Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLN 32-1964 ,0/ DICKERING Report to Council Report Number: PLN 32-19 Date: December 16, 2019 From: Kyle Bentley Director, City Development & CBO Subject: The Municipal Comprehensive Review of the Durham Regional Official Plan: Growth Management Urban System Discussion Paper, June 2019 File: A-2100-020 Recommendation: 1. That, to strengthen the existing urban system goal of creating healthy and complete, sustainable communities that balances population and employment growth, stronger regional implementation policies, such as financial incentives (which could include Community Improvement Plans; deferral or reduction of development charges; and servicing of employment areas) should be considered for certain types and locations of job creating uses; 2. That, to strengthen the existing urban system goal of encouraging a mix of housing by type, size and tenure, stronger implementation policies are required to incentivize the delivery of seniors, affordable, and/or accessible housing (which could include Community Improvement Plans; deferral or waiving of development charges). 3. That an additional goal should be added for the urban system, to create a "smart" connected community, with the inclusion of policies addressing existing and next generation information and communication technologies, and that implementation policies be added requiring the Region to provide for broadband infrastructure in all Regional Roads. 4. That the Region adopt a "dig once" policy to ensure that a comprehensive network is advanced across the Region, and that the Region allow for the shared use of its conduit and assist local municipalities in the development of localized networks and the provision of broadband services to rural settlement areas. 5. That the Regional Official Plan support the needs of an aging population by focusing on elements contained in the Age -Friendly Durham Strategy and Action Plan, including: • providing opportunities for affordable, assisted housing options and encouraging development that complements the concept of "aging in place"; • addressing accessibility needs and age -friendly design within the built environment; and • ensuring that active and passive recreational facilities, and community and health services are available for the aging population. 6. That the following measures be considered by the Region to achieve its employment objectives: • pre -servicing employment lands, ensuring that they are shovel ready for potential development; PLN 32-19 December 16, 2019 Subject: The Municipal Comprehensive Review of the Durham Regional Official Plan Page 2 • protecting employment lands from conversion to residential and commercial use; • ensuring that uses are not introduced in employment areas that may be considered sensitive land uses and which would undermine the ability of employment areas to diversify and expand in accordance with existing zoning permissions; • ensuring that lands adjacent to key goods movement corridors are protected for employment uses; • providing lands close to highway interchanges for land uses that involve the shipping or receiving of goods via long combination vehicles; • continue promoting the development of an airport in Pickering; and • consider the implementation of Community Improvement Plans for employment generating uses/lands, which would include measures such as municipal grants, tax increment financing, development charges and building permit fee deferrals. 7. That the Region can influence how and where people work by: • ensuring locally developed and available skilled labour/talent, by supporting and partnering with post -secondary institutions, centres of excellence, research institutes, and apprenticeship programs; • providing stronger policy direction recognizing centres and corridors as locations for significant employment; • assessing current and future trends in the micro and macro -economic contexts; • providing insight into business and industry needs for employment land, urban form and tenure; • developing and articulating the Region's key differentiators and unique sales proposition; • targeting high growth sectors; and • developing a series of strategic economic development action plans along the following themes: sustainable economic development, entrepreneurship, innovation and the technology ecosystem; arts, culture and creative economy; international business development; urban growth centres; planning for diversity; and digital disruption on local commerce. 8. That to assist in achieving 50 percent of the jobs in designated Employment Areas, the Region should establish a program to upfront the cost of servicing vacant employment lands, and that a context sensitive analysis for any proposed Employment Area conversion be conducted, to ensure that job generating opportunities are not compromised or lost. 9. That the Region have regard for Pickering Council's comments on proposed Amendment 1 to the Growth Plan to revise the Province's proposed Provincially Significant Employment Zones, by among other matters, excluding the Durham Live lands. 10. That the measure of density at a Regional level should be undertaken on a modified gross basis (excluding the area of natural heritage lands and the transit/roadway), and refined to a net level through area municipal official plan, secondary plan, and zoning exercises. PLN 32-19 December 16, 2019 Subject: The Municipal Comprehensive Review of the Durham Regional Official Plan Page 3 11. That stronger policy direction be provided in the Regional Official Plan regarding employment densities and the creation of complete communities within Urban Growth Centres. 12. That the Region continue to work collaboratively with the City of Pickering, and the other area municipalities, to delineate the extent of the Kingston Road corridor from the Toronto - Pickering Boundary to Simcoe Street (and the Simcoe Street corridor from Kingston Road to Highway 407) and to establish densities and floor space indexes that would be necessary to support Light Rail Transit (LRT) service in the future. 13. That it would be most appropriate for the balance of the priority bus corridors shown in the Metrolinx Regional Transportation Plan to be delineated and detailed in area municipal official plans as "Local Corridors". Corridors with frequent regional express services along 400 series highways or GO rail services which have limited stops (either at key interchanges or GO Station sites) do not warrant such a corridor treatment. Instead, the stations sites are more appropriately detailed through a Major Transit Station Area (e.g., Lakeshore East GO Stations) exercise or a Local Centre approach (e.g., 407 Transit -way stations). 14. That the designation and delineation of Waterfront Places be dealt with as a local planning matter, similar to the approach for Local Centres. As such, it is suggested that the Waterfront Place symbols be removed from the Regional Official Plan, and that local municipalities be provided with greater discretion regarding the identification of areas for growth, and the distribution and density of development within their municipalities. 15. That the methodology for delineating Major Transit Station Areas (MTSA), and the resultant draft boundary delineation for Pickering's MTSA (see Attachment #2 to Report PLN 32-19), are supported; 16. That the Region, when conducting the analysis to determine the location and amount of lands for any proposed settlement boundary expansion, should also consider buffer planning, by accounting for lands required to accommodate proper buffers between any new Community (Living) or Employment Areas and farmland. 17. That the Region, through Envision Durham, consider the implementation of additional measures/strategies to shift the balance and favour non-residential growth. Such measures should include: making Durham's employment lands more attractive and market ready by: ensuring official plan and zoning designations are in place; pre -servicing strategic employment lands; and making financial incentives available (e.g., tax increment financing, municipal grants, building permit and development charges subsidies), where appropriate. 18. That, with respect to Northeast Pickering, the Region have regard to the Pickering Council Resolutions #140/19 and #173/19 (see Attachments #3 and #4 to Report PLN 32-19) requesting the inclusion of northeast Pickering in an urban area boundary expansion, and the request to use and alternate intensification rate of 45 percent. 19. That the Region's Land Needs Assessment consider a scenario reflecting a future airport and the potential implications it may have in terms of population and employment allocation and growth. PLN 32-19 December 16, 2019 Subject: The Municipal Comprehensive Review of the Durham Regional Official Plan Page 4 20. That appropriate policy provisions and designations be included in the Durham Region Official Plan to bring the ROP into conformity with the Central Pickering Development Plan, in a manner similar to the other Provincial Plans. 21. That the Region provide further policy support for the allocation of sufficient lands for community facilities (such as parkland, community centres and schools) within centres to assist in achieving strong, vibrant and healthy downtowns. 22. That the Region, through Envision Durham, also consider the means to address the challenges faced by places of worship to establish within residential areas, taking into account the functions and services they offer within the context of building "complete communities". Executive Summary: On June 4, 2019, the Regional Municipality of Durham released the Growth Management Urban System Discussion Paper, the third in a series of discussions papers to be released as part of "Envision Durham" — The Municipal Comprehensive Review of the Regional Official Plan. The deadline for comments was September 2, 2019. Staff informed Regional staff that since Council would not be meeting in July and August, a report in that regard would only be considered by Council later in the year. Financial Implications: The recommendations of this report do not present any financial implications. 1. "Envision Durham" — The Municipal Comprehensive Review of the Durham Regional Official Plan An Official Plan provides a vision for the future orderly development of a municipality through a set of policies and maps. The Planning Act, which is provincial legislation governing land use planning in Ontario, requires that a municipality regularly review and update its Official Plan. With this in mind, the Region is reviewing the Durham Region Official Plan. Once the Region has completed its Official Plan review, the City will be in a position to review the Pickering Official Plan. The first stage of the Region's Official Plan Review focuses on public engagement, and includes the preparation of a series of discussion papers. These discussion papers address the following major areas: agriculture and rural systems; climate change and sustainability; growth management; the environment and greenlands system; transportation system; and housing; (see Overview of the Region of Durham's Municipal Comprehensive Review of its Official Plan, Attachment #1). PLN 32-19 December 16, 2019 Subject: The Municipal Comprehensive Review of the Durham Regional Official Plan Page 5 2. The Growth Management Urban System Discussion Paper The Region has released the third of its discussion papers, Growth Management Urban System. The issues explored through this discussion paper are numerous, complex and interrelated, and multi -faceted. The Region is to be congratulated on its solid background information, well-written paper and thought-provoking questions to encourage dialogue on the topic of growth management and urban systems. The ever -shifting Provincial policy landscape is also layered onto the existing intricacies of growth management. The paper provides background of the current provincial policy context, and observations about growth management in Durham. Further, the paper provides an overview and discussion of a long list of growth related land use planning and policy matters, including: trends in demographics, economic and development patterns; population and employment forecasts; the Region's urban structure; the mapping of the urban system; where to grow - intensification and greenfield development; the delineation of strategic growth areas; servicing growth; limited expansion of urban areas; growth outside the urban system; the growth management study process; the Federal airport lands; nuclear generations stations; and the Central Pickering Development Plan Area. The paper can be found online at: https://www.durham.ca/en/regional- government/resources/Documents/Council/Reports/2019-Committee-Reports/Planning- Economic-Development/2019-P-31.pdf The Paper poses 20 questions for discussion. City Development staff have undertaken a detailed review of the Growth Management Urban System Discussion Paper (see Appendix I), and responded to the questions through the recommendations of this Report. Appendix Appendix I Staff Review of the Growth Management Urban System Discussion Paper Attachments 1. Overview of the Region of Durham's Municipal Comprehensive Review of its Official Plan 2. Proposed Major Transit Station Area in Pickering 3. Pickering Council Resolution #140/19 4. Pickering Council Resolution #173/19 PLN 32-19 December 16, 2019 Subject: The Municipal Comprehensive Review of the Durham Regional Official Plan Page 6 Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Dear -Jacobs, MCIP, RPP Manager, Policy & Geomatics DJ:Id / Catherine Rose, MCIP, R Chief Planner Kyle Bentley, P. Eng. Director, City Development & CBO Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Tony Prevedel, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer .17.0e„ 4100 Appendix 1 to Report PLN 32-19 Staff Review of the Growth Management Urban System Discussion Paper Staff Review of the Growth Management Urban System Discussion Paper 1. Questions for Consideration On June 4, 2019, the Region, as part of the second stage ("Discuss") of their public engagement program, released the Growth Management Urban System Discussion Paper (the Paper), the third in a series of discussions papers to be released as part of "Envision Durham". The Paper provides an overview of the Region's urban system and associated Regional Official Plan (ROP) policies; describes the Provincial planning regime that set the ground rules for land use planning; provides an overview of trends in demographic, economic and development patterns; and, identifies preliminary approaches to update the Region's urban system. The Paper also poses a number of questions to leverage discussion and feedback, including: 1. Is the Urban System achieving the ROP vision of creating distinct Urban Areas, balancing population and employment growth, and achieving healthy and complete communities? 2. Are there any additional goals for the Urban System that should be included in the ROP? 3. How can ROP policies support the needs of an aging population? 4. Are there specific policies or other measures that are needed to enable the achievement of employment forecasts and/or the Regional Council target of one job for every two persons? 5. How can Regional policies recognize and support changing patterns of where and how people work? 6. What Regional policies and approaches could assist in achieving the ROP target that 50 percent of all jobs be in designated Employment Areas? 7. How should density (gross or net) be measured in the ROP? 8. Should the Region delineate only those corridors with significant intensification potential that are also within the Higher Order Transit Network? 9. Should Regional Corridors that are intended to be priority areas for the highest level of transit service (Highway 2 and Simcoe Street) be delineated in the ROP and assigned an increased minimum density target? 10. Should Waterfront Places be specifically designated in the ROP? 11. Is the proposed approach for delineating and assigning density targets to existing and future Major Transit Station Areas appropriate? 12. Do you have any feedback or input to the proposed draft Major Transit Station Area delineation? 13. Are there any other criteria that should be considered when evaluating Settlement Area Boundary Expansions? 14. Are there other criteria that should be considered when evaluating Employment Area conversions? Staff Review of the Growth Management Urban System Discussion Paper Page 2 of 21 15. Are additional strategies or solutions required to support development in Strategic Growth Areas? 16. Should a Regional structure, consisting of appropriate Regional land use designations, be applied to lands located within the Central Pickering Development Plan Area? 17. What type of ROP policies should be provided to support deployment of broadband infrastructure? 18. How can ROP policies support the achievement of strong, vibrant, and healthy downtowns? 19. Should places of worship be permitted in Employment Areas? The Paper is the first step in the Region's Growth Management Study. It does not present positions on potential changes that may be part of the ROP, and only provides information and poses questions for consideration. Following public input on the Paper, the next phase of the Growth Management Study will be the completion of a Land Needs Assessment (LNA) and related studies. The LNA is a comprehensive review of Durham's existing land supply and its ability to accommodate forecasted population and employment growth. The Region retained the services of consultants from Urban Strategies Inc. in conjunction with CN Watson & Associates to assist the Region with the Growth Management Study. The following sections provide a high level overview of the Paper, and provide answers to the questions posed with recommendations (highlighted in bold) on matters that should also be addressed through the Municipal Comprehensive Review (MCR). 2. Ontario's Planning Hierarchy 2.1 Provincial Policy impacting growth management The Paper provides an outline of the provincial plans that apply to Durham's urban system (including the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, the Greenbelt Plan and the Central Pickering Development Plan). These plans provide direction where growth should occur and protecting areas where growth should not occur. Core policy directions in the Growth Plan include the allocation of population and employment growth forecasts to 2041 for each upper tier municipality, the requirement to optimize the existing urban land supply through intensification and infill before considering further settlement area boundary expansions, and the setting of intensification and density targets for built-up areas and greenfield areas. In terms of the Growth Plan, 2017 and most recent changes to the Growth Plan through Amendment 1, Durham Region is allocated a population of 1,190,000 and 430,000 jobs by 2041, and must be planned through its MCR to achieve a minimum intensification target of 50 percent jobs and residents within the "built boundary" as defined in 2008 (40 percent under the Growth Plan, 2006) and a Greenfield density target of 50 jobs and persons per hectare (the same as the Growth Plan, 2006). Pickering's "built boundary" basically includes all lands south of the CP Rail line, and thus, all growth until Seaton commenced has been "intensification". Seaton was designed to meet 50 jobs and persons per hectares. Staff Review of the Growth Management Urban System Discussion Paper Page 3 of 21 However, in February 2019, Durham Regional Council requested the Minister of Municipal Affairs to permit a lower intensification rate of 45 percent within the identified built up area of the Region. Pickering Council also supported this request in Resolution #140/19 on September 23, 2019 (see Attachment #3). 2.2 Provincial Guidance documents to implement municipal growth management requirements The Paper discusses the requirement in the Growth Plan for upper tier municipalities to complete a Land Needs Assessment (LNA) to manage and plan for their share of population and employment growth in the Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH) to 2041. The Province released the LNA methodology for the GGH in May 2018. The LNA methodology outlines a series of required steps to mathematically determine the amount of land needed to accommodate forecasted growth. Only upon the completion of the LNA will the Region determine whether there is sufficient land within existing settlement areas to accommodate growth to 2041, or if additional lands are required. Despite the release of the methodology in 2018, the Province commenced a review of that methodology in mid -2019. 3. Durham Region's structure The Paper describes the core components of the regional structure as well as the land use designations that make up the Urban System (e.g., Living Areas, Employment Areas, Urban Growth Centres, and Regional Corridors); and highlights the current ROP goals for the Urban System. The Paper notes that through the MCR, the Region is seeking feedback as to whether the Urban System is achieving the ROP vision of creating distinct Urban Areas, balancing population and employment growth, and achieving healthy and complete communities, and if there are any additional goals for the Urban System that should be included in the ROP? Since the inception of the Region of Durham in 1974, the population to job ratio in Durham has steadily decreased. In addition, the amount of out -commuting from the Region and its local municipalities has correspondingly increased. This suggests that there is an imbalance which is continuing to grow, as Durham becomes less of a "complete community" and even more of a "bedroom community". The population and employment projections of the Province entrench this imbalance, even though the Growth Plan embraces the concept of complete communities. The Province has provided no direction for how the 905 ring, and in particular Durham Region, can achieve such a balance. The public transit system has been designed as a hub and spoke system favouring development within the Toronto core, while highway systems in the peripheral areas are tolled making them less competitive for goods movement and employment growth. Recent development applications also indicate this trend is continuing. While the City of Pickering has received a number of applications with higher densities, these applications are almost entirely residential, with a few commercial applications, and very little employment growth, in particular, of major office development. Staff Review of the Growth Management Urban System Discussion Paper Page 4 of 21 To ensure that we achieve "complete communities", there has to be assurances that opportunities for "living" are balanced with opportunities for "work" and "play". While the current market may not show the need for major office employment, mixed use development, parkland and community facilities, it is important that official plans (and our local decision makers) not forfeit prime locations to allow for quick residential development approvals that may be in conflict with the overall long term vision for the area or do not provide requisite community services for the area. We often see opportunities foregone with the expectation that the next proponent would provide the site for an office building, or the location for a park. Another factor impacting our urban vision is the desire of the development industry to have the broadest range of residential densities, heights and uses permissible on strategic development locations. In other words a "blank check". The higher end of the designation, reflecting higher land value, allows for greater flexibility with negotiations with financial institutions for project financing, while the lower end designation allows for greater flexibility for development if market conditions change. The difficulty with this is that the "community interest" can be compromised, particularly where densities reach or exceed the upper end of the range and there is no availability or recourse to secure parkland, community facilities, trails, or public roads. In response to Question 1, the goals for the Urban System in ROP include the matters that are important to our desired vision. However, as noted above, they do not appear to be achieving the balance of population and jobs resulting in more and more out -commuting. Further, with the challenge of the development industry providing seniors, affordable, and/or accessible housing, the goal of providing healthy and complete communities is not being achieved. The solutions to these require financial incentives for certain types of housing and servicing of existing employment land to attract companies. In response to Question 2, additional goals that should be added include the creation of a "smart" connected community by providing broadband infrastructure in all Regional Roads. Additionally, the Region should establish a goal to use its substantial financial resources to establish incentive programs (such as Community Improvement Plans; provide servicing to vacant but designated employment lands; grant programs; or programs that eliminate development charges for selected housing types). 4. Demographic and development trends in Durham The Region used various data sources to report demographic and development characteristics and trends in the Paper, including Statistics Canada, Durham's annual business count, and the Region's building permit database and subdivision activity reports. Some of the key characteristics and trends are: • Durham's population has increased significantly from 247,473 in 1976 to an estimated 697,800 in May 2019, representing an increase of 182 percent. The population is forecasted to grow by another 492,200 people over the next 21 years. • The population in Durham comprises 92 percent urban and 8 percent rural. Staff Review of the Growth Management Urban System Discussion Paper Page 5 of 21 • Although low-density housing continues to be the most common form of housing (72 percent), there has been a clear shift towards more medium- and high-density housing forms in recent years, partly because of the growing trend of fewer people per household. • Based on the Region's short-term growth forecast for 2021 and the estimated actual population by 2021 (based on development application and building permit activity), Ajax and Oshawa should exceed their 2021 population forecast while Pickering would fall short by approximately 66,300 people (59 percent). Lower than forecast growth in Pickering results from a slower than anticipated rate of growth in Seaton. • Since 1976, the average household size has decreased steadily from 3.5 persons to below 3 per household in 2016. • Over two thirds of the population growth in Durham over the past five years has been in the form of migration from foreign countries or from other areas in Ontario and Canada. • The Ministry of Finance projects that by 2041, almost 24 percent of Durham's population will be 65 years old or older. (The Paper notes that the Region has taken a proactive approach to planning for an aging population which includes its Age -Friendly Durham Strategy and Action Plan, dated April 2017.) The current ROP forecasts growth by area municipality to the year 2031. The Growth Plan requires the Region to plan and allocate population growth to 2041. The Region will, through the Land Needs Assessment, conduct a further analysis of the population and employment trends. The Paper also notes that through the MCR, the Region will consider policies that support an aging population. In response to Questions 3, to support an aging population, staff recommends that the Regional Official Plan focus on providing financial assistance programs, grants, waiver od development charges, etc., to assist in implementing elements in the Age -Friendly Durham Strategy and Action Plan, including: • providing opportunities for affordable, assisted housing options and encouraging development that complements the concept of "aging in place"; • addressing accessibility needs and age friendly design within the built environment; • ensuring that active and passive recreational facilities, and community and health services are available for the aging population. 4.1 Employment trends and job growth in Durham The 2016 Census reported a total of 236,760 jobs in Durham, translating into an employment to population ratio of 1:2.83 and falling short of the Region's target of 1:2. Other key characteristics and trends associated with employment in Durham include the following: • Oshawa holds most jobs (26.1 percent), followed by Whitby (20.7 percent), Pickering (16.4 percent), Ajax (15.4 percent), and Clarington (12.1 percent), with the rest picked up by Brock, Scugog and Uxbridge. Staff Review of the Growth Management Urban System Discussion Paper Page 6 of 21 • Job creation in Durham has not kept pace with the employment forecast in the ROP. The ROP forecasted that in 2016 there would be a total of 265,115 jobs, whereas the actual number was 236,760, a shortfall of 28,355 jobs. To achieve the 2041 employment forecast in the Growth Plan, an annual growth of approximately 7,730 jobs is required, with most of the forecasted growth (30.9 percent) required by 2021. • 59 percent of jobs are captured within Living Areas and Centres (also referred to as population -related employment), 31 percent by Employment lands, 6 percent by rural areas and 4 percent by other areas (source: 2018 Durham Business Count). • The commercial sector accounts for 37 percent of jobs in Durham, followed by Institutional (26.7 percent), Industrial (24.2 percent), Office (10.6 percent), and Agriculture (1.5 percent) (Source: 2018 Durham Business Count). Through Questions 4 to 6 of the Paper, the Region is requesting: Whether there are specific policies or other measures needed in the ROP to enable the achievement of employment forecasts or the one job for every two persons ratio? How the ROP policies can recognize and support the changing pattern of where and how people work, and what ROP policies or approaches could assist in achieving the ROP target of 50 percent of all jobs to be in designated Employment Areas? Staff recommends that the following measures be considered by the Region to achieve its employment objectives: • pre -servicing employment lands, ensuring that they are shovel ready for potential development; • protecting employment lands from conversion to residential and commercial use; • ensuring that uses are not introduced in employment areas that may be considered sensitive land uses and which would undermine the ability of employment areas to diversify and expand in accordance with existing zoning permissions; • ensuring that lands adjacent to key goods movement corridors are protected for employment uses; • providing lands close to select highway interchanges for land uses that involve the shipping or receiving of goods via long combination vehicles; • establish intermodal facility locations that allow for the transfer of goods from one mode to another; • continue to promote the development of an airport in Pickering; • consider the implementation of Community Improvement Plans for employment generating uses/lands, which would include measures such as municipal grants, tax increment financing, development charges and building permit fee deferrals. In response to Question 5, the Region can influence how and where people work by: • ensuring locally developed and available skilled labour/talent, by supporting and partnering with post -secondary institutions, centres of excellence, research institutes, and apprenticeship programs; Staff Review of the Growth Management Urban System Discussion Paper Page 7 of 21 • providing stronger policy direction recognizing centres and corridors as locations for significant employment; • assessing current and future trends in the micro and macro -economic contexts; • providing insight into business and industry needs for employment land, urban form and tenure; • developing and articulating the Region's key differentiators and unique sales proposition; • target high growth sectors; • developing a series of strategic economic development action plans along the following themes: sustainable economic development; entrepreneurship, innovation and the technology ecosystem; arts, culture and creative economy; international business development; urban growth centres; planning for diversity; and digital disruption on local commerce. During the previous MCR, the objective set by the Region was to achieve 60 percent of all jobs from designated Employment Areas. Now, the Region is requesting approaches to achieve a 50 percent target. This may be difficult to achieve, given that: higher yielding employment uses such as office development and the manufacturing sector have diminished considerably in Ontario; many office developments now prefer to be in downtown locations where transit and amenities are available to employees; and, there is greater demand for land consumptive, low employment generating uses (e.g., distribution centres, warehouses). Fewer industries create noxious fumes, odours or other adverse impacts that require them to be located in remote areas. Many of the new jobs being created are in the service and government/public sectors with locations outside of Employment Areas. As uses are becoming more "mixed", the non-residential uses and their jobs are moving from the employment areas. In response to Question 6, to assist in achieving 50 percent of jobs in designated Employment Areas, vacant employment land needs to be serviced (and protected from conversion to Living Area). Servicing should include piped water, sanitary sewer, gas, hydro, broadband, etc. Minimize conversions of major blocks of employment land as this could start a domino effect of business moving out of the area, in hopes to be the next area for conversion. Also, in considering potential conversions, the effects of non -industrial traffic mixing with existing industrial vehicular movements (both time of day and volume) creates conflicts and could incite existing industries to relocate. When measuring vacant industrial land, ensure that natural heritage constraints that would be taken out for residential development are subtracted from the total, so the number of "vacant" hectares are as realistic as possible. 4.2 Designated Employment Areas In accordance with the Growth Plan and the ROP, a sufficient amount of employment lands needs to be maintained in appropriate locations to accommodate forecasted job growth. The ROP also requires that an adequate supply of vacant, serviced lands be maintained within designated Employment Areas. Some of the key characteristics and trends associated with Employment Areas in Durham that are highlighted in the Paper include the following: Staff Review of the Growth Management Urban System Discussion Paper Page 8 of 21 • In 2018, the total amount of designated Employment Area lands in urban areas covered 6,252 hectares, with Rural Employment areas covering 116 hectares and employment- related uses (such as OPG and the Oshawa airport) covering 871 hectares. • In terms of development status of urban and rural employment area lands, 50 percent are estimated to be vacant, 28 percent built, 16 percent underutilized, and 6 percent constrained due to environmental constraints. • In terms of the Region's Employment Lands Inventory, 2018, 34.4 percent of the vacant Employment Area lands are fully serviced, while 43 percent are un -serviced (note: 370 hectares of designated Employment Area lands in Seaton was excluded from the un -serviced vacant Employment Lands Area figure, due to their rapidly evolving servicing status). The relatively high percentage of un -serviced Employment Area lands in Durham stifles industrial development and the creation of local jobs. Potential steps to address this concern have been listed in staff's recommendations under section 4.1 of this review. 5. Where to grow The Growth Plan directs growth to urban areas. Growth within urban areas may occur through intensification (infill and redevelopment within the existing delineated built-up areas), or through the development of designated Greenfield areas (the vacant lands between the delineated built-up areas and the urban boundaries). The Paper highlights that, according to the Envision Durham public opinion survey, reducing "urban sprawl" was identified as one of the most important land use and planning issues in the Region of Durham today. In terms of intensification, it is estimated that approximately 1,000 secondary suites have been created in the Region over the past 5 years. The Paper also highlights that the Region, since 2014, has exceeded the initial minimum intensification target of 40 percent as prescribed by the 2006 Growth Plan. In accordance with Durham Region building permit data, Pickering obtained the highest intensification rate amongst area municipalities with 98 percent of its growth occurring in 2014 within the delineated built-up area (the South Pickering urban area), but that number has been dropping steadily and sat at 50.6 percent in 2018. Staff wishes to point to recent changes to the Planning Act, through Bill 108, which included the requirement that municipalities authorize in their official plans and zoning by-law secondary suites in both a detached, semi-detached, and row house and in an ancillary building or structure (e.g., above a laneway garage). The MCR should consider the implications of this change on ROP policy direction regarding planning for intensification. In terms of designated Greenfield Areas development, several large secondary plans across Durham have been recently completed or are either in process of being completed. The majority of these areas are in the southern municipalities and include Seaton (Pickering), West Whitby, Kedron (Oshawa), Bowmanville and Newcastle. These areas will contribute to the long-term greenfield housing supply in Durham. Staff Review of the Growth Management Urban System Discussion Paper Page 9 of 21 Some of the key characteristics and trends associated with the development of Designated Greenfield Areas in Durham that are highlighted in the Paper include the following: • There are more than 30,000 units in draft approved and registered plans of subdivision and condominium, that have not been built, with Pickering holding the greatest proportion (14,081 units), followed by Whitby (4,200 units) and Oshawa (3,092 units). This does not include unit supply associated with freestanding site plan applications. • There are currently 3,834 units remaining in draft approved plans that were originally proposed in the 1980s and 1990s. 6. Strategic Growth Areas (SGAs) Strategic Growth Areas include Urban Growth Centres, Major Transit Station Areas (MTSAs), and other major opportunities for growth including infill, redevelopment, brownfield and greyfield sites, lands along major roads, or areas with planned frequent transit service or higher order transit corridors (e.g., Kingston Road). The Growth Plan requires that the boundaries of SGAs be delineated in the ROP. At a minimum this includes Urban Growth Centres and MTSAs, and may also include other areas such as Regional Centres, Regional Corridors and Waterfront Places. The ROP currently assigns density targets for Urban Growth Centres, Regional Centres and Corridors, and Waterfront Places, as follows: • Urban Growth Centres: 200 people and jobs combined per gross hectare and a minimum floor Space Index (FSI) of 3.0; • Regional Centres: 75 units per gross hectare and a minimum FSI of 2.5; • Waterfront Places: 60 units per gross hectare and a minimum FSI of 2.0. The Region will, through the MCR, evaluate these minimum density targets and update them, as appropriate. Through this Paper the Region is seeking feedback as to how density (gross or net) should be measured in the ROP. Misinterpretations or confusion as to how densities are calculated in accordance with the ROP versus local Official Plans, often occur when development applications are being prepared and/or reviewed. Providing clarification in the ROP, would address this concern. In response to Question 7, staff recommend that the measure of density at the Regional level should be undertaken on basis of a modified gross hectare (netting out the area of natural heritage lands, and the area of the transit/roadway), and refined to a net density (only the area of the lot that is developable), and established in area municipal official plans, secondary plans, and zoning by-laws. 6.1 Urban Growth Centres There are two Urban Growth Centres in Durham, one in Pickering and one in Oshawa. The Paper highlights the key objective of Urban Growth Centres as being the dominant centres with in the Region, to be planned as focal points for regional -wide public services, major office, commercial, recreational, cultural, entertainment and residential uses. The Region will, through the MCR, delineate the detailed boundaries of the two Urban Growth Centres, and consider any required policy updates to support the development of these areas. Staff Review of the Growth Management Urban System Discussion Paper Page 10 of 21 The boundaries of the City Centre of Pickering is consistent with the boundaries of the Urban Growth Centre, as approved by the Province. The Paper points to 2016 statistics, estimating the density in the Pickering City Centre at 82 residents and jobs combined per hectare. This number is significantly less than the Growth Plan and ROP target of 200 residents and jobs combined per hectare. In 2015, the Ontario Municipal Board approved Amendment 26 to the Pickering Official Plan. Amendment 26 implemented the new vision for the redevelopment and intensification of the Pickering City Centre, a designated Urban Growth Centre. Amendment 26 sets a maximum FSI of 5.75 for development in the City Centre, which is well beyond the minimum FSI of 3.0 in the current ROP. Amendment 29, a subsequent City -initiated Official Plan Amendment, approved in 2017, removed the maximum net residential density of 570 dwellings per hectare from the City Centre, in order to maximize the build -out potential of lands within the City Centre. The redevelopment of the lands in the City Centre may still be in its infancy, but there are numerous redevelopment proposals, such as the redevelopment of the Pickering Town Centre lands and the Universal City towers (on City Centre South lands), that reflect residential densities well beyond that which was initially envisioned. Although it is expected that the desired residential densities in the City Centre will be attained or even exceeded over time, there is concern that the amount of new jobs that may be created through redevelopment in the City Centre may not be sufficient to create a proper live -work balance, since many of the new development applications in the City Centre reflect limited or no commercial or office floor space. Additionally, securing land for necessary public roadways and for parkland is challenging. To address this concern, staff recommend that the Region include stronger policy direction in the ROP regarding employment densities and the creation of complete communities within Urban Growth Centres. 6.2 Regional Corridors Regional Corridors form the key connections between Urban Growth Centres and other locations, and are intended to be higher density mixed-use areas that support higher order transit services and pedestrian oriented development. There are 13 Regional Corridors identified in the ROP, of which four are within Pickering: Kingston Road, Brock Road, Bayly Street, and Whites Road. The Paper states that preliminary discussions with area municipal staff indicate that not all Regional Corridors are equal in terms of their intensification potential, and that they do not share an equal level of current and planned transit service. Also, there are corridors that may be unsuitable or unable to accommodate intensification, and certain segments appear to be unable to achieve their intended function as outlined in the ROP. The Region will, through the MCR, consider the delineation of Regional Corridors that meet the definition of Strategic Growth Areas, and consider the policies that support the development of these areas. Staff Review of the Growth Management Urban System Discussion Paper Page 11 of 21 The Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Intensification Study has recently concluded. Its conclusion has resulted in new draft urban design guidelines for the study area, and sets the stage for City -initiated Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments to facilitate the redevelopment and intensification of the lands along this Regional Corridor and within the node, in conformity with the Growth Plan and the ROP. Regional staff have been actively engaged in the study, and the study results should assist the Region in updating the Regional Corridor policies. Staff will continue coordinating with the Region to ensure consistency between any new local policy direction and any new regional policy direction regarding the corridor. The Paper also highlights the significance of the recently completed Regional Transportation Master Plan (RTMP), which sets out a higher order transit network, and points to the importance of aligning the RTMP with the Regional Corridors (Land Use) designations in the ROP. Accordingly, the Paper is seeking feedback as to whether the Region should delineate only those corridors with significant intensification potential that are also within the Higher Order Transit Network. City staff believes this is the best approach. There are only two high order transit corridors shown in the Metrolinx Regional Transportation Plan as "Frequent Rapid Transit — LRT/BRT". These are Highway 2 (Kingston Road) from the Toronto -Pickering Boundary to Simcoe Street, and Simcoe Street from Highway 401 to Highway 407. In response to Questions 8 and 9, staff recommend that the Region in collaboration with each local area municipal staff, further review the extent of these corridors, uses, densities, and floor space indexes that would be necessary to support LRT service in the future. Staff does not believe a "corridor boundary" needs to be delineated in the ROP. The balance of the corridors shown in the Metrolinx Regional Transportation Plan that are priority bus corridors are best delineated and detailed in the area municipal official plans as "Local Corridors". Corridors with frequent regional express services along 400 series highways or GO rail services which have limited stops (either at key interchanges or GO Station sites) do not warrant such a corridor treatment. Instead, the stations sites are more appropriately detailed through a Major Transit Station Area (e.g., Lakeshore East GO Stations) exercise or a Local Centre approach (e.g., 407 Transit -way stations). 6.3 Waterfront Places Waterfront Places are intended to be developed as focal points along the Lake Ontario waterfront and may include residential, commercial, and recreational uses, as well as marinas, tourism establishments and cultural and community facilities. There are five Waterfront Places identified in the ROP, including one in Pickering at Frenchman's Bay. The ROP recognizes that each Waterfront Place has unique characteristics and permits development to occur at scale appropriate for the area. The Paper states that preliminary discussions with area municipal staff indicates a preference for continued flexibility to implement Waterfront Places, as opposed to delineating their boundaries in the ROP, and that not all Waterfront Places will continue to meet the definition of Strategic Growth Areas, since some are nearing built out while others have limited intensification potential. Accordingly, the Region is asking if Waterfront Places should be specifically designated in the ROP. Staff Review of the Growth Management Urban System Discussion Paper Page 12 of 21 Although Waterfront Places are symbolically designated within the Regional Official Plan, there is no common definition of what comprises a Waterfront Place or standard method of delineating their boundaries. Furthermore, there is no rationale for the density target and floor space index target contained in the Regional Official Plan, and no requirement of the Province for the Region to detail such areas. While the plan provides a target density and FSI that can be applied where appropriate, this policy raises expectations that such targets will be applied to each area (i.e., not as an option, but as a requirement). In addition, the criteria in section 8A.2.13 of the Regional Official Plan for the waterfront places are not unique and could, and possibly should, be applied to any development that occurs along the waterfront. Since each location within Durham is unique, and in response to Question 10, staff recommend that the designation and delineation of Waterfront Places be dealt with as a local planning matter, similar to the approach for Local Centres. As such, it is suggested that the Waterfront Place symbols be removed from the Regional Official Plan, and that local municipalities be provided with greater discretion regarding the identification of areas for growth, and the distribution and density of development within their municipalities. 7. Major Transit Station Areas A Major Transit Station Area (MTSA) constitutes the area around existing or planned higher order transit within a settlement area, generally within 500 or 800 metre radius of a transit station, representing a 10 minute walk. The 2006 Growth Plan required MTSAs to be designated in official plans and planned to achieve a higher density and mix of uses, where appropriate. The new Growth Plan added more significance to MTSAs by prescribing density requirements for these areas, being a minimum density target of 150 residents and jobs combined per net hectare. The GO stations along the Lakeshore East GO Transit rail line through Durham have been identified as MTSAs, inclusive of the Pickering GO station. Under the Provincial Growth Plan, Pickering's delineated Urban Growth Centre, which contains the GO station, must achieve an overall target of 200 residents and jobs combined per gross hectare. The Paper points to the new requirement in the Growth Plan that requires the detailed boundaries of MTSAs to be delineated in the ROP. The Paper also discusses the methodology Regional staff have developed, following the requirements of the Growth Plan and Provincial guidance documents, and by consulting with area municipal staff, to establish the principles and steps to guide the delineation of MTSAs in the ROP. The conceptual process for delineating MTSAs consists of a stepped "Start Big, Net Out, Net In, and Draft Boundary" process. Some of the key principles include: the application of a 500 and 800 metre radius from the centre of the rail platform, representing a 10 minute walking distance; avoiding non -developable areas, such as natural areas and highways; and excluding areas that are not intended or unsuitable for redevelopment, such as stable neighbourhoods that are intended to remain low density. Staff Review of the Growth Management Urban System Discussion Paper Page 13 of 21 Regional staff held workshops with area municipal staff in January 2019, which resulted in the delineation of draft boundaries for each of the MTSAs in Durham. A copy of the draft MTSA in Pickering is contained in Attachment #2 to Report PLN 32-19. To be noted is that the majority of the proposed MTSA falls within the boundaries of the Pickering City Centre, where development is required to achieve a minimum density of 200 residents and jobs combined per gross hectare. In response to Questions 11 and 12, regarding the appropriateness of the proposed approach for delineating the boundaries for the MTSAs in the ROP, and the proposed draft MTSA delineation in Pickering, staff is of the opinion that the refined approach developed by the Region, in consultation with each of the local municipalities is appropriate, providing defensible and rational boundaries for these Major Transit Station Areas, as opposed to an arbitrary 500 metre or 800 metre radius from the centre of a station. Furthermore, the proposed boundaries of the MTSA in Pickering, shown in Attachment #1 of Appendix D of the Region's Growth Management — Urban System Discussion Paper, are consistent with those discussed with Regional staff. 8. Growth Management Study Process The Paper outlines the key elements and steps of the Growth Management Study process, which can be summarized as follows. After the public consultation process in relation to this Discussion Paper, the Region will conduct a Land Needs Assessment (LNA) to plan for growth and determine the need for any settlement boundary expansions and/or employment area conversions. The LNA will determine the amount of land required to accommodate the Growth Plan's 2041 population and employment forecast for Durham. The following studies will be undertaken by the Region to complete the LNA process: An Intensification Analysis and Strategy; A Designated Greenfield Area Analysis; an Employment Analysis; and a Housing Analysis. These studies will also assist the Region to answer other future growth related questions such as the following: Will the Region's existing structure be able to accommodate the 2041 growth forecast? Are any additional Community (Living) Areas or Employment Areas required? Whether any of the prescribed targets in the Growth Plan cannot be met, and whether alternative targets are justified? 8.1 Settlement boundary expansion analysis If the LNA determines that additional land within the Community (Living) Areas or Employment Areas are needed beyond the existing urban boundary, a settlement boundary expansion analysis will be required. The outcome of that analysis would be to identify the most appropriate location(s) for the boundary expansion(s). The Growth Plan outlines the criteria for evaluating settlement area boundary expansions, which includes matters such as: the capacity of existing or planned infrastructure and public service facilities; avoidance of key hydrologic areas and the Natural Heritage System for the Growth Plan; and the proposed expansion would be informed by applicable water and wastewater master plans or equivalent and stormwater master plans or equivalent, where appropriate. Staff Review of the Growth Management Urban System Discussion Paper Page 14 of 21 In response to Question 13, other criteria that should be considered by the Region when evaluating settlement area boundary expansions, is "buffer planning". The analysis to determine the location and amount of lands for any settlement boundary expansion, should also account for lands required to accommodate proper buffers between any new Community (Living) and Employment Areas, or Community Areas and Agricultural Areas, or Employment Areas and Agricultural Areas. Note: The Paper did not address the provision introduced through Amendment 1 to the Growth Plan that enables 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, subject to specific criteria. Discussions with Regional staff confirmed that the Region would not consider adjusting or expanding any urban settlement area boundary outside the MCR process. Such a process would lead to piecemeal planning and is not supported by City staff. 8.2 Employment area conversion analysis If the LNA concludes that there is a surplus of Employment Area lands, the Region will consider the conversion of Employment Areas to non -employment uses. There are also several criteria, including criteria in the Growth Plan, against which conversion request would have to be evaluated to determine the suitability of non -employment uses. Some of the key criteria include the following: that there is a need for the conversion; and that the lands are not required over the horizon of the Plan for the employment purposes for which they are designated. Given that the ratio between population and jobs has been in decline, the Region needs to weigh the conversion of employment lands to other uses very carefully. In certain instances, the conversion of uses (e.g., from low intensity employment lands to higher intensity commercial or mixed use development) may render an increase in the total number of jobs being generated by the subject site. On the other hand, this may leave a municipality short of lands that it may need for large scale, but low intensity employment uses, which may need outside storage or may conflict with surrounding sensitive lands uses. In response to Question 14, staff recommend that a context sensitive analysis for any proposed Employment Area conversion be conducted, to ensure that job generating opportunities are not compromised or lost either on the subject lands, or as a result of impacts on the remaining employment lands. The Paper also provides a short discussion on Provincially Significant Employment Zones (PSEZ), which were identified in accordance with Amendment 1 to the Growth Plan. Requests for exclusions or additions to the PSEZ will be dealt with in accordance with the Province's "Request for Reconsideration" process released in May 2019, and will be considered as part of the LNA process. Through the City's comments on Amendment 1 to the Growth Plan, Council recommended that the Province revise the proposed PSEZ in Pickering by: • excluding certain lands located within the City Centre South lands and a row of properties along the Bayly Street Mixed Use Corridor, as well as the Durham Live lands; and Staff Review of the Growth Management Urban System Discussion Paper Page 15 of 21 • including the Whites Road Prestige Employment Area in the West Shore Neighbourhood, and the Seaton Employment Lands along Highway 407 (the Pickering Innovation Corridor). Although these recommendations were not incorporated by the Province, Provincial staff met with the Region and area municipalities to discuss requested changes to the PSEZ. Regional staff provided the Province with a consolidated package of submissions from the area municipalities and the Region containing materials, (e.g., staff reports, Council resolutions, and mapping) in support of the reconsideration requests. Municipal staff were allowed to provide an overview of their municipality's requests. An overview was also given of submissions from private landowners. No decisions were made at the meeting. Note: The Paper did not address the provisions introduced through Amendment 1 which enables upper -tier municipalities to designate new employment areas through an official plan amendment without the need for a MCR, and which provides municipalities with increased autonomy to convert lands within existing employment areas to non -employment uses prior to a MCR, subject to specific criteria. Discussions with Regional staff confirmed that the Region would not consider designating any new employment areas or the conversion of existing employment areas to non -employment uses outside the MCR process. 9. Additional Growth Management considerations 9.1 Servicing Growth The Region uses various financial tools to fund new infrastructure and services, with development charges (DCs) as the primary mechanism. The Region also has several funding programs to help support intensification projects that are eligible for financial incentives, such as the Intensification Servicing Policy, DCs credits for existing uses, the Regional revitalization program and the affordable housing program. The Paper highlights the importance of having a sufficient supply of serviced employment lands to expand industry, increase employment opportunities, and ensure jobs are located in proximity to Durham's labour force. As with residential lands, the servicing of employment lands are done primarily through Regional DCs. The Growth Plan requires an integrated approach to land use planning and infrastructure investment. Accordingly, the Region will be considering matters such as leveraging existing infrastructure, directing infrastructure to appropriate areas to optimize infrastructure, considering full life cycle costs, providing sufficient infrastructure capacity in strategic growth areas, considering full life cycle costs, reviewing the impact of climate change on infrastructure in relation to its proposed growth management strategy, as well as the implications the changes to Development Charges Act through Bill 108 may have on how the Region finances services through growth. As previously noted, a key objective of the Growth Plan is to achieve complete communities. Whether they are urban, suburban or rural, complete communities: • foster vibrant public interaction and give residents and workers a sense of place • encourage active transportation Staff Review of the Growth Management Urban System Discussion Paper Page 16 of 21 • make efficient use of land and infrastructure • support transit • provide a mix of housing types and offer a range of affordability • offer a range of employment opportunities • offer access to healthy local food, and • are designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and address climate change. However, there is an extreme imbalance in the current composition of our communities within Durham (e.g., residential growth outpacing non-residential growth and the services necessary to support residential growth). The Region and area municipalities should be treating its Employment Areas as Strategic Growth Areas. In response to Question 15, staff recommend that the Region, through the MCR, consider the implementation of additional measures/strategies to shift the balance in favour non-residential growth. Such measures should include: making Durham's employment lands more attractive and market ready, by: ensuring official plan and zoning designations are in place; pre -servicing strategic employment lands; and, making financial incentives available (e.g., tax increment financing, municipal grants, building permit and development charges subsidies), where appropriate. 9.2 Limited expansion for Urban Areas in the Greenbelt Plan and Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP) The Growth Plan, the Greenbelt Plan and the ORMCP limit the amount of settlement area expansion that may be permitted in Durham's northern urban areas namely, Uxbridge, Port Perry, Sunderland, Cannington, Beaverton and Orono. The Region will, through the LNA determine if any urban area boundary expansions within northern Durham are warranted. 9.3 Growth outside of the Urban System The amount of growth that may occur in areas outside the Durham Urban System, such as in rural settlements and on rural lands, are controlled by Provincial policy. For example, the minor rounding out of hamlets within the Greenbelt Plan is no longer permitted, which solidifies their boundaries, limiting growth to appropriate forms of infill and intensification. In spite of these restrictions, the Region estimates the potential for approximately 2,245 additional residential dwellings across Durham's Rural Area. The majority of these lots (approximately 1,800) are located outside rural settlement areas. The Region will, through the MCR and LNA, consider development trends and potential in the Rural System. Staff note that Claremont Development Corporation's appeal regarding their applications to develop a plan of subdivision on lands located partly outside the boundaries of the Hamlet of Claremont, remains before the LPAT. 9.4 Northeast Pickering The Paper refers to the Region's LNA that was undertaken as part of its 2006 Growth Plan conformity exercise (ROPA 128), and notes that the Province, in its decision on ROPA 128: removed the proposed northeast Pickering urban expansion area (approximately 1,500 hectares), although Pickering's overall population and employment allocations remained; and that as part of an Ontario Municipal Board settlement, ROPA policy 7.3.11 (p) was added to the ROP, requiring that the amount and rate of development in Seaton be Staff Review of the Growth Management Urban System Discussion Paper Page 17 of 21 evaluated, and that the watershed plans for Carruther's Creek and East Duffin Creek be updated, should urban area expansion be considered in this area during a future MCR process. The Carruther's Creek Watershed Update Study is underway, with completion anticipated in the new year. With respect to the rate and amount of development in Seaton, the ROP defines the entire Seaton Urban Area as a "secondary plan area" and notes that prior to development occurring the next secondary plan area, 75 percent of the existing secondary plan area (i.e., 75 percent of the residentially developable lands) must be built -out. The Region will, through the MCR, consider the need to designate additional urban land, and the currently unallocated population and employment forecasts in Pickering, as part of the overall LNA process. In this regard, it is also important to note that the Council passed two motions on September 23, 2019 and November 25, 2019 respectively in relation to the possible future designation of additional urban land in Pickering. The motion passed by Council on September 23, 2019 requests that the Region of Durham include in their review: 1. All lands within the City of Pickering meeting the following criteria: • lands not restricted by availability of servicing • lands that do not comprise a Specialty Crop Area • lands that are not within a Natural Heritage System • lands not located in the Moraine Natural Core and Linkage Areas • lands experiencing growth pressures and/or with locations in the white belt that are appropriate for growth and can achieve a healthy, connected, thriving and complete community, and • lands that have existing or planned infrastructure to support and accommodate growth; and 2. That the Region of Durham be requested to seek approval of the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing to use an alternate intensification rate of 45 percent for Durham Region that will enable greater flexibility to provide a more diverse range of grade related housing mix. A copy of this Motion (Council Resolution #140/19) is contained in Attachment #3 to Report PLN 32-19. The motion passed by Council on November 25, 2019 states that the Council of the Corporation of the City of Pickering supports the Vision and Community Planning Principles for the lands in northeast Pickering known as Veraine, and reaffirms its request that the Region of Durham include these lands in the settlement area boundary during its current Municipal Comprehensive Review. A copy of this Motion (Council Resolution #173/19) is contained in Attachment #4 to Report PLN 32-19. 9.5 Airports The ROP identifies the Pickering Federal Airport Lands in Pickering and the Oshawa airport on Schedule A (MAP A4), Regional Structure. The ROP contains "Economic Development" policies that recognize the importance of key economic drivers that will influence the future Staff Review of the Growth Management Urban System Discussion Paper Page 18 of 21 growth of the Region, and policies that require Regional Council to request the Federal and/or Provincial Government to improve accessibility to Employment Areas and increase employment opportunities by expediting the construction of an airport on the Federal Airport Lands. The Paper provides information regarding the Oshawa airport and the function it fulfills, and discusses the Federal airport lands in Pickering by noting: • the reduction of its initial size, with the redundant lands becoming part of the Rouge National Urban Park; • the Federal Government's update to the Airport Site Order and the Pickering Airport Zoning Regulations, initiated in 2015; • that a decision has not yet been made by the Federal Government regarding whether or not to proceed with the airport in Pickering; and • that the Regional Council confirmed its support, in principle, for the development of an airport in the City of Pickering. The Region will, through the MCR, consider the overall impacts of airports. Although there is still uncertainty as to whether the Federal Government is going to support the development of an airport in Pickering, the Region's LNA should consider a scenario reflecting a future airport and the potential implications it may have in terms of population and employment allocation and growth. 9.6 Nuclear generating stations There are two nuclear generating stations in Durham, one in Clarington (the Darlington plant) and one in Pickering. The direct and indirect employment associated with the Pickering Nuclear Generating Station is estimated at 7,500 jobs, of which 4,500 are in Durham. The Paper notes that the Pickering station is expected to cease operation in 2024, and will then undergo a long process of decommissioning, followed by eventual demolition and site restoration. The 2014 PPS (and the draft 2019 PPS) provide policy direction regarding the separation of major facilities, such as nuclear stations, from sensitive land uses. Development within proximity of the two nuclear stations must consider the risks and impacts associated with these facilities, including appropriate separation and required road network improvements to ensure the ability to safely and quickly evacuate the areas in case of an emergency. The Region will, through the MCR, consider land use compatibility between major facilities, (including the two nuclear stations) and sensitive land uses, the ongoing refurbishment and potential expansion of the Darlington Nuclear Station, and the future closure of the Pickering station. It is anticipated that the Region's Employment Analysis, which will form part of the LNA process, will consider the implications of the future closure of the Pickering station. 10. Policy Considerations The Paper provides an overview of a number of policy topics that will be further considered through the MCR, including Specific Policy Area A (Central Pickering Development Plan), Staff Review of the Growth Management Urban System Discussion Paper Page 19 of 21 telecommunications and broadband, strong and vibrant downtowns, and places of worship in Employment Areas. 10.1 Specific Policy Area A — Central Pickering Development Plan (CPDP) Area The ROP identifies the CPDP area as Specific Policy Area A, and it is reflected on Schedules 'A' (Regional Structure), `B' (Natural Heritage System & Key Natural Heritage and Hydrologic Features) and `C' (Road Network), and the related policies in the ROP provide high-level direction on how development in the Seaton Urban Area will occur, including the requirement that all development be in accordance with the CPDP. The Paper refers to progress that has been made in the planning and development of Seaton and notes that various planning approvals have been put in places to enable development in Seaton (e.g., Amendment 22 to the Pickering Official Plan, Neighbourhoods plans, approval of draft plans of subdivision and zoning by-laws). Since the requisite planning approvals are in place to enable development, the Region will, through the MCR, consider whether it is appropriate to apply a Regional Structure, consisting of appropriate Regional land use designations to lands within the CPDP area. A comprehensive review of the Central Pickering Development Plan (CPDP) should have started in 2017. However, the Province has not taken steps to do so, and it appears that they do not have the resources to move forward with this undertaking or assist with the installation of key infrastructure in the Employment Lands. Accordingly, in response to Question 16, staff recommend that appropriate designations and policies be included in the Durham Region Official Plan, to bring the ROP into conformity with the CPDP. Where necessary, specific policies for select parts of the geographic area of the Seaton Urban Area or the Agricultural Preserve may be required to capture the nuances of the CPDP. This would be consistent with the ROP being brought into conformity with the Greenbelt Plan, or A Place to Grow, for example. 10.2 Telecommunications and broadband In February 2019, Regional Council endorsed in principle "Connecting our Communities: a Broadband Strategy for Durham Region". The Strategy identified certain actions to support improved broadband connectivity through the region, including that the Region consider the incorporation of new policies in its ROP that would support the inclusion of broadband infrastructure in new development. Through Amendment 31 (approved by the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal in June 2019), the City incorporated policies in the Pickering Official Plan to strengthen and support the development of an Information and Communication Technology (ICT) network, and the implementation of the "Dig Once" Standard. As noted in the response to Question 2, staff recommended that a goal should be added for the Urban System to become a "smart" connected community by such means as providing broadband infrastructure in all Regional roads. Further, in response to Question 17, staff recommend that the Region, through the MCR, examine the "Smart City" approach and consider the inclusion of policies addressing existing and next generation Staff Review of the Growth Management Urban System Discussion Paper Page 20 of 21 information and communication technologies. The City of London Plan provides a good example of the type of policies that could be developed in this regard. With respect to broadband, staff recommend that the Region adopt a "dig once" policy to ensure that a comprehensive network is advanced across the Region, and that the Region allow for the shared use of its conduit and assist local municipalities in the development of localized networks and the provision of broadband services to rural settlement areas. 10.3 Strong and vibrant downtowns The Paper describes the various functions downtowns fulfill, noting their value as cultural, recreational, residential and employment centres, and serving as catalysts for economic development within Durham. The ROP currently deals with downtowns through its "Centres" polices, distinguishing between Urban Growth Centres (e.g., Pickering and Oshawa City Centres), Regional Centres (e.g., Whitby downtown) that are recognized as the key areas for intensification within the Region's Urban System, and permits the designation of local centres in local official plans. The Region will, through the MCR, consider policies to further support the achievement of strong and vibrant, healthy downtowns. For the most part, staff is of the opinion that the Regional Official Plan provides sufficient direction and support for the development of Urban Growth Centres, Regional and Local Centres. Through Amendment 26 to the Pickering Official Plan (approved by the Ontario Municipal Board in 2015), the City incorporated a robust set of policies to facilitate the redevelopment and intensification of the City Centre into a vibrant mixed-use, transit oriented, pedestrian -friendly downtown. In response to Question 18, the one area staff has identified that could use further Regional policy support is the requirement for area municipalities to designate sufficient lands for community facilities (such as parkland, community centres, schools) within the centres so that as intensification takes place, the achievement of strong, vibrant and healthy downtowns can be achieved, instead of becoming mostly residential, devoid of the amenities that made the suburbs attractive places to live and raise a family. 10.4 Places of worship in Employment Areas The decrease of institutionally zoned lands and the diversification of the faith base of communities has resulted in faith groups seeking permissions to build on lands in other zones and designations, such as Employment Areas. According to the Region's 2018 business count, there are 37 places of worship within Employment Areas in Durham. Through the last review of the ROP, the Province required the ROP to prohibit the establishment of new places of worship within Employment Areas, as places of worship are regarded as sensitive land uses that requires separation from noise, pollutants and other impacts from industrial operations. Staff Review of the Growth Management Urban System Discussion Paper Page 21 of 21 Places of worship often operate with limited budgets. Since land costs and leases are often cheaper in Employment Areas, numerous places of worship have gravitated to such locations. Others seek a small, affordable spaces to start or grow their congregation, and often end up occupying smaller industrial units because it is more affordable than commercial floor space. Many places of worship have evolved into multi -functional community facilities addressing not only the spiritual, but also the mental, physical, and intellectual needs of people through services such as day care, soup kitchens, financial and relational counselling and other social services, fulfilling an important role in community building and wellbeing. However, their locations within Employment Areas are not always the best locations to serve their congregations, and such uses may negatively impact or conflict with certain industrial uses. To outright prohibit places of worship from Employment Areas may be appropriate from a land use compatibility point of view, but it is a "band aid" solution and is not satisfactorily addressing the problem. Accordingly, in response to Question 19, staff recommend that the Region, through the MCR, consider the means to address the challenges faced by places of worship to establish within residential areas, taking into account the functions and services they offer within the context of building "complete communities". Additionally, the Region should request that the Province allow places of worship in Employment Area designations depending on the site-specific location and the particular suite of uses the place of worship plans to provide (e.g., day care; other education classes). The Region could also explore mandatory designation of institutional land for such facilities as an integral requirement through any employment land conversion or urban area expansion. 11. Conclusion The above review provides a synopsis of the Region's Growth Management (Urban System) Discussion Paper, answers questions, and highlights key issues which, in the opinion of staff, should also be considered through the MCR process. Attachment #1 to Report #PLN 32-19 Overview of the Region of Durham's Municipal Comprehensive Review of its Official Plan 1. Background The Planning Act requires that municipal official plans be reviewed every five years to ensure that the plans have regard to matters of Provincial interest, are consistent with Provincial Policy Statement (PPS), and conform to Provincial Land Use Plans. The current Durham Regional Official Plan (ROP) was approved in 1993 and has over 150 amendments to keep it up-to-date with changing provincial plans and policies. On May 2, 2018, Regional Council authorized staff to proceed with the Municipal Comprehensive Review (MCR) of the ROP titled "Envision Durham, 2041 Our Region, Our Plan, Our Future" (or "Envision Durham"). "Envision Durham" offers a strategic opportunity to create a completely new plan with an advanced planning vision for the Region to 2041. 1.1 What are the key components of the Region's MCR? The MCR is structured around the following strategic planning themes: • The Agriculture and Rural System (Discussion Paper released March 5, 2019; Pickering Council commented through Council Resolution #94/19, dated May 27, 2019); • Climate Change and Sustainability (Discussion Paper released May 7, 2019; Pickering Council commented through Council Resolution #150/19, dated October 21, 2019); • Growth Management (Urban System Discussion Paper released June 4, 2019; subject of this Report; to be considered at the December 16, 2019 Council meeting); • Environment and Greenlands System (released September 3, 2019; under review); • Transportation System (released October 1, 2019; under review), and • Housing (to be released in December 2019); 1.2 The MCR and Public Engagement The public engagement program and its timeline associated with the MCR consists of four stages: Discover (2019), Discuss (2019), Direct (2020), and Draft (2021-2022). On February 5, 2019, the Region initiated the first stage ("Discover") of the "Envision Durham" public engagement program by launching the project website: durham.ca/Envision Durham, as well as a public opinion survey, which closed on April 6, 2019. The Region also created an introductory video on the project, which can be viewed on the project website. In addition, the Region set up "pop-up" information kiosks in various locations, as part of their public engagement launch. In accordance with the public engagement program, each stage of the project will be promoted through news releases, the project website, social media platforms, and public service announcements. Attachment #2 to Report #PLN 32-19 "ammo :v i li 4. .11111.1.WIW M.; i Bayly Street- , f 11 .°�` , ` • •-1 • Poprad Avenue \ '.' a)A !�'1 co • Tatra Driver Y -'.1 lA in_..anier off: o. t x PAD co <<Radom6;: 9 'rlt _— II -] m o --ii w, 10 -F, 17 i I (13 �+r: , -..;,Patmore Lane T Jam' -' .tl ca 0 CD pvenueoc• � . a) Haller Avenue •' � Draft Delineation 0 Proposed Major Transit Station Area N KERING PICE City Development Department Date: Feb. 05, 2019 O The Corporaton of the City of Pickanng Produced On part) under license from: © Queens Pnntar, Ontano Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.;© Her Majesty the Queen In Right of Canada, Department of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and Its suppliers all rights reserved: © Municipal Property Assessment Corporation and Its suppliers all nohts reserved: SCALE. o� o00 THC C NnT API AN np CI Iavev Attachment #3 to Report #PLN 32-19 Council Decision Resolution #140/19 WHEREAS, the City of Pickering is projected to be a driving force for residential and economic growth in Durham Region and the GTA over the next 2 decades; And Whereas, by the year 2031 the estimated population of Pickering will grow to 190,000; And Whereas, the lack of affordable and sustainable housing options have reached a crisis in parts of Canada, and in particular the Greater Toronto area; And Whereas, the City of Pickering recognizes that there is an urgent need to create an age friendly housing strategy that includes reviewing and redefining its urban/living boundaries consistent with current and future growth within the GTA, Durham, and City of Pickering beyond 2031; And Whereas, the City of Pickering considers all serviceable lands with access to water and sewer within its current and potential urban/living boundaries be considered as a living area; And Whereas, the Province of Ontario has recognized the need for more housing choices and more affordability; And Whereas, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing has produced its "More Homes, More Choice: Ontario's Housing Supply Action Plan", and has given royal assent to Bill 108 (More Homes, More Choice Act, 2019) to address housing supply, housing variety and affordability; And Whereas, the City of Pickering has commenced a Strategic Plan Review that includes redefining its urban/living boundaries; And Whereas, the Provincial Government amended the Growth Plan to permit some additional options for urban area boundary expansions, and to allow upper and single- tier municipalities to request alternative intensification targets to address, among other matters, greater housing supply, and affordability; And Whereas, proposed amendments to the Provincial Policy Statement will allow consideration of market demands and needs in determining housing options, as a strategy to provide a more diverse range of grade related homes; And Whereas, the Region of Durham is currently undertaking a municipal comprehensive review of its settlement areas, including a land needs assessment as required by the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe; And Whereas, on February 27, 2019, Durham Regional Council commented on Amendment 1 to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe 2017 in support of a minimum density of 50 persons and jobs per gross hectare for new greenfield developments, and a region -wide intensification target of a minimum 45% within the existing built boundary; Council Decision Resolution #140/19 And Whereas, the City of Pickering supports the Region's comments on Amendment 1 to the Growth Plan Now therefore be it resolved that the Council of the Corporation for the City of Pickering request that the Region of Durham in their review include: 1. All lands within the City of Pickering meet the following criteria: • Lands not restricted by availability of servicing • Lands that do not comprise a Specialty Crop Area • Lands that are not within a Natural Heritage System • Lands not located in the Moraine Natural Core and Linkage Areas • Lands experiencing growth pressures and or with locations in the white belt that are appropriate for growth and can achieve a healthy, connected, thriving and complete community • Lands that have existing or planned infrastructure to support and accommodate growth 2. That the Region of Durham be requested to seek approval of the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing to an alternate intensification rate of 45% for Durham Region that will enable greater flexibility to provide a more diverse range of grade related housing mix; 3. That City staff be directed to report back to Planning & Development Committee in the first quarter of 2020 outlining a process to develop an age friendly housing strategy, including changes to Pickering's Official Plan and any required secondary plan reviews of those lands in Pickering that meet the stated criteria of recommendation #1; and, 4. That a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Premier of Ontario, Durham Region MPPs, all Durham Regional Municipalities, and the Region of Durham. Attachment #4 to Report #PLN 32-19 Council Decision Resolution #173/19 WHEREAS, at the September 23, 2019 Council meeting, the City of Pickering adopted Resolution #140/19 "An Age Friendly Affordable Housing Strategy"; And Whereas, included in this Resolution was a request for Durham Region to include in their Municipal Comprehensive Review all lands within the City of Pickering that meet the following criteria: • lands not restricted by availability of servicing • lands that do not compromise a specialty crop area • lands that are not within a natural heritage system • lands not located in the moraine natural core and linkage areas • lands experiencing growth pressures and/or with locations in the white belt that are appropriate for growth and can achieve a healthy, connected, thriving and complete community • lands that have existing or planned infrastructure to support and accommodate growth; And Whereas, at the Planning and Development Committee meeting of November 4, 2019, the Community of Veraine presentation was made to the City of Pickering, being a new community proposed for northeast Pickering based on thriving, connected and complete community principles that comprise inclusivity and affordability; And Whereas, among other things Veraine provides an opportunity that can address the need for age friendly, affordable housing options for future generations for decades to come; Now therefore be it resolved that the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering: 1. Supports the Vision and Community Planning Principles for the lands in northeast Pickering known as Veraine, and reaffirms its request that the Region of Durham include these lands in the settlement area boundary during its current Municipal Comprehensive Review; 2. That City Staff be directed to report back to Committee in Q1 2020 outlining a process to initiate a secondary plan for the new community of Veraine based on the Community Planning Principles in Appendix 1 attached to this Motion; 3. That City Staff be directed through the CAO's Office to discuss with the landowners an arrangement for a dedicated team that will work on the Veraine file, without impacting other priorities of the City of Pickering; and, 4. That a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Region of Durham.