Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
March 4, 2019
C!, ef DICKERING Planning & Development Committee Agenda Monday, March 4, 2019 Council Chambers 7:00 pm Chair: Councillor Pickles Anything highlighted denotes an attachment or link. By clicking the links on the agenda page, you can jump directly to that section of the agenda. To manoeuver back to the agenda page use the Ctrl + Home keys simultaneously, or use the "bookmark" icon to the left of your screen to navigate from one report to the next. For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Linda Roberts 905.420.4660 extension 2928 Iroberts@pickering.ca DICKERING cdy Planning & Development Committee Agenda Monday, March 4, 2019 Council Chambers - 7:00 pm Chair: Councillor Pickles (1) Disclosure of Interest (II) Part `A' Information Reports Pages Subject: Information Report No. 04-19 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 14/18 2184107 Ontario Inc. Part of Lot 18; Concession 3: Now Part 2, 40R-6962 (On Brock Road, north of Rex Heath Drive) 1-14 Subject: Information Report No. 05-19 15-25 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 12/18 Stuart Mark Golvin and JMPM Holdings Ltd. Lot 19, Range 3 BFC, Now Part of Part 1, 40R-10527 and Part 1, 40R-8832 (1635 Bayly Street) (III) Part `B' Planning & Development Reports 1. Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 04-19 26-34 By-law for the Civic Numbering of Buildings and Properties within the City of Pickering Recommendation 1. That Council repeal and replace By-law 3503/90 with a new by-law to provide for the civic numbering of buildings and properties within the City of Pickering; and For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Linda Roberts 905.420.4660 extension 2928 Iroberts@pickering.ca cry DICKERING Planning & Development Committee Agenda Monday, March 4, 2019 Council Chambers - 7:00 pm Chair: Councillor Pickles 2. That the draft by-law provided as Appendix I to Report PLN 04-19 be forwarded to Council for enactment. 2. Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 05-19 City of Pickering Comments on Proposed Amendment 1 to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2017 Recommendation 35-69 1. That the comments in Report PLN 05-19 on Proposed Amendment 1 to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2017, be endorsed, and that the Province be requested to: A. revise the lands to be identified within a Provincially Significant Employment Zone, by: 1. excluding the following lands from Zone 3: a. lands designated "Mixed Use Areas - City Centre", (a designated Urban Growth Centre), bounded by the hydro corridor on the east, Bayly Street on the south, Sandy Beach Road on the west, and Highway 401 on the north; and the row of properties along the south side of Bayly Street, west of the hydro corridor, also designated "Mixed Use Areas — Mixed Corridors", as shown on Appendix II; and 2. including the following employment areas in Pickering within Zone 3: a. the Whites Road Prestige Employment Area in the West Shore Neighbourhood on the south side of Highway 401 and west of Whites Road, as shown on Appendix III; and b. the Seaton Employment Lands along Highway 407, also referred to as the Pickering Innovation Corridor, as shown on Appendix IV; B. initiate a strategy to financially assist municipalities to service vacant employment lands in strategic locations, removing one of the key barriers to economic growth; C,Ly DICKERING Planning & Development Committee Agenda Monday, March 4, 2019 Council Chambers - 7:00 pm Chair: Councillor Pickles C. investigate financial tools (e.g., parking space levy, fuel tax, sales tax, payroll tax, vehicle kilometers travelled tax, highway tolls, development charges, land value capture, property tax, development charges, fare increases, etc.) and funding opportunities to enable the timely implementation of transportation and other municipal infrastructure and services, to support the implementation of the Growth Plan; and 2. That a copy of Report PLN 05-19 be forwarded to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Members of Parliament for Pickering -Scarborough East and Ajax -Pickering, the Region of Durham, and other Durham Area Municipalities. (IV) Other Business (V) Adjournment G4 o/ DICKERING Information Report to Planning & Development Committee Report Number: 04-19 Date: March 4, 2019 From: Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Chief Planner Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 14/18 2184107 Ontario Inc. Part of Lot 18, Concession 3; Now Part 2, 40R-6962 (On Brock Road, north of Rex Heath Drive) 1. Purpose of this Report The purpose of this report is to provide preliminary information regarding an application for Zoning By-law Amendment, submitted by 2184107 Ontario Inc., to permit a mixed use development. This report contains general information on the applicable Official Plan and other related policies, and identifies matters raised to date. This report is intended to assist members of the public and other interested stakeholders to understand the proposal. The Planning & Development Committee will hear public delegations on the application, ask questions of clarification, and identify any planning issues. This report is for information and no decision is being made at this time. Staff will bring forward a recommendation report for consideration by the Planning & Development Committee upon completion of a comprehensive evaluation of the proposal. 2. Property Location and Description The subject property is located on the east side of Brock Road, north of Rex Heath Drive within the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood (see Location Map, Attachment #1). The property has an area of approximately 0.32 of a hectare, with approximately 61 metres of frontage along Brock Road and approximately 31 metres of frontage along Carousel Drive. The property is currently vacant. The surrounding land uses include (see Air Photo Map, Attachment #2): North and An existing medium density residential subdivision comprising freehold East: semi-detached and townhouse dwelling units. A future Village Green is located between the residential subdivision and Brock Road, to be constructed by the City. South: A residential condominium development by Averton (Brock) Limited, which includes a mix of townhouse units on the north and south sides of Rex Heath Drive, and two 8 -storey mixed use apartment buildings and townhouse units along Brock Road (not yet under construction). In 2017, Averton (Brock) Limited submitted a rezoning application to permit an increase in the number of apartment units and an increase in the height of the apartment buildings. 1 Information Report No. 04-19 Page 2 West: Across Brock Road, vacant lands designated "Mixed Use Areas — Mixed Corridor" in the Pickering Official Plan. The lands at the northwest corner of Brock Road and Zents Drive, which are owned by the City, are planned for a future Fire Hall and headquarters. 3. Applicant's Proposal The applicant is proposing a 6 -storey mixed use building containing 634 square metres of commercial space at grade, and 35 residential units above.(see Submitted Conceptual Site Plan, Attachment #3). Separate vehicular access points and parking areas are proposed for the respective residential and commercial uses. Vehicular access for the residential component is proposed from Carousel Drive leading to an underground access ramp. A one -level underground parking garage is proposed to accommodate a total of 48 parking spaces for both residents and visitors. Vehicular access for the commercial component will be from a restricted right-in/right-out entrance off of Brock Road. A total of 19 surface parking spaces are proposed to support the commercial uses at grade. The principle entrance for the residential use is proposed on the ground floor at the rear of the building. The pedestrian access to the commercial units is proposed from a walkway at the front of the building facing Brock Road (see Submitted Conceptual Rendering and Submitted Conceptual Elevations, Attachments #4, #5 and #6). The applicant is requesting a mix of retail, office and personal service uses for the ground floor. A private parkette is proposed on the north side of the building adjacent to Brock Road. Private balconies will be provided for 27 of the 35 apartment units. Internal pedestrian walkways are proposed to connect to the existing sidewalk along Carousel Drive and the multi -use path along Brock Road. Table below summaries the key statistic details of the proposal: Gross Floor Area Commercial: 634 square metres. Residential: 4,378 square metres Total: 5,012 square metres Total # of Units 35 units Unit Types 14 two-bedroom units 16 two-bedroom, plus den units (including 5 barrier -free units) 5 three-bedroom, plus den units Density 110 units per net hectare Floor Space Index 1.58 # of Storeys and Building Height 6 -storeys (20 metres and 24 metres to the top of the mechanical penthouse) Information Report No. 04-19 Page 3 # of Parking Spaces provided Residential: 40 spaces for residents and 8 visitor parking (all located within a one -level underground parking garage) Commercial: 19 spaces (surface parking) Proposed Parking Residential: 1.14 spaces per unit, plus 0.22 spaces per visitor Ratios Commercial: 3.2 spaces per 100 square metres of gross floor area • Requested • commercial fitness/recreational centre Commercial Uses • commercial school • .day care centre • dry -cleaner's distributing station • financial institution • office, business • office, professional • personal service shop • restaurant, and • retail store The proposal will be subject to site plan approval and an application for draft plan of condominium will be required at a later date. 4. Policy Framework 4.1 Region of Durham Official Plan The Regional Official Plan (ROP) designates the subject lands as "Living Areas" with a "Regional Corridor" overlay along Brock Road. Living Areas shall be developed predominately for housing purposes. Limited office development and limited retailing of goods andservices, in appropriate locations, as components of mixed use developments, are also permitted. In the consideration of development proposals, regard shall be had to achieving a compact urban form, including intensive residential, office, retail, service and mixed uses along arterial roads, in conjunction with present and potential transit facilities. Regional Corridors shall be planned and developed in accordance with the underlying land use designation, as higher density mixed use areas, supporting higher order transit services and pedestrian oriented design. Regional Corridors are intended to support an overall, long-term density target of at least 60 residential units per gross hectare and a floor space index (FSI) of 2.5, with a wide variety of building forms, generally mid -rise in height with some higher buildings, as detailed in municipal official plans. Brock Road is designated asa Type 'A' Arterial Road and High Frequency Transit Network in the ROP. Type 'A' Arterial Roads are designed to carry large volumes of traffic at moderate to high speeds, have some access restrictions and generally have a right-of-way width ranging from 36 to 45 metres. Roads designated High Frequency Transit Network are recognized for planned High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes, or buses in mixed traffic, with transit signal priority at major intersections and other measures to ensure fast and reliable transit service. The proposal appears to conform to the policies and provisions of the Durham Region Official Plan. Information Report No. 04-19 Page 4 4.2 Pickering Official Plan The Pickering Official Plan designates the subject lands as "Mixed Use Areas — Mixed Corridors" within the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood. Mixed Use Areas are recognized as lands that have or are intended to have the widest variety of uses and highest levels of activity in the City. The Mixed Corridors designation is intended primarily for residential, retail, community, cultural and recreational uses at a scale serving the community. Mixed Corridors provides for a density range of over 30 and up to and including 140 units per net hectare, and a maximum FSI up to and including, 2.5. The applicant is proposing a maximum density of 110 units per net hectare and an FSI of 1.58. 4.3 Duffin Heights Neighbourhood Policies The Duffin Heights Neighbourhood is intended to be developed with a mix of uses including high density residential and commercial uses. Policies for lands designated Mixed Use Areas — Mixed Corridors include: • requiring new development to provide a strong and identifiable urban image by establishing buildings closer to the street, providing safe and convenient pedestrian access, and requiring all buildings to be multi-storey • requiring higher intensity multi -use housing forms on lands adjacent to Brock Road and restricting grade related residential developments to lands adjacent to collector or local roads, and • supporting shared access points between properties along Brock Road in order to minimize access points along Brock Road The Duffin Heights Neighbourhood policies of the Pickering Official Plan also require landowners to demonstrate how the proposal is consistent with the Duffin Heights Environmental Servicing Plan (ESP) to the satisfaction of the Region, City and the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA). As a condition of approval, the landowners are required to become a party to the cost sharing agreement for Duffin Heights or receive an acknowledgement from the Trustee of the Duffin Heights Landowners Group Inc. that the benefitting landowner has made satisfactory arrangements to pay its proportion of the shared development costs. The application will be assessed against the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood policies and provisions of the Pickering Official Plan during the further processing of the application. 4.4 Duffin Heights Neighbourhood Development Guidelines The Duffin Heights Neighbourhood Development Guidelines provide design objectives for the neighbourhood. The Tertiary Plan identifies the lands as Brock Road Streetscape, which encourages higher density, mid -rise and mixed use buildings with a high level of architectural quality. The guidelines for development an lands within the Brock Road Streetscape include the following: • properties fronting Brock Road shall be required to provide a built form across a minimum of 60 percent of the lot frontage • buildings shall frame the street and be located within build -to -zones established in the respective zoning by-laws 4 Information Report No. 04-19 Page 5 • retail and commercial uses are encouraged to be provided on the ground floors of buildings and must have facades which are at least 60 percent transparent • all primary frontages of buildings shall front Brock Road and provide pedestrian access directly to the sidewalk and multi -use trail along Brock Road • canopies shall be encouraged above windows and signs, and should overhang private space • large walls visible from Brock Road shall be articulated through various treatments such as offsets in massing; blank facades will not be permitted facing Brock Road or any street The application will be assessed against the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood policies and Development Guidelines during the further processing of the application. 4.5 Zoning By-law 3037 The subject lands are currently zoned "CA" within Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by By-law 1469/82. The current zoning permits an Automobile Service Station. The applicant is requesting to rezone the subject lands to an appropriate mixed use zone category with site-specific performance standards to facilitatethe proposal. 5. Comments Received 5.1 Residents Comments from Public Open House Meeting and Written Submissions On January 24, 2019, a Public Open House meeting was hosted by the City Development Department to inform area residents about the development proposal. Eight persons attended the Open House meeting. The following is a list of key concerns that were verbally expressed by the area residents at the meeting, and written comments received to date: • concerned that the proposed height will shadow adjacent properties • concerned that the proposed 6 -storey building is out of character with the adjacent townhouse development fronting onto Carousel Drive • concerned about additional traffic along Carousel Drive • commented that there is currently insufficient parkland in the neighbourhood and that adding more residential units will exacerbate the issue • concerned with the potential dust, noise and vibration nuisances during the construction process • requested that privacy fences be erected along properties lines shared with existing residents to the north and east 5.2 Agency Comments 5.2A Region of Durham — Planning Department • no comments received at the time of writing this report Information Report No. 04-19 Page 6 5.2.2 Durham Catholic District School Board • no objections to this proposal • students will attend St. Wilfrid Catholic Elementary School located at 2360 Southcott Road and St. Mary's Catholic Secondary School located at 1918 Whites Road in the City of Pickering 5.2.3 Durham District School Board • no objections to this proposal • students generated from this development will attend existing neighbourhood schools 5.2.4 CP Railway • no comments received at the time of writing this report 5.3 City Departments Comments 5.3.1 Engineering Services • no comments received at the time of writing this report 5.3.2 Fire Services • no comments received at the time of writing this report 6. Planning & Design Section Comments The following is a summary of key concerns/issues or matters of importance raised to date. These matters, and other identified through the circulation and detailed review of the proposal, are required to be addressed by the applicant prior to a final recommendation report to Planning & Development Committee: • ensuring conformity with all applicable policies of the Provincial Policy Statement (2014), the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2017), and the Regional Official Plan • ensuring the proposal is consistent with the goals and objectives of the City's Official Plan and the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood policies • ensuring the proposal addresses the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood Development Guidelines with respect to building siting and setbacks, building heights and massing, architectural features and materials, landscaping, .outdoor open space and pedestrian connectivity within and external to the site • evaluating the proposed building setbacks, building height and massing, and landscaping to ensure the proposal is compatible with the existing residential subdivision to the north and east, and the future planned development to the south • assessing any potential shadow impacts from the proposed 6 -storey building on the surrounding existing and future residentialdevelopments and the future Village Green immediately to the north • reviewing any potential traffic implications along Carousel Drive 6 Information Report No. 04-19 Page 7 • ensuring sufficient on-site parking is provided to serve both the residential and commercial uses • ensuring bicycle parking is provided for both commercial and residential components of the development • evaluating the appropriateness of the proposed commercial uses • ensuring the applicant becomes a party to the cost sharing agreement for Duffin Heights or receives an acknowledgement from the Trustee of the Duffin Heights Landowners Group Inc., that the benefitting landowner has made satisfactory arrangements to pay its proportions of the shared development cost • exploring opportunities to achieve more points -in the City's Sustainable Development Guidelines • ensuring that the required technical submissions and reports meet City standards • further issues may be identified following receipt and review of comments from the circulated departments, agencies and public The City Development Department will conclude its position on the application after it has received and assessed comments from the circulated departments, agencies and public. 7. Information Received Full scale copies of the plans. and studies listed below are available for online viewing at pickering.ca/devapp or in person at the office of the City of Pickering, City Development Department: • Planning Rationale Report, prepared by The Biglieri Group, dated October 2018 • Arborist Letter, prepared by Wildwood Tree Services Ltd., dated April 3, 2018 • Shadow Study, prepared by AND Architecture Inc.. • Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment, prepared by ASI Heritage, dated April 30, 2018 • Traffic Impact Study & Parking Justification Study, prepared by Trans -Plan Transportation Inc., dated October 5, 2018 • Functional Servicing and Stormwater Management Report, prepared by blueprint2build, dated October 9, 2018 • Phase One Environmental Site Assessment, prepared by Cambium Inc., dated June 29, 2018 • Noise Impact Assessment, prepared by Cambium Inc., dated September 10, 2018 • Planning Noise Impact Study, prepared by Cambium Inc., dated August 16, 2018 • Geotechnical Investigation Report, prepared by Cambium Inc., dated August 30, 2018 • Architectural Plans Set, prepared by AND Architecture Inc., dated May 2017 • Site Grading Plan, prepared by blueprint2build, dated July 17, 2018 • Site Servicing Plan, prepared by blueprint2build, dated July 17, 2018 8. Procedural Information 8.1 General • written comments regarding this proposal should be directed to the City Development Department • oral comments may be made at the Public Information Meeting 7 Information Report No. 04-19 Page 8 • all commentsreceived will be noted and used as input to a Planning Report prepared by the City Development Department for a subsequent meeting of Council or a Committee of Council • any member of the public who wishes to reserve the option to appeal Council's decision must provide comments to the City before Council adopts any by-law for this proposal • any member of the public who wishes to be notified of Council's decision regarding this proposal must request such in writing to the City Clerk 9. Owner/Applicant Information The owner of the property is 2184107 Ontario Inc. and is represented by The Biglieri Group Limited. Attachments 1. Location Map 2. Air Photo Map 3. Submitted Conceptual Site Plan 4. Submitted Conceptual Rendering 5. Submitted Conceptual Elevations (East and West Elevations) 6. Submitted Conceptual Elevations (North and South Elevations) Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Rory McNeill Planner 1 Nilesh Surti, MCIP, RPP Manager, Development Review & Urban Design RM:NS:Id Date of Report: February 11, 2019 8 Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Chief Planner Attachment # 1 to Information Reoort# ()U -I 9 _ Fourth Concess on Road Subject Lands 0 0 0 CO Zents Drive anCEICI NEM NNW ..111111 Mao MIME fume .•••••• ►••••••• Carousel I ( Mews 'ULW . Tally Street 3 0 0- 1011 - F � Carousel Drive o 1111111 1111 NIB /11 NIB m G) o��o► tossing m — ��0� E mn g Calico Mews -s,N ° •w �������l���l) 43 'O O N,-0 0 .a _IUco m Huckleberry Crossing Rex Heath Drive Grenwich Glen rn. ai c rn co 0 co L O c 0 U 0 c c0 x 0 O 0 .co p 7 I� '`Ci 2 z rAdirondack Chase 4 Pure Springs Boulevard (Hayden Lanen Creekside Park Kalmar Avenue co J C>. CL I� Liatris Drive mpg oimm. Parkhurst Crescen II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 Location Map File: A 14/18 oI PICKERING City Development Department Applicant: 2184107 Ontario Inc. Property Description: Part of Lot 18, Concession 3 Now Part 2, 40R-6962 (On Brock Road, north of Rex Heath Drive) Date: Feb. 08, 2019 CT. Corporation of the City of Pickens Produced(In pan) under license from: C) Queens Pnnter, Ontano Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.0 Her Majesty the Queen In Right of Canada, Department of Natural Resources. Al rights reserved.; 0Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppPars all rights reserved.;® Muntlpal Property Assessment Corporation and is supplers all rlghlo reserved.; SCALE. 1:5,000 I THIS IS HOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. 9 Attachment # a to infoiclrin+inn Rinnrt# (74 -I c1 0+4 Air Photo Map . File: A 14/18 PICKERING City Development Department 1, n Applicant: 2184107 Ontario Inc. . Property Description: Part of Lot 18, Concession 3 Now Part 2, 40R-6962 (On Brock Road, north of Rex Heath Drive) Date: Feb. 08, 2019 01 he Corporation of the City of Picketing Produced (in pan) under incense torn: 0 Queens PnMer, Onlano Ministry of Natural Resources. Outten In Right of Canada, Department of Natural Resources. Al tights reserved.; All rights resetved.i0 Her.Majesty and 0 Teanet Enterprises lnc. and W suppAers all rights reserved; 0 Municipal Property Assessment Corporation end is soppier. all NOV. reserved.; SCALE. 1•5,000 I MS Is NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. L:\Plannin3\Corel\Planning Apps W\2018 48.71 11.1 m . 0 0 0 0to O 01 m O,I re Ci ,- 1 PARKETTE RAMP TO RAMP W UNDERGROUND PARKING ON b 1 O D WALKWAY 1 0�/ + + + O 0 LL 09 2 Q v 0 O7 © . OPROPOSED CI SIXSTOREY Q al 0 COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL BUILDING y re a O 50 0 RESIDENCE w < 0 w II ENTRANCE rc x u.S 0 re 0 i z 1 P l \�JJ G :41.. - • • e LOADING& RDVING • / O '1 C�_7 E } I '4= FIRE ROUTE b 0 0 �0 x b d HEAVY DUiYAS AL7 . . C� 1 CO 0 CO (3-c () • 55.36 4 Submitted Conceptual Site Plan File No: A 14/18 PICKERING City Development Department Applicant: 2184107 Ontario Inc. Property Description: Part of Lot 18, Concession 3, Now Part 2, 40R-6962 (On Brock Road, North of Rex Heath Drive) FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. DATE: Jan. 31, 2019 L:\Plannin3\Corel\Planning Apps W\2018 s. I. III - jpir Mew= -111. iii SI ir tJ 111r. •Ti'..!P.1:mits,,. 0 k •- 4 :: • •' i--, tr I .;, ,. 14111131039111.• :N.s.,,,--49- • , , -7 1 i al—',-- ••-- --., ,...,:' c-• . etc - 1 v, OMB 41 illiii .9°1 PICKERING City Development Department LAPlanning \ Core! \ Planning \Apps \2018 Submitted Conceptual Rendering File No: A 14/18 Applicant: 2184107 Ontario Inc. Property Description: Part of Lot 18, Concession 3, Now Part 2, 40R-6962 (On Brock Road, North of Rex Heath Drive) FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CT' OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. DATE: Jan. 31, 2019 L:\Planning\Corel\Planning Wpps'A'2018 p3 Yq ✓ CD qtt °D'e •'-Y6IX ,nnrnn.,r, / ,nxrrn-,.n .r X�Y sr. �� xun rYxMv ;x:.n.x... I f ...i..1 Iu.iu I) 1 1 maim... HI = ......■ mi., 1 I 1 I l< «6s `' `Q ;I: flu Ali �� m �. ,�.>= I •" �y ,- s� , Imo 1 ., 1 ,,. 1 111` 1 1 I �<is ,'� 1 nx.,,n...x., 1 I I I. fl 1 '':..; i1 ` "1� ° - "`— r 1" 1 x.nn In ry •Krbytk -- 11 T T West Elevation (View from Brock Road) ;1. --- ---—------ --- -- —IA6lJMRR� ------------------_...-B t Vii IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 116MFE / { .� I I :I ri IIIi1P1P1IP1j . W. M M�j.'Jj�� 4g. c.. :r+, —B '2■ -+,y0w :rx.N"...x— sem!+!- I I 1 I I 1 I' I I I I I I 1 MIN ,.' I r I an;s — — �- ill »� •- ---- .., _ 'ce Iaraa� ,. , '. .-.. .-- .._.-- EnVnF�+w~W.r� A, L+1 .. A iw`"�.i✓.P YOA'rk+v: I II encom 2_i_ East Elevat on (View from Carousel Drive) Submitted Conceptual Elevations (East and West Elevations) 4 File No: A 14/18 PICKERING Applicant: 2184107 Ontario Inc. Property Description: Part of.Lot 18, Concession 3, Now Part 2, 40R-6962 City Development (On Brock Road, North of Rex Heath Drive) Department _ FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. DATE: Jan. 31, 2019 L:\Planning\Corel\Planning Wpps'A'2018 p3 Yq ✓ CD qtt .p L'\Planning\Corel \Planning AppsW\201 B g - CD 0 It's a r ql • 1 1 wsx L sr:e ice --11 ■■■l Y1._•...e l 1 w M1 LLVGl6�. .... 5 • ,����➢ :i I I Irl I I I •w•...r.rel. rmo 4a•�`x.. Vs+ J l lA 1 , I I I I J ftz.a- '■ = 11 _ :111::—..— --- flu■ rw..s "-Li,.-3- eMY9( r�'.f.✓' ._ 43`.. E2 1, :IHN.+,�[..4 •,, .Ifoa::nrY".•.Mr.1 l�:.a.m "'�di�rC"�ki: 17;n r.,, � J �?1�r•,R'� �C r 4_ OIIOIIXOl10011 North Elevation :, — »,. a . 1 1 1 1 1 I I --� .-"-� Ye. leXr11, [_ waeag4.o. Er I - Lm!!_ w -- _ Elm. El a... F1-1 Fri : NI w i=�pnz,,: FSI H FSI _. M - .� —� — , Ir cru' e `,. - South Elevation Submitted Conceptual Elevations (North and South Elevations) • C4 4 File No: A 14/18 PICKERI NG. Applicant: 2184107 Ontario Inc. Property Description: Part of Lot 18, Concession 3, Now Part 2, 40R-6962 City Development (On Brock Road, North of Rex Heath Drive) • Department FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING . CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. • DATE: Jan. 31, 2019 .p L'\Planning\Corel \Planning AppsW\201 B g - CD 0 It's a DICKERING edy Information Report to Planning & Development Committee Report Number: 05-19 Date: March 4, 2019 From: Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Chief Planner Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 12/18 Stuart Mark Golvin and JMPM Holdings Ltd. Lot 19, Range a BFC, Now Part of Part 1, 40R-10527 and Part 1, 40R-8832 (1635 Bayly Street) 1. Purpose of this Report The purpose of this report is to provide preliminary information regarding an application for Zoning By-law Amendment, submitted by Stuart Mark Golvin and JMPM Holdings Ltd., to expand the list of permitted uses on the subject lands. This report contains general information on the applicable Official Plan and other related policies, and identifies matters raised to date. This report is intended to assist members of the public and other interested stakeholders to understand the proposal. The Planning & Development Committee will hear public delegations on the application, ask questions of clarification, and identify any planning issues. This report is for information and no decision is being made at this time. Staff will bring forward a recommendation report for consideration by the Planning & Development Committee upon completion of a comprehensive evaluation of the proposal. 2. Property Location and Description The subject lands are located on the south side of Bayly Street, west of Brock Road within the Brock Industrial Neighbourhood (see Location Map, Attachment #1.). The subject lands comprise two properties having a combined area of approximately 2.7 hectare with approximately 210 metres of frontage along Bayly Street and approximately 75 metres of frontage along Dillingham Road. In 2012 the City issued Site Plan Approval, along with subsequent amendments in 2015 and 2017 to facilitate the development of the subject lands for seven separate buildings. The subject property supports three industrial/commercial buildings, and future phases include an additional four buildings to be constructed at a later date (see Site Plan, Attachment #2). 15 Information Report No. 05-19 Page 2 The table below summarizes the total gross floor area of the existing and future buildings, and the uses currently occupied within the existing buildings. Upon completion, a total of 300 parking spaces are to be provided. Vehicular access for the site is a restricted right-in/right-out access on Bayly Street, a full -movement access on Bayly Street opposite Salk Road, and a full -movement access on Dillingham Road. Surrounding land uses include (see Air Photo Map, Attachment #3): North: Across Bayly Street is the Pickering Playing Fields sports and entertainment complex, Pickering Fire Station #5, and various industrial/commercial buildings containing a mix of automotive related stores and services. East: To the east along Bayly Street is a vehicle sales establishment and vacant lands that were previously occupied by an automobile service station. Along the north side of Dillingham Road is a mix of industrial/commercial buildings. South: Immediately to the south is an outdoor storage facility of equipment and trailers_ and further south across Dillingham Road is a Bingo hall. West: To the west is the Hydro Corridor, and further west is a mix of industrial/commercial uses along the south side of Bayly Street. 3. Applicant's Proposed Amendments The applicant is requesting to amend the existing zoning for the subject lands to permit additional uses on the site, and to make certain changes to the existing Special Regulations of the site-specific zoning by-law. The intention of the rezoning application is to create greater flexibility for leasing within the approved buildings. The current proposal does not seek to make any changes to the existing and future buildings, vehicular access, or parking area. Should this change, a Site Plan Application will be required. 16 Gross Floor Area Existing Uses Building 'A' 187 square metres A restaurant (Harvey's) with a drive-through facility Building `B' 364 square metres A restaurant (St. Louis Bar and Grill) and a personal Service Shop (Pretty Girl Lounge) Building 'C' 427 square metres To be constructed Building 'D' 595 square metres To be constructed Building `E' 5,245 square metres To be constructed Building 'F' 1,177 square metres Multiple units occupied by a printing establishment (The Printing House), a professional office (mortgage office), chiropractor, commercial club (I Love Kickboxing), and Madison Homes condominium sales office. There are currently two vacant units. Building `G' 889 square metres To be constructed Upon completion, a total of 300 parking spaces are to be provided. Vehicular access for the site is a restricted right-in/right-out access on Bayly Street, a full -movement access on Bayly Street opposite Salk Road, and a full -movement access on Dillingham Road. Surrounding land uses include (see Air Photo Map, Attachment #3): North: Across Bayly Street is the Pickering Playing Fields sports and entertainment complex, Pickering Fire Station #5, and various industrial/commercial buildings containing a mix of automotive related stores and services. East: To the east along Bayly Street is a vehicle sales establishment and vacant lands that were previously occupied by an automobile service station. Along the north side of Dillingham Road is a mix of industrial/commercial buildings. South: Immediately to the south is an outdoor storage facility of equipment and trailers_ and further south across Dillingham Road is a Bingo hall. West: To the west is the Hydro Corridor, and further west is a mix of industrial/commercial uses along the south side of Bayly Street. 3. Applicant's Proposed Amendments The applicant is requesting to amend the existing zoning for the subject lands to permit additional uses on the site, and to make certain changes to the existing Special Regulations of the site-specific zoning by-law. The intention of the rezoning application is to create greater flexibility for leasing within the approved buildings. The current proposal does not seek to make any changes to the existing and future buildings, vehicular access, or parking area. Should this change, a Site Plan Application will be required. 16 Information Report No. 05-19 Page 3 The table below provides a summary of the existing and proposed (in bold) uses, as well as the location of the existing and proposed uses on the subject property. Existing Schedule I to Zoning By-law 6974/09, as amended by Zoning By-law 7519/16 Proposed Revision to Schedule I . 1 - i 1 , , Bayly Street Bayly Street 21cz1• / �o•°••°�°o•so•®° o. 3 C. L ia��444*• ,%i MG=21 oil ►••�°.. - ®•�•o 4440 *0 P MC -21 •e•♦•o ®•e•°�o°so°i•e•o� oo IV 00* 0400 Hydro. Con Dillingham Road Dillingham Road z Uses permitted in only Horizontally Hatched area • day care centre • private school Uses permitted in only Cross Hatched area •.banquet facility • club • commercial club • commercial -recreational • exhibition hall establishment • place of amusement or • place of assembly entertainment • place of worship Uses permitted in only Diagonally and Horizontally Hatched areas • convenience store • dry cleaning depot • financial institution • personal service shop • restaurant — type A • retail store Uses permitted in All Areas • bakery • business office • commercial school • dry cleaning establishment • food preparation plant • light machinery and equipment • light manufacturing plant supplier • office -associated • merchandise service shop commercial establishment • professional office • rental establish • sales outlet • scientific, medical or , • vehicles sales establishment research laboratory • animal boarding establishment • warehouse • auction and estate sales house • art gallery/studio 17 Information Report No. 05-19 Page 4 The applicant is also proposing the following modifications to the Special Regulations of the site-specific zoning by-law: • permit Sales Outlets accessory to an Auction and Estate Sales House • increase the maximum number of permitted Restaurants — Type A from three to five • increase the maximum aggregate grossfloor area for Restaurants — Type A from 1,000 square metres to 1,300 square metres. • cap the aggregate gross leasable floor area for Retail use to a maximum of 10 percent of the aggregate gross leasable floor area of buildings and a maximum of 500 square metres per single Retail use • allow for one Place of Amusement or Entertainment use with a maximum gross leasable floor area of 150 square metres on the northerly half of the subject lands fronting Bayly Street The applicant is also requesting that the intersection of Bayly Street, Salk Road and the existing full -movement access to the site be signalized in the future. The applicant's transportation consultant has indicated that the full build -out of the site will trigger the need for a signalized intersection so that vehicles can enter and exit the site, and Salk Road, without significant delay. 4. Policy Framework 4.1 Durham Region Official Plan The Region of Durham Official Plan (ROP) designates the subject lands as "Employment Areas" in the Urban System, with a "Regional Corridor" overlay along Bayly Street. Employment areas allow for a range of employment uses, which include: manufacturing; assembly and processing of goods; service industries; research and development facilities; warehousing; offices and business parks; hotels; storage of goods and materials; and freight transfer and transportation facilities. Designations in the respective area municipal official plan will further identify the appropriate locations for these uses. Limited personal service and retail uses, serving the immediate designated employment area may be permitted as a minor component (e.g., 10 percent) of the aggregate gross floor area of the uses in the designated Employment Area, and no single use shall exceed 500 square metres. Furthermore, Retail sales as a minor ancillary componentof an industrial operation may be permitted, subject to the inclusion of appropriate provisions in the Pickering Official Plan and/or Zoning By-law. Residential uses, nursing and retirement homes, elementary and secondary schools, and places of worship are not permitted in Employment Areas. However, other sensitive uses may be permitted as an exception, by amendment to Pickering's zoning by-law subject to compatibility. Bayly Street is designated as a Type `A' Arterial Road and is also identified as a Rapid Transit Spine in the ROP. Type `A' Arterial Roads are designed to carry large volumes of traffic at moderate to high speeds, having some access restrictions and generally have a right-of-way width ranging from 36 to 45 metres. Roads identified as Rapid Transit Spine are recognized for planning High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes or buses in mixed traffic, with transit signal priority at major intersections and other measures to ensure fast and reliable transit service. 18 Information Report No. 05-19 Page 5 4.2 Pickering Official Plan The subject lands fall within two separate land use designations. The northerly half of the subject lands along Bayly Street is designated as "Employment Areas — Mixed Employment", and the southerly half along Dillingham Road is designated as "Employment Areas — General Employment". The site-specific zoning by-law permits select uses on the north and south parcels to align with the corresponding Official Plan land use designation and the applicable policies. Landsdesignated as Mixed Employment are located generally along arterial roads that provide for a broad range of employment uses, including light manufacturing, warehousing, offices and other supportive service commercial uses such as limited personal service uses, restaurants, and limited retailing of goods and services serving the area. Lands designated as General Employment are located within the interior of the City's employment areas, and typicallypermit uses that are associated with the heaviest industrial uses and outdoor storage, and potential noise, vibration, odour or dust emissions. Uses permitted in this designation include, but are limited to, manufacturing; assembly; processing of goods; service industries; offices as a minor component of an industrial operation or serving the area; limited personal service uses serving the area; restaurants serving the area; retail sales as a minor component of an industrial operation; and community, cultural and recreational uses. The employment area policies within the ROP are more current and restrictive, and any amendments shall be in conformity with the ROP. The subject application will be further assessed against the policies and provisions of the Regional Official Plan and the City's Official Plan during the further processing of the rezoning application. 4.3 Zoning By-law 2511, as amended The subject lands are zoned "MC -21" within Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by Zoning By-laws 6974/09 and 7519/16. The zoning permits a range of employment and service commercial uses within certain locations on the subject lands. As noted in Section 3 of this report, the applicant is seeking a site-specific zoning by-law amendment to expand the list of permitted uses on the subject lands and modify specific regulations. 5. Comments Received 5.1 Residents Comments As of the writing of this report, no comments or concerns have been received from the public. 5.2 Agency Comments 5.2.1 Region of Durham — Planning Department As of the writing of this report, no comments or concerns have been received from the Region of Durham Planning and Economic Development Department. 19 20 Information Report No. 05-19 Page 6 5.3 City Departments Comments 5.3.1 Engineering Services As of the writing of this report, no comments or concerns have been received from Engineering Services. 6. Planning & Design Section Comments The following is a summary of key concerns/issues or matters of importance raised to date. These matters, and others identified through the circulation and detailed review of the proposal, are required to be addressed by the applicant prior to a final recommendation report to Planning & Development Committee: • ensuring the additional requested uses and the existing permitted uses are consistent with the policies of the Provincial Policy Statement, the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe and the Durham Regional Official Plan • ensuring the additional uses, which are primary non-industrial/service commercial uses, do not erode the industrial function of these lands • assessing whether introducing sensitive lands uses (private school and daycare) will negatively impact, or be negatively impacted by, the existing surrounding industrial uses, industrial uses permitted by the City's Official Pian, and permitted as -of -right under the current zoning by-law • assessing the location of the proposed day care centre and private school, immediately adjacent to an existing outdoor storage facility • assessing whether some uses permitted by the current zoning on the site need to be deleted to achieve conformity with the Durham Regional Official Plan • ensuring the Region of Durham concurs with the recommendations of the submitted Transportation Brief, particularly the future signalization of the intersection of Bayly Street, Salk Road and the existing full -movement access to the site • ensuring the applicant makes appropriate arrangements with either the City or the Region regarding the future signalization of the intersection of Bayly Street, Salk Road and the existing full -movement access • assessing whether the existing parking supply is sufficient to accommodate the mix of existing and proposed uses • further issues may be identified following receipt and review of comments from the circulated departments, agencies and public The City Development Department will conclude its positon on the application after it has received and assessed comments from the circulated departments, agencies and public. 7. Information Received Full scale copies of the plans and studies listed below are available for online viewing at pickering.ca/devapp or in person at the office of the City of Pickering, City Development Department: • Application form to Amend Zoning By-law completed by the applicant, dated September 20, 2018 • Planning Rationale Report, prepared by The Biglieri Group, dated September 2018, revised January 2019 Information Report No. 05-19 Page 7 • Transportation Brief, prepared by WSP Canada Group Limited, dated September 7, 2018 • Transportation Brief Update, prepared by WSP Canada Group Limited, dated January 31, 2019, • Land Use Compatibility Assessment, prepared by Rubidium Environmental, dated September 28, 2017 • Phase One Environmental Site Assessment, prepared by WSP Canada Group Limited, dated November 13, 2018 • Conceptual Site Plan, prepared by The Biglieri Group, dated December 11, 2018 8. Procedural Information 8.1 General • written comments regarding this proposal should be directed to the City Development Department • oral comments may be made at the Public Information Meeting • all comments received will be noted and used as input to a Planning Report prepared by the City Development Department for a subsequent meeting of Council or a Committee of Council • any member of the public who wishes to reserve the option to appeal Council's decision must provide comments to the City before Council adopts any by-law for this proposal or makes a decision on the Draft Plan of Subdivision • any member of the public who wishes to be notified of Council's decision regarding this proposal must request such in writing to the City Clerk 9. Owner/Applicant Information The owner of the property is Stuart Mark Golvin; JMPM Holdings Ltd. and is represented by The Biglieri Group Ltd. Attachments 1. Location Map 2. Site Plan 3. Air Photo Map 21 Information Report No. 05-19 Page 8 Prepared By: Felix Chau Plann= 1 Nile II'S rti, CIP, RPP Manager, Development Review & Urban Design FC:NS:Id Date of Report: February 13, 2019 22 Approved/Endorsed By: ez7(7---44-L-t, Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Chief Planner . Attachment #_to Information Report# 0 Hydro Corridor Subject Lands Hydro Corridor (0 0 0 (1) Plummer Street Bayly Street v.''•W•'•'• •'•... •v • •••�•�•�•••••••••••••••••••�•••�� ••••••••••••..••• •'•❖•••❖'••••'•••'•••'• • • •• •.'••• ••'•'•'•'•'•••'•O'•': •'•'•••O•••••••••••••••••••••: •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 0•••'00••••••4 00•••'•'•'••••. ►••••••'•••'•'•'i ►••••'••••••••'•'i• �•••••�1• •• • • Don Beer Arena a f0 0 E ( m 00 0 / Quigley Street Orangebrook Court Cts Location Map File: A 12/18 o PICKERING City Develop hent Departrnent Applicant:, Stuart Mark Golvin and JMPM Holdings Ltd Property Description: Lot 19, Range 3, BFC, Now Part of Part 1, 40R-10527 and Part 1, 40R-8832 (1635 Bayly Street) Date: 11, 2019 tl The Cerporaben of the City of Piekenrg Produced tin pan, under bg Mune from: N Queens Pnntene Mh&try of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.;® Her Majesty the Queen In Rlghl of Canada, Department of Natural Resources. M rights reserved,; 0 Tenant Enterprises Inc. and Ks sonnets all rights reserved.;®Municipal Property Assessment Corperetaan end is suppters all ryhh reserved.; .Feb. 1 SCALE. ..57,000 THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. ?3 Attachment #_s -_to I rr,,a,#1rrr l ort# -9 'ss (� City Air Photo Map File: Al2/18 :,f— - PICKER1 NG City Development Department Applicant: Stuart Mark Golvin. and JMPM Holdings Ltd Property Description: Lot 19, Range 3, BFC, Now Part of Part 1, 40R-10527 and Part 1, 40R-8832 (1635 Bayly Street) Date: Feb. 11, 2019 e) The Corporason of the City of Pickering Produced (In pant under license Form ® Queens Printer, Onlado Mhbey 01 Natural Resources. All rights res erved.;6 Her Makoly the Queen In Right of Canada, Department of Natural Resources. Al right% reserved.; OTeranel Enterprises Inc. and ib oopp1n al rights reserved.; El Municipal Property Assessment Corporellon end to soppier% all rig hie reserved.; .I SCALE: :5,000 THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. L:\Planning\Corel\P la n n ing\Ap ps\A\2018 : T RIFT i'PECIC ..14r 16. 1. -. _f U 1_2 YL ES_REET f, , ,, :, _ _----- r_..;`,nik rim iI�E'%7 .. —. .t.AN 777 Y,R- • —•-- —Ir �.."4'41�r I �.. +m,r,7 '� --- i. .T7PI/'. �R �0��' "'+- .T� ii Building `A' L I Building_ `: " Building — _ — F.il� — �= Building —_ �� I� �_ 1 —1 --- w & L) J I L _ 11II 1 IIIIl 1111'1,1'.1 I� �4I 1 I I,h¢:,s-i`11 1_ n ", y u - ;, a ' �-J _ • . Building `G' ...LI Building `F.' Building `E' ' - �,I ProposedDaycare-Outdoor .:7, 1 i J' PlayArea _, IElffii - , r,..' _...,,.:,.... <� /Hit • 1 I -1 —!I zl I I I I I I I I I 1/11F-77:' :.• M?' ,'E �. --DI:LLIIN' -• A R' R' AD Submitted Conceptual Site Plan city 4 File No: A 12/18 PICKERING Applicant: Stuart Mark Golvin; JMPM Holdings Ltd - Property Description: Lot 19, Range 3, BFC, Now Part of Part 1, 40R-10527 and Part 1, 40R-8832 City Development (1635 Bayly Street) - Department FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. DATE: Feb. 5, 2019 L:\Planning\Corel\P la n n ing\Ap ps\A\2018 Cdr DICKERING Report to Planning & Development Committee Report Number: PLN 04-19 Date: March 4, 2019 From: Kyle Bentley Director, City Development & CBO Subject: By-law for the Civic Numbering of Buildings and Properties within the City of Pickering File: D-9600 Recommendation: 1. That Council repeal and replace By-law 3503/90 with a new by-law to provide for the civic numbering of buildings and properties within the City of Pickering; and 2. That the draft by-law provided as Appendix I to Report PLN 04-19 be forwarded to Council for enactment. Executive Summary: The purpose of this report is to obtain Council's approval to repeal and replace By-law 3503/90 with a new by-law for the civic numbering of buildings and properties. A new by-law is required to ensure consistent procedures are used for all development types, to deal with concerns, and to recover costs from requests to change municipal addresses. Financial Implications: The implementation of the new by-law would provide cost recovery for applications to change a municipal address (civic number change). Discussion: 1. Purpose of Municipal Addressing Municipal addressing includes street naming and civic numbering of properties and buildings. Municipal addressing is important for wayfinding and ensuring timely responses by police, fire and emergency medical services during an emergency. The assignment of postal codes is undertaken by Canada Post. Postal codes are considered part of the mailing address. Mailing addressing is important forpostal delivery. By-law 3530/90 provides the regulatory framework for civic numbering, whereas Regional Report 2001-P-27 provides the procedure for street names in the Durham Region. With respect to civic numbering, By-law 3530/90: • requires the City to assign numbers to all properties in the City of Pickering • requires the City maintain an official record, of those numbers • establishes requirements for property owners to display on their property, the numbers which have been assigned • establishes fines for contravening the by-law 26 PLN 04-19 March 4, 2019 Subject: Civic Numbering of Buildings and Properties in Pickering Page 2 2. Overview of Standard Operating Procedures for Assigning Civic Numbers Civic numbers for properties and buildings are assigned by the City. At the outset of construction of a building, the owner must install a temporary sign displaying the civic number and this sign must remain in place for the duration of construction. The permanent civic number sign for the property/building must be installed prior to occupancy. Civic numbers are assigned from south to north starting at the Iakeshore Broken Front Concession, and from west to east starting at the Scarborough -Pickering and Markham -Pickering Townline Roads. Irregular streets are considered to be west -east or south -north according to their predominant direction. Even numbers are assigned for buildings on the north and west sides of the streets, while odd numbers are assigned for buildings on the south and east sides of the streets. Civic numbers are assigned on the basis of one number for every 6.0 metres (20 feet) of lot frontage. 3. Recent Challenges Within the past few years, two significant challenges have arisen: 1. more complex development forms (e.g., common element condominiums containing a number of private streets and stacked or back to back townhouses).; 2. a significant increase in requests to change an assigned civic number. For new and emerging forms of development, City Development staff have worked with Fire Services to develop new standard operating procedures for assigning street names and civic numbers in these situations, and recommended that key parts of these standard operating procedures be included in the new by-law. The increase in requests to change civic numbers has been rising over the past 15 years. During this time, the City's population has become more diverse, having many cultural, religious or philosophical beliefs about the meaning or symbolism of numbers. These belief systems do not always align, and while some prefer certain numbers, others may wish to avoid these numbers. The City has a standard operating procedure for assigning municipal addresses that is strictly adhered to. However, the current By-law does not speak to requests for municipal address changes. Costs for addressing subdivisions and land severances are covered through planning application fees. However, costs for time spent on requests for site-specific municipal address changes are not recuperated. Therefore, steps and fees need to be included in the By-law regarding requests for address changes. 4. Staff Recommend that the New By-law be Enacted by Council Staff consulted with internal departments including City Development (Building Services and Planning & Design Division), and Fire Services, throughout the drafting of the new by-law. In addition to those matters already addressed in By-law 3503/90, the new by-law will include: • Standard definitions (section 1) • Assignment of responsibilities to the Director, City Development, in accordance with the Municipal Addresses standard operating procedure (section 2) 27 PLN 04-19 March 4, 2019 Subject: Civic Numbering of Buildings and Properties in Pickering Page 3 • Requirements for applications to change civic numbering (section 3)' • General sign requirements (section 4) • Reflective sign requirements (section 5) • Obligation of property owners to post civic numbers (section 6) • Reporting to Council for City -initiated proposed civic number changes (section 7) • Penalties for contravening the by-law (section 8) It is recommended that Council repeal and replace By-law 3503/90 with a new by-law to provide for the civic numbering of buildings and properties within the City of Pickering. Appendix Appendix 1 Draft By-law for the Civic Numbering of Buildings and Properties in the City of Pickering Prepared By: Jill McMullen Coordinator, Geomatics Jeff Brooks, MCIP, RPP, AMCT Manager, Policy & Geomatics JM:JB:Id Approved/Endorsed By: Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Chief Planner X-t6i Kyle Bentley, P. Eng. Director, CityDevelopment & CBO Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Tony Prevedel, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer !S,Zo'7 28 Appendix I to Report PLN 04-19 Draft By-law for the Municipal Addressing of Buildings and Properties in the City of Pickering 29 The Corporation of the City of Pickering By-law No. XXXX/19 Being a by-law to provide for the Civic Numbering of Buildings and Properties in the City of Pickering. Whereas section 8(1) of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c. 25, as amended ("Municipal Act, 2001"),provides that the powers of a municipality shall be interpreted broadly so as to confer broad authority on municipalities to enable them to govern their affairs as they consider appropriate, and to enhance their ability to respond to municipal issues; Whereas section 11 (2) 6 of the Municipal Act, 2001 provides that a municipality may pass by-laws for the health, safety and well being of persons; Whereas section 11 (2) 8 of the Municipal Act, 2001 provides that a municipality may pass by-laws for the protection of persons and property; Whereas section 11 (3) 1. of the Municipal Act, 2001 provides that a municipality may pass by-laws for highways; Whereas section 11 (3) 7. of the Municipal Act, 2001 provides that a municipality may pass by-laws for structures, including fences and signs; Whereas section 116 (2) of the Municipal Act, 2001 provides that where a municipality has established a centralized communication system for emergency services it may at any reasonable time enter onto land to affix numbers on buildings or erect signs setting out numbers on land; Whereas section 23.2 of the Municipal Act, 2001 provides that a municipality may delegate some of its powers under the Municipal Act, 2001 to an employee of the municipality; Whereas Council is of the opinion that the act of assigning civic numbers to buildings and properties is a power of a minor nature; Whereas section 227 of the Municipal Act, 2001 provides that it is the role of officers and employees of the municipality to implement Council decisions and establish practices and procedures to implement those decisions; Whereas section 429 (1) of the Municipal Act, 2001 provides that a municipality may establish a system of fines for a by-law passed under the Municipal Act, 2001; Whereas section 446 (1) of the.Municipal Act, 2001 provides that where a person fails .to do something that is required under a by-law, the municipality may undertake to do the thing required at the person's expense and the costs may be collected in same manner as property taxes; Whereas the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering desires to repeal and replace By-law 3503/90, as amended, with this By-law; 30 By-law No. X.>>J Xi 19 Page 2 Now therefore the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering enacts as follows: 1. In this by-law, a. "Council' means the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering; b. "Director" means the Director of City Development of the Corporation of the City of Pickering or designate; c. "Highway" includes a common and public highway, street, avenue, parkway, driveway, square, place, bridge, viaduct or trestle, any part of which is intended for or used by the general public for the passage of vehicles and includes the area between the lateral property lines thereof; d. "City" means The Corporation of the City of Pickering; e. "Civic Number" means the number assigned by the City to a property or building, and which forms part of a Municipal Address; f. "Municipal Address" means the Civic Number and Street Name; g. "Record" means the City's official record of Municipal Addresses; h. "Street Name" means the name and suffix assigned by the City for each Highway or private road with the City of Pickering; and i. "SOP" means the City's Municipal Addresses Standard Operating Procedure. 2. The Director shall assign a civic number to every building or lot abutting or fronting on a street within the City, .according to the processes described in the current standard operating procedure titled "Municipal Addresses" and shall maintain an official record of all municipal addresses assigned to buildings and properties within the City. The Director shall ensure that: a. All civic numbers are included in the addressing of a street. b. Draft municipal addresses are assigned to a plan of subdivision after the Director has granted draft approval by stamping and signing copies of the draft plan of subdivision, and that final municipal addresses are confirmed upon receipt of a registered plan of subdivision from the Land Registry Office and entered into the Record. c. Draft municipal addresses are assigned to Tots subject to land severance after all approvals are granted for the severance by the Region of Durham or other approvals agencies, and that final municipal addresses are confirmed upon receipt of a registered deed for the severed property from the Land Registry Office and entered into the Record. d. Municipal addresses on private roads conform to the SOP. e. A civic number given to a rural building is subject to the building's relative location along the lot frontage. 31 By --law No. XXXX/19 Page 3 f. Multiple occupancy buildings are assigned a single civic number and individual units are given numerical identification in sequential order. g. In the situation of a multiple building complex, a civic number will be assigned to each building and to each unit. The number for each building shall be assigned in a clockwise order around the complex starting at the main entrance to the site. The number for each unit within the building shall be numbered sequentially. 3. All applications for a civic number change shall be reviewed and considered, upon receipt of the application and appropriate fees. The fee shall be $1,000.00 plus HST, for up to one year following the passing of this. by-law. Subsequent application fees will be in accordance with the City's Fee By-law. The Director of City Development shall only grant approval of an application if: a. The request was made by the property owner; b. The requested change to the existing civic number does not conflict with the SOP or other sections of this By-law; c. Fire Services determines that the change would improve the level of emergency response service; and d. Abutting property owners are not adversely affected by the change. 4. No person shall affix to any building or premises or, being the owner shall allow to be affixed or to remain affixed thereto, any civic number except that appearing in the Record. Every property owner shall: a. Securely affix or inscribe on the wall of the main building, which is the wall closest to the highway on which the main building has vehicular access, the civic number. b. Affix the civic number at a height between 2.0 metres (6.5 feet) and 2.5 metres (8.2 feet) above grade. c. Ensure that every civic number shall be expressed in legible Arabic digits at least: i. 100 millimetres (4 inches) high with at least a 12 millimetre (1/2 inch) wide stroke, subject to 4(c)(ii); and ii. at least 200 millimetres (8 inches) high with at least a 20 millimetre (3/4 inch) wide stroke where the building is setback from the travelled portion of the road between 18.0 metres (59 feet) and 30.0 metres (98 feet); d. Ensure that where a civic number is placed on a building, the civic number is placed on a contrasting background and is clearly visible from the highway on which the building has vehicular access during daylight, and absent daylight when illuminated from the street. 32 By-law No. XXXX/19 Page 4 e. Ensure that where pylon signs or ground signs are erected and used, as defined in City of Pickering Sign By-law 6999/09, as amended, the civic number shall be clearly indicated on the sign in accordance to the Sign By-law. f. Ensure that buildings under construction and not occupied have the civic numbers posted on a sign in front of the building and that the address is clearly differentiated from references to lot numbers. g. Ensure that permanent civic numbers are affixed to the structure prior to the granting of occupancy. h. Ensure that where multiple lots are accessed by a common driveway, except in the case of condominium apartments or townhouses, a reflective sign with all of those civic numbers of the buildings accessed by the common driveway shall be installed at the entrance to the driveway located at the highway and in addition, and that the civic numbers also be affixed to every main building accessed by the common driveway. Ensure that where no building is located on a lot for which a municipal address has been assigned based on vehicular access to that vacant lot, a reflective sign is erected and maintained depicting the civic number of the vacant lot in accordance with the requirements of Section 5. 5. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 4 of this By-law, where the building is situated more than 30 metres (98 feet) from the highway on which the main building has vehicular access measured from the edge of the travelled portion of the highway, or where the view of such a building is obscured from the highway by grade or vegetation or any structure or feature, the municipality shall affix the civic address to a reflective sign subject to the following requirements: a. The reflective sign shall be supported by a post. b. The distance between the post and the centre line of the vehicular access to the main building shall not exceed 6.0 metres (20 feet). c. The reflective sign shall be at a right angle alignment to the highway on which the main building has vehicular access. d. The reflective sign shall be located on the property line where the lot meets the highway unless its view will be obstructed, in which case the reflective sign shall be located on the road allowance and as close as possible to the lot line. e. The reflective sign shall be posted on the same side of the highway as the building or vehicular access to the main building or vacant lot to which it pertains. f. The top of the reflective sign shall be at least 1.4 metres (4.5 feet) above the average grade of the lot directly in front of the reflective sign. 33 By-law No. XXXX/19 Page 5 g. The reflective sign and the lot to which it pertains shall be maintained so that the reflective sign is clearly visible from the highway on which the vacant lot or main building has vehicular access, at all times. h. The reflective sign and its support post shall not be used for any other purpose than to support the reflective sign. i. The reflective sign shall be of reflective green material. The civic number for the vacant lot or main building shall be affixed to each side of the reflective sign. The civic number shall be of reflective white material and shall contrast with the plate so that the civic number is clearly visible from the abutting highway. Dimensions of the plate and civic numbers shall be in accordance to guidelines used by the City's Community Services Department, Public Works Section. 6. Every owner of a property which abuts or fronts on a street shall be responsible for the expense of civic numbering their property. 7. Whenever City staff identifies that it is necessary to have the civic numbers changed on any street or portion of a street, the Director of City Development shall report to the Council and, if directed by resolution of the Council, shall reassign civic numbers to the buildings or properties along the street or portion of the street and shall cause the owners of the properties on the street or portion of the street to be notified and directed to remove the previous civic numbers and attach the new civic numbers to the buildings or premises. 8. Every person who contravenes any provision of this by-law is guilty of an offence, and upon conviction is liable to a fine of not more than $2,000.00, exclusive of costs, recoverable under the Provincial Offences Act. 9. By-law 3503/90 is hereby repealed and replaced. 10.This By-law shall come into force on the date of passage by Council. By-law passed this XXth day of XXXX, 20XX. David Ryan, Mayor Susan Cassel, City Clerk 34 DICKERING Report to Planning & Development Committee Report Number: PLN 05-19 Date: March 4, 2019 From: Kyle Bentley Director, City Development & CBO Subject: City of Pickering Comments on Proposed Amendment 1 to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2017 File: D-1240-018 Recommendation: 1. That the comments in Report PLN 05-19 on Proposed Amendment 1 to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2017, be endorsed, and that the Province be requested to: A. revise the lands to be identified within a Provincially Significant Employment Zone, by: 1. excluding the following lands from Zone 3: a. lands designated "Mixed Use Areas - City Centre", (a designated Urban Growth Centre), bounded by the hydro corridor on the east, Bayly Street on the south, Sandy Beach Road on the west, and Highway 401 on the north; and the row of properties along the south side of Bayly Street, west of the hydro corridor, also designated "Mixed Use Areas - Mixed Corridors", as shown on Appendix 11; and 2. including the following employment areas in Pickering within Zone 3: a. the Whites Road Prestige Employment Area in the West Shore Neighbourhood on the south side of Highway 401 and west of Whites Road, as shown on Appendix 111; and b. the Seaton Employment Lands along Highway 407, also referred to as the Pickering Innovation Corridor, as shown on Appendix IV; B. initiate a strategy to financially assist municipalities to service vacant employment lands in strategic locations, removing one of the key barriers to economic growth; C. investigate financial tools (e.g., parking space levy, fuel tax, sales tax, payroll tax, vehicle kilometers travelled tax, highway tolls, development charges, land value capture, property tax, development charges, fare increases, etc.) and funding opportunities to enable the timely implementation of transportation and other municipal infrastructure and services, to support the implementation of the Growth Plan; and 2. That a copy of Report PLN 05-19 be forwarded to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Members of Parliament for Pickering -Scarborough East and Ajax -Pickering, the Region of Durham, and other Durham Area Municipalities. 35 PLN 05-19 March 4, 2019 Subject: Comments on Proposed Amendment 1 to the Growth Plan, 2017 Page 2 Executive Summary: On January 15, 2019, the Provincial Government released proposed Amendment 1 to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2017. The deadline for comments is February 28, 2019. The purpose of this report is to provide formal comments to the Province on the proposed changes. Financial Implications:.The recommendations of this report do not present any financial implications. 1. Background Between 2015 and 2017, the previous Provincial Government conducted a coordinated review of the four Provincial Land Use Plans. During the coordinated review process, City Council offered formal comments to the Province twice. The first time was in May 2015 (via Report PLN 02-15, dated May 11, 2015), and the second time in September 2016 (via Report PLN 15-16, dated September 12, 2016). Council's resolutions from these reports are provided as Attachment #1 to this report. In May of 2017, new versions of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, Greenbelt Plan, Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, and the Niagara Escarpment Plan came into effect. Following the election of the new Provincial Government in 2018, the Ontario Growth Secretariat initiated a consultation process with representatives from regional and local municipalities, other key public agencies, the development industry, and stakeholders. From September to November 2018, the Province hosted six working group sessions around the following themes: • Planning for Employment • Agricultural System Policies • Natural Heritage System Policies • Settlement Area Boundary Expansions • Intensification and Density Targets, and • Planning for Major Transit Station Areas The purpose of the working group sessions was to identify implementation challenges with the 2017 Growth Plan policies, and to offer and discuss potential solutions. Staff from the City Development Department participated in these sessions. On January 15, 2019, the Province released proposed changes to the Growth Plan, entitled "Proposed Amendment 1 to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2017". The Province indicated that the proposed changes are intended to address potential barriers to increasing the supply of housing, creating jobs and attracting investments. The document has been posted on the Province's Environmental Bill of Rights Registry and the deadline for comments is February 28, 2019. The Ministry has been advised that the City will be submitting Council's comments, after the deadline. 36 PLN 05-19 March 4, 2019 Subject: Comments on Proposed Amendment 1 to the Growth Plan, 2017 Page 3 2. Comments on the proposed changes to the Growth Plan The proposed changes to the 2017 Growth Plan range from minor grammatical revisions that change the nuance or tone of certain statements and provisions, to major modifications to policies on employment lands planning, agricultural system and natural heritage system mapping, settlement area boundary adjustments, rural settlements, intensification and designated greenfield area density targets, and major transit station delineation. The proposed revisions appear to address certain concerns expressed and solutions offered by participants during the provincially hosted working group sessions. Table 1 to this report outlines key proposed changes to the Growth Plan and staff's corresponding comment (see Appendix I). High level comments are discussed below, with recommendations in bold on those matters that require further review and consideration by the Province. 2.1 Employment Planning Under the 2017 Growth Plan, the designation of new employment areas and the conversion of employment areas to non -employment uses can only be considered at the time of a "municipal comprehensive review" (MCR). A MCR is a new official plan or an official plan amendment initiated by an upper- or single -tier municipality under section 26 of the Planning Act that comprehensively applies the policies and schedules of the Growth Plan. Durham Region must undertake the required MCR. Amendment 1 would enable upper -tier municipalities to designate new employment areas through an official plan amendment without the need for a MCR. Municipalities would also have increased autonomy to convert lands within existing employment areas to non -employment uses prior to a MCR, subject to specific criteria. Furthermore, Amendment 1 proposes the creation of "provincially significant employment zones", which could only be considered for conversion to a non -employment use through a MCR. The 2017 Growth Plan requires upper -tier municipalities to develop an employment strategy in collaboration with the Province and lower -tier municipalities. The strategy must establish a minimum density target reflecting an average for all employment areas in the Region. Amendment 1 removes the requirement for upper -tier municipalities to develop an employment strategy, and maintains the requirement for minimum employment density targets. However, the targets are for individual employment areas within the Region, not an average across the Region. The proposed revisions to the employment policies are discussed in more detail below. a) Proposed Provincially Significant Employment Zones A new policy is being introduced that allows the Minister to identify Provincially Significant Employment Zones (PSEZ), and stipulates that such lands must be protected and cannot be converted outside of a MCR. 37 PLN 05-19 March 4, 2019 Subject: Comments on Proposed Amendment 1 to the Growth Plan, 2017 Page 4 As part of the supporting information for Amendment 1, the Province mapped proposed PSEZs in the Greater Golden Horseshoe. The map identifies a PSEZ south of Highway 401 in Ajax and Pickering. For Pickering, the lands include employment areas in the Brock Industrial Neighbourhood, with the exception of the Pickering Nuclear Station and Durham Water Pollution Treatment Plan (see the Map, Attachment #2). However, the "Mixed Use Areas — City Centre" lands bounded by Sandy Beach Road, Bayly Street, Highway 401, and the hydro corridor, and the "Mixed Use Areas — Mixed Corridors" strip along the south side of Bayly Street, west of the hydro corridor, were inadvertently included in the proposed PSEZ. These lands allow for a mix of uses, including residential and commercial uses, which would not be permitted within the proposed PSEZ. Therefore, these lands (shown in Appendix II) need to be removed from the proposed PSEZ in South Pickering. Staff has already brought this matter to the attention of Provincial staff. In addition, the Province's Map does not identify the Whites Road Prestige Employment Area (designated in the Pickering Official Plan) in the West Shore Neighbourhood at Highway 401 and Whites Road (see Appendix III).. This employment area is strategically located to Highway 401 and the CN main rail line, is an integral part of the City's employment lands base, and should also be recognized as a Provincially Significant Zone. Furthermore, although the Seaton Employment Lands fall within the Central Pickering Development Plan, it is strategic in terms of its location to Highway 407, the Seaton Community, and the proposed airport site. These lands should be included as a Provincially Significant Employment Zone (see Appendix IV). To advance the development of lands within PSEZs, the Province should initiate a strategy to financially assist municipalities to service vacant employment lands in strategic locations. This would complement the Province's plan to remove barriers to economic growth by creating shovel -ready employment lands. This will also assist in lands being "open for business" and creating "complete communities". It is therefore recommended that: i) The Province revise the lands to be included as a PSEZ, by: • excluding the following areas from the proposed PSEZ in Pickering: • lands designated "Mixed Use Areas - City Centre", (a designated Urban Growth Centre), bounded by the hydro corridor on the east, Bayly Street on the south, Sandy Beach Road on the west, and Highway 401 on the north; and the row of properties along the south side of Bayly Street, west of the hydro corridor, also designated "Mixed Use Areas — Mixed Corridors", as shown on Appendix II; and 38 PLN 05-19 March 4, 2019 Subject: Comments on Proposed Amendment 1 to the Growth Plan, 2017 Page 5 • including the following employment areas in Pickering in a PSEZ: • the Whites Road Prestige Employment Area in the West Shore Neighbourhood, on the south side of Highway 401 and west of Whites Road, reflected in Appendix III; and • the Seaton Employment Lands along Highway 407, also referred to as the Pickering Innovation Corridor, reflected in Appendix IV; and ii) The Province initiate a strategy to financially assist municipalities in servicing vacant employment lands in strategic locations, removing one of the key barriers to economic growth. b) Removing the requirement for Employment Strategies The proposed policy revision that would remove the need for upper -tier municipalities to develop an employment strategy does not preclude the option to do one. The Region has indicated that the preparation of an employment strategy or similar study is part of their MCR scope of work. Staff agree that there is value in undertaking an employment strategy to: develop employment targets; set the right regulatory climate for investment; facilitate timely servicing of employment areas; and monitor performance and do benchmarking. c) Setting Multiple Density Targets for Employment Lands Staff supports the proposed. policy revision that would require upper -tier municipalities, in consultation with lower -tier municipalities, to set density targets for each employment areas, rather than set a single target for the entire Region. The nature of employment uses and their corresponding densities vary between employment areas and between municipalities. Setting employment density targets for individual employment areas would more accurately reflect expectations of job growth. 2.2 Urban Settlement Area Boundary Expansions Under the 2017 Growth Plan, settlement area boundaries can only be adjusted or expanded through a MCR. Amendment 1 would enable municipalities to advance residential and commercial development by permitting upper -tier municipalities to "adjust" or "expand" an urban settlement area boundary changes outside of a MCR. A key condition to enable an "adjustment" to an urban settlement area boundary, in advance of a MCR, is that there must be no net increase in the land area of the settlement. A key condition to enable an "expansion" to an urban settlement area boundary, in advance of a MCR, is that the expansion not exceed 40 hectares (100 acres). However, adjustments or expansions to a settlement area boundary excludes rural settlements and settlements in the Greenbelt Area. Staff has no objection to these proposed policy changes, as they provide flexibility to municipalities seeking minor adjustments or expansions to settlement area boundaries in advance of a MCR, while protecting the integrity of the Greenbelt Area. 39 PLN 05-19 March 4, 2019 Subject: Comments on Proposed Amendment 1 to the Growth Plan, 2017 Page 6 2.3 Rural Settlements a) Minor adjustments to rural settlement boundaries Under the 2017 Growth Plan, new multiple lots or units for residential development in' rural areas are directed to locations with a residential designation in an official plan or a residential zoning approved as of June 16, 2006. Amendment 1 would enable minor adjustments to the boundary of a rural settlement, outside of a MCR. Key criteria to be considered under this. policy include that the change constitute a "minor rounding out" of the existing development, and that the affected settlement be outside the Greenbelt Area. b) Implications for the Hamlet of Claremont As noted earlier, City Council commented on the coordinated review of the Provincial Land Use Plans in 2015 and 2016. Council requested policy modifications to enable consideration of a minor rounding out of the Hamlet of Claremont through a municipally - initiated study. Council's request acknowledged rezoning and subdivision applications, submitted by Geranium Homes, for lands in the Claremont area that pre -date the Greenbelt Plan and the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan. The Province did not change.the Provincial Plans as Council requested. In late 2017, Geranium Homes (now the Claremont Development Corporation) appealed to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT). The grounds for the appeal was City Council's failure to make a decision on the rezoning and subdivision applications within the prescribed period under the Planning. Act. In their appeal, the Claremont Development Corporation submitted that the LPAT should review their applications against the policy framework in place at the date of the applications. Following a pre -hearing conference in March, 2018, the Claremont Development Corporation requested an adjournment of the Hearing scheduled for October 2018. The matter of rounding out the rural settlement boundary in the Hamlet of Claremont remains before the LPAT. 2.4 Natural Heritage System (NHS) and Agricultural System Mapping Under the 2017 Growth Plan, the Natural Heritage and Agricultural System mapping came into effect upon issuance by the Province. Through Amendment 1, provincial Natural Heritage and Agricultural System mapping would not apply until it is included in the upper -tier official plan. Until then, the policies of the Growth Plan would apply to the NHS systems designated in local and regional official plans. Upper- and lower -tier municipalities may refine the system boundaries and request changes to the provincial mapping. Once the refined system boundaries are incorporated in the upper -tier official plan, future changes can only be made through a MCR. The new policies are consistent with previous comments provided to the Province. Council requested the Province revise the timeframe for municipalities to bring their official plans into conformity with the NHS and agricultural systems mapping to enable consultation, analysis and refinement of the system maps. 40 PLN 05-19 March 4, 2019 Subject: Comments on Proposed Amendment 1 to the Growth Plan, 2017 Page 7 2.5 Intensification and Density Targets Under the 2017 Growth Plan, the Region of Durham is required to achieve an annual minimum intensification target for development within the built boundary of: • 40 percent until the next MCR (the same target as the 2006 Growth Plan) • 50 percent from completion of the MCR until 2031 • 60 percent from 2032 until 2041 whereas under Amendment 1, the Region of Durham would be required to achieve a less aggressive target of: • 40 percent until the next MCR (the same target as the 2006 Growth Plan) • 50 percent from completion of the MCR until 2041 Under the 2017 Growth Plan, greenfield areas in the Region of Durham are required to achieve a minimum density of residents and jobs per hectare of: • 50 for lands currently designated within an official plan (the same density as the 2006 Growth Plan) • 60 for the same lands as the above lands, following the completion of a MCR • 80 for new greenfield areas designated arising from the MCR whereas under Amendment 1, greenfield areas in the Region of Durham would be required to achieve a less aggressive density of: • 50 for lands currently designated within an official plan, or designated following the completion of a MCR (the same density as the 2006 Growth Plan) The reduction in both the intensification targets and minimum greenfield density requirements are discussed further below. a) Different Intensification Targets Amendment 1 distinguishes different minimum intensification targets for municipalities, which would take effect at the next MCR, as follows: • The City of Hamilton and the Regions of Peel, Waterloo and York will have a minimum intensification target of 60 percent; • The Cities of Barrie, Brantford, Guelph, Orillia and Peterborough and the Regions of Durham, Halton and Niagara will have a minimum intensification target of 50 percent; • The City of Kawartha Lakes and the Counties of Brant, Dufferin, Haldimand, Northumberland, Peterborough, Simcoe and Wellington will establish a minimum intensification target based on maintaining or improving upon their current minimum intensification target. 41 PLN 05-19 March 4, 2019 Subject: Comments on Proposed Amendment 1 to the Growth Plan, 2017 Page 8 This approach acknowledges the diversity of urban communities within the Greater Golden Horseshoe, and differentiates larger urban centres from smaller ones. Durham Region staff indicate they agree with the reduction of the region -wide intensification target to 50 percent. Pickering has been a significant contributor to meeting the intensification target in Durham as almost 100 percent of the City's growth has been classified as "intensification" since the approval of the first Growth Plan (Pickering's built boundary generally corresponds with the CP Rail line). With Pickering's growth shifting to include greenfield development in Seaton, the City's intensification rate has decreased by 28 percent. As such, the Region will need to rely more on the other area municipalities in Durham to meet the region -wide target. b) Different Greenfield Area Density targets Amendment 1 also proposes different greenfield density targets for different municipalities, rather than the "one size fits all" approach. The following targets would take effect at the next MCR and would apply to the entire designated greenfield area (with the exception of net -outs): • The City of Hamilton and the Regions of Peel, Waterloo and York will have a minimum designated greenfield area density target of 60 residents and jobs per hectare; • The Cities of Barrie, Brantford, Guelph, Orillia and Peterborough and the Regions of Durham, Halton and Niagara will have a minimum designated greenfield area density target of 50 residents and jobs per hectare; • The City of Kawartha Lakes and the Counties of Brant, Dufferin, Haldimand, Northumberland, Peterborough, Simcoe and Wellington will have a minimum designated Greenfield area density target of 40 residents and jobs per hectare. The new policy is consistent with previous comments provided to the Province. Council recommended that the initial Greenfield area density target of 50 residents and jobs combined per hectare be maintained, or that the Province consider developing a more context sensitive approach for 905 communities. 2.6 Major Transit Station Areas (MTSA) Under the 2017 Growth Plan, the limits of major transit station areas are to be defined in the Durham Official Plan through a MCR. For a station area, such as Pickering that is served by the GO Transit rail network, the minimum density of 150 residents and jobs per hectare is to be achieved. Amendment 1 would enable municipalities to delineate station boundaries, and identify minimum density targets for these areas prior to a MCR, in accordance with the Planning Act's provisions for majortransit station areas. The Amendment would also permit the radius of a major transit station area to range from an approximate 500 to 800 metres, instead of only 500 metres. 42 PLN 05-19 March 4, 2019 Subject: Comments on Proposed Amendment 1 to the Growth Plan, 2017 Page 9 Pickering's major transit station area generally corresponds with our Urban Growth Centre. These lands are designated Mixed Use Areas — City Centre,in the Official Plan, and were recently rezoned to facilitate development. The boundary of the City Centre is less than 500 metres from the GO station facility in some locations, and more than 800 metres from the facility in other locations. 2.7 Other comments Consistent with previous comments provided on the proposed 2017 Growth Plan, Staff again highlights that the Growth Plan seeks to focus growth in areas that have infrastructure in place. However, with intensification also comes the need for improvements and upgrades to both hard and soft services. Accordingly, it is recommended that: i) The Province, as part of supporting the implementation of the Growth Plan, investigate financial tools (e.g., parking space levy, fuel tax, sales tax, payroll tax, vehicle kilometers travelled tax, highway tolls, development charges, land value capture, property tax, development charges, fare increases, etc.) and funding opportunities to enable the timely implementation of transportation and other municipal infrastructure and services. Lastly, there is still uncertainty regarding the relation between the Growth Plan and the Central Pickering Development Plan (CPDP), which includes the Seaton Urban Area. The CPDP was established under the Ontario Planning and Development Act, 1994, but the instrument to implement the CPDP was the Ontario Planning Act. The Province has yet to clarify whether the Growth Plan applies to the lands within the CPDP, or not. 3. Conclusions and Recommendations Proposed Amendment 1 to the Growth Plan addresses many of the comments and concerns that were previously expressed by municipalities and stakeholders during the 2015-2017 coordinated land use plan review process, or which were expressed at recent working group sessions hosted by the Province in late 2018. More specifically, the proposed amendments to the Growth Plan give greater recognition to the diverse character and context of local communities in the Growth Plan area, and provide more flexibility to upper -tier municipalities to implement the Growth Plan without departing from the general spirit and intent of the current plan. However, there are still a number of minor but important aspects that require further consideration by the Province. Staff will continue to keep Council informed as the Province moves toward concluding the consideration of Amendment 1 to the Growth Plan. 43 PLN 05-19 March 4, 2019 Subject: Comments on Proposed Amendment 1 to the Growth Plan, 20.17 Page 10 Appendices Appendix I Table 1 — Proposed Key Changes to the Growth Plan & Staff Response Appendix II Map of lands to be removed from the Proposed Provincially Significant Employment Zone in Pickering Appendix III Map of Prestige Employment Area at Whites Road and Highway 401 Appendix IV Map of Seaton Employment Corridor Attachments 1. Council Resolutions in relation to Report PLN 02-15, dated May 11, 2015 and Report PLN 15-16, dated September 12, 2016 2. Province's proposed Provincially Significant Employment Zone in Pickering Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: 44 Dean Jacobs, MCIP, RPP Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner, Policy Chief Planner Jeff Brooks, MCIP, RPP, AMCT Manager, Policy & Geomatics DJ:Id Kyle Bentley, P. Eng. Director, City Development & CBO Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Tony Prevedel, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer Appendix No. I to Report No. PLN 05-19 Table 1 — Proposed Key Changes to the Growth Plan & Staff Response 45 Proposed Key Changes to the 2017 Growth Plan and Staff Response Current Growth Plan Policy Proposed Policy Change By Amendment 1 Response Employment Planning: 1. The 2017 Growth Plan does not use the term "Provincially Significant Employment Zones" (PSEZs), or have any policy provisions for such lands. A new policy (2.2.5.12) is added enabling the Minister to identify "Provincially Significant Employment Zones" (PSEZ). Lands identified with a PSEZ must be protected and cannot be converted outside of a municipal comprehensive review (MCR). In addition to the Growth Plan Amendment, the Province has identified proposed Provincially Significant Zones on a map entitled "Proposed Framework for Provincially Significant Employment Zones". Proposed Zone 3 includes part of Pickering (see Attachment #2 to this Report). The Province is also seeking comments on the proposed PSEZs. The identification of Provincially Significant Employment Zones (PSEZ) is consistent with previous comments provided to the Province. The proposed PSEZ, identified on the Province's map, includes lands within the City Centre (a designated Urban Growth Centre in the Growth Plan) situated between the hydro corridor on the east side, Sandy Beach Road on the west side, and Bayly Street on the south side, and lands along Bayly Street that is designated "Mixed Use Area - Mixed Corridors, that need to be removed from the proposed PSEZ (see Appendix II to this report). Furthermore, the proposed PSEZ omitted the Whites Road Prestige Employment Area in the West Shore Neighbourhood. at Highway 401 and Whites Road. This area is strategically. located to Highway 401 and CN main rail line, and should therefore be included (see Appendix III to this report). Although the Seaton Employment Lands fall within the Central Pickering Development Plan, it is strategic in terms of its location to Highway 407, the Seaton Community, and the proposed airport site, should be included Page 1 46 Current Growth Plan Policy Proposed Policy Change By Amendment 1 Response as a PSEZ (see Appendix IV to this report). Furthermore, the Province should initiate a strategy to assist financially municipalities to service vacant employment lands in strategic locations, as this would complement the Province's plan to remove barriers for economic growth by creating shovel -ready employment lands. 2. Current policy permits the conversion of lands within employment areas to non -employment uses, but only through a MCR where it is demonstrated that certain criteria can be met. A new policy (2.2.5.10) that creates a one-time window to allow municipalities to undertake, conversions of lands within existing employment areas to non -employment uses between the effective date of the proposed amendments and their next MCR, provided that certain criteria be satisfied, including the requirement that a significant number of jobs on those lands be maintained. This policy would not apply to lands within identified Provincially Significant Employment Zones. Staff supports this policy because MCRs in a two tier system could take 4 or more years to complete, and amidst a fast changing global economy, a one -window opportunity to consider a conversion may prove helpful. This policy may also assist with converting brownfield sites in a timely fashion. 3. Current policy states that upper -tier municipalities, in consultation with lower -tier municipalities, will designate all employment areas, including "Prime Employment Areas" in their official plans. Prime Employment Areas refers to land extensive uses or uses with low employment The policies requiring the designation and identification of "Prime Employment Areas" are removed (various subsections in policies 2.2.5.6 to 2.2.5.9). A modified policy (2.2.5.5) states that municipalities should designate and preserve lands located adjacent to or near major goods movement facilities and corridors, including major highway interchanges, as areas for manufacturing, warehousing and Staff supports the removal of this designation. With the proposed introduction of Provincially Strategic Employment Zones, the Prime Employment designation becomes moot. The term Prime Employment was ambiguous because it referred to warehousing and logistical uses that typically result in low employment densities. Staff supports the intent of the modified policy 2.2.5.5 as it Page 2 47 Current Growth Plan Policy Proposed Policy Change By Amendment 1 Response densities that require locations adjacent to or near major goods movement facilities and corridors. logistics, and appropriate associated uses. provides a stronger policy regime to designate and protect employment lands in strategic locations other than Provincially Significant Employment Zone. 4. Current policy requires upper -tier municipalities, in consultation with lower -tier municipalities, the Province, and other appropriate stakeholders, to each develop an employment strategy that: a) establishes a minimum density target for all employment areas,... Modified policy (now 2.2.5.13) removes the requirement for upper -tier municipalities to develop an employment strategy, and requires upper -tier municipalities, in consultation with lower -tier municipalities, to set minimum density targets for each employment area rather than a single target for the upper -tier. Although the revised policy removes the requirement for the development of an employment strategy, it does not preclude the option to do . one. The Region has indicated that the development of an employment strategy or similar study is part of their MCR scope of work. Staff agree that there is value in undertaking an employment strategy to: develop employment targets; set the right regulatory climate for investment; facilitate timely servicing of employment areas; and monitor performance and do benchmarking. 5. Current policy states that upper -tier municipalities, in consultation with lower -tier municipalities, will designate all employment areas, including any prime employment areas, in official plans and protect them for appropriate employment uses over the Tong -term. A revised policy (2.2.5.6) that states that upper -tier municipalities, in consultation with lower -tier municipalities, will designate all employment areas in official plans and protect them for appropriate employment uses over the Tong -term, and that for greater certainty, employment area designations may be incorporated into upper -tier official plans by amendmentat any time, in advance of the next municipal comprehensive review. Note: This policy revision must be read in conjunction with item #3 in this table. The principle of allowing greater flexibility to upper -tier municipalities to incorporate employment area designations in advance of the next municipal comprehensive review is supported, if such a process does not compromise the outcome of any land use study that may be underway in the area. 48 Page 3 Current Growth Plan Policy Proposed Policy Change By Amendment 1 Response 6. The 2017 Growth Plan does not contain a policy that speaks to the redevelopment of employment lands that are outside of designated employment areas. A new policy (2.2.5.14) states that the redevelopment of employment lands outside employment areas should retain space for a similar number of jobs to remain accommodated on site. Discussions between City and Ministerial staff confirmed that the employment lands this policy is referring to are lands outside of designated employment (industrial) areas, such as the City Centre lands or along a mixed use corridor — also referred to as population - related employment. Staff supports the spirit or intent of the policy. 7. The 2017 Growth Plan policies regarding existing office parks do not contain language regarding the protection of office parks against non -employment uses. A modified policy (2.2.5.16.d)) stipulates that within existing office parks, the introduction of non -employment uses should be limited, and should not negatively impact the primary function of the area. Staff supports this policy as it puts more emphasis on the importance of protecting the function and integrity of office parks. 8. The 2017 Growth Plan states that municipalities will plan employment areas by integrating employment areas with adjacent non -employment areas and developing vibrant, mixed use areas and innovation hubs, where appropriate. A modified policy (2.2.5:7.c)) is added that requires municipalities, when planning employment areas, to provide for an appropriate interface to maintain land use compatibility between employment areas and adjacent non -employment areas. Staff supports the proposed modification because the integration of employment areas with non -employment areas requires caution depending on the development characteristics and potential land use compatibility conflicts. Urban Settlement Area Boundary Expansions: 9. The 2017 Growth Plan contains an exhaustive list of criteria and detailed study requirements to justify the feasibility and location of settlement area boundary expansions. A modified policy (2.2.8.3) focuses on key outcomes rather than specifying the types of studies to justify the feasibility and location of settlement area boundary expansions. Staff agrees with this policy approach, because the Provincial Plans provide sufficient guidance/direction to enable regional and local municipalities to further detail the criteria and type of studies required in their official plans. Page 4 49 Current Growth Plan Policy Proposed Policy Change By Amendment 1 Response 10. The 2017 Growth Plan permits the consideration of a settlement area boundary expansion (or adjustment) only through a municipal comprehensive review process, subject to meeting certain criteria. A new policy (2.2.8.4) allows municipalities to adjust settlement area boundaries in advance of a municipal comprehensive review, subject to certain criteria, including the following: • there would be no net increase in land within the settlement area; • the lands that are added will be planned to achieve at least the minimum Greenfield Area density target or the Employment Lands density target, as appropriate; • the location of any lands added to the settlement area will satisfy the applicable requirements of policy 2.2.8.3; • the affected settlement areas are not rural settlements or in the Greenbelt Area; • the settlement area to which lands would be added is serviced by municipal water and wastewater systems and there is sufficient reserve infrastructure capacity to service the lands; and • the additional lands and associated forecast growth will be fully accounted for in the land needs assessment associated with the next municipal comprehensive review. Staff has no objection to the new exception policy as it provides more flexibility for municipalities seeking minor boundary adjustments to round -out or refine urban settlement area boundaries. In addition, the required criteria provide the necessary checks and balances to ensure the urban footprint remains the same, and that a transparent and accountable planning process is followed. 11. The 2017 Growth Plan permits the consideration of a settlement area boundary expansion only through a municipal comprehensive review A new policy (2.2.8.5) states that a settlement area boundary expansion may occur in advance of a municipal comprehensive review, subject to certain criteria, including the following: This exception policy provides more flexibility to municipalities to seek minor settlement area boundary expansions (with an associated gross increase in the settlement area footprint) in advance of the municipal 50 Page 5 Current Growth Plan Policy Proposed Policy Change By Amendment 1 Response process, subject to meeting certain criteria. • the lands that are added will be planned to achieve at least the minimum Greenfield Area density target or the Employment Lands density target, as appropriate; • the location of any lands added to a settlement area will satisfy the applicable requirements of policy 2.2.8.3; • the affected settlement area is not a rural settlement or in the Greenbelt Area; • the settlement area is serviced by municipal water and wastewater systems and there is sufficient reserve infrastructure capacity to service the lands; and • the additional lands and. associated forecasted growth will -be fully accounted for in the land needs assessment associated with the next municipal comprehensive review. A new policy (2.2.8.6) is proposed that settlement area boundary expansions undertaken in accordance with newly proposed policy 2.2.8.5 above, will not be larger than 40 hectares. comprehensive review, and the required criteria provide the necessary checks and balances to ensure a transparent andaccountable planning process is followed. Rural Settlements: 12. The 2017 Growth Plan defines "designated greenfield area" as follows: "Lands within settlement areas but outside of delineated built-up areas that have been designated in an official plan for development and are required to The Province proposes to revise the definition of "Designated Greenfield Areas" (section 7, Definitions) by clarifying that rural settlements are not part of the designated greenfield area. The Province included this revision because various municipalities made the interpretation, based on the current definition of "designated greenfield areas" to include rural settlements in their greenfield density calculations. Rural settlements accommodate communities that cannot be classified and Page 6 51 Current Growth Plan Policy Proposed Policy Change By Amendment 1 Response accommodate forecasted growth to the horizon of this Plan. Designated greenfield areas do not include excess lands." planned for in the same context as designated greenfield areas within urban areas, particularly in terms of lot size, transit service availability, and residential mix. Staff supports the proposed revision. 13. The 2017 Growth Plan does not allow the minor adjustments to rural . settlement boundaries, with the exception of settlements within the Greenbelt Area that are identified as Towns or Villages, but only through a municipal comprehensive review (MCR). A new policy (2.2.9.7) that allows minor adjustments to rural settlement boundaries outside of a MCR, subject to the certain criteria including the following: • the affected settlement area is not in the Greenbelt Area; • the change would constitute minor rounding out of existing development, in keeping with the rural character of the area; • confirmation that water and wastewater servicing can be provided in an appropriate manner that is suitable for the long term. Through the coordinated review of the Provincial Land Use Plans process, the City pointed out that the Hamlet of Claremont is the subject of outstanding rezoning and subdivision applications (by Geranium Homes) that pre -date the implementation of the Greenbelt Plan and the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan. Accordingly, Council requested the Province modify the policies in the previous Growth Plan, Greenbelt Plan and Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan to enable the consideration of the minor rounding out of the Hamlet of Claremont through a municipally initiated study, in accordance with certain criteria. The Province declined Council's request. Geranium Homes (now the Claremont Development Corporation) has since appealed their applications to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal. Whether their development application can proceed rests with the Tribunal. Page 7 52 Current Growth Plan Policy Proposed Policy Change By Amendment 1 Response. Natural Heritage System and Agricultural System Mapping: 14. The 2017 Growth Plan states that the Province would be mapping a Natural Heritage System (NHS) for the rural area of the Greater Golden Horseshoe. The Plan requires municipalities to incorporate the mapping into their official plans. The Plan also states that the NHS in official plans in effect as of July 1, 2017, will continue to be protected in accordance with the relevant official plan until the Provincial NHS has been issued. The Provincial mapping comes into effect upon issuance. The Province has issued the NHS System map for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. A new policy (4.2.2.4) specifies that the provincial mapping of the NHS for the Growth Plan does not apply until it has been implemented in the upper -tier official plan. Until that time, the policies in the Growth Plan that refer to the NHS for the Growth Plan will apply outside settlement areas to the NHS identified in official plans that were approved and in effect as of July 1,2017. The transitional provisions are also changed. The provisions now stipulate that municipalities will continue to protect the NHS designated in local official plan in accordance with the NHS policies in the Growth Plan (not in accordance with local official plan policies), until the Province's NHS has been implemented in upper -tier official plans. The new policy is consistent with previous comments provided to the Province. Council requested that the Province revise the timeframe for municipal conformity to commence upon completion of the documents listed in the Supplementary Directions to the Growth Plan (which includes the Province's NHS mapping). The City recently brought the Pickering Official Plan into conformity with the 2014 PPS, the 2005 Greenbelt Plan, and the Regional Official Plan, and updated the natural heritage mapping (through Amendment 27). Amendment 27 basically meets the Natural Heritage System Policies in the Growth Plan. However, minor amendments to the City's Official Plan will need to be incorporated at a future date. 15. The 2017 Growth Plan states that the Province will identify an Agricultural System for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. The Province's Implementation Procedures for the Agricultural System in Ontario's Greater Golden Horseshoe, (2018), stipulates that the Province's Agricultural Land Base A new policy (4.2.6.8) specifies that the provincial mapping of the Agricultural land base for the Growth Plan does not apply until it has been implemented in upper -tier official_ plans. In the interim, prime agricultural areas identified in upper -tier official plans that were in effect as of July 1, 2017 will be considered the agricultural land base for the purposes of this Plan. The new policy is consistent with previous comments provided to the Province. Council requested that the Province revise the timeframe for municipal conformity to commence upon completion of the documents listed in the Supplementary Directions to the Growth Plan (which includes the implementation of the Province's Agricultural System Land Base mapping). It would allow more time for the Region to consult, analyze and Page 8 53 54 Page 9 Current Growth Plan Policy Proposed Policy Change By Amendment 1 Response mapping, issued on February 9, 2018, applies to all land use planning decisions in the GGH. make refinements to the provincially issued mapping before the lower -tier municipalities bring their plans into conformity with upper -tier plans. 16. The 2017 Growth Plan states that upper -tier municipalities may only refine the provincial mapping of the agricultural land base and the natural heritage system through a municipal comprehensive review (MCR). New policies (4.2.2.6 and 4.2.6.9) state that upper -tier municipalities can refine and implement provincial mapping in advance of the municipal comprehensive review. Also, for upper -tier municipalities, the initial . implementation of provincial mapping may be done separately for each lower -tier municipality. This provides flexibility to the Region to implement the provincial mapping. However, Durham Region has already started its MCR. Therefore, it is unlikely the Region will use this policy. 17. The 2017 Growth Plan only stipulates that upper -tier municipalities must implement the provincial mapping of the agricultural land • base and the Natural Heritage System in their official plans through a MCR. However, it does not speak to the option of further refinements afterwards, or the means by which this could occur. New policy language (4.2.2.6 and 4.2.6.9) specifies that once provincial mapping of the agricultural land base and the Natural Heritage System respectively has been implemented in official plans, further refinements may only occur through a MCR. Staff agrees. Sufficient time should be allowed for implementation and monitoring of the provincial mapping, and to create a level of certainty and predictability for the public, land owners and developers. Intensification and Density Targets: 18. The 2017.Growth Plan requires that by the year 2031, and for each year thereafter: • a minimum of 60 percent of all residential development occurring annually within each upper -tier A revised policy (2.2.2.1) establishes different minimum intensification targets for groups of municipalities. The following targets would take effect at the next MCR with no further required increase of the targets in 2031: • the City of Hamilton and the Regions of Peel, Waterloo and , This approach acknowledges the diversity of urban communities within the Greater Golden Horseshoe, and differentiates larger urban centres from smaller ones. Regional staff agree with the reduction of the region -wide intensification target to 54 Page 9 Current Growth Plan Policy Proposed Policy Change By Amendment 1 Response municipality will be within the delineated built-up area; and • by the time the next municipal comprehensive review (MCR) is approved and in effect, and each year until 2031, a minimum of 50 percent of all residential development occurring annually within each upper -tier will be within the delineated built-up area. York will have a minimum intensification target of 60 percent; • the Cities of Barrie, Brantford, Guelph, Orillia and Peterborough and the Regions of Durham, Halton and Niagara will have a minimum • intensification target of 50 percent; the City of Kawartha Lakes and the Counties of Brant, Dufferin, Haldimand, Northumberland, Peterborough, Simcoe and Wellington will establish a minimum intensification target based on maintaining or improving upon their current minimum intensification target. 50 percent. Targets for each municipality will be set through the MCR. It may be difficult for Pickering to achieve this target on a city-wide basis as growth is now shifting from the intensification of lands within the built up area of South Pickering to development on the greenfield lands in Seaton. 19. The 2017 Growth Plan requires the designated greenfield area of each upper -tier municipality to be planned to achieve, within the horizon of the Plan (2041), a minimum density target of not less than 80 residents and jobs per hectare. In the interim, designated greenfield areas approved as of July 1, 2017, such as Seaton, can maintain the original target (50 residents and jobs per hectare) until the MCR, after which, these lands must be planned to meet a minimum density of 60 residents and jobs per hectare. A new policy (2.2.7.2)Jestablishes different minimum designated greenfield area density targets for groups of municipalities. The following targets would take effect at the next MCR and apply to the entire designated greenfield area (with the.exception of net -outs): • for the City of Hamilton and the Regions of Peel, Waterloo and York: a minimum density. target of 60 residents and jobs per hectare; • for the Cities of Barrie, Brantford, Guelph, Orillia and Peterborough and the Regions of Durham, Halton and Niagara: a minimum density target of 50 residents and jobs per hectare; • for the City of Kawartha Lakes and the Counties of Brant, Dufferin, Haldimand, Northumberland, Peterborough, Simcoe and The new policy is consistent with previous comments provided to the Province. The revised policy acknowledges the diversity of urban communities within the Greater Golden Horseshoe, and the approach is more context sensitive. Page 10 55 Current Growth Plan Policy Proposed Policy Change By Amendment 1 Response Wellington: a minimum density target of 40 residents and jobs per hectare. 20. The 2017 Growth Plan states that the councils of upper -tier municipalities may request an alternative intensification target or an alternative density target for designated greenfield areas through the next comprehensive review, subject to meeting certain criteria. Revised policies (2.2.2.4 and 2.2.7.4) permit upper -tier municipalities to apply for alternative intensification and designated greenfield area density targets respectively, where it can be demonstrated that the target cannot be achieved, and subject to meeting certain criteria. The new policies do not limit consideration of alternative targets to the MCR. The revised policy addresses, in part, previous comments requesting the Province consider developing a context sensitive approach for 905 communities, if the greenfield density target of 50 residents and jobs per hectare was to be increased. Staff supports the proposed policy revision, because it acknowledges the diversity of urban communities within the Growth Plan, and provides more flexibility for situations where local conditions warrant. alternative targets. Major Transit Station Areas: 21. The 2017 Official Plan states that for upper -tier municipalities, council's may request an alternative to the density target established in the Growth Plan for a major transit station area, through a municipal comprehensive review (MCR). A new policy (2.2.4.4) is introduced that does not require a MCR to request a density target for a Major Transit Station Area that is lower than the applicable target in the Growth Plan, subject to simplified criteria. Staff supports the option for a lower density target and for simplified criteria, as certain criteria are too prescriptive and may not have been attainable in some locations. Although not explicitly stated in the Amendment, the Minister must approve a request for a lower target. 22. The 2017 Growth Plan does not contain a provision that permits upper -tier municipalities to delineate and set density targets for major transit station areas in advance of the MCR. A new policy (2.2.4.5) allows upper -tier municipalities to delineate and set density targets for major transit station areas in advance of the MCR, so long as the Protected Major Transit Station Area provisions of the Planning Act are used. This policy may assist those upper -tier municipalities that have already advanced the identification and planning of 'Major Transit Stations within their jurisdictions, to move forward with implementation and related initiatives. Durham Region has already begun delineating and Page 11 56 Current Growth Plan Policy Proposed Policy Change By Amendment 1 Response planning for Major Transit. Station Areas as a component of their MCR. The number, unique characteristics and density planning for the Major Transit Station Areas will inform the Region's land needs assessment process. While other upper- or single - tier municipalities may find this policy advantageous, it is unlikely that Durham Region will advance major transit station planning ahead of their MCR. 23. The definition of "major transit station areas" in the 2017 Growth Plan refers to an area within an approximate 500 metres radius of a transit station, representing about a 10 -minute walk. Section 7, Definitions, of the Amendment revised the definition of "major transit station areas" as an area that can range from an approximate 500 to 800 metres radius of a transit station, representing about a 10 -minute walk. The inclusion of "800 metres" provides greater flexibility in delineating and planning Major Transit Stations, recognizing unique aspects of transit station areas, such as their size, shape, walksheds, and existence of natural and other barriers. Page 12 57 Map of Lands to beremoved from the Proposed Provincially Significant Employment Zone in Pickering 58 Appendix No. II to Report No. PLN 05-19 r Lan Remc the Proposed Provincially Significant Employment Zones Excerpt from Schedule I of the Pickering Official Plan Edition 8 r � r Open Space System - Seaton Natural Heritage System NM Natural Areas 1111 Active Recreational Areas 1.1 Marina Areas Hamlet Heritage Open Space Rural Settlements 111111 Rural Clusters El Rural Hamlets Land Use Structure Urban Residential Areas Low Density Areas 17 Medium Density Areas High Density Areas Mixed Use Areas - Local Nodes ® Community Nodes ® Mixed Corridors Specialty Retailing Node MI City Centre Employment Areas ■ General Employment 1111 Prestige Employment ® Mixed Employment Freeways and Major Utilities Controlled Access Areas Potential Multi Use Areas Seaton Symbols Da District Park cP Community Park Hs ' High School Other Designations C f Prime Agricultural Areas D1 Deferrals Greenbelt Boundary Cry/A 59 Map of Prestige Employment Area at Whites Road and Highway 401 60 Appendix No. III to Report No. PLN 05-19 1111 ' Lands to '////i %� 1.1 rar , � 1 f"Itlei ��jl �rrf�.>____,..4..r..".,:----°"-;"- Excerpt from Schedule 1 of the Pickering Official Plan Edition 8 Open Space System - Seaton Natural Heritage System 111 Natural Areas ® Active Recreational Areas ® Marina Areas Hamlet Heritage Open Space Rural Settlements 11111 Rural Clusters Rural Hamlets Land Use Structure Urban Residential Areas Low Density Areas FA Medium Density Areas High Density Areas Mixed Use Areas Local Nodes MI Community Nodes ® Mixed Corridors EN Specialty Retailing Node City Centre Employment Areas ® General Employment MA Prestige Employment " gsm Mixed Employment Freeways and Major Utilities Controlled Access Areas Potential Multi Use Areas Seaton Symbols oP District Park cP Community Park CI High School Other Designations .1 Prime Agricultural Areas 1=1 Deferrals Greenbelt Boundary 61 Map of Seaton Employment Corridor 62 Appendix No. IV to Report No. PLN 05-19 0 . ir . 4 P OV I 1 .1111Cillen.......11444111.401101 1,4014 440 NO414114411M0014114041400 *O. -wirwIlrerillE4 Pc. 414:44g- Oil. illielipe&I'll eil. 044,,044,.. ,,,,,k4Tortitt.ropcipeititstiviroboeirofrooT04, vv-!/411*-4.40-04kier*•••4040,410.0.opoilepti„„eAk 1,'..,-Ito.,,044,Pikeer,..hitatAlmlerra , c'4741 044 14 rAceiiiii•os • ify:/,,,i!,,ittattfotoiret-4,-Jra-torallfririrlito, II A is, 41) 411/41144r•a-11 Itialtoefrotallral Net reAltvellia- 11.041140$04,414br .16 eel wi -wr 4 ii 411 ---wwww-414. 4,44-1.40. .4 1460111611.7.114.11111110 s.44141 411441.4111400,6**. -„,tikis, 40.041401,04( I"' :ieiNOWNItial114.1140.1011.1"1* grielli alit AK A.„ Ao will* PAIR.," AT , f". mr Pri".401.0404.4144011*gto II, BROKIT-1 ‘4__ zzaii* -eswil,k" jpfxr, . r /r / d e 1 -444111-,, 0:7 #./ ... ara deli km! • 1 i g Ai II r ,... , .„,,, er rib1 Oilk 14)4'00 11 'Irt-411441-411' 41.1""'N 1•111.1911/- wil Lands to be Added as a PSEZ •1" fr -07 Po r 141 4.1inkL - _ Excerpt from Schedule I of the Pickering Official Plan Edition 8 =ern= Open Space System Seaton Natural 1.1 Heritage System 1.111 Natural Areas 1.11 Active Recreational Areas Oak Ridges Moraine 1.111 Natural Linkage Areas Hamlet Heritage Open Space Oak Ridges Moraine Natural Core Areas Rural Settlements Rural Clusters 11.1 Rural Hamlets WMOak Ridges Moraine Rural Hamlets Land Use Structure Urban Residential Areas Low Density Areas P7A Medium Density Areas Mixed Use Areas Local Nodes ISE Community Nodes 1= Mixed Corridors Employment Areas FffE Prestige Employment Seaton Symbols 0 0 0 District Park Community Park High School Freeways and Major Utilities Controlled Access Areas Other Designations 71 Proposed Airport Site Li 1 Prime Agricultural Areas rq Prime Agricultural Areas On The Oak Ridges Moraine "Oak Ridges Moraine •Countryside Areas 41.....11; Rural Study Area annum, L..; Federal Lands Oak Ridges Moraine Boundary fea Greenbelt Boundary 63 ATTACHMENT # 1 TO REPORT # . Council Decision Resolution #46/15 May 19, 2015 1 That Report PLN 02-15 of the Director, City Development, regarding comments on the first round of the Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans be received; 2.. That the comments in Report PLN 02-15 on the Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans be endorsed, and that the Province be requested to: incorporate the recommendations provided through the Durham Region Greenbelt Plan Review study as endorsed by the City of Pickering, in particular: • that the provincial plans allow for stand-alone agricultural supportive uses in prime agricultural areas (such as grain elevators or food processing operations); that the provincial plans provide opportunities for rural economic diversification in terms of cultural, educational, recreational and eco -tourism uses and value added agricultural uses which complement farming and the health of rural settlements; and that the Province establish new, more effective separation distance policies to provide an appropriate buffer between new residential development and farmland to protect the viability of farm operations and avoid land use conflicts; That the Province establish a process to consider limited refinements to the boundaries of the Greenbelt Plan and Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, in accordance with Recommendations 16, 17 and 18 of the Durham Region Greenbelt Plan Review study. b) provide direction for the planning of infrastructure beyond the 20 -year land use planning horizon, by extending the population and employment forecasts to at least 2051, and adjusting the Places to Grow Concept and Forecasts accordingly, to allow for the timely and transparent planning of long term urban infrastructure; c) provide stronger policy direction on implementing affordable housing, in terms of type and tenure; provide the opportunity to redefine the Greenbelt and/or Oak Ridges Moraine boundaries to allow for minor expansions of hamlets, subject to the completion of a municipally led hamlet boundary review; 64 ATTACHMENT # I TO REPORT # PLN1 U5 -1Cf e) identify provincially strategic employment lands within the Growth Plan, such as the Seaton Employment Lands, and activelyfacilitate the marketing, servicing and development of those lands in concert with other development contemplated by the Growth Plan; and f) allow for minor expansions for existing businesses in the rural area; 3. That the Province be requested to hold Town Hall Meetings in Pickering during the second round of consultation; 4. That the Province consider the implementation strategies, plan coordination measures, and financial tools and incentives as summarized in Appendix I; 5. That comments received at the Town Hall Meeting held by the City of Pickering on April 13, 2015 regarding the Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans, as set out in Appendix II be forwarded to the Province; and 6. Further, that a copy of Report PLN 02-15 and Pickering Council's Resolution on the matter, be forwarded to the Region of Durham, other Durham Area Municipalities, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, and the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry. 65 ATTACHMENT # ,TO . REPORT # Fc N 05--19_ • Council Decision Resolution #202/16 September 19, 2016 1 That the comments in Report PLN 15-16 on the proposed changes to Ontario's Land Use Plans be endorsed, and that the Province be requested to: revise the timeline for municipalities to bring their official plans into conformity with the revised Growth Plan, to only take effect after the Ministry has approved and released the standard methodology for the assessment of land needs and that the process for developing the standard methodology for the assessment of land needs include proper ground-truthing and consultation with municipalities, conservation authorities and other key stakeholders; b) maintain the intensification target at 40 percent for the 905 region; c) identify a mechanism to prevent. strategic growth areas (e.g. high density residential or high intensity mixed-use) from being down designated to support intensification opportunities that may not be realized within the time horizon of the Growth Plan; consider the potential Tong -term development and intensification of its major transit station sites by: • introducing policies that require the introduction of alternative station designs that are more compact, diversified and integrated with their surroundings; and • expediting investment in alternative modes of transportation (i.e., local transit, cycling, walking, carpooling) to access such locations in order to limit the amount of surface parking in the future; remove the words "or stop" within the revised definition of the term "Major Transit Station Area", so that only high order transit station areas are included in the intensification calculation; revise Schedule 5 (Moving People — Transit) in the Growth Plan to reflect the - proposed CP -Belleville rail connection to the new Seaton community, and the "possible" rail extension (CP -Havelock line) towards Peterborough; identify employment lands of provincial significance within the Growth Plan, such as the Seaton Employment Lands, and actively facilitate the marketing, servicing and development of those lands in concert with other development contemplated by the Growth Plan; h) maintain the current Greenfield area density target of 50 residents and jobs combined per hectare, or consider developing a morecontextsensitive approach for 905 communities, with particular attention to factors such as urban structure, availability of public transit and other amenities, built form character, place - making, housing mix and affordability; i) conduct a financial analysis of the impact of the intensification and density 66 targets on municipal infrastructure and service delivery; ATTACHMENT # 1_ TO REPORT # LN L5 -I9 _ j) consider extending the newly proposed policy that would recognize existing employment areas on "rural lands" with opportunity for expansion, subjectto certain criteria, to include existing cultural and educational uses; k) move forward with the development of the Transportation Planning Policy • Statement outlined in the Greater Toronto Transportation Authority Act, to clarify the role of the Big Move in relation to the Growth Plan, and to include a statement that acknowledges this relationship within the Growth Plan. This would help ensure that the integration and coordination of transportation infrastructure planning and land use planning at local, Regional and Provincial levels are properly, acknowledged in the Plan; as part of supporting the new Growth Plan, investigate financial tools (e.g. parking space levy, fuel tax, sales tax, payroll tax, vehicle kilometers travelled tax, highway tolls, development charges, land value capture, property tax, development charges, fare increases, etc.) and funding opportunities to enable the timely implementation of transportation and other municipal infrastructure and services; m) base the mapping of the "natural heritage system" upon approved watershed plans, and that the Province collaborate with conservation authorities to develop a standard methodology for mapping of the "natural heritage system"; n) build on the Land Evaluation and Area Review (LEAR) analysis that was completed by the Region of Durham for mapping the "agricultural system", and that the mapping process include the application of standard methodology, proper ground-truthing and consultation with municipalities, conservation authorities, the agricultural community and other key stakeholders; o) engage municipalities in the identification, establishment or update ofthe documents listed as Supplementary Directions to the Growth Plan; p) revise the timeframe for municipal official plan conformity to commence upon completion of the documents listed as Supplementary Directions to the Growth Plan; q) as part of the Supplementary Direction for implementing the Growth Plan, identify and develop programs to attract and retain workers and businesses to achieve the growth plan targets, and to foster the development of balanced communities (for example, such measures could include, investing in, or subsidizing training programs that will ensure that municipalities have the resident labour force to attract new businesses in targeted sectors; eliminating or reducing tolls for trucks on Highway 407 making the highway a more attractive goods movement corridor; and promoting further employment growth in the 905 Region); r) provide more guidance regarding the type and extent of buffer planning necessary to protect existing agricultural practices, by minimizing and mitigating impacts of new adjacent urban development on the Agricultural System; 67 ATTACHMENT /1°.1®10 REPORT # P W l�5' i c1 s) retain the existing policy in the Greenbelt Plan that permits the minor rounding out of hamlets at the time of municipal conformity, and modify the policy to read as follows: "Outside of specialty crop areas, minor expansion of Hamlet boundaries may be permitted only through a municipal initiated study, that must address matters such as the merits and appropriate scale and form of development; the protection and enhancement of key natural heritage and hydrologic. features and functions; the impact on agricultural lands and agricultural operations; soft and hard servicing needs, constraints and solutions; and the rationale for any minor expansion to the hamlet boundary"; t) revise proposed policy 6.2, subsection 1, in the Greenbelt Plan, by making all lands within the Urban River Valley designation, whether publicly or privately owned, subject to the Greenbelt Plan policies associated with this designation; u) remove the policy 3.4.4.2a in the current Greenbelt Plan and in the proposed Greenbelt Plan (policy 3.4.5.2a) that prohibits the consideration of a municipally initiated settlement area expansion proposal to proceed on the lands bounded by the CP Belleville Line in the south; the York -Durham Townline to the west; and West Duffins Creek to the east (referred to as the Cherrywood Area Lands); v) retain the existing policy in the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan that permits the minor rounding out of rural settlements, and modify the policy to read as follows: "New lots may be created in Countryside Areas for the following purposes only, and subject to Parts 111 and IV: Minor expansion of Rural Settlements designated in the applicable official plan as appropriate for this type of lot creation, only through a municipal initiated study, that must address matters such as the merits and appropriate scale and form of development; the protection and enhancement of key natural heritage and hydrologic features and functions; the impact on agricultural lands and agricultural operations; soft and hard servicing needs, constraints and solutions; and the rationale for any minor expansion to the rural settlement boundary."; w) establish a simplified process including criteria and timeframes to consider limited refinements to the boundaries of the Greenbelt and Oak Rides Moraine Conservation Plan that result from further ground-truthing of the boundary; and 2. That a copy of Report PLN 15-16 be forwarded to the Region of Durham, other Durham Area Municipalities, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, and the Members of Parliamentfor Pickering -Scarborough East and Ajax -Pickering. 68 ATTACHMENT #�_- TO REPORT # srr•®nu®reoo®uo ' darr� � rrNr ••• Kellino Street 1 1 `0 0 U 0 /i al Bayly:Street i 1 can -170I o -E—cc - • U • O C m 0 Feldspar, Court-- • CCS U (II a) 9; II a) 2 .0 • • •�:SiIic2 p (/) 'o— OCA o ClementslRoad'v ‘‘ Montgomery Park Road II l=_-_1 Hydro Corridor ®aa®®oa 911111111111rCity of Pickering Boundary Proposed Provincially Significant Employment Zone in Pickering Proposed Provincially Significant Employment Zone is conceptual. To be used for quick reference only. U 1 r0rr� rapernrnr®rr"r 69