HomeMy WebLinkAboutPD 33-04RECOMMENDATION OF THE
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
DATE
MOVED BY
SECONDED BY
That Pickering Council RECEIVE and ENDORSE Report PD 33--04 as its
comments on the proposed Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe,
prepared by the Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal, dated Summer 2004;
That Pickering Council ADVISE the Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal
that:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
Pickering Council supports the recognition of downtown Pickering as an
emerging urban centre;
there is a lack of rationale for designating the entire Agricultural Assembly
area in Pickering as permanent open space;
the Province should be adopting a 50-year planning horizon for its Growth
Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe Region; and
the Province needs to develop and detail the appropriate fiscal, regulatory
and other tools for municipalities to facilitate plan implementation;
That Pickering Council REQUEST the Province to release a comprehensive
package of reforms for further consultation, which includes the planning reform
initiatives, and the Greater Golden Horseshoe initiatives, such as the above
Growth Plan, Transportation Strategy, 10-year Strategic Infrastructure
Investment Plan, and the proposed Provincial Greenbelt Plan, prior to finalizing
the growth plan; and
That the City Clerk FORWARD a copy of Report PD 33.-04 to the Minister of
Public Infrastructure Renewal, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, the
Region of Durham, and Wayne Arthurs, MPP, Pickering-Ajax-Uxbridge.
REPORT TO
~epc~ ~umber: ?D 33-04
Date: August 27, 2004
Neii Carroll
Director, Planning & Development
Subject:
Places to Grow - Better Choices. Brighter Future
Greater Golden Horseshoe Growth Plan Discussion Paper
Summer 2004
Recommendation:
That Pickering Council RECEIVE and ENDORSE Report PD 33-04 as its comments
on the proposed Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, prepared by
the Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal, dated Summer 2004;
That Pickering Council ADVISE the Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal
that:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
Pickering Council supports the recognition of downtown Pickering as an
emerging urban centre;
there is a lack of rationale for designating the entire Agricultural Assembly
area in Pickering as permanent open space;
the Province should be adopting a 50-year planning horizon for its
Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe Region; and
the Province needs to develop and detail the appropriate fiscal, regulatory
and other tools for municipalities to facilitate plan implementation;
That Pickering Council REQUEST the Province to release a comprehensive
package of reforms for further consultation, which includes the planning reform
initiatives, and the Greater Golden Horseshoe initiatives, such as the above
Growth Plan, Transportation Strategy, 10-year Strategic Infrastructure Investment
Plan, and the proposed Provincial Greenbelt Plan, prior to finalizing the growth
plan; and
That the City Clerk FORWARD a copy of Report PD 33-04 to the Minister of
Public Infrastructure Renewal, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, the
Region of Durham, and Wayne Arthurs, MPP, Pickering-Ajax-Uxbridge.
Executive Summary: The Province has released a discussion paper on a proposed
Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe for public consultation. Council recently
provided comments on other Provincial planning reform initiatives: the Planning Act/Bill
26, the Strong Communities (Planning Amendment) Act, 2004; the Provincial Policy
Statement; the Ontario Municipal Board; and the Greenbelt Task Force Discussion Paper.
. ........... .u~,=.=~er (:,*ide~ ~orsesnoe Grow~.h Plan
in ~he discussion paper, the Growth Plan proposes to redirect urban growth away from
suburban sprawl toward existing and emerging urban centres (as infill and
redevelopment) with new greenfield development directed to lands south of the Oak
Ridges Moraine. The Province is proposing to support this shift by: investing
significantly in public transit, assuming stronger Provincial authority, and providing new
fiscal and regulatory tools for municipalities to implement the Growth Plan.
Comments have been made on the discussion paper relating to: the shift in
responsibility for land use planning matters from municipalities to the province; the need
for a provincial vision of 50 (not 30) years for the Greater Golden Horseshoe; the lack of
rationale for Pickering's future growth areas; the need to expedite enabling legislation
for new and effective fiscal and regulatory tools; and the need to clarify the role and
structure of the Greater Toronto Transportation Authority (GTTA).
It is recommended that the Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal consider, and where
appropriate incorporate, Pickering's comments. Further, the Province should release a
comprehensive package of all of its initiatives for further consultation, prior to finalizing
the Growth Plan.
Financial Implications: Although there are no financial implications to providing
comments on the Growth Plan, possible implementation of some of the financial tools
by the Province (such as amendments to the Development Charges Act) may have
future financial implications on the City.
Background:
1.0 Introduction
The Province has initiated a review of planning and development in Ontario. The
review includes the preparation of provincial, or area wide growth plans,
transportation strategies and source water protection. For the Greater Golden
Horseshoe, a Growth Plan, a 10-Year Infrastructure Investment Plan, a
Transportation Strategy, and a Greenbelt Plan are being developed. Other
initiatives include reviewing legislation - such as the Planning Act; policy - such
as the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS); and other mechanisms - such as the
Ontario Municipal Board (OMB).
In July 2004, Council endorsed Report PD 31-04 relating to the planning reform
components: the Planning Act / Bill 26, the Strong Communities (Planning
Amendment) Act, 2004; the Provincial Policy Statement; and the Ontario
Municipal Board. Earlier, Council endorsed Report PD 28-04 relating to the
Greenbelt Task Force's Discussion Paper that outlines proposed approaches for
a Golden Horseshoe Greenbelt.
.... ~ ....... .~r~a~er Goiden 4orsesr~oe Growth
(ugust 27:, 2004
:age S
2.0
,~.ecently, the Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal released a discussion
paper on a proposed Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. During July
and August of this year, the Ministry held public sessions in the Golden Horseshoe
area. City staff attended the stakeholder sessions in Oshawa and Markham.
Comments on the proposed Growth Plan are requested by September 24, 2004.
A copy of the Growth Plan was previously forwarded to members of Council for
their information.
Greater Golden Horseshoe Growth Plan Discussion Paper
The paper indicates the population growth of the Greater Golden Horseshoe will
increase from 7.8 million in 2001 to over 11 million by 2031. Approximately
75 percent of this growth is projected to occur in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA)
and Hamilton with most of the remaining growth expected to occur in the larger
urban centres located at the periphery of the Horseshoe area.
To accommodate this growth, the Province is proposing its vision for managing
growth for the area over the next 30 years by:
identifying priority urban centres, strengthening the transportation linkages
among them; and encouraging more compact development in urban areas to
maximize the benefits of new growth;
· protecting and managing valuable greenlands, natural
agricultural lands so that they continue to contribute a
environmental, social and economic benefits to Ontario;
· using tools to implement these objectives:
systems and
full range of
invest strategically in infrastructure that supports identified growth priorities;
create a legislative and regulatory planning framework that promotes
greater collaboration between the province and its partners to strategically
accommodate growth;
provide a suite of new regulatory and fiscal tools to assist municipalities
and other stakeholders in attracting and locating growth strategically and
protecting what is valuable.
}uSiect: 5mater';$ciC~en ~orsesxoe Gi'oW~.h
~,ugust 27,200!
-~age ~
7he foilowing tabie identifies how Pickering is addressed in the paper.
3.0
3.1
Discussion Paper
emerging urban centre
future growth areas
natural heritage features
agricultural resources
Picketing
identifies downtown Pickering (see Maps 3
and 4 of the Discussion Paper)
includes lands in Pickering located slightly
south of the Oak Ridges Moraine including
the Pickering airport site and all of the
lands between the Ajax and Whitby
municipal borders (see Maps 4, 5, and 6 of
the Discussion Paper)
specifically identifies the Agricultural
Assembly (see Map 7 of the Discussion
Paper)
specifically identifies the Agricultural
Assembly lands (see Map 8 of the
Discussion Paper)
In addition, the paper indicates that significant infrastructure investment is
planned for the Seaton lands, which will be developed as a model community
that provides balanced housing choices, jobs and greenspace. The paper also
acknowledges the potential of the future Pickering Airport to become a major
employment hub and economic generator.
Many of the objectives and opportunities for growth discussed in the paper are
consistent with the principles and policies set out in the Pickering Official Plan,
which supports mixed use, intensification, pedestrian oriented and transit
supportive development patterns.
Discussion
The proposed Greater Golden Horseshoe Growth Plan would duplicate
regional and local official plans.
There is merit in a provincial Growth Plan that is visionary and provides long term
guidance to and coordination of provincial actions and the actions of other levels of
government and agencies. Staff supports the provincial vision of encouraging
more compact development in urban areas, protecting natural systems and
agricultural lands, and investing in infrastructure.
!i=sge ,5
3.2
However, it appears from our review of the document fhat the effect of the
provincial Growth Plan will be a significant shift in responsibility for land use
planning matters to the provincial level. Essentially, the proposed provincial
growth plan would duplicate the function of many of the policies already contained
in regional and local official plans, and reduce the role of municipalities to that of
'implementers' of policy.
It is unclear as to whether the Growth Plan will be implemented by special
legislation or as part of a strengthened Provincial Policy Statement under the
Planning Act. In either case, more stringent policies in upper and lower-tier
Official Plans will be required to implement the provincial vision for the
Greater Golden Horseshoe.
Although the discussion paper sets out a broad vision for growth and
development, the lack of detail prevents an evaluation of its full impact on the
City. Staff recommends that Council request a further opportunity to comment
on the specifics of the proposed growth plan, before it is finalized and adopted,
and that those specifics be provided as part of a comprehensive package of
provincial land use planning reforms and initiatives.
A provincial vision of 50 (not 30) years is required to manage growth in the
Greater Golden Horseshoe.
The City had previously commented to the Province on its planning reform
initiatives that the GTA Regions already use a 30-year time-frame in their
Official Plans, and that a longer time-frame is required for provincial
infrastructure planning, such as 400-series highways, hospitals, water and
sanitary servicing and interregional transit.
The Province should reconsider the proposed timeframe for its growth plan and
adopt a 50-year planning horizon for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, with the
upper and single-tier municipalities continuing to plan for up to 30 years.
The discussion paper is proposing that upper-tier and single-tier municipalities
be required to prepare growth plans, and subsequent conforming official plan
amendments. However, the need for municipal growth plans, distinct from
municipal official plans, is not explained. Official plans currently guide growth
and development at the municipal level. Another level of 'growth plan' would be
redundant, and further complicate the planning and development process. The
Province should eliminate the need for upper and single-tier municipalities to
also prepare growth plans, but ensure that growth matters are incorporated into
official plans.
.Eu~iec~: '2ma~er Goiden ~orsesnoe Gro~vth Plan
No rafionaie is provided for the ]ocation of ?Jckering=s 'conceptual future
growth areas' or the identification the Agricultural Assembly lands in
Picketing as permanent open space.
The discussion paper identifies the 'conceptual future growth areas' for the
Greater Golden Horseshoe. For Pickering, the growth areas encompass most of
the lands south of the Oak Ridges Moraine, including the future airport site and
all of the lands between the Ajax and Whitby borders, except for the Agricultural
Assembly. These lands are identified as a natural area. There is no rationale or
justification provided for either the inclusion in or exclusion of lands from the
'conceptual future development areas'.
The Province's continued position to retain the Agricultural Assembly lands for
open space and agriculture is contrary to many of the objectives and strategies
stated in the proposed Growth Plan. The Agricultural Assembly lands:.
· do not currently support a sustainable agricultural industry, and will become
further impacted as urban development proceeds on the Seaton lands and the
future Pickering airport lands;
· are not a unique high value crop area, like the Holland Marsh, the grape lands
or the tender fruit lands;
· are not a unique natural area or feature, like the Oak Ridges Moraine and
Niagara Escarpment; and,
· have natural heritage features that are less sensitive than those on other lands
within the Duffins Creek watershed identified for development in Seaton (and
as 'conceptual growth areas' to the east of Seaton).
A provincial Growth Plan should be based on credible information and analysis,
and result in defensible conclusions and recommendations. The discussion paper
does not meet this standard in identifying the conceptual growth areas for
Pickering.
Furthermore, the Growth Plan discussion paper strongly promotes partnerships
with municipalities. This language is consistent with earlier Provincial planning
reform initiatives that recognized the role of municipalities in growth matters
including: the draft Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) that identifies that the
upper-tier municipalities, in consultation with local municipalities, would
designate new growth areas; and, the proposed amendment to the Planning Act
(Bill 26) that would eliminate a developer's appeal rights on urban area boundary
expansions where the expansion is not supported by the municipality. Yet, the
effect of a provincial Growth Plan, as set out in the paper, will be to
pre-determine where growth should occur.
With the Province pre-determining the areas for growth, both the City and the
Region will be relegated to only detailing the types of uses and when growth
should occur, not whether growth should occur.
.~iec:: S~'ea'~er 9oiden ~omesnoe GroWth Plan
~t~gust 27:2004
3.4
Partnerships should include respect for and incorporation of municipal input.
Therefore, a provincial Growth Plan should incorporate the results of independent
planning studies that have examined the relative opportunities to and constraints
for growth, such as Pickering's Growth Management Study ([GMS). The provincial
Growth Plan should reflect the results of the City's GMS and include the southern
part of the Agricultural Assembly as a 'conceptual future growth area'.
The discussion paper proposes fiscal and regulatory tools to support
provincial and municipal efforts to implement the shift in development
patterns.
The paper proposes that the Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal will
coordinate policy and infrastructure funding of all Provincial Ministries with the
Greater Golden Horseshoe area. In addition, the Province is proposing
significant new fiscal and regulatory tools to support municipalities in
implementing the Growth Plan. These tools include:
· appointing a provincial facilitator to resolve conflicts;
· requiring upper-tier and single-tier municipalities to prepare growth plans with
long term goals for population growth, transportation priorities and
infrastructure plans;
· encouraging lower or single tier municipalities to implement community
improvement plans to promote revitalization of underused areas;
· amending the Development Charges Act to require full-cost pricing for
infrastructure in greenfields development and possible discounts in
urbanized areas where basic infrastructure exists;
· examining land transfer taxes as a tool to promote more compact
development;
· considering property tax reform as a means to encourage higher densities; and,
· requesting municipalities to investigate new fiscal tools.
The details on how the various tools are to be implemented by municipalities
have not been provided. However, the use of one or more of the new fiscal tools
can reduce the City's dependency on property taxes. For example, new tools
could enable Council to impose income tax, sales tax or gas tax at its own
discretion. This would equip municipalities with the ability to provide updated
infrastructure without waiting for the changing priorities of senior levels of
governments.
.&,ugust,_°?,, 2004
::age
4.0
iVIore information on the role and structure of tlhe Greater Toronto
Transportation Authority (GTTA) is required.
The Province has an important role in coordinating transportation at the GTA level.
To this end, the discussion paper proposes that the previously announced Greater
Toronto Transportation Authority (GTTA) will be responsible for coordinating
transportation planning and investment at a regional level and ensuring a
seamless transit system in the Greater Toronto Area.
However, as with many of the strategies and implementation measures referred to
in the discussion paper, too little detail is provided about the role and structure of
the new GTTA. It is unclear how much authority for transit operations and
planning will be assigned to the GTTA.
Last February, Council supported Durham Region assuming full authority over
bus passenger transportation currently provided at the lower-tier. It now appears
that the GTTA would be responsible for developing an integrated system for the
Greater Toronto Area including Durham Region. Again, although there is merit
in provincial coordination of transit planning and funding, the role of local and
regional transit operators within the GTA requires further detail before staff can
provide comment on its implications for Pickering.
Other strategies' include: building urban transit facilities within the GTA (including
Pickering); strengthening GO facilities and ridership; building a network of HOV
(high occupancy vehicle) lanes; and supporting the movement of goods. These
strategies signify a redirection of provincial priorities in favour of public transit
and is consistent with the policies of the Pickering Official Pllan.
Conclusion
It is recommended that Council request the Province to combine all of its
Greater Golden Horseshoe initiatives to create an integrated package of reforms
for the area. This package should be circulated for public review and comment.
In addition, the Province needs to provide more details on the GTTA, and on the
fiscal and regulatory tools available to municipalities. Details of, and legislation
enabling, the new fiscal and regulatory tools as well as a GTTA must be given
high priority by the Province; otherwise, there will be a growth plan without
sufficient power or tools to implement it effectively.
ATTACHMENTS:
None - A copy of the Discussion Paper was distributed to Members of Council on
July 23, 2004.
.... ~ ..... ~:aLer ,.:o~ae, ~orseshoe GroWth Plan
Prepared
Approved /Endorsed ~¥:
Catherine Rose, MOIP, RPP
Manager, Policy
GM:SG:Id
Copy: Chief Administrative Officer
Division Head, Corporate Projects & Policy
Recommended for the consideration of
Pickering City
Thomas J. Quinn, Chief Administrative~Officer