HomeMy WebLinkAboutMarch 30, 2026 - Special Council - 6:00 pm
Special Council
Meeting Minutes
Electronic Meeting
March 30, 2026 - 06:00 PM
Chair: Mayor Ashe
Present:
Mayor K. Ashe
Councillor M. Brenner
Councillor L. Cook
Councillor D. Pickles
Councillor M. Nagy
Councillor L. Robinson
Regrets:
Councillor S. Butt
Also Present:
M. Carpino - Chief Administrative Officer
K. Bentley - Director, City Development & CBO
P. Bigioni - Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor
S. Boyd - Fire Chief,
L. Gibbs - Director, Community Services
K. Heathcote - Director, City Infrastructure
R. Holborn - Director, Engineering Services
F. Jadoon - Director, Economic Development & Strategic Projects
S. Karwowski - Director, Finance & Treasurer
S. Cassel - City Clerk
C. Rose - Chief Planner
Z. Khan - Senior Project Manager, Special Projects
R. Kumar - Senior Financial Analyst – Development Charges & Capital Management
P. Wirch - Principal Planner, Policy
R. Perera - Deputy Clerk
Call to Order/Roll Call 1.
1
The City Clerk certified that all Members of Council were present and participating
electronically, save and except for Councillor Butt.
Disclosure of Interest
No disclosures of interest were noted.
Delegations
Matt Bentley, Uxbridge Resident
Re: Report PLN 04-26
Official Plan Amendment OPA 25-003P
City-Initiated Northeast Pickering Secondary Plan
Updated Staff Report: Responses and Revisions to Report PLN 03-26
M. Bentley, Uxbridge Resident, appeared before Council via electronic connection
to speak to Report PLN 04-26. M. Bentley stated that the proposal appeared rushed
and encouraged Council to consider deferring its decision. M. Bentley expressed
concern that the Plan had advanced without adequate fiscal and environmental
analysis and without meaningful consultation with the Mississaugas of Scugog
Island First Nation, referencing correspondence dated March 25, 2026. M. Bentley
stated that approval of the Plan would benefit developers while transferring
financial, environmental, and long-term risks to residents. M. Bentley advised that
approval would represent a point of no return, noting that expanding the urban
boundary shifts leverage away from the City. M. Bentley stated that several key
studies remained outstanding and that approving the Plan before completion of
these studies would limit Council’s ability to respond if the development was found
to be inappropriate. M. Bentley further stated that approval could result in increased
taxes, heightened flood risk, environmental harm, deterioration of relationships with
First Nations, and loss of sustainable farming in Northeast Pickering. M. Bentley
clarified that the opposition was not to growth or housing generally, but to advancing
the Plan without demonstrated need, financial certainty, and completed analysis. M.
Bentley encouraged Council not to approve the Plan at this time.
Abdullah Mir, Pickering Resident
Re: Report PLN 04-26
Official Plan Amendment OPA 25-003P
City-Initiated Northeast Pickering Secondary Plan
Updated Staff Report: Responses and Revisions to Report PLN 03-26
2.
3.
3.1
3.2
Special Council Meeting Minutes
March 30, 2026
2
A. Mir, Pickering Resident, appeared before Council via electronic connection to
speak to Report PLN 04-26. A. Mir advised that this was the fourth delegation on
the matter and thanked the Mayor, Councillors, and City staff for meetings and
information provided in advance of the meeting. A. Mir stated that proceeding with
development in Northeast Pickering remained a poor decision and expressed
concern that no fiscal impact studies had been completed to demonstrate whether
the proposal made financial sense. A. Mir stated that approving the Plan would
create a permissive framework allowing development applications to proceed,
making it difficult for the City or future Councils to refuse proposals should
subsequent studies indicate the development was too costly. A. Mir questioned
whether approval could be revisited if analysis showed the Plan to be unaffordable
and cautioned that approval could expose the City to legal risk at the Ontario Land
Tribunal. A. Mir referenced recent reductions in immigration targets, declining
population growth, and changes to development charges legislation, adding that
demand assumptions underlying the Plan were uncertain. A. Mir stated that
development should instead be prioritized in areas with existing serviced land,
including the Seaton community, which remained significantly unbuilt. A. Mir
concluded that development in Northeast Pickering would primarily benefit
developers and requested that Council vote against approving the Official Plan
Amendment at this time.
Helen Brenner, Pickering Resident
Re: Report PLN 04-26
Official Plan Amendment OPA 25-003P
City-Initiated Northeast Pickering Secondary Plan
Updated Staff Report: Responses and Revisions to Report PLN 03-26
H. Brenner, Pickering Resident, appeared before Council via electronic connection
to speak to Report PLN 04-26. H. Brenner stated that despite the volume of updates
released since the previous meeting, the revisions did not address core resident
concerns, including potential tax increases, increased flood risk, irreversible loss of
prime agricultural land, and the lack of meaningful consultation with the
Mississaugas of Scugog Island First Nation. H. Brenner expressed concern that
developer funded studies would only be peer reviewed after public review and
approval, noting that this was not standard practice and raised questions regarding
the thoroughness and independence of the evidence relied upon by Council. H.
Brenner stated that approving the Plan prior to completing required studies would
transfer financial and environmental risk to taxpayers. H. Brenner advised that the
proposal would place significant urban development on the headwaters of
Carruthers Creek, raising foreseeable downstream flood risks and potential liability
to the City. H. Brenner also raised that the Plan relied on outdated provincial growth
3.3
Special Council Meeting Minutes
March 30, 2026
3
projections, while serviced land remained available elsewhere in Pickering,
including in Seaton. H. Brenner stated that Council should delay approval until
proper analysis was completed and noted that approving the Plan was not required
to maintain municipal control. H. Brenner further stated that prior investment by
developers did not obligate Council to approve the proposal and urged Council to
vote against approving the Plan at this time and to complete the Pickering Forward
Official Plan Review process to ensure growth was affordable, evidence based, and
sustainable.
Carter Perks, Pickering Resident
Re: Report PLN 04-26
Official Plan Amendment OPA 25-003P
City-Initiated Northeast Pickering Secondary Plan
Updated Staff Report: Responses and Revisions to Report PLN 03-26
C. Perks, Pickering Resident, appeared before Council via electronic connection to
speak to Report PLN 04-26. C. Perks advised that they reside near the northwest
boundary of the proposed development area and had lived in the area for over 30
years. C. Perks expressed concern regarding the scale and location of the proposed
development, noting that the Plan would introduce a population comparable to most
of Pickering’s existing population into a small, rural area that currently lacked
supporting infrastructure. C. Perks stated that the proposal amounted to the creation
of a satellite city in a remote location, disconnected from the existing urban fabric of
Pickering. C. Perks raised concern regarding traffic impacts, road capacity, flooding,
high water tables, and the City’s ability to maintain existing infrastructure in the area.
C. Perks questioned how development could proceed given that land ownership
within the proposed area remained fragmented and suggested that the Plan would
result in an inconsistent built-form and disruption to existing homeowners. C. Perks
expressed skepticism regarding claims of affordability, stating that the proposal
primarily benefited developers through the construction of high-density housing
while disregarding the character of North Pickering and surrounding rural
communities. C. Perks further stated that population and immigration trends had
shifted since the proposal was first advanced, calling into question the underlying
assumptions driving the Plan. C. Perks encouraged Council to prioritize
development in areas with existing infrastructure, including Seaton and lands closer
to Highway 7 and Highway 407, and to preserve Class 1 agricultural land. C. Perks
concluded by urging Council to recognize the proposal as premature and to refrain
from approving the Plan at this time.
Adrian Stocking, President and Elizabeth Stocking, Secretary and Board
Member, National Farmers Union - Ontario Local 345
3.4
3.5
Special Council Meeting Minutes
March 30, 2026
4
Re: Report PLN 04-26
Official Plan Amendment OPA 25-003P
City-Initiated Northeast Pickering Secondary Plan
Updated Staff Report: Responses and Revisions to Report PLN 03-26
A. Stocking, President and E. Stocking, Secretary and Board Member, National
Farmers Union - Ontario Local 345, appeared before Council via electronic
connection to speak to Report PLN 04-26. They advised that the proposed
development lands were located within the Union’s local jurisdiction and consisted
of Class 1 agricultural soils. They stated that while support existed for new housing
and employment, this must be balanced with the protection of Ontario’s best
farmland, environmental systems, and food security. They noted that advancing the
Plan prior to completing required studies and planning measures was inconsistent
with the Planning Act, the Provincial Planning Statement, and the Durham Region
Official Plan. They emphasized that prime agricultural lands may only be converted
where no reasonable alternatives existed and stated that regional growth scenarios
demonstrated that housing targets could be met through intensification and the build
out of existing serviced communities, including Seaton. They stated that the
destruction of Class 1 farmland was not a planning necessity and represented a
permanent loss of a limited resource and raised concerns regarding flood risk,
environmental compliance, fiscal liability for residents, and the lack of meaningful
Indigenous consultation. They stated that the lands also contained important
headwaters that supported drinking water systems and mitigated flooding, and that
these natural assets should be protected. They concluded by urging Council to vote
against the proposal and to consider the importance of farmland preservation, food
security, and long-term sustainability in decision making.
Mike Borie, Pickering Resident
Re: Report PLN 04-26
Official Plan Amendment OPA 25-003P
City-Initiated Northeast Pickering Secondary Plan
Updated Staff Report: Responses and Revisions to Report PLN 03-26
M. Borie, Pickering Resident, appeared before Council via electronic connection to
speak to Report PLN 04-26. M. Borie stated that while housing was a critical priority,
the Plan represented a significant and uncalculated financial risk to taxpayers. M.
Borie advised that the proposal amounted to a buy now, pay later approach, noting
that the City was being asked to approve a major urban expansion without a
completed independent fiscal impact analysis. M. Borie stated that low-density
sprawl historically did not pay for itself and that property taxes generated by new
development rarely covered the long-term maintenance costs of roads, sewers,
pumping stations, and emergency services. M. Borie raised that advancing
3.6
Special Council Meeting Minutes
March 30, 2026
5
Northeast Pickering before completing the build-out of Seaton would force existing
taxpayers to subsidize infrastructure in a remote area. M. Borie also highlighted the
loss of Class 1 agricultural land as a hidden financial and economic cost and
expressed concern that development on the Carruthers Creek headwaters would
increase downstream flooding risks, with future mitigation and repair costs borne by
the public. M. Borie urged Council to prioritize intensification within existing urban
boundaries and requested that approval of the Plan be deferred until a
comprehensive, City-led fiscal impact study and environmental studies were
completed and made public. M. Borie further requested that any decision on the
matter be conducted by recorded vote. M. Borie concluded by stating that approval
without proper studies could result in appeals and further actions and urged Council
not to proceed with the Plan at this time.
James Blair, Pickering Resident
Re: Report PLN 04-26
Official Plan Amendment OPA 25-003P
City-Initiated Northeast Pickering Secondary Plan
Updated Staff Report: Responses and Revisions to Report PLN 03-26
J. Blair, Pickering Resident, withdrew their delegation and did not appear before
Council.
Craig Bamford, Pickering Resident
Re: Report PLN 04-26
Official Plan Amendment OPA 25-003P
City-Initiated Northeast Pickering Secondary Plan
Updated Staff Report: Responses and Revisions to Report PLN 03-26
C. Bamford, Pickering Resident, appeared before Council via electronic connection
to speak to Report PLN 04-26. C. Bamford stated that the planning process was
incomplete and requested that Council defer further consideration of the Secondary
Plan until the concerns raised by the Mississaugas of Scugog Island First Nation in
correspondence dated March 25, 2026, were fully addressed and meaningful
Indigenous consultation was completed. C. Bamford questioned why the Secondary
Plan was being advanced prior to completion of the Pickering Forward Official Plan
Review and before all requirements of the Region of Durham Official Plan had been
satisfied. C. Bamford raised that required studies related to natural hazards,
downstream flood mitigation, infrastructure impacts, and fiscal responsibility
remained outstanding, including studies addressing flood mitigation solutions in Ajax
and responsibility for associated costs. C. Bamford stated that approving the Plan
prior to completion of these studies would transfer risk and liability to the City and its
3.7
3.8
Special Council Meeting Minutes
March 30, 2026
6
taxpayers. C. Bamford clarified that the opposition was not to development in
principle, but to advancing the Plan prematurely and urged Council to require
completion of all required studies before proceeding with approval.
Katie Pandey, Innovative Planning Solutions Inc.
Re: Report PLN 04-26
Official Plan Amendment OPA 25-003P
City-Initiated Northeast Pickering Secondary Plan
Updated Staff Report: Responses and Revisions to Report PLN 03-26
K. Pandey, Innovative Planning Solutions Inc., appeared before Council via
electronic connection to speak to Report PLN 04-26. K. Pandey advised that this
was a second delegation following comments provided at the March 2, 2026
Planning & Development Committee meeting, and raised concerns regarding the
impact of the proposed Community Park and Community Centre designations on
the subject lands. K. Pandey stated that the symbols identifying community facilities
within the Plan did not have corresponding policy text clearly outlining their intent or
implications. K. Pandey added that the public lands needs assessment identified
significant parkland and community facility requirements without sufficient detail
regarding park type, facility size, or justification for the selected locations. K. Pandey
questioned the criteria used to determine the location of community facilities and
parks and noted that although it was indicated that further detail would be
addressed through neighbourhood planning, the proposed designations would
remain and continue to impact the development potential of the subject lands. K.
Pandey stated that the ambiguity created uncertainty for landowners and limited
their ability to plan for future development. K. Pandey raised concerns regarding the
absence of information related to compensation or relocation criteria should
community facilities be moved to alternative sites. K. Pandey advised that due to the
lack of clarity and supporting technical information, they did not support the current
iteration of the Secondary Plan and indicated that an appeal may be pursued should
the Plan be approved. K. Pandey concluded by stating that they remained open to
continued discussion with City staff to resolve the outstanding issues.
Stefan Woloszczuk, Pickering Landowner
Re: Report PLN 04-26
Official Plan Amendment OPA 25-003P
City-Initiated Northeast Pickering Secondary Plan
Updated Staff Report: Responses and Revisions to Report PLN 03-26
S. Woloszczuk, Pickering Landowner, withdrew their delegation and did not appear
before Council.
3.9
3.10
Special Council Meeting Minutes
March 30, 2026
7
Andrea Woloszczuk, Pickering Landowner
Re: Report PLN 04-26
Official Plan Amendment OPA 25-003P
City-Initiated Northeast Pickering Secondary Plan
Updated Staff Report: Responses and Revisions to Report PLN 03-26
A. Woloszczuk, Pickering Landowner, appeared before Council via electronic
connection to speak to Report PLN 04-26. A. Woloszczuk advised that they were
one of six property owners affected by the Plan and stated support for the City’s
updated Report and acknowledged the collaborative work undertaken by City staff
and Council throughout the process. A. Woloszczuk noted that good faith efforts
had been made to engage with staff and propose practical solutions, however,
concerns raised by the landowners had not been resolved in the new
recommendation report. A. Woloszczuk expressed concern that the current land use
designations created uncertainty that directly affected long-term planning and the
ability to make full use of the subject lands. A. Woloszczuk stated that the
landowners were seeking clarity and a fair, well-supported outcome that balanced
broader community objectives with landowner interests. A. Woloszczuk requested
that Council not proceed with approval of the Secondary Plan until the outstanding
landowner concerns were fully addressed and urged Council to provide direction
that would allow the Plan to move forward with greater certainty and without the
need for further dispute or procedural challenge.
Carmen Lishman, Pickering Resident
Re: Report PLN 04-26
Official Plan Amendment OPA 25-003P
City-Initiated Northeast Pickering Secondary Plan
Updated Staff Report: Responses and Revisions to Report PLN 03-26
C. Lishman, Pickering Resident, appeared before Council via electronic connection
to speak to Report PLN 04-26. C. Lishman stated that the proposed urban
expansion would require extensive new infrastructure, including roads, water and
wastewater systems, schools, fire stations, and transit, with costs ultimately borne
by residents. C. Lishman expressed that the anticipated short-term revenue from
development would not offset the long-term infrastructure and maintenance costs
and would place a financial burden on current and future taxpayers. C. Lishman
raised that significant serviced lands remained available elsewhere in Pickering,
including in Seaton, and that advancing development in Northeast Pickering
represented an unnecessary financial risk. C. Lishman questioned whether Council
had been provided with full lifecycle cost projections for maintaining the proposed
infrastructure over the long term. C. Lishman also expressed concern regarding the
3.11
3.12
Special Council Meeting Minutes
March 30, 2026
8
permanent loss of Class 1 agricultural land, noting that such land was a finite and
irreplaceable resource and that urban sprawl continued to result in the daily loss of
farmland in Ontario. C. Lishman stated that compact, transit oriented development
within existing urban boundaries would be both fiscally and environmentally more
responsible. C. Lishman urged Council to reject the proposal and protect the City’s
tax base and agricultural lands.
Andrew McCammon, The Ontario Headwaters Institute
Re: Report PLN 04-26
Official Plan Amendment OPA 25-003P
City-Initiated Northeast Pickering Secondary Plan
Updated Staff Report: Responses and Revisions to Report PLN 03-26
A. McCammon, The Ontario Headwaters Institute, appeared before Council via
electronic connection to speak to Report PLN 04-26. Through the aid of a
PowerPoint presentation, A. McCammon advised that although not a resident of
Pickering, the organization had been involved in watershed and land-use planning
matters in Durham Region for several years and worked closely with local
environmental and community organizations. A. McCammon stated that none of the
Institute’s partner organizations had supported the proposal and expressed concern
that the Plan was not ready for approval due to unresolved issues related to
agriculture, flooding, taxation impacts, and watershed protection. A. McCammon
stated that long-standing concerns regarding protection of water resources and
natural heritage systems remained inadequately addressed. A. McCammon
emphasized the importance of planning at a watershed scale and noted that
provincial policy required municipalities to protect, improve, and restore the quality
and quantity of water. A. McCammon raised that sufficient safeguards had not yet
been established to prevent long-term impacts on water systems, including
stormwater management and cumulative environmental effects. A. McCammon
recommended that the Plan be withdrawn and revisited and further suggested that
future versions should include a commitment to retaining a significant portion of the
lands in natural heritage, reinforcing adherence to Provincial Planning Statement
policies related to water protection, and establishing a framework for cumulative
environmental monitoring with benchmarks established prior to development. A.
McCammon urged Council to defer approval of the Plan and to prioritize the
protection of agricultural land, natural heritage, and water resources.
Nicholas Zamora, President and James Grundy, Treasurer, Greenwood
Community Association
Re: Report PLN 04-26
3.13
3.14
Special Council Meeting Minutes
March 30, 2026
9
Official Plan Amendment OPA 25-003P
City-Initiated Northeast Pickering Secondary Plan
Updated Staff Report: Responses and Revisions to Report PLN 03-26
N. Zamora, President and J. Grundy, Treasurer, Greenwood Community
Association, appeared before Council via electronic connection to speak to Report
PLN 04-26. They stated that the Plan was being advanced without completed
environmental and fiscal studies required to support an informed decision and that
approving the Plan at this stage was premature, inconsistent with the Planning Act,
and contrary to proper planning sequence. They identified protection of groundwater
and private wells, protection of Duffins Creek and Carruthers Creek, and long-term
affordability as key unresolved concerns, and advised that hydrogeological,
watershed, fiscal impact, and servicing studies should guide the Plan rather than
follow approval. They urged Council to require completion of outstanding studies
prior to adoption and to refrain from approving the Plan at this time. They stated that
the primary concern related to water resources and protection of private wells and
requested that proposed mitigation language be expanded to include Staxton Glen.
They advised that mitigation would be insufficient where aquifers were damaged or
wells ran dry and requested that policy language require the provision of municipal
water, at no cost to residents, should studies conclude that development would
likely damage aquifers serving Greenwood, Kinsale, or Staxton Glen.
Matters for Consideration
Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 04-26
Official Plan Amendment OPA 25-003P
City-Initiated Northeast Pickering Secondary Plan
Updated Staff Report: Responses and Revisions to Report PLN 03-26
P. Lowes, Principal, SGL Planning & Design Inc., appeared before Council via
electronic connection to speak to Report PLN 04-26. P. Lowes advised that they
had been retained to assist the City with preparation of the Secondary Plan and
provided an overview of comments received since the previous meeting and
revisions made to the Plan. P. Lowes stated that feedback from Council, staff, and
the public had highlighted concerns related to the location of community facilities,
protection of natural heritage features, loss of agricultural lands, impacts on private
wells, infrastructure staging, and the timing of development applications. P. Lowes
noted that revisions to the land use schedules included adjustments to the location
of the proposed Sportsplex and Community Park to better align with infrastructure
phasing and environmental constraints and advised that policies had been added to
4.
4.1
Special Council Meeting Minutes
March 30, 2026
10
clarify that the locations of parks and community facilities shown on the schedules
were conceptual and that final locations would be determined through future
neighbourhood planning processes with public consultation. P. Lowes further noted
that refinements had been made to the Natural Heritage System to reflect existing
conditions, subject to further field evaluation through subsequent studies and
outlined additional policy changes, including the introduction of a General
Employment designation on specific lands, clarification regarding affordable housing
provisions, revisions to cost-sharing requirements among landowners, and updates
to implementation policies outlining when development applications could proceed
and what studies would be required. P. Lowes advised that further work remained to
be completed, including the Master Environmental Servicing Plan, neighbourhood
plans, Phase 3 of the Scoped Subwatershed Study, continued consultation with
First Nations, and engagement with residents of Greenwood and Kinsale to address
concerns related to rural character and protection of private wells. P. Lowes
concluded by noting that the Secondary Plan represented an initial framework for
long-term planning and that subsequent stages would provide additional detail and
technical refinement.
A question and answer period ensued between Members of Council, staff, P. Lowes
regarding:
whether the archaeological assessment referenced in the Report, initiated in
July 2022 and completed in December 2022, remained current and
appropriate for reliance at this stage of the process, and how that study had
informed the Secondary Plan;
•
clarification regarding the scope of the archaeological assessment completed
to date, including whether it constituted a comprehensive assessment or a
high level review and when additional, more detailed archaeological studies
would be required;
•
whether correspondence from Alderville First Nation regarding archaeological
matters would necessitate further studies and how that issue would be
addressed through future planning stages;
•
how public notice was circulated for the Secondary Plan, including whether the
150 metre radius notification was sufficient in rural areas and whether the
radius could be expanded to improve public awareness;
•
whether larger notification radius mailouts had been used elsewhere in rural
planning applications and how expanded notice could be implemented for
future stages of the Northeast Pickering planning process;
•
whether study requests raised by public delegations, including hydrology and
environmental studies, would be formally incorporated into the approval
•
Special Council Meeting Minutes
March 30, 2026
11
process;
which technical studies remained and when those studies were expected to be
initiated and completed;
•
how outstanding environmental, stormwater, and fiscal concerns raised by
delegations would be addressed through the remaining study work identified in
the report;
•
clarification regarding the reference to special area rate levies in the report,
including which Ontario municipalities had implemented such levies and
whether any future levy would apply only to properties within the Northeast
Pickering area;
•
whether the proposed approach to funding growth related infrastructure would
ensure that existing residents outside the Secondary Plan area would not bear
those costs;
•
whether the identification of future recreation facilities and library branches
was subject to change, and how those recommendations were informed by
the City’s Parks and Recreation 10 Year Plan;
•
how future recreation and library needs could evolve through
subsequent neighbourhood planning and further community engagement as
development proceeded toward the 2051 horizon;
•
whether any development would be permitted within wetlands or other natural
heritage features and how such features would be protected through future
planning and permitting processes;
•
how stormwater would be managed to ensure that post development runoff
volumes would not exceed existing conditions and whether development in
Northeast Pickering would worsen downstream flooding in Ajax;
•
whether remediation would be required if natural heritage features were
damaged and how compliance would be ensured;
•
whether groundwater studies would be undertaken to assess potential impacts
to private wells in Greenwood and surrounding communities and how
monitoring programs would detect and respond to any impacts;
•
how impacts to shallow and deep aquifers would be monitored over time and
whether mitigation measures would be implemented if groundwater impacts
were identified;
•
clarification regarding the use of holding provisions, including whether an H
holding provision could be applied at the Secondary Plan stage and how study
completion would be enforced prior to development applications;
•
whether the Secondary Plan was consistent with the Provincial Planning
Statement, Envision Durham Official Plan, and Pickering Official Plan, given
concerns raised by several delegations;
•
how growth related infrastructure would be funded through development •
Special Council Meeting Minutes
March 30, 2026
12
charges, assessment growth, user fees, and community benefit charges, and
whether senior government funding opportunities would be pursued;
whether concerns raised by Members regarding natural heritage
systems, stormwater, flooding, endangered species, farmland protection, and
Indigenous consultation had been fully addressed to date; and,
•
when outstanding responses to previously raised concerns would be provided
to Members prior to Council’s further consideration of the matter.
•
Moved By Councillor Pickles
Seconded By Councillor Cook
1. That Official Plan Amendment Application OPA 25-003P, initiated by the City of
Pickering, to add new policies and designations to the Pickering Official Plan
regarding the recommended Northeast Pickering Secondary Plan, as set out in
Attachment 1 to Report PLN 04-26, be approved;
2. That the Draft By-law to adopt Official Plan Amendment 54 to the Pickering
Official Plan, to add new policies and designations to the Pickering Official Plan
regarding the recommended Northeast Pickering Secondary Plan, as set out in
Exhibit “A” to Attachment 1 of Report PLN 04-26, be approved;
3. That staff be directed to negotiate the terms of the following agreements with the
North East Pickering Landowners Group Inc. (the “Landowners Group”) for the
purpose of implementing the Northeast Pickering Secondary Plan (the “Secondary
Plan”) in the City’s best interests, and that these agreements be brought to Council
for approval:
an agreement respecting the funding and preparation of a Master
Environmental Servicing Plan (the "MESP”) for the Secondary Plan area,
which the Agreement shall include:
Terms of Reference for the completion of the MESP to the satisfaction of
the City, and the Region of Durham, in consultation with the respective
conservation authorities, as set out in section 11.B.71 a) of the
Secondary Plan; and,
i.
details of funding arrangements requiring the Landowners Group to
either fully fund in advance the City’s preparation of the MESP or to
prepare the MESP at its cost while fully funding in advance the City’s
peer review and oversight function;
ii.
a.
an agreement respecting the funding and preparation of Neighbourhood Plans
for the Secondary Plan area, which Agreement shall include:
Terms of Reference for the completion of the Neighbourhood Plans to
the satisfaction of the City, as set out in section 11.B.72 of the
i.
b.
Special Council Meeting Minutes
March 30, 2026
13
Secondary Plan;
the process to complete the Neighbourhood Plans either one at a time or
concurrently; and,
ii.
details of funding arrangements requiring the Landowners Group to
either fully fund in advance the City’s preparation of the Neighbourhood
Plans or to prepare the Neighbourhood Plans at its cost while fully
funding in advance the City’s peer review and oversight function;
iii.
an agreement respecting the funding and preparation of Development
Charges and Community Benefits Charges By-laws (the "DC-CBCBs”) and a
Fiscal Impact Study (the ”FIS”), which agreement shall include:
Terms of Reference for the completion of the DC-CBCBs and the FIS
satisfactory to the City as set out in section 11.B.70 b) v. and c) of the
Secondary Plan, and section 4.14 of Report PLN 03-26, which includes
but is not limited to: Growth Forecast; Capital Forecast; Development
Charges/Community Benefits Charges; Operating Expenditure
Requirements; Property Tax Yield; Operating, and Capital Fund Impacts;
and Municipal Land Needs; and,
i.
details of funding arrangements requiring the Landowners Group to fully
fund in advance the City’s cost to prepare the DC-CBCBs and the FIS;
ii.
c.
an agreement (referred to as a Master Parks and Community Lands
Agreement or “MPCLA”) respecting the size, general location and timing of the
transfer to the City of lands required for parks, essential community facilities,
cultural heritage, road widenings and affordable housing (including
compensation where appropriate). The MPCLA shall be completed and
executed in sufficient time to be inputted into the FIS;
d.
an agreement respecting the funding and preparation of an Infrastructure
Staging and Phasing Plan (the "ISPP”), which agreement shall include:
Terms of Reference for the completion of the ISPP to the satisfaction of
the City as set out in section 11.B.68 of the Secondary Plan; and,
i.
details of funding arrangements requiring the Landowners Group to
either fully fund in advance the City’s preparation of the ISPP, or to
prepare the ISPP at its cost while fully funding in advance the City’s peer
review and oversight function;
ii.
e.
consistent with the requirements of the Secondary Plan, an agreement that
the Landowners Group shall not receive any development approval until:
all required environmental assessments for sanitary sewer and water
infrastructure are completed to the satisfaction of the Region of Durham,
as set out in section 11.B.70 b) iii. of the Secondary Plan, and fully
funded in advance by the Landowners Group;
i.
all required environmental assessments for transportation infrastructure ii.
f.
Special Council Meeting Minutes
March 30, 2026
14
are completed to the satisfaction of the Region of Durham and the City
of Pickering, as set out in section 11.B.70 b) iv. of the Secondary Plan,
and fully funded in advance by the Landowners Group;
all the agreements referred to in Recommendations 3 a., b., c., d. and e.
of this report have been finalized and executed by the City and the
Landowners Group; and,
iii.
the MESP, the Neighbourhood Plans, the DC-CBCBs, the FIS and the
ISPP are approved or accepted by the City as the case may be;
iv.
4. That staff be directed to include expenditures for studies and related items for the
implementation of the Secondary Plan in future current budget submissions;
5. That staff continue to engage and collaborate with First Nations rights holders in
the preparation of the MESP, the Neighbourhood Plans, Phase 3 Scoped
Subwatershed Study, the required Environmental Assessments, and all other
documents and studies as may be necessary to complete the planning processes
for the Secondary Plan area;
6. That staff continue to engage with existing property owners in the Northeast
Pickering area, residents of Greenwood, relevant stakeholders, and the broader
public at each milestone in the ongoing planning process;
7. That the City Clerk advise the Williams Treaties First Nations, all statutory
commenting agencies, the Landowners Group, the Region of Durham, delegates to
the November 10, 2025 Statutory Public Meeting and respective Council meeting,
delegates to the March 2, 2026 Planning & Development Committee and respective
Council meeting, delegates to the March 30, 2026 Council meeting and interested
parties of Council’s decision on Pickering Official Plan Amendment 54, which adds
policies and designations regarding the Secondary Plan and other general policies
to the Pickering Official Plan;
8. That appropriate mitigation is taken to prevent impacts from development in
Northeast Pickering on local wells, specifically in Greenwood and the former hamlet
of Kinsale;
9. That staff continue to work with the residents of Greenwood to preserve the rural
character of the hamlet;
10. That, through the forthcoming Neighbourhood Plan process, the block pattern
and layout respect the existing homes and businesses in the former hamlet of
Kinsale while also providing them with the opportunity to redevelop in accordance
with the Northeast Pickering Secondary Plan; and,
11. That appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the actions
necessary to implement the Recommendations in this report.
Note: The disposition of this matter was determined through the referral
Special Council Meeting Minutes
March 30, 2026
15
motion below.
Resolution ##975/26
Moved By Councillor Cook
Seconded By Councillor Brenner
That Report PLN 04-26 regarding Official Plan Amendment OPA 25-003P,
City-Initiated Northeast Pickering Secondary Plan, Updated Staff Report:
Responses and Revisions to Report PLN 03-26 be referred back to staff to
address the issues and concerns raised during the March 30, 2026 Special
Council meeting that may be deemed appropriate and necessary to aid in
Council's decision-making and to allow staff to:
Hold a meeting to address the concerns of MSIFN, including the
implementation of an appropriate consultation protocol between MSIFN
and the City of Pickering;
a.
That staff use this protocol to provide notice for opportunity to MSIFN
and William Treaties First Nations and rights holders, to consult on
matters pertaining to studies and assessments such as, but not limited to
Phase 3 Scoped Subwatershed Study, updated archaeological
assessment, including potential for Stage 2-4 archeological
assessments, hydrology studies, fiscal impact study, transportation and
servicing infrastructure reports, Region water and wastewater reports;
b.
That staff ensure that any artifacts unearthed from an archeological
study, or excavation as a result of development, such as bones,
remains, or other such evidence of a native burial site or any other
archaeological findings, all Williams Treaty right holders be notified
immediately, and that all artifacts and remains be returned to their
rightful ancestors; and,
c.
That staff report back to the April 27, 2026 Council Meeting.d.
1.
Carried Unanimously on a Recorded Vote
By-laws
Resolution ##976/26
Moved By Councillor Brenner
Seconded By Councillor Cook
That By-laws 8240/26 through 8241/26, be approved
Carried
By-law 8239/26
5.
5.1
Special Council Meeting Minutes
March 30, 2026
16
Being a By-law to adopt Amendment 54 to the Official Plan for the City of Pickering
(OPA 25-003P).
Note: Due to the referral of Report PLN 04-26, By-law 8239/26 was not
adopted.
By-law 8240/26
Being a by-law to exempt Blocks 131 to 145, Plan 40M-2798, Pickering from the
part lot control provisions of the Planning Act. (Mattamy (Seaton) Limited)
By-law 8241/26
Being a by-law to establish Part Lots 19 and 20, Range 3 Concession Broken Front
Pickering, being Part 4, Plan 40R-3953, Parts 3 and 4, Plan 40R-5128 and Parts 3
and 4, Plan 40R-1123 and Part Lot 20, Range 3 Concession Broken Front
Pickering, being Parts 3 and 5, Plan 40R-32326, as public highway. (Clements
Road)
Confirmatory By-law
Moved By Councillor Cook
Seconded By Councillor Nagy
That By-law 8243/26, to confirm the proceedings of the March 30, 2026 Special Council
Meeting be approved
Carried
Adjournment
Moved By Councillor Cook
Seconded By Councillor Pickles
That the meeting be adjourned.
Carried
The meeting adjourned at 8:06 p.m.
Dated this 30th day of March, 2026.
______________________________
5.2
5.3
6.
7.
Special Council Meeting Minutes
March 30, 2026
17
Kevin Ashe, Mayor
______________________________
Susan Cassel, City Clerk
Special Council Meeting Minutes
March 30, 2026
18