgeman, Commissioner of Planning and Economic Development - 168 - Memo To: Susan Cassel City Clerk February 17, 2021 From: Paul Bigioni Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor Copy: Director, City Development & CBO Manager, Development Services Subject: Request for Road Establishing By-law -Part of Lot 24 Concession 5, being Part 6, 40R-30968 (Kubota Drive) -Part of Lot 24, Concession 5, being Part 7, 40R-30968 and Part of the Road Allowance between Lots 24 and 25, Concession 5, being Parts 1 and 2, 40R- 29474 (Sideline 24) File: Roadded.603 The City acquired Part of Lot 24, Concession 5, being Parts 6 and 7, 40R-30968 from Infrastructure Ontario on October 15, 2020 for road purposes. Part 6, 40R-30968 was to be established as public highway upon the development of the adjacent lands. As the development of the lands adjacent to Part 6 are nearing completion, it is now appropriate to pass a by-law establishing Part 6, 40R-30968 as public highway (Kubota Drive). The City is the registered owner of Part of the Road Allowance between Lots 24 and 25, Concession 5, being Parts 1 and 2, 40R-29474. These lands, along with Part 7, 40R-30978, form a travelled road which was the result of a realignment of Sideline 24, as required due to the construction of highway 407. Since the realignment, the travelled road has been known as Sideline 24 but has not been established as public highway. As such, it is recommended that Council enact the attached by-law to establish the said parts as public highway (Sideline 24). Attached is a location map and the draft by-law for the consideration of City Council at is meeting scheduled for February 22, 2021. PB:ca Attachments - 169 - Sideline 24Highway 7 1:2,543 SCALE: © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © Queens Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.;© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, Department of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers all rights reserved.; © Municipal Property Assessment Corporation and its suppliers all rights reserved.; PN-6 City Development Department Location Map File:Applicant: Property Description:ROADDED 603 City of Pickering Part 6, 40R-30968 and Parts 1 & 2, 40R29474 THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. Date: Feb. 04, 2021Sideline 24DETAIL INSET SCALE PART 740R-30968 E1:400 PART 640R-30968 E PART 140R-29474 EPART 240R-29474 EPART 240R-29474 PART 740R-30968 EPART 740R-30968SEE INSET Eand Part 7, 40R-30968 - 170 - The Corporation of the City of Pickering By-law No. 7818/21 Being a by-law to establish certain roads within the City of Pickering, Regional Municipality of Durham as public highways. Whereas The Corporation of the City of Pickering is the owner of certain lands lying within Pickering, set out herein and wishes to establish them as public highways. Now therefore the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as follows: 1. Part Lot 24, Concession 5, being Part 6, 40R-30968 is hereby established as public highway (Kubota Drive). 2. Part of Lot 24, Concession 5, being Part 7, 40R-30968 and Part of the Road Allowance between Lots 24 and 25, Concession 5, being Parts 1 and 2, 40R- 29474 (Sideline 24). By-law passed this 22nd day of February, 2021. ________________________________ David Ryan, Mayor ________________________________ Susan Cassel, City Clerk - 171 - Memo To: Susan Cassel City Clerk February 17, 2021 From: Paul Bigioni Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor Copy: Director, City Development & CBO Director, Engineering Services Manager, Development Services Subject: Request for Assumption By-law Block 21, 40M-2565 (Fairport Road) File: 40M2565 The City is the registered owner of Block 21, Plan 40M-2565 as it was dedicated to The Corporation of the City of Pickering as public highway (Fairport Road) upon the registration of Plan 40M-2565. Engineering Services has confirmed that the works and services within Plan 40M-2565 can now be assumed by the City. The assumption of Plan 40M-2565 has been approved by Council under resolution 502/21. As such, it is recommended that Council enact the attached by-law to assume Block 21. Attached is a location map and draft by-law for the consideration of City Council at its meeting scheduled for February 22, 2021 PB:ca Attachment Location Map Draft By-law - 172 - Gablehurst CrescentHolbrook CourtFairport RoadDalewood Ravine 1:1,500 SCALE: © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © Queens Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.;© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, Department of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers all rights reserved.; © Municipal Property Assessment Corporation and its suppliers all rights reserved.; City Development Department Location MapFile:Applicant:Property Description: Subdivision Assumption 40M-2565 City of Pickering Block 21, 40M-2565 THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. Date: Feb. 11, 2021 Lots 1-14 and Blocks 15-20, 40M-2565E L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\Legal\SubdivisionCompletion\SubCompletion_40M2656.mxd E Block 21, 40M-2565 - 173 - The Corporation of the City of Pickering By-law No. 7819/21 Being a by-law to assume Block 21, Plan 40-2565, Pickering (Fairport Road) as public highway Whereas Block 21, Plan 40M-2565 (Fairport Road) was dedicated as public highway under the jurisdiction of The Corporation of the City of Pickering upon the registration of Plan 40M-2565, Pickering; and Whereas the works and services constructed for the City of Pickering within Block 21, Plan 40M-2565 (Fairport Road) have now been installed and completed to the satisfaction of the City. Now therefore the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as follows: 1. Block 21, Plan 40M-2565, Pickering (Fairport Road) and the works and services within the said Block 21 are hereby assumed for maintenance purposes by the City. By-law passed this 22nd day of February, 2021. ________________________________ David Ryan, Mayor ________________________________ Susan Cassel, City Clerk - 174 - The Corporation of the City of Pickering By-law No. 7820/20 Being a by-law to appoint Marisa Carpino as the Chief Administrative Officer for The Corporation of the City of Pickering Whereas pursuant to Section 229 of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c.25, as amended, a municipality may appoint a chief administrative officer who shall be responsible for, (a)exercising general control and management of the affairs of the municipality for the purpose of ensuring the efficient and effective operation of the municipality; and, (b)performing such other duties as are assigned by the municipality. And Whereas the duties and responsibilities of the Chief Administrative Officer are set out in By-law Number 7780/20; Now therefore the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as follows: 1.That Marisa Carpino is hereby appointed Chief Administrative Officer for The Corporation of the City of Pickering. 2.By-law Number 7763/20 is hereby repealed. By-law passed this 22nd day of February, 2021. ________________________________ David Ryan, Mayor ________________________________ Susan Cassel, City Clerk - 175 -