HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLN 15-16 Cd Oo Report to
PiCKERING Planning & Development Committee
Report Number: PLN 15-16
Date: September 12, 2016
From: Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP
(Acting) Director, City Development
Subject: 2015 Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans
City of Pickering Comments on the Proposed Changes to the Growth Plan for the
Greater Golden Horseshoe, the Greenbelt Plan, and the Oak Ridges Moraine
Conservation Plan
File: D-1000-019
Recommendation:
1. That the comments in Report PLN 15-16 on the proposed changes to Ontario's Land Use
Plans be endorsed, and that the Province be requested to:
a) revise the timeline for municipalities to bring their official plans into conformity with the
revised Growth Plan, to only take effect after the Ministry has approved and released
the standard methodology for the assessment of land needs and that the process for
developing the standard methodology for the assessment of land needs include proper
ground-truthing and consultation with municipalities, conservation authorities and other
key stakeholders;
b) maintain the intensification target at 40 percent for the 905 region;
c) identify a mechanism to prevent strategic growth areas (e.g. high density residential or
high intensity mixed-use) from being down designated to support intensification
opportunities that may not be realized within the time horizon of the Growth Plan;
d) consider the potential long-term development and intensification of its major transit
station sites by:
• introducing policies that require the introduction of alternative station designs that are
more compact, diversified and integrated with their surroundings; and
• expediting investment in alternative modes of transportation (i.e., local transit,
cycling, walking, carpooling) to access such locations in order to limit the amount of
surface parking in the future;
e) remove the words "or stop" within the revised definition of the term "Major Transit
Station Area", so that only high order transit station areas are included in the
intensification calculation;
f) revise Schedule 5 (Moving People —Transit) in the Growth Plan to reflect the proposed
CP-Belleville rail connection to the new Seaton community, and the "possible" rail
extension (CP-Havelock line) towards Peterborough;
PLN 15-16 September 12, 2016
Subject: 2015 Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans Page 2
g) identify employment lands of provincial significance within the Growth Plan, such as the
Seaton Employment Lands, and actively facilitate the marketing, servicing and
development of those lands in concert with other development contemplated by the
Growth Plan;
h) maintain the current Greenfield area density target of 50 residents and jobs combined
per hectare, or consider developing a more context sensitive approach for 905
communities, with particular attention to factors such as urban structure, availability of
public transit and other amenities, built form character, place-making, housing mix and
affordability;
i) conduct a financial analysis of the impact of the intensification and density targets on
municipal infrastructure and service delivery;
j) consider extending the newly proposed policy that would recognize existing
employment areas on "rural lands" with opportunity for expansion, subject to certain
criteria, to include existing cultural and educational uses;
k) move forward with the development of the Transportation Planning Policy Statement
outlined in the Greater Toronto Transportation Authority Act, to clarify the role of the Big
Move in relation to the Growth Plan, and to include a statement that acknowledges this
relationship within the Growth Plan. This would help ensure that the integration and
coordination of transportation infrastructure planning and land use planning at local,
Regional and Provincial levels are properly acknowledged in the Plan;
I) as part of supporting the new Growth Plan, investigate financial tools (e.g. parking
space levy, fuel tax, sales tax, payroll tax, vehicle kilometers travelled tax, highway tolls,
development charges, land value capture, property tax, development charges, fare
increases, etc.) and funding opportunities to enable the timely implementation of
transportation and other municipal infrastructure and services;
m) base the mapping of the "natural heritage system" upon approved watershed plans, and
that the Province collaborate with conservation authorities to develop a standard
methodology for mapping of the "natural heritage system";
n) build on the Land Evaluation and Area Review (LEAR) analysis that was completed by
the Region of Durham for mapping the "agricultural system", and that the mapping
process include the application of standard methodology, proper ground-truthing and
consultation with municipalities, conservation authorities, the agricultural community and
other key stakeholders;
o) engage municipalities in the identification, establishment or update of the documents
listed as Supplementary Directions to the Growth Plan;
p) revise the timeframe for municipal official plan conformity to commence upon
completion of the documents listed as Supplementary Directions to the Growth Plan;
PLN 15-16 September 12, 2016
Subject: 2015 Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans Page 3
q) as part of the Supplementary Direction for implementing the Growth Plan, identify and
develop programs to attract and retain workers and businesses to achieve the growth
plan targets, and to foster the development of balanced communities (for example, such
measures could include, investing in, or subsidizing training programs that will ensure
that municipalities have the resident labour force to attract new businesses in targeted
sectors; eliminating or reducing tolls for trucks on Highway 407 making the highway a
more attractive goods movement corridor; and promoting further employment growth in
the 905 Region);
r) provide more guidance regarding the type and extent of buffer planning necessary to
protect existing agricultural practices, by minimizing and mitigating impacts of new
adjacent urban development on the Agricultural System;
s) retain the existing policy in the Greenbelt Plan that permits the minor rounding out of
hamlets at the time of municipal conformity, and modify the policy to read as follows:
"Outside of specialty crop areas, minor expansion of Hamlet boundaries may be
permitted only through a municipal initiated study, that must address matters such
as the merits and appropriate scale and form of development; the protection and
enhancement of key natural heritage and hydrologic features and functions; the
impact on agricultural lands and agricultural operations; soft and hard servicing
needs, constraints and solutions; and the rationale for any minor expansion to the
hamlet boundary";
t) revise proposed policy 6.2, subsection 1, in the Greenbelt Plan, by making all lands
within the Urban River Valley designation, whether publicly or privately owned, subject
to the Greenbelt Plan policies associated with this designation;
u) remove the policy 3.4.4.2a in the current Greenbelt Plan and in the proposed Greenbelt
Plan (policy 3.4.5.2a) that prohibits the consideration of a municipally initiated
settlement area expansion proposal to proceed on the lands bounded by the CP Belleville
Line in the south; the York-Durham Townline to the west; and West Duffins Creek to the
east (referred to as the Cherrywood Area Lands);
v) retain the existing policy in the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan that permits the
minor rounding out of rural settlements, and modify the policy to read as follows:
"New lots may be created in Countryside Areas for the following purposes only, and
subject to Parts Ill and IV:
Minor expansion of Rural Settlements designated in the applicable official
plan as appropriate for this type of lot creation, only through a municipal
initiated study, that must address matters such as the merits and appropriate
scale and form of development; the protection and enhancement of key
natural heritage and hydrologic features and functions; the impact on
agricultural lands and agricultural operations; soft and hard servicing needs,
constraints and solutions; and the rationale for any minor expansion to the
rural settlement boundary.";
PLN 15-16 September 12, 2016
Subject: 2015 Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans Page 4
w) establish a simplified process to consider limited refinements to the boundaries of the
Greenbelt and Oak Rides Moraine Conservation Plan that result from further ground-
truthing of the boundary; and
2. That a copy of Report PLN 15-16 be forwarded to the Region of Durham, other Durham
Area Municipalities, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, the Ministry of Natural
Resources and Forestry, and the Members of Parliament for Pickering-Scarborough East
and Ajax-Pickering.
Executive Summary: On May 10, 2016, the Province released proposed changes to the Growth
Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe; the Greenbelt Plan; the Oak Ridges Moraine
Conservation Plan (ORMCP); and the Niagara Escarpment Plan (NEP). The deadline for
comments is October 31, 2016. The purpose of this report is to provide formal comments to the
Province on the proposed changes to the Provincial Land Use Plans.
Financial Implications: The recommendations of this report do not present any financial
implications.
•
1. Background
On February 27, 2015, the ministries of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH) and Natural
Resources and Forestry (MNRF), announced a Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use
Plans: the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe; Greenbelt Plan; ORMCP; and
the NEP. These plans govern land use planning in Ontario, and provide the long-term
planning framework and direction on how to manage growth, protect agricultural lands,
preserve the natural environment and support economic development within Ontario's
Greater Golden Horseshoe.
In April of 2015, the City hosted a Town Hall Meeting to solicit input from the public and
community stakeholders on the Coordinated Review of Provincial Land Use Plans, and
later in May of 2015 City Council, following its consideration of Report PLN 02-15 dated
May 11, 2015, offered formal comments to the Province.
From June to November, 2015 an expert advisory panel, appointed by the Province,
reviewed the submissions from the 1st round of public and agency consultations and
developed recommendations on how to amend and improve the four provincial land use
plans.
On September 21, 2015, Council passed a resolution requesting the Provincial
Development Facilitator to assist the Province in undertaking a review of the Hamlet of
Claremont, including consulting with the residents and landowners in the Hamlet of
Claremont, the City of Pickering, the Region of Durham and other relevant stakeholders. It
was anticipated that this process would help inform the development of a broader provincial
policy in consideration of minor boundary amendments and expansions to hamlets under
the ORMCP. On December 2, 2015, the Provincial Development Facilitator responded that
they would not be directly involved in this matter, but that the matter would be considered
by the Province through its review of submissions on the Coordinated Review of the
Provincial Land Use Plans.
PLN 15-16 September 12, 2016
Subject: 2015 Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans Page 5
On December 7, 2015, the advisory panel released a report entitled "Planning for Health,
Prosperity and Growth in the Greater Golden Horseshoe: 2015 —2041", which contained
87 recommendations that formed the basis for the proposed changes to the four land use
plans.
On May 10, 2016, the Province released the proposed changes to the four land use plans,
as well as a document titled "Shaping Land Use in the Greater Golden Horseshoe", which
provides an overview of the proposed changes. The documents have been posted on the
Province's Environmental Bill of Rights Registry. The deadline for comments is
October 31, 2016.
Provincially-organized Public Open Houses were held across the Greater Golden
Horseshoe, from May 31 to July 7, 2016. The Open House events consisted of display
boards and other reference materials on the proposed changes to the four provincial land
use plans, and ministry staff were present to answer questions about the proposed
changes to the plans. The Province hosted one Public Open House event in Durham in the
City of Oshawa at Durham College on June 23, 2016. The Province also hosted a
technical briefing for staff from municipalities and conservation authorities in the Town of
Newcastle on June 29, 2016.
2. The Provincial Land Use Plans
The responsibility for long-term planning in Ontario is shared between the Province and
municipalities. The Province sets ground rules and directions for planning through the
Planning Act and the Provincial Policy Statement. Provincial plans, such as the four under
review, are created as needed to provide more detailed and geographically specific
policies. The following discussion provides an overview of the three plans affecting the City
of Pickering, and an outline of how the City has taken steps to conform to these plans.
2.1 Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe
The Places to Grow Act, 2005 became law in June 2005, while the Growth Plan for the
Greater Golden Horseshoe (the `Growth Plan') came into effect in June 2006. The Growth
Plan is a framework for implementing the Province's vision for building stronger, prosperous
communities by better managing growth in the Greater Golden Horseshoe region. Similar
to the Greenbelt Plan, the Growth Plan is due for a legislated review 10 years after its
approval (June 2006), to determine if revisions are needed.
The City initiated a Growth Strategy Program to implement the Provincial Growth Plan in
2010. The City's strategy was divided into two phases: the intensification of the City
Centre; and the intensification of the South Pickering urban area outside of the City Centre.
In March 2014, the Ontario Municipal Board approved Amendment 26 addressing future
growth and development in the City Centre, which is designated as an "Urban Growth
Centre" in the Growth Plan. Staff is currently working on finalizing the new City Centre
Zoning By-law and the City Centre Urban Design Guidelines, which will be brought forward
for Council's approval in Fall 2016.
PLN 15-16 September 12, 2016
Subject: 2015 Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans Page 6
Phase one of the South Pickering Intensification Study, which was completed in 2015,
included community roundtables and an interactive online survey that told us what needs
attention in South Pickering and what type of development the community would like to see.
Staff is currently working on phase two that involves the identification of a new vision and
strategy for the intensification of the Kingston Corridor.
2.2 Greenbelt Plan
The Greenbelt Act, 2005 and the accompanying Greenbelt Plan came into effect in
December 2004. The Greenbelt Plan identifies where urbanization should not occur in
order to provide permanent protection to the agricultural base and the ecological features
and functions occurring on this landscape. The Act requires a review of the Greenbelt Plan
to be carried out 10 years after the approval of the Plan (February 2005), in conjunction
with the reviews of the ORMCP and NEP, in order to determine whether comprehensive
revisions are needed to these Plans.
As part of the ongoing review of the City's Official Plan, the City undertook a Countryside
and Environment Background Study in 2010. This Study provides the foundation for an
official plan amendment that will implement the Greenbelt Plan, in addition to other
Provincial legislative and policy changes, updated natural heritage systems mapping,
watershed studies and Conservation Authority regulations. The Public Meeting for the
Environment and Countryside Official Plan Amendment (proposed Amendment 27) was
held in December, 2015. Staff is currently reviewing the comments and submissions
received, and will bring forward a recommendation report for the approval of proposed
Amendment 27 in Fall, 2016.
2.3 The ORMCP
The Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Act, 2001 and the accompanying Oak Ridges
Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP) came into effect in November 2001. The ORMCP is
an ecologically based plan that provides land use and resource management direction for
the Oak Ridges Moraine. The vision for the Moraine is that of"a continuous band of green
rolling hills that provides form and structure to south-central Ontario, while protecting the
ecological and hydrological features and functions that support the health and well-being of
the region's residents and ecosystems."
The City amended its Official Plan to conform to the ORMCP, through Amendment 15,
which was approved by the Province on August 30, 2007. The implementing zoning
by-law, to bring the subject lands into conformity with the ORMCP and Amendment 15,
was approved in October, 2009.
3. The Province's response to the City's initial comments and recommendations
During the first round of public and agency consultations in 2015, the City offered formal
comments and recommendations to the Province. Staff has undertaken a review of how
the proposed changes to the provincial land use plans addressed Council's initial key
recommendations (see Table 1, Attachment#1).
PLN 15-16 September 12, 2016
Subject: 2015 Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans Page 7
The City's key recommendations that were not addressed by the Province have been
restated and/or recaptured in the comments on the proposed changes to the provincial land
use plans affecting the City, outlined in section 5 of this report.
4. Submissions received
4.1 Building Industry and Land Development Association (BILD)
On July 28, 2016 BILD, in collaboration with the Ontario Home Builder's Association and
Malone Given Parsons Ltd. made a presentation to the Mayor and City Development staff,
highlighting their concerns with the proposed changes to the Growth Plan. Their key
concerns/observations are the following:
• Transitional provisions ("grandfathering") are required to preserve the planning for
Official Plan Amendments, Secondary Plans, and Draft Plans of subdivision for
intensification and Greenfield areas that have been prepared, before the revisions to the
Provincial Plans take effect;
• A one size fit all approach is inappropriate to address intensification and Greenfield
development across the Greater Golden Horseshoe;
• There is a need for more relief on land budget "take-outs" to achieve the desired
densities in Greenfield areas, given that modern stormwater management and new
standards for arterial roads require more land;
• Required densities can only be achieved by the timely provision of transit infrastructure;
• The Land Supply Methodology in terms of designated Greenfield areas did not account
for areas already built or approved draft plans, thereby forcing the remaining Greenfield
areas to be built at an average of 130 residents and jobs per hectare; and
• The implementation of the revised Provincial plans will have significant financial
implications for municipalities —there is no direction regarding financial tools to assist
municipalities with this task.
Section 5.1 in this report shares many of the concerns expressed by BILD.
4.2 The Cherrywood lands area
The Mayor's office received correspondence from Tracy MacCharles, MPP of Pickering-
Scarborough East, and Joe Dickson, MPP of Ajax-Pickering. The letter addressed to the
Province,
• highlights previous efforts by landowners, the City and the Region of Durham, during
the City's Growth Management Study in 2002, to exclude the Cherrywood Area Lands
from the Greenbelt Plan;
PLN 15-16 September 12, 2016
Subject: 2015 Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans Page 8
•
• refers to a potential land dedication agreement between TACC Developments and
Habitat for Humanity Durham to develop affordable housing on the Cherrywood Area
Lands; and
• requests that the current policy in the Greenbelt Plan that prohibits the consideration
of a municipally initiated settlement area expansion proposal on the lands bounded by
the CP-Belleville Line in the south; the York-Durham Townline to the west; and West
Duffins Creek to the east (referred to as the Cherrywood Area Lands) be removed, so
that the settlement area expansion on these lands can be considered.
See staff's comments on this submission in paragraph 5.2 d) of the report.
4.3 The Hamlet of Claremont
The City received correspondence from Mr. B. Welch, resident at 1762 Joseph Street,
Hamlet of Claremont. The contents of his letter addressed to the Province, are similar in
nature to a letter he submitted during the 1st round of provincial consultation. The latest
letter,
• restates his concerns regarding the flooding impacts the volume of stormwater runoff
from farmland and the poorly designed conveyance system along Franklin Road in
Claremont have on property values and the health and safety of residents;
• reiterates his support of the conclusions of a report prepared by a Claremont
Community Working Group to expand the hamlet boundaries in order to accommodate
a proposed residential plan of subdivision that could potentially provide certain benefits
to the community; and
• refers to the Council's motion adopted on September 21, 2015 in which the Province
was requested to review the designation of the subject lands and consider changing the
"Countryside area" designation to "Rural Settlement"; and that the Provincial Facilitator
be requested to assist the Province with this review, in consultation with the City, the
Region of Durham and affected community.
•
See staff's comments on this submission in paragraph 5.3 b) of the report.
5. Comments on the proposed changes to the Provincial Land Use Plans
The proposed changes to the Provincial Land Use Plans is a more unified, integrated
approach towards land use planning in Ontario through the use of consistent policies and
terminology, reflecting the comments provided by various agencies and stakeholders
during the first round of public consultation. Staff prepared three tables that contain
proposed key changes to the Growth Plan, the Greenbelt Plan and the ORMCP, and
corresponding comments on each of the proposed changes (see Tables 2, 3 and 4,
Attachments #2, #3 and #4). The following paragraphs provide detailed comments and key
recommendations on those matters which, in staff's opinion, require further review and
consideration by the Province. Key recommendations are shown in bold.
PLN 15-16 September 12, 2016
Subject: 2015 Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans Page 9
5.1 Proposed changes to the Growth Plan
a) Where and How to Grow— Context
The chapter describing Where and How to Grow, refers to a dynamic and diverse
geographic area, and it puts forward the notion of developing complete communities,
active transportation and net-zero communities. However, the Province's new plan for
growth does not give recognition to the dynamic and diverse characteristics of the
Greater Toronto Area, but treats it as a Toronto-centric "one model fits all". It is evident
that the Province is not planning for "complete communities", but rather planning by
numbers, with little or no regard to aspects such as urban structure, community
integrity, built form character, place-making, local housing affordability and choice,
availability of transit and infrastructure, and financial capacity.
b) Managing Growth
A new policy is being introduced that requires the Minister to develop standard
methodology to be used by all municipalities across the Greater Golden Horseshoe to
assess land needs. However, the Ministry has indicated that the standard methodology
may not be available until 2018. This will present a significant challenge to the City,
given that the Region must complete its review prior to the City moving forward with its
conformity exercise. In order to provide a realistic timeline for local municipalities to
complete amendments to their official plans to conform with the Growth Plan, it is
recommended that:
i) The Province revise the proposed timeline for municipalities to bring their
official plans into conformity with the revised Growth Plan to only take
effect after the Ministry has approved and released the standard
methodology for the assessment of land needs; and
ii) That the process for developing the standard methodology for the
assessment of land needs include proper ground-truthing and
consultation with municipalities and other stakeholders.
c) Built-up Areas
The Province is proposing to increase the intensification target in the Growth Plan from
40 to 60 percent for all new residential development to occur annually in the existing
built-up area. Most municipalities barely finished their Growth Plan conformity
exercises, and are just starting to see the effect of the Growth Plan. Municipalities
have been working in earnest towards achieving the 40 percent target, and there has
been no rationale for changing the target "mid-stream". Although this revised target is
intended to provide more compact, transit oriented development and slow down urban
sprawl, it does not acknowledge the difference between the 905 and 416 regions in
terms of existing scale, built-form, community character, and associated levels of transit
infrastructure. There is also a concern that the implementation of the higher target may
require significant redevelopment and/or reconstruction, and the imposition of densities
and built form that would be intrusive and incompatible with established
neighbourhoods. It is therefore recommended that:
i) The Province maintain the intensification target at 40 percent for the
905 region.
PLN 15-16 September 12, 2016
Subject: 2015 Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans Page 10
Furthermore, attaining densities at the levels required to meet the intensification targets
in the Growth Plan, and to prevent jeopardizing such opportunities, may require
stronger planning tools. This could include measures similar to those imposed on
employment lands or restrictions on appeals. The Growth Plan proposes the
introduction of the term "strategic growth areas" and adds a new policy stating that,
municipalities will identify the appropriate type and scale of development in "strategic
growth areas" to support achievement of the minimum intensification areas target in the
Growth Plan. However, no policies have been included for the long-term protection of
such areas (e.g., by protecting against the down designation of high density residential
or high intensity mixed-use to lower or medium densities given short to medium term
market demands).
It is therefore recommended that:
iii) The Province identify a mechanism to prevent "strategic growth areas"
(e.g. high density residential or high intensity mixed-use) from being down
designated to support intensification opportunities that may not be
realized within the time horizon of the Growth Plan.
d) Transit Corridors and Station Areas
The Province is proposing specific minimum density targets for "major transit station
areas", as delineated by municipalities, which would be scaled to reflect the type of
transit service offered (e.g. subways, light rail, bus rapid transit, or express rail). Major
transit stations served by light rail or bus rapid transit must be planned to achieve, by
2041 or earlier, a minimum gross density target of 160 residents and jobs combined per
hectare. In many instances, the densities that are contained in the proposed Growth
Plan cannot be realized, because of the insistence of the Province and Metrolinx to
surround such stations with a sea of surface parking. This practice is counter productive
to the objective of developing more compact, diversified and higher density transit
stations. To address this matter, it is recommended that:
i) The Province consider the potential long-term development and
intensification of its station sites by:
• introducing policies that require the introduction of alternative station
designs that are more compact, diversified and integrated with their
surroundings; and
• expediting investment in alternative modes of transportation (i.e., local
transit, cycling, walking, carpooling) to access such locations in order to
limit the amount of surface parking in the future.
Furthermore, the revised definition for the term "Major Transit Station Area" has been
revised to include transit stops. If the proposed density of 160 residents and jobs
combined per hectare is applied to each BRT station and stop, the effect is that an
entire corridor would be subject to this higher density. It is inappropriate to extend the
level of intensification corridor-wide. Accordingly, it is recommended that:
PLN 15-16 September 12, 2016
Subject: 2015 Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans Page 11
ii) The words "or stop" within the revised definition of the term "Major Transit
Station Area" be removed, so that only high order transit station areas are
included in the intensification calculation.
Schedule 5 (Moving People —Transit) in the Growth Plan, shows that areas of growth
in Toronto and its neighbouring communities to the immediate north and west are to be
served by a system of priority transit corridors (consisting of rail and subways lines)
whereas the Lakeshore East Railway is identified as the only "priority transit corridor"
within the 905 region. Schedule 5 is inconsistent with Metrolinx's "The Big Move"
15-year Plan, which identifies a number of proposed regional rapid transit corridors
within the 905 region, including a CP-Belleville rail connection to the new Seaton
community, and a "possible" rail extension (CP-Havelock line) to Peterborough. In
order to be consistent with Metrolinx's Big Move Plan and to support future growth, it is
recommended that:
iii) Schedule 5 (Moving People — Transit) in the Growth Plan be revised to
reflect the proposed CP-Belleville rail connection to the new Seaton
community, and the "possible" rail extension (CP-Havelock line) towards
Peterborough.
e) Employment
Schedule 3 in the Growth Plan forecasts the greatest population growth between 2031
and 2041 to occur in the Region of Durham (220,000) with associated job growth of
70,000 jobs, which translates into a resident to job ratio of 3:1. Yet, during the same
period, all other regions in the Greater Golden Horseshoe, except the City of Toronto,
reflect a resident to job ratio of 2.5:1 or better. The obvious disparity between the
Region of Durham and the other regions further entrenches this imbalance,
perpetuating the 905 region as a bedroom community with significant implications on
the quality and life of families and the environment (increased greenhouse gas
emissions). Complete communities, active transportation, strong live-work relations,
and net-zero communities can only be attained when jobs are created closer to home.
When the resident to job ratio widens, the gap between residential and industrial
assessment widens, putting municipalities in a weaker financial position.
Furthermore, the Province is proposing new policies that require municipalities to
identify and designate suitable lands near "major goods movement facilities and
corridors" as "prime employment areas", which would be protected over the long-term
for uses that are land extensive and/or have low employment densities and require
such locations.
There is a concern that the identification and designation of"Prime" (low density)
Employment Areas in the 905 region by municipalities or the Province (because most of
the vacant employment lands supply is in the 905 region) may result in attracting
employment uses that are not labour intensive, thereby entrenching the 905
communities as a bedroom community and widening the disparity in population to job
growth between the 905 and other regions.
PLN 15-16 September 12, 2016
Subject: 2015 Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans Page 12
The Province should play a lead role in combating regional disparities in job growth by
advancing development in strategic locations. For example, the Province should work
collaboratively with Pickering to secure high-tech, knowledge based employment and
prestige office uses for its lands within Seaton, as part of the first phase of development
within the community. Accordingly, it is recommended that:
i) The Province identify employment lands of provincial significance within
the Growth Plan, such as the Seaton Employment Lands, and actively
facilitate the marketing, servicing and development of those lands in
concert with other development contemplated by the Growth Plan.
f) Designated Greenfield Areas
The Province is proposing to increase the minimum density target for"Designated
Greenfield Areas" from 50 to 80 residents and jobs per hectare.
The Seaton community, a model for sustainable development, has been planned and
approved at a density of 50 residents and jobs combined per hectare. Detailed and
costly technical studies were carried out in accordance with this density target for
Seaton, and for countless other Secondary Plans and draft plans of subdivision
approved for Greenfield development across the Greater Golden Horseshoe. To undo
and redo these plans would be financially devastating to municipalities and the
development industry, and may cause significant delays to housing delivery with a
subsequent further increase in house prices.
The proposed increase of the density target for designated Greenfield areas also raises
a number of other serious concerns, namely:
• No planning rationale or scientific analysis has been provided for the proposed
increase of the target from 50 to 80. If draft approved plans are considered
committed, it would imply that the balance of the designated Greenfield areas would
have to be increased well beyond 80 residents and jobs combined per hectare to
arrive at an average density of 80. Significant increases in densities within
Greenfield areas will result in communities on the outskirts lacking transit services
and convenient access to employment and other amenities, thus perpetuating an
unsustainable lifestyle and greater carbon footprints (incomplete communities).
• It would appear that the suggested minimum density target of 80 residents and jobs
combined per hectare for Greenfield areas is derived from the Transit Supportive
Guidelines, prepared by the Ministry of Transportation. Closer scrutiny of these
guidelines indicates that this density is contingent upon frequent transit service (one
bus available every 10 — 15 minutes) for areas within a 5 to 10 minute walk of transit.
It is unrealistic and overambitious to assume that this guideline can be imposed as a
uniform standard across all Greenfield Areas in the 905 region where priority transit
corridors in Greenfield Areas are absent, resident to job ratios are worsening, and
where there is significant lack of transit infrastructure investment.
PLN 15-16 September 12, 2016
Subject: 2015 Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans Page 13
• The Province has not provided any analysis of what 80 residents and jobs combined
per hectare would look like within Greenfield areas in the 905 region (i.e., downtown
Toronto is not the same as areas in 905 or beyond). An increase in Greenfield
density targets to 80 or beyond would have significant implications in terms of
housing composition and affordability, especially for single detached homes.
Marketability of housing depends on various other factors, such as demand, family
size, availability of public transit, proximity to public and other amenities. The
Province has not examined the levels of community services to serve these
densities, and there hasn't been any analysis of the financial impacts the increased
Greenfield densities may have on municipalities. To leave these factors out of the
equation is not in the public interest and not good planning.
To address these concerns, it is recommended that:
i) That the Province maintain the current Greenfield area density target of
50 residents and jobs combined per hectare, or consider developing a
more context sensitive approach for 905 communities, with particular
attention to factors such as urban structure, availability of public transit
and other amenities, built form character, place-making, housing mix and
affordability; and
ii) That the Province conduct a financial analysis of the impact of the
intensification and density targets on municipal infrastructure and service
delivery.
g) Rural Areas
The Province is proposing new policies that would recognize existing employment
areas on rural lands with opportunity for expansion, subject to certain criteria, and
policies to clarify the parameters for planning for resource-based recreational uses.
Although the policy addresses tourism and recreational uses, the policy should be
extended to cultural and educational uses as well. The rural area is rich in cultural
heritage (structures and uses), and agricultural operations and ecological features
provide a wealth of education opportunities. Many cultural and educational uses are
resource-based and are not necessarily limited to locations within rural settlements. As
such, it is recommended that:
i) The Province consider extending the newly proposed policy that would
recognize existing employment areas on "rural lands" with opportunity for
expansion, subject to certain criteria, to include existing cultural and
educational uses.
h) Transportation - General
Although the Growth Plan includes a policy stating that transportation system planning,
land use planning, and transportation investment will be coordinated to implement the
Growth Plan, the Province should take further steps to clarify the role of the Big Move in
relation to the Growth Plan. Accordingly, it is recommended that:
PLN 15-16 September 12, 2016
Subject: 2015 Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans Page 14
i) The Province move forward with the development of the Transportation
Planning Policy Statement outlined in the Greater Toronto Transportation
Authority Act, to clarify the role of the Big Move in relation to the Growth
Plan, and to include a statement that acknowledges this relationship within
the Growth Plan. This would help ensure that the integration and
coordination of transportation infrastructure planning and land use
planning at local, Regional and Provincial levels are properly
acknowledged in the Plan.
Furthermore, the Growth Plan seeks to ensure that growth is initially focused in areas
that already have infrastructure in place. However, major transit and road infrastructure
projects are complex and can take decades to plan and build. Planning ahead by
protecting lands and corridors, and examining the environmental, social and economic
impacts of these future uses in advance needs to take place, and can go a long way
towards ensuring such projects are delivered in a timely and cost-effective way.
Accordingly, it is recommended that:
ii) The Province, as part of supporting the new Growth Plan, investigate
financial tools (e.g., parking space levy, fuel tax, sales tax, payroll tax,
vehicle kilometers travelled tax, highway tolls, development charges, land
value capture, property tax, development charges, fare increases, etc.) and
funding opportunities to enable the timely implementation of
transportation and other municipal infrastructure and services.
i) Natural Heritage Systems
The Province proposes new policy that would require municipalities to incorporate a
"natural heritage system" as mapped by the Province in their official plans, including
"key natural heritage features" and their connectivity and diversity, and to apply
appropriate policies. The Ministry has indicated that this mapping may not be available
until 2018. In addition, the high level mapping undertaken by the Province is typically
refined through watershed plans.
Given that watershed plans have been developed in Pickering by the conservation
authorities, which provide a fine level of detail on natural heritage resources, the
intention of the Province to map the "natural heritage system" would seem redundant,
and would further delay efforts by municipalities to bring their official plans into
conformity with the Growth Plan. Instead, the Province should require all conservation
authorities to collaborate and use standardized methodology to map the natural
heritage system across the Growth Plan area.
Accordingly, it is recommended that:
i) The mapping of the "natural heritage system" be based upon approved
watershed plans; and
ii) The Province collaborate with conservation authorities to develop
standard methodology for mapping the "natural heritage system".
PLN 15-16 September 12, 2016
Subject: 2015 Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans Page 15
j) Agricultural System
The Province proposes a new policy that would require municipalities to incorporate an
"agricultural system" as mapped by the Province in their official plans, which would be
comprised of"prime agricultural areas", "specialty crop areas", "rural lands" and an
"agricultural support network". The Ministry has indicated that this mapping may not be
available until 2018. The Region of Durham has already prepared detailed mapping on
the agricultural system, based on the Province's Land Evaluation and Area Review
• (LEAR) model. So as not to duplicate past efforts, the Province should build on the
LEAR analysis that was completed by the Region. Accordingly, it is recommended that:
i) The Province's process for mapping the "agricultural system" build on the
LEAR analysis that was completed by the Region of Durham and include
the application of standard methodology, proper ground-truthing and
consultation with municipalities, conservation authorities, the agricultural
community and other key stakeholders.
k) Supplementary Direction
The Province proposes supplementary direction to implement the Proposed Growth
Plan. This provision outlines a number of matters that the Minister or the Province,
shall identify, establish or undertake. This includes: natural heritage system and
agricultural system mapping; standard methodology for assessing urban land needs; a
review of the built boundary; the identification of priority transit corridors and prime
employment areas; and guidance for watershed planning. As mentioned in preceding
paragraphs, the Ministry has indicated that some of this information may not be
available until 2018. However this information must be in place prior to the Region and
the City undertaking their next conformity exercise/official plan reviews, within the
timeframes specified within the Planning Act. This becomes particularly challenging in
a two-tier municipal system, where the upper tier (Durham Region) must complete its
conformity/official plan review exercise first. Accordingly, it is recommended that:
i) The Province engage municipalities in the identification, establishment or
update of the documents listed as Supplementary Directions to the Growth
Plan; and
ii) revise the timeframe for municipal official plan conformity to commence
upon completion of the documents listed as Supplementary Directions to
the Growth Plan.
Furthermore, the Implementation and Interpretation section of the Growth Plan speaks
to various further steps and actions to be taken by the Province, municipalities and
stakeholders to implement the plan. However, a critical element that is missing from
this section is an assessment of the economic opportunities and challenges of the
Growth Plan area. The Growth Plan puts emphasis on attracting a certain percentage
of jobs and residential growth within the built boundary and on Greenfield lands.
However, the projections for the growth plan for Durham continue to show that the ratio
between residents and jobs will continue to widen, impacting opportunities for creating
stronger live-work relationships and the development of complete communities. As
such, it is recommended that:
PLN 15-16 September 12, 2016
Subject: 2015 Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans Page 16
iii) The Province, as part of the Supplementary Direction, identify and develop
programs to attract and retain workers and businesses to achieve the
growth plan targets, and to foster the development of balanced
communities (for example, such measures could include, investing in, or
subsidizing training programs that will ensure that municipalities have the
resident labour force to attract new businesses in targeted sectors;
eliminating or reducing tolls for trucks on Highway 407 making the
highway a more attractive goods movement corridor; and promoting
further employment growth in the 905 Region).
5.2 Proposed changes to the Greenbelt Plan
a) Prime Agricultural Area Policies
The Province proposes a new policy requiring land use compatibility where "agricultural
uses" and non-agricultural uses interface, to avoid, or if avoidance is not possible,
minimize and mitigate adverse impacts on the "Agricultural System". Too often
agricultural operations have had to scale down or retract practices due to the
introduction of new, adjacent urban land uses, instead of the other way around.
Although this policy is aimed at providing much needed protection for the agricultural
industry, there are little or no guidance on "agricultural buffer planning" in Ontario. To
support this policy, it is the recommended that:
i) The Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs provide more guidance
regarding the type and extent of buffer planning necessary to protect
existing agricultural practices, by minimizing and mitigating impacts of
new adjacent urban development on the Agricultural System.
b) Hamlet Policies
The Province proposes to delete the policy that permits the minor rounding out of
hamlets at the time of municipal conformity with the Greenbelt Plan, and to permit
limited growth only through infill and intensification. The Hamlets of Claremont and
Greenwood are the largest hamlets within the City and contain a hub of community
facilities and small businesses. The Hamlets of Claremont and Greenwood are subject
to outstanding development applications that pre-date the implementation of the
Greenbelt Plan and the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan. The opportunity to
consider the minor expansion of these hamlets through a municipal initiated (not private
landowner) study would provide the proper means to cohesively plan for growth, and to
realize potential opportunities for developing "complete communities" within these rural
settlements. Such a hamlet review should include extensive public consultation to
ensure that the interests of the municipality are addressed and the relevant objectives
of the local, regional and provincial plans are met. Such a hamlet boundary review
would address:
• the merits and appropriate scale and form of development;
• the protection and enhancement of key natural heritage features and environmental
functions;
PLN 15-16 September 12, 2016
Subject: 2015 Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans Page 17
• the impact on agricultural lands and agricultural operations;
• soft and hard servicing needs, constraints and solutions; and
• the rationale for any changes to the hamlet boundary.
As such, it is recommended that:
i) The Province retain the existing policy in the Greenbelt Plan that permits
the minor rounding out of hamlets at the time of municipal conformity, and
modify the policy to read as follows:
"Outside of specialty crop areas, minor expansion of Hamlet boundaries
may be permitted only through a municipal initiated study, that must
address matters such as the merits and appropriate scale and form of
development; the protection and enhancement of key natural heritage and
hydrologic features and functions; the impact on agricultural lands and
agricultural operations; soft and hard servicing needs, constraints and
solutions; and the rationale for any minor expansion to the hamlet
boundary.
c) Urban River Valley Policies
The Province is proposing a policy clarifying that only publicly owned lands would be
subject to the policies of the Urban River Valley designation. This policy proposal does
not complement the system-based approach being advocated through the Provincial
Policy Statement of 2014 and proposed changes to the Greenbelt Plan. A systems
approach speaks to the functional relationship and connectivity of key natural heritage
and hydrologic features, and the identification, maintenance and protection of these
features. The urban river valleys form part of the system, and land parcels within them
should be subject to the same rules and principles, irrespective of ownership.
Accordingly, it is recommended that:
i) The Province revise proposed policy 6.2, subsection 1, by making all lands
within the Urban River Valley designation, whether publicly or privately
owned, subject to the Greenbelt Plan policies associated with this
designation.
d) Comments on correspondence received
The current Greenbelt Plan provides the opportunity for municipalities to complete
municipally initiated settlement area expansion studies that were initiated prior to
December 16, 2003. However, the Cherrywood Area lands in the City of Pickering,
which were being studied at the time and later approved by Council, were excluded
from this provision. The submission received from the MPP's of Pickering-Scarborough
East and Ajax-Pickering (summarized in section 4 of the report) requests the removal of
the provision that excludes the Cherrywood Area lands. This request is consistent with
Council's past position on this matter, and it is recommended that:
PLN 15-16 September 12, 2016
Subject: 2015 Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans Page 18
i) The Province remove policy 3.4.4.2a in the current Greenbelt Plan and in
the proposed Greenbelt Plan (policy 3.4.5.2a) that prohibits the
consideration of a municipally initiated settlement area expansion proposal
to proceed on the lands bounded by the CP Belleville Line in the south; the
York-Durham Townline to the west; and West Duffins Creek to the east
(referred to as the Cherrywood Area Lands).
5.3 Proposed changes to the ORMCP
a) New lots in Countryside Areas
The Province is proposing to delete the policy that permits the minor rounding out of
Rural Settlements. This is consistent with a proposed policy revision in the Greenbelt
Plan, discussed in paragraph 5.2 b) of this report.
Consistent with the City's initial key recommendations during the 1st round of
consultation, and in accordance with staff's comments contained in paragraph 5.2 b) of
this report, it is recommended that:
i) The Province retain the existing policy in the ORMCP that permits the
minor rounding out of rural settlements, and modify the policy to read as
follows:
"New lots may be created in Countryside Areas for the following purposes
only, and subject to Parts Ill and IV:
Minor expansion of Rural Settlements designated in the applicable
official plan as appropriate for this type of lot creation, only through a
municipal initiated study, that must address matters such as the
merits and appropriate scale and form,of development; the protection
and enhancement of key natural heritage and hydrologic features and
functions; the impact on agricultural lands and agricultural
operations; soft and hard servicing needs, constraints and solutions;
and the rationale for any minor expansion to the rural settlement
boundary."
b) Comments on correspondence received
Regarding Mr. Brian Welch's submission (summarized in section 4 of the report), the
Office of the Provincial Facilitator indicated that it would not assist the Province with
reviewing the re-designation of the lands located north of Franklin Road in Claremont
from "Countryside Areas" to "Rural Settlement" (to accommodate Geranium Homes'
proposed residential plan of subdivision). However, staff's recommendation contained
in paragraph 5.3 a) of this report, if approved by the Province, would provide the means
to properly investigate the appropriateness of expanding the hamlet boundaries of
Claremont.
PLN 15-16 September 12, 2016
Subject: 2015 Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans Page 19
6. Conclusions and Recommendations
The Province's integrated approach towards the interpretation and implementation of the
provincial land use plans provides a stronger vision and greater consistency for land use
planning in Ontario. Major departures from the current policy regime without sound
planning rationale and appreciation of the diverse character and context of local
communities in Ontario, will present a significant challenge to municipalities in planning for
sustainable, complete communities. It is also evident from the report that additional time,
tools and resources are needed to enable municipalities and other agencies to conform and
implement the new policies that are forthcoming. The recommendations offered through
this report provide a range of directions that the Province should consider.
Staff will continue to keep Council informed as the Province moves toward concluding the
review of the plans, and the final amendments to each of the plans.
Attachments
1. Table 1 — Provincial Response to City Comments of May 2015
2. Table 2 — Proposed Changes to the Growth Plan
3. Table 3 — Proposed Changes to the Greenbelt Plan
4. Table 4 — Proposed Changes to the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan
Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By:
IF
JO -n acobs, MCIP, RPP Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP
Principal Planner— Policy (Acting) Director, City Development
L7. /2
Jeff Brooks, MCIP, RPP, AMCT
Manager, Policy & Geomatics
DJ:Id
Recommended for the consideration
of Pickering City ouncil
act, Zo/4
Tony Prevedel, P.Eng.
Chief Administrative Officer
Attachment #1 to
Report PLN 15-16
Table 1
Provincial Response to City Comments of May 2015
•
Table 1 — Provincial Response to City Comments of May 2015
City's Initial Comments Provincial Response
(May 2015) (May 2016)
That the Province be requested to:
Incorporate the recommendations provided
through the Durham Region Greenbelt Plan
(GBP) Review study, in particular:
• that the provincial plans allow for The Greenbelt Plan is being revised to allow
stand-alone agricultural supportive uses in greater flexibility by permitting larger
prime agricultural areas (such as grain "agricultural-related uses" such as grain dryers
elevators or food processing operations) on farmland, provided that such uses are
compatible with, and do not hinder,
surrounding agricultural operations, and
comply with the Provincial Guidelines on
Permitted Uses in Ontario's Prime Agricultural
Areas.
• that the provincial plans provide The GBP and the Oak Ridges Moraine
opportunities for rural economic Conservation Plan (ORMCP) are being revised
diversification in terms of cultural, by permitting additional uses on farms such as
educational, recreational and eco-tourism "on-farm diversified uses", subject to certain
uses and value added agricultural uses conditions, and by introducing a newly defined
which complement farming and the health term "on-farm diversified uses". The Greenbelt
of rural settlements Plan is being revised by introducing the
concepts of"Agricultural Support Network" and
"Agricultural System Connections" with related
policies to acknowledge the importance of
supporting and sustaining a diverse agricultural
economy, and the connectivity between
permitted uses within the agricultural system.
• that the Province establish new, more A new policy is being introduced in the
effective separation distance policies to Greenbelt Plan requiring land use compatibility
provide an appropriate buffer between new where agricultural uses and non-agricultural
residential development and farmland to uses interface, to avoid, or if avoidance is not
protect the viability of farm operations and possible, minimize and mitigate adverse
avoid land use conflicts. impacts on the Agricultural System.
• that the Province establish a process to The Greenbelt Plan is being revised by
consider limited refinements to the requiring the Province, in collaboration with
boundaries of the Greenbelt Plan and Oak municipalities, to undertake an exercise to
Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, in provide consistent identification, mapping and
accordance with Recommendations 16, 17 protection of the Agricultural System, and to
and 18 of the Durham Region Greenbelt enable upper-tier and single-tier municipalities
Plan Review study to refine official plan mapping to bring prime
agricultural areas, specialty crop areas, and
Page 1 of 7
Table 1 — Provincial Response to City Comments of May 2015
City's Initial Comments Provincial Response
(May 2015) (May 2016)
rural lands into conformity with provincial
mapping through a municipal comprehensive
review under the Growth Plan. These
refinements shall only be carried out where
there are inconsistencies at municipal
boundaries or discrepancies between
provincial and municipal mapping that are
significant.
Also, the Greenbelt Plan is being revised by
the addition of a new policy stating that the
Province would lead the process to identify
potential areas to be added to the Greenbelt,
and a new policy stating that the Province will
consider requests from municipalities to grow
the Greenbelt. However, a simplified process
should be established to address limited
• refinements that result from further ground-
.
truthing of the boundary.
Provide direction for the planning of Although the Growth Plan forecasts have not
infrastructure beyond the twenty year land use been extended, a guiding principle is being
planning horizon, by extending the population revised that requires improvement to the
and employment forecasts to at least 2051, and integration of land use planning with planning
adjusting the Places to Grow Concept and and investment in infrastructure and public
Forecasts accordingly, to allow for the timely and service facilities.
transparent planning of long-term urban Also, a new policy section is being added
infrastructure. under "Managing Growth" requiring upper and
single-tier municipalities to develop an
integrated approach to planning and managing
growth to the horizon of this Plan, through a
municipal comprehensive review, which will
include the integration of planning for
infrastructure and public service facilities that
considers the full life cycle costs of these
assets, and identifies options to pay for these
costs over the long-term.
Lastly, a new policy is being included in the
Growth Plan stating that where the need for a
settlement area boundary expansion has been
justified, a municipal comprehensive review will
determine the feasibility of a settlement area
boundary expansion and identify the most
appropriate location based on a number of
Page2of7 .
Table 1 - Provincial Response to City Comments of May 2015
City's Initial Comments Provincial Response
(May 2015) (May 2016).
conditions. The conditions include:
requirements regarding the infrastructure and
public service facilities to support the
expansion to be financially viable; that the
proposed expansion aligns with a water and
wastewater master plan, and a stormwater
master plan.
Provide stronger policy direction on Various sections in the Growth Plan are being
implementing affordable housing, in terms of revised by the addition of new policies
type and tenure. requiring that provision'be made for a mix and
range of housing types to serve all sizes,
incomes and ages of households, including
affordable housing.
Also, a new section "Housing" is being
introduced in the Growth Plan requiring upper
and single-tier municipalities, in consultation
with lower-tier municipalities, the Province and
other stakeholders, to develop a housing
strategy to address matters such as
homelessness, housing targets, diversity and
affordability, and rental housing:
Provide the opportunity to redefine the Greenbelt The Greenbelt Plan and the ORMCP are being
and/or Oak Ridges Moraine boundaries to allow revised by the removal of the policies that
for minor expansions of hamlets, subject to the would permit the minor rounding out of Hamlet
completion of a municipally led hamlet boundary boundaries at the time of municipal conformity.
review.
Also, the Greenbelt Plan policies in relation to
designated Towns and Villages are being
revised by a new policy stating that, as part of
a municipal comprehensive review under the
• Growth Plan, an upper or single-tier planning
authority may allow expansions of the
boundaries'of Towns and Villages.
Identify provincially strategic employment lands Not addressed.
within the Growth Plan, such as the Seaton
Employment Lands, and actively facilitate the
marketing, servicing and development of those
lands in concert with other development
contemplated by the Growth Plan.
• Page 3 of 7
Table 1 — Provincial Response to City Comments of May 2015
City's Initial Comments Provincial Response
(May 2015) (May 2016)
Allow for minor expansions for existing The Province did not revise its current policies
businesses in the rural area. with regard to existing uses in the rural area,
except that the Greenbelt Plan is being revised
by permitting expansions to existing
agricultural, agricultural-related and on-farm
diversified uses, and rural employment uses
under certain circumstances and conditions.
Hold Town Hall Meetings in Pickering during the The Province held a Public Open House in
second round of consultation. Oshawa on June 23, 2016 from 5:00 pm to
8:00 pm at Durham College.
That the Province consider the following implementation strategies, plan coordination
measures, and financial tools and incentives:
Undertake an area-wide agricultural land The Greenbelt Plan is being revised by the
assessment in support of the food production inclusion of a new policy in its implementation
role that the Greenbelt plays to gain a better section requiring the Province, in collaboration
appreciation of the needs of future generations. with municipalities, to undertake an exercise to
provide consistent identification, mapping and
protection of the "Agricultural System" across
the Greater Golden Horseshoe. Furthermore,
a new policy section "Agricultural Support
Network" is being introduced that encourages
municipalities to implement strategies and
approaches to sustain the "Agricultural Support
Network", e.g., by providing opportunities to
support local food/near-urban agriculture,
preparing regional agri-food strategies or
establishing and/or consulting with agricultural
advisory committees.
Also, the Greenbelt Plan is being revised by
the addition of a new policy requiring that the
geographical continuity of the agricultural land
base and the functional and economic
connections to the Agricultural Support
Network be maintained and enhanced.
Provide for, and promote, improved management Although there does not appear to be any new
practices and new technologies that will maximize policy that directly addresses this specific
production/crop yields while minimizing the matter, the implementation of the new policy in
environmental impact of such uses. the Greenbelt Plan regarding an "Agricultural
Support Network" may address this point.
Page 4 of 7
Table 1 — Provincial Response to City Comments of May 2015
City's Initial Comments Provincial Response
(May 2015) (May 2016)
Provide further tools and incentives aimed at The proposed revisions to the relevant
enhancing the natural heritage system and Provincial Plans do not appear to directly
environmental health, and advancing agricultural address this specific matter. However, the
best practices in the Greenbelt and Oak Ridges Growth Plan introduces various new and
Moraine. expanded policies under "Policies for
protecting what is valuable" that speaks to
strategies and actions to be taken by
municipalities to protect and enhance the
Water Resources System, the Natural Heritage
System, Key Hydrologic and Key Natural
Heritage Features, the Agricultural System,
alternative and renewable energy systems,
and to plan for Climate Change adaption and
mitigation.
Ensure that the reviews of the Growth Plan and The Growth Plan is being revised by adding
the Regional Transportation Plan —the Big Move new policies stating that transportation system
result in a consistent vision and direction for planning, land use planning, and transportation
transportation planning. investment will be coordinated to implement
the Growth Plan, and that the Province will
work with public sector partners, including
Metrolinx, to identify strategic infrastructure
needs.
Move forward with the development of the Not addressed.
Transportation Planning Policy Statement
outlined in the Greater Toronto Transportation
Authority Act.
Provide municipalities with new financial tools to Not addressed.
enable the early implementation of transit and
other alternative modes of transportation.
Provide direction for the protection of higher Not specifically addressed. However, the
density residential lands, that may not be Growth Plan is being revised by the
absorbed within the time horizon of the Growth introduction of the term "strategic growth
Plan. areas" and the addition of a new policy stating
that, in planning for the intensification of built-
up areas, municipalities will identify the
appropriate type and scale of development in
strategic growth areas to support achievement
of the minimum intensification areas target in
the Growth Plan, but no policies have been
included for the protection of such areas.
Page 5 of 7
•
Table 1 — Provincial Response to City Comments of May 2015
City's Initial Comments Provincial Response
(May 2015) (May 2016)
Examine incentives to attract and retain workers The Growth Plan puts emphasis on attracting a
and businesses to achieve the Growth Plan certain percentage of jobs and residential
targets and to foster the development of growth within the built boundary and on
balanced communities. Greenfield lands, but no policies have been
included regarding any incentives offered or to
be offered to achieve the Growth Plan targets.
Coordinate the development of a provincial The Growth Plan is being revised by the
climate change plan with the ongoing review of addition of a new policy requiring upper and
the provincial land use plans, to improve single-tier municipalities to develop policies in
awareness and understanding of limiting their official plans to identify actions that will
emissions and the role of adaptation and reduce greenhouse gas emissions and
resiliency can play in addressing climate change. address climate change adaptation goals,
aligned with the Ontario Climate Change
Strategy, 2015 and Action Plan.
Provide direction for the implementation of The Growth Plan is being revised by the
adaptive measures, such as changes to the addition of a new policy encouraging
Ontario Building Code. municipalities to plan for the reduction of
greenhouse gas emissions and to address the
impacts of climate change, through actions
such as the development of strategies to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to
improve resilience to climate change through
land use planning, planning for infrastructure,
including transit and energy; developing
greenhouse gas inventories for transportation,
buildings, waste management and municipal
operations; and establishing municipal interim
and long-term greenhouse gas emission
reduction targets that support provincial targets
and reflect consideration of the goal of net-zero
communities.
Also, the Greenbelt Plan is being revised by
the addition of a new policy stating that the
support of complete communities is promoted
in order to promote and enhance human health
and social well-being, to be economically and
environmentally sustainable and to be
developed in a manner that support the long-
term goal of becoming net-zero communities;
and a further policy is being included in the
Growth Plan that requires the integration of
climate change considerations into planning
Page 6 of 7
Table 1 — Provincial Response to City Comments of May 2015
City's Initial Comments Provincial Response
(May 2015) (May 2016)
and managing growth by incorporating
techniques to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions in resilient settlement areas and
infrastructure located within the Greenbelt.
Provide improved technical training and On Wednesday, June 29, 2016 the Province
workshops to municipal staff to ensure that the hosted a technical briefing with municipal staff
objectives of the provincial land use plans are across the Region regarding the proposed
implemented in an effective and consistent revisions to the Provincial Plans. However, the
manner. Province has not announced any further
technical workshops or training sessions to
address the implementation of the Provincial
Plans.
Provide education on best practices for Nothing has been announced in this regard.
agricultural practices and environmental
stewardship to community stakeholders.
Provide new financial tools and/or incentives to Nothing has been announced in this regard.
assist municipalities and other stakeholders in
achieving the objectives of the plans.
Develop a consistent framework and set of key The sections in the Greenbelt Plan, ORMCP
performance indicators for monitoring the policy and Growth Plan dealing with Performance
performance for the all of the provincial plans. Indicators and Monitoring have been revised to
reflect similar policy language and a consistent
approach towards the monitoring of the
provincial plans.
Develop tools, best practices and guidelines to Nothing has been announced in this regard.
support the implementation of the provincial
plans.
Page 7of7
Attachment#2 to
Report PLN 15-16
Table 2
Proposed Changes to the Growth Plan
•
Table 2 — Proposed Changes to the Growth Plan
Proposed Change Response
Where and How to Grow
Section 2.2.1 (3) — Managing Growth
New policy builds on existing policy direction that The provision of more detail regarding the term
would provide more detail about how the "complete communities" provides clearer policy
application of the policies in this Plan would direction in terms of what it means, and how it
support the achievement of"complete can be planned for through local policies and
communities". initiatives.
Section 2.2.1 (4) — Managing Growth
Additional direction and criteria for Upper and This new policy provides more guidance in terms
Single-tier municipalities to develop an of the methodology to be used by the Region, in
integrated approach to planning and managing consultation with the lower-tier municipalities, to
growth, which would be implemented through a plan and manage growth in an integrate fashion
"municipal comprehensive review". to 2041. The Region of Durham's initial Growth
Plan conformity exercise included some of the
criteria, but aspects such as integrated planning
for infrastructure and public service facilities that
considers the full life cycle costs of these assets
and options to pay for these costs over the long
term, as well as the identification of areas where
development should be prohibited, introduces a
wider scope for the Regional and local
municipalities to bring their official plans in
conformity with the revised Growth Plan.
Section 2.2.1 (5) — Managing Growth
New policy that requires the Minister to develop A standardized method to assess land needs
a standard methodology for assessing land provides more transparent and predictable
needs and requiring the use of this methodology outcomes that would hopefully be less
by municipalities. vulnerable to external pressures and interests.
However, staff would caution against the use of
a scientific based approach only, and that the
methodology include proper ground-truthing and
consultation.
The Ministry has indicated that the standard
methodology may not be available until 2018.
This will present a significant challenge to the
City, given that the Region must complete its
review prior to the City moving forward with its
conformity/Official Plan review exercise. This
matter is further addressed in section 5.1 of the
report.
Page 1 of 11
Table 2 — Proposed Changes to the Growth Plan
Proposed Change Response
Section 2.2.2 (3) — Built-up Areas
The minimum intensification target would be The Province has introduced this policy to
increased from 40 per cent to 60 per cent, and restrict future urban expansion, reduce impacts
revisions would be made to the requirements on rural lands, improve live-work relationships,
and eligibility for an alternative target. and minimize resulting greenhouse gas
emissions. However, the Province has not
provided information as to: 1) why the target
needs to be increased from 40 to 60 per cent;
and 2) how the increase to 60 per cent was
determined, or how this target can be practically
implemented in the 905 region. This matter is
further addressed in section 5.1 of the report.
Section 2.2.4 (5) — Transit Corridors and
Station Areas
New policies would establish specific minimum In many instances, the densities contained in the
density targets for "major transit station areas", proposed Growth Plan cannot be realized,
as delineated by municipalities, which would be because of the persistence to surround such
scaled to reflect type of transit (e.g., subways, stations with huge expanses of surface parking.
light rail). The Province needs to consider the potential
long term development and intensification of its
Within "major transit station areas" development station sites, and investment in alternative
is to be supported by prohibiting land uses and modes to access such locations to limit the
built from that would adversely affect the amount of surface parking in the future. This
achievement of minimum density targets. matter is further addressed in section 5.1 of the
report.
Also, the revised definition for the term "Major
Transit Station Area" now includes transit stops.
It is inappropriate to extend the level of
intensification set for major transit stations to
stops too. This matter is further addressed in
section 5.1 of the report.
Lastly, the proposed changes to the Growth Plan
are not consistent with Metrolinx's Big Move, in
that the extension at the CP-Belleville line to
Seaton and the extension of the CP-Havelock
line to Peterborough are not shown on
Schedule 5 (Moving People-Transit). This matter
is also addressed in section 5.1 of the report.
Page 2 of 11
Table 2 — Proposed Changes to the Growth Plan
Proposed Change Response
Section 2.2.4 (10) — Transit Corridors and
Station Areas
New policies would support prioritizing planning The Region's and City's Official Plans already
and zoning for"priority transit corridors", which embrace the concept of centres and corridors.
would be identified in Schedule 5 (or by the Through the ongoing Durham Transportation
province). Master Plan (DTMP) review, the Region in
consultation with the City is re-examining
corridors for priority transit service and
refinements. As a result, revisions may be
forthcoming to the Region's Official Plan, which
will need to be reflected in the City's Official
Plan.
Schedule 3 (Distribution of Population and
Employment to 2041)
Schedule 3 in the Growth Plan forecasts the The disparity in the resident to job ratio between
greatest population growth between 2031 and the Region of Durham and the other regions
2041to occur in the Region of Durham (220 000) further entrenches this imbalance with
with associated job growth of 70 000 jobs, implications that are not conducive to attaining
translating into a resident to job ratio of 3:1. complete and net-zero communities in the 905
During the same period, all other regions in the region. This matter is further addressed in
Greater Golden Horseshoe, except the City of section 5.1 of the report.
Toronto, reflect a resident to job ratio of 2.5:1 or
better.
Section 2.2.5 (3) — Employment
New policies would require municipalities to The identification and designation of"Prime"
identify and designate suitable lands near "major (low density) Employment Areas in the 905
goods movement facilities and corridors" as region by municipalities or the Province
"prime employment areas", which would be (because most of the vacant employment lands
protected over the long-term for uses that are supply is in the 905 region) may result in
land extensive and/or have low employment attracting employment uses that are not labour
densities and require such locations. Certain intensive, thereby entrenching the 905
uses would be strictly prohibited in "prime communities as a bedroom community, and
employment areas" and these areas would not widening the disparity in population to job growth
be eligible for conversion to non-employment between the 905 and other regions. This matter
uses. is further addressed in Section 5.1 of the report.
Furthermore, the use of the adjective "prime" is
confusing in this context, as it leads the reader
to interpret "prime employment areas" to be
employment areas that have locations or
characteristics most suitable for attracting
employment intensive (labour intensive
industries). As such, it is recommended that the
Page 3 of 11
•
Table 2 — Proposed Changes to the Growth Plan
Proposed Change Response
Province consider replacing the adjective "prime"
with a word that better describes the intent of
this policy, e.g. "low density", and to revise the
definition accordingly.
Section 2.2.5 (2) - Employment
Municipalities would also be required to Agree, the full range of employment uses should
designate other "employment areas" where a be accommodated within a municipality.
wider range of employment uses would be
permitted.
Section 2.2.5 (10) — Employment
New policy would direct that existing "office Although these objectives are aimed at
parks" should be planned to improve transit revitalizing "office parks" and making them more
connectivity (including appropriate use of sustainable, these objectives could also be
"transportation demand management" applied to employment areas in general. Many
strategies), provide for an appropriate mix of employment areas are not properly connected to
amenities, and encourage intensification of public transit and lack the supporting amenities
employment uses. necessary to foster future intensification.
Section 2.2.7 (2) — Designated Greenfield
Areas
The minimum density target for"designated Designated greenfield areas, such as Seaton,
greenfield areas" would be increased from 50 to have been planned at a density of 50 residents
80 residents and jobs per hectare. Additional and jobs per hectare.
features would be excluded when measuring this The proposed increase of the density target for
target, including floodplains, rights-of-way for designated Greenfield areas raises a number of
certain types of linear "infrastructure", as well as other concerns and questions, for example:
"prime employment areas"' • What is the science behind increasing the
target from 50 to 80?
• If draft approved plans are considered
committed, should the densities on the
balance of the Greenfield areas be increased
• beyond 80 to make up the difference?
This matter is further addressed in Section 5.1 of
the report.
Section 2.2.8 (2) — Settlement Area Boundary
Expansions
Where the need for a "settlement area" The addition of new criteria provides a more
boundary expansion is demonstrated (based on comprehensive and greater test to proposed
the proposed standard methodology for land settlement area boundary expansions, but are all
needs assessment), there would be additional valid matters to consider.
Page 4 of 11
Table 2 — Proposed Changes to the Growth Plan
Proposed Change Response
new criteria for assessing feasibility of an
expansion and determining the most appropriate
location, including:
• The financial viability over the life cycle of the
"infrastructure" and "public service facilities"
that would be needed to service growth;
• Completion of master plans for water and
wastewater, informed by "watershed
planning", to protect water quality and
quantity and to service growth and
development in a manner that would not
exceed the assimilative capacity of the
receiving water body;
• Completion of"stormwater master plans"
informed by "watershed planning" to address
flood risk vulnerability;
• Direction to avoid where possible "natural
heritage systems", "key hydrologic areas" and
"prime agricultural areas" and to minimize
impact on the "agricultural system"; and
• Additional specific tests for "settlement areas"
(Towns and Villages only) within the
Protected Countryside in the "Greenbelt
Area".
Section 2.2.9 (4) and (5) — Rural Areas
New policies would recognize: 1) existing This change supports the comments that the
employment areas on "rural lands" with City provided with respect to resource-based
opportunity for expansion, subject to certain recreational uses. Although the policy
criteria, and 2) clarify the parameters for addresses tourism and recreational uses, staff
planning for resource-based recreational uses. believes that the policy should be extended to
cultural and educational uses as well. This
matter is further addressed in section 5.1 of the
report.
Infrastructure to Support Growth
Section 3.2.1 (2) — Integrated Planning
More direction on integrated planning for This policy emphasizes the importance of
"infrastructure" and requirements for financial, coordinating land use planning, infrastructure
environmental and "infrastructure" planning planning, financial planning and environmental
analysis. concerns in the planning process. The success
of integrating these elements will rely heavily
upon the level of cooperation within and
between public agencies.
Page 5 of 11
Table 2 — Proposed Changes to the Growth Plan
Proposed Change Response
Section 3.2.1 (3) — Integrated Planning
New policy would specifically link "infrastructure" This provision will ensure that infrastructure
investments to facilitate higher-density investment is targeted for Pickering's City
development in "strategic growth areas". Centre. The City Centre is designated an Urban
Growth Centre and as such is considered a
"strategic growth area" within the Growth Plan.
Other strategic growth areas may also be
recognized associated with major transit station
areas, redevelopment and brownfield lands, and
transit priority corridors (e.g., Kingston Road).
Section 3.2.4 (1) — Moving Goods
Goods movement policies would be updated to Ensuring efficient freight movement is critical to
align with the PPS, 2014 and Ontario's Freight- supporting economic development opportunities
Supportive Guidelines (2016). The concept of within the City. This matter will be further
"freight-supportive" land use planning would also addressed through the City's upcoming
•
be integrated throughout the Growth Plan (e.g., Transportation Master Plan study.
planning for"prime employment areas").
Section 3.2.5 (1) — Infrastructure Corridors
New subsection on "infrastructure" corridors Encouraging the co-location of facilities can
would encourage the co-location of linear result in a more optimal use of such corridors.
"infrastructure" and would ensure that "planned
corridors" would be protected in accordance with
the PPS, 2014.
Section 3.2.5 (1) — Infrastructure Corridors
Planning for "infrastructure" corridors would be This new policy is consistent with revised
required to avoid, minimize or mitigate impacts Infrastructure policies in the Greenbelt Plan
on the "agricultural system", "key natural and Oak Ridges Moraine Plan. This matter has
heritage features", "key hydrologic features" and also been addressed through proposed
"key hydrologic areas". Amendment 27 (OPA 27) to the Pickering
Official Plan.
Section 3.2.6 (3) —Water and Wastewater
Systems
New policy (adapted from existing policy in the This provides consistency between the two
Greenbelt Plan) would prevent the extension of Provincial Plans.
water and wastewater services, from areas that
are currently serviced by an inland source, to the
Great Lakes, except for reasons of public health
or safety. This would not apply to municipalities
that have "urban growth centres", and in these
cases extension from the Great Lakes would be
Page 6 of 11
Table 2 — Proposed Changes to the Growth Plan
Proposed Change Response
permitted only if there is a demonstrated need
for the extension of services and there is an
approved environmental assessment for the
project.
Section 3.2.6 (2) —Water and Wastewater
Systems
Existing criteria for the expansion of water and The Region would be responsible for preparing
wastewater services would be supplemented by this master plan. The master plan would be
requiring a water and wastewater master plan, informed by watershed plans, and is a
or equivalent, to demonstrate no negative impact requirement for examining and making informed
on water quality and quantity, financial viability, decisions about settlement boundary
and assimilative capacity. expansions.
Section 3.2.7 (1) — Stormwater Management
New policy would require municipalities to create Clarity is required in terms of what "serviced"
"stormwater master plans" for serviced settlement areas mean. Does it refer to full
"settlement areas" that are informed by municipal services or could it also mean a
"watershed planning" and examine the combination of municipal and private services?
cumulative environmental impacts of stormwater Furthermore, the words "cumulative
from existing and planned development. environmental impacts" are too broad and may
be interpreted to also include "birds and bees".
To prevent any misinterpretation, it is suggested
that the statement be more specific to what
should be examined, namely flooding, erosion
and water quality.
Lastly, what is the timeline for the development
of these master plans, and does this policy only
pertain to settlement areas that were developed
without any stormwater management plan or
where there are major failures of existing
systems?
Section 3.2.7 (2) —Stormwater Management
New policy would require large-scale Noted.
development to be supported by a "stormwater
management plan" or equivalent informed by a
"subwatershed plan" or equivalent.
Page 7 of 11
Table 2 — Proposed Changes to the Growth Plan
Proposed Change Response
Section 3.2.7 (2) -Stormwater Management
New requirements for "low impact development" Agree. Such an approach was undertaken for
and "green infrastructure" would be incorporated the planning of the Seaton Urban Area, and
throughout the Growth Plan to help address has been incorporated into the recent
climate change. Amendment 23 ("Tools for Sustainable
Placemaking") to the Pickering Official Plan.
Section 3.2.8 — Public Service Facilities
The defined term "community infrastructure" Noted.
would be changed to "public service facilities" to
align with the PPS, 2014 and more direction
would be provided for locating "public service
facilities", including community hubs, in locations
that are accessible by "active transportation" and
transit.
Protecting What is Valuable
Section 4.2.1 (2) -Water Resource Systems
New policy would require municipalities to Proposed OPA 27 to the Pickering Official Plan
identify and protect a "water resource system", is proposing mapping changes consistent with
including both "key hydrologic features" and "key this new policy.
hydrologic areas"; municipalities would
undertake "watershed planning" as a basis for
identifying and protecting the "water resource
system".
Section 4.2.2 (2) — Natural Heritage Systems
New policy would require municipalities to The City of Pickering, through proposed OPA 27
incorporate a "natural heritage system" as to the Pickering Official Plan, is proposing
mapped by the Province in their official plans, mapping to identify an integrated natural
including "key natural heritage features" and heritage system, as well as the various key
their connectivity and diversity, and to apply natural heritage and key hydrologic features and
appropriate policies. areas, which is consistent with this policy
mandate.
Watershed plans have been developed in
Pickering by the conservation authorities, which
provide a fine level of detail on natural heritage
resources. The intention of the Province to map
the "natural heritage system" would seem
redundant. Concerns have however been
expressed that the conservation authorities use
different approaches to map natural heritage
Page 8 of 11
Table 2 — Proposed Changes to the Growth Plan
Proposed Change Response
features, leading to confusion and unpredictable
outcomes. This matter is further addressed in
section 5.1 of the report.
Section 4.2.4— Lands Adjacent to Key
Hydrologic, Key Hydrologic Areas and Key
Natural Heritage Features
New policies to incorporate Greenbelt-level The City of Pickering, through proposed OPA 27,
protections for"natural heritage systems", "key is proposing changes which are generally
natural heritage features", "key hydrologic consistent with this policy. Minor changes to the
features" and "key hydrologic areas" outside proposed OPA will be required to reflect new
"settlement areas", while allowing some flexibility definitions and requirements (e.g., habitat of
in order to accommodate growth. endangered species and threatened species).
Section 4.2.8 (3) — Mineral Aggregate
Resources
New policies for "mineral aggregate operations" This provides consistency between the two
within the "natural heritage system" would be Provincial Plans.
similar to those for the Protected Countryside in
the current Greenbelt Plan.
Section 4.2.3 (4) — Key Hydrologic, Key
Hydrologic Areas and Key Natural Heritage
Features
Within "settlement areas", the PPS, 2014 would The wording of the policy is confusing. The
apply for the protection of the "natural heritage policy does not specifically indicate that it is
system" and the "water resource system", with being applied to "Settlement Areas" as the
the added requirement that the diversity and Province indicated in its explanatory notes.
connectivity of the "natural heritage system" Furthermore, there is no explanation as to why
would continue to be protected. this change is being made.
Section 4.2.6 (1) — Agricultural System
New policy would require the province to identify This policy is consistent with the City's request
an "agricultural system" for the GGH, which for the Province to undertake an area wide
would be comprise "prime agricultural areas", agricultural assessment in support of food
"specialty crop areas", "rural lands" and an production.
"agricultural support network". Although the new policy provision indicates that
the Province will be providing mapping of the
Agricultural System, there is a concern that this
mapping process may duplicate the Region of
Durham's detailed mapping of the agricultural
system, based on the Province's Land
Evaluation and Area Review (LEAR) model.
This matter is further addressed in section 5.1 of
the report.
Page 9 of 11
Table 2 — Proposed Changes to the Growth Plan
Proposed Change Response
Section 4.2.6 (6) — Agricultural System
Municipalities would be required to minimize This new policy is consistent with the new or
impacts on the "agricultural system" and revised policies in the Greenbelt Plan (e.g.,
implement strategies to sustain and enhance the policies 3.1.3 (3), 3.1.6, 4.2.1 (2) and 4.3.2 (4) in
"agricultural system" and the long-term the Greenbelt Plan).
economic viability of the agri-food sector.
Section 4.2.10 (1) — Climate Change
New policies would require municipalities to The matters identified through these Climate
develop official plan policies to address climate Change provisions have been largely addressed
change and encourage them to prepare climate through the Amendment 23 (Tools for
change strategies and greenhouse gas Sustainable Placemaking) to the City's Official
inventories. Plan. Durham Region with the assistance of
local municipalities and conservation authorities
is developing a Community Climate Adaptation
Plan for implementation by 2017.
Implementation and Interpretation
Section 5.2.2 —Supplementary Direction
The section dealing with sub-area assessments The Ministry has indicated that some of this
(additional information to be prepared for smaller information may not be available until 2018.
geographic regions) would be changed to outline Given the timeframe for the delivery of the
the priorities for additional information the Provincial information and mapping, the City will
Province will prepare for the entirety of the be challenged to meet the Province's
Growth Plan area. expectations for Official Plan conformity. This
matter is further addressed in section 5.1 of the
This provision outlines a number of matters that report.
the Minister or the Province, shall identify,
establish or undertake. This includes: natural
heritage system mapping; a methodology for
assessing urban land needs; a review of the built
boundary; the identification of priority transit
corridors and prime employment areas; the
mapping of agricultural system; and guidance for
watershed planning.
Section 5.2.5 (4) - Targets
Clarification that intensification and density Noted.
targets would not require or enable growth
beyond what is permitted under the PPS for
special policy areas and other "hazardous
lands".
Page 10 of 11
Table 2 — Proposed Changes to the Growth Plan
Proposed Change Response
Section 5.2.6 (3) — Performance Indicators
and Monitoring .
New policies would support the establishment of While the establishment of a comprehensive
a comprehensive monitoring program for the monitoring program is generally supported, such
Greater Golden Horseshoe by allowing the a program may result in new costs to
province to require municipalities to provide data municipalities. The Province has indicated that
for the purposes of monitoring implementation of they will be requiring municipalities to provide
the Growth Plan. such data. However,it is not clear whether the
Province will be relying on data which is
currently being collected or readily available. If
such data does not currently exist, costs for the
acquisition, collection or synthesis of such data
may be significant.
Section 5.2.7 (1) — Schedules and
Appendices
New policy would require that all schedules, Noted.
including the population and employment
forecasts, be reviewed and updated where
appropriate every five years.
Page 11 of 11
Attachment#3 to
Report PLN 15-16
Table 3
Proposed Changes to the Greenbelt Plan
Table 3 - Proposed Changes to the Greenbelt Plan
Proposed Change Response
Introduction — Vision and Goals
Section 1.2.2 (4) — Protected Countryside
Goals — Settlement Areas:
A new goal for settlement areas that Settlement Areas in the Protected Countryside
encourages the development of "complete in Pickering are limited to hamlets that are
communities" that have a long-term goal of characterized by low density built form, a
becoming "net-zero communities". ("Net-zero predominant singular land use pattern (mainly
communities" means communities that meet single detached homes supported by limited
their energy demand through low-carbon or amenities), private services, and infrequent or
carbon-free forms of energy and off-set, no public transit.
preferably locally, any release of green gas Attaining truly "complete communities" and "net-
emissions that cannot be eliminated. It also zero communities" within the City's rural
means communities that include a higher settlements is an unrealistic objective, even in
density built form, and denser and mixed-use the long term, given that these existing
development patterns that ensure energy settlements would require extremely costly
efficiency, reduced distance travelled, and retrofits (e.g., reconstructing buildings to be
improved integration with transit, energy, water energy efficient) and upgrades to their
and waste systems). supporting infrastructure (e.g., replacing septic
beds with integrated municipal sewage
systems). However, incremental improvements
leading to this objective may be realized in part
through proposals for minor infill and
redevelopment.
Section 1.2.2 (6) — Protected Countryside
Goals — Climate Change: •
A new subsection, related to climate change The various ways by which planning and
goals, that promotes the integration of climate climate change considerations may be attained,
change considerations (e.g., techniques to particularly in relation to agricultural land uses
reduce greenhouse gas emissions) into and the management, protection and
planning and managing growth, the agricultural enhancement of the natural heritage system,
system and the natural heritage system. will rely heavily on education and training,
stewardship, best practices, and monitoring, as
the majority of rural lands are in private
ownership.
Section 1.2.3 — Urban River Valley Goals:
A new subsection "Urban River Valley Goals", In terms of Pickering, it is proposed that Duffins
to acknowledge the integration of certain major Creek be designated "Urban River Valley' in the
river valleys within urban areas into the Greenbelt Plan. Although the Pickering Official
Greenbelt Plan, and by promoting the protection Plan (POP) and Zoning By-law already provide
of certain matters within designated urban river protection to the Duffins Creek within the urban
valleys, including coastal wetlands and cultural areas through policies and regulations, the
heritage resources. introduction of this new designation with
Page 1 of 7
Table 3 - Proposed Changes to the Greenbelt Plan
Proposed Change Response
associated goals within the Greenbelt Plan,
emphasises the valley's importance and
function.
However, as part of the natural heritage system
the new urban river valley policies only pertain
to publicly owned lands. Privately owned lands
should also be included in this designation.
This matter is further addressed in section 5.2
of the report.
Geographic Specific Policies for the Protected Countryside
Section 3.1.3 (3) — Prime Agricultural Area
Policies:
A new policy requiring agricultural impact The new provision elevates the importance of
assessments where non-agricultural uses (e.g., agricultural lands to a similar level than that of
infrastructure, wildlife management, mineral natural heritage features. The completion of an
aggregates) are proposed in "specialty crop agricultural assessment will help inform
areas" and "prime agricultural areas". decisions regarding trade-offs made during the
implementation of future public infrastructure in
the rural area. An assessment may render
outcomes that could potentially minimize
impacts on prime agricultural lands to the extent
feasible, and generate best practices (e.g.,
erosion control, construction management, etc.).
Section 3.1.3 (5) — Prime Agricultural Area
Policies:
A new policy requiring land use compatibility Often agricultural operations have had to scale
where "agricultural uses" and non-agricultural down or retract practices due to the introduction
uses interface, to avoid, or if avoidance is not of new, adjacent urban land uses, instead of the
possible, minimize and mitigate adverse other way around. To support this policy, more
impacts on the "Agricultural System". guidance regarding the type and extent of buffer
planning should be provided by the Ministry of
Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs. This matter
is further addressed in section 5.2 of the report.
Section 3.1.5 —Agricultural Support
Network:
A new policy encouraging municipalities to Staff supports the acknowledgement of an
implement strategies to sustain and enhance "Agricultural Support Network". The City has
the "Agricultural Support Network" (e.g., supported the Region and the Durham
providing opportunities to support local food, • Agricultural Advisory Committee in advancing
near-urban agriculture, and preparing regional such strategies, and will continue to assist in
agri-food strategies). the development of new strategies to sustain
Page 2 of 7
Table 3 - Proposed Changes to the Greenbelt Plan
Proposed Change Response
and enhance the Agricultural Support Network.
Proposed Amendment 27 (OPA 27) to the
Pickering Official Plan, which addresses
Environment and Countryside matters, also
contains policies regarding promoting the
availability of local food, the diversification of
agricultural products, and the preparation of a
local food policy, which complements this new
policy.
Section 3.1.6 —Agricultural System
Connections:
A new policy section stating that the agricultural This policy shifts the initial focus on individual
system is connected both functionally and agricultural parcels to a functionally and
economically to the agricultural land base and economically integrated agricultural system that
agri-food sector beyond the boundaries of the is linked to land and activities beyond the
Greenbelt, and that municipalities and other boundaries of the Greenbelt Plan.
relevant agencies are encouraged to consider
how activities and changes in land use, both
within and in proximity to the Greenbelt, relate
to the broader agricultural system and
economy.
Section 3.2.3 (4) —Water Resource System
Policies:
A new policy requiring municipalities to consider Proposed OPA 27 contains provisions which
the Great Lakes Strategy and the target and are consistent with this policy.
goals of the Great Lakes Protection Act, 2015
as part of"watershed planning", coastal or
waterfront planning initiatives.
Section 3.2.4— Key Hydrologic Areas:
A new section "Key Hydrologic Areas" and This new section strengthens the basis for
related policies requiring municipalities to comprehensive watershed planning. Proposed
identify and protect "key hydrologic areas", to OPA 27 contains provisions which are
undertake watershed planning as a basis for consistent with this policy.
identifying and protecting these areas, and
policies setting out criteria to be met where
"major development" is proposed within a "key
hydrologic area".
Page 3 of 7
Table 3 - Proposed Changes to the Greenbelt Plan
Proposed Change Response
Section 3.2.5 (6) - Key Natural Heritage
Features and Key Hydrologic Features
Policies:
A new policy that exempts new development or This proposed revision stems from the fact that
site alteration within 120m of a key natural the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry,
heritage feature within the Natural Heritage in their methodology to identify the habitat of
System from the requirement to prepare a endangered species and threatened species,
natural heritage evaluation where the only key already incorporate minimum vegetation
natural heritage feature is the habitat of protection zones within the habitat area which
endangered species and threatened species. may vary from species to species. This new
policy will bring the Greenbelt Plan in closer
alignment with the Provincial Policy Statement,
2014 and the Endangered Species Act, 2007.
The Pickering Official Plan is to be revised
accordingly.
Section 3.2.5 (8) - Key Natural Heritage
Features and Key Hydrologic Features
Policies:
A new policy exempting buildings and This exemption will provide relief to farmers and
structures for"agricultural uses", "agricultural- farm operations that are already subject to
related uses" and "on-farm diversified uses" various restrictions and impediments, while
located within 120 metres of a key natural ensuring that certain key conditions are still
heritage and/or key hydrologic feature from the being met.
requirement to undertake a natural heritage or
hydrologic evaluation, subject to meeting
certain criteria.
Section 3.2.6 — External Connections:
A new policy adding many major watercourses Please see Staffs response to section 1.2.3,
between the Greenbelt and Lake Ontario, and Urban River Valley Goals, above.
several coastal "wetlands" into the Greenbelt
Plan as "Urban River Valley areas".
Section 3.4.2 (2) - General Settlement Area
Policies:
A new policy requiring municipalities to This new policy is consistent with the newly
incorporate policies in their official plans to proposed policy 3.2.8 in the Growth Plan
facilitate the development of community hubs to regarding the development of community hubs
enable the co-location of public services to in settlement areas.
promote cost effectiveness and service
integration.
•
Page 4 of 7
Table 3 - Proposed Changes to the Greenbelt Plan
Proposed Change Response
Section 3.4.2 (5) — General Settlement Area
Policies:
A new policy encouraging municipalities to This new policy is consistent with the Province's
develop soil re-use strategies and to use best guideline document entitled "Management of
practices for the management of excess soil Excess Soil — A Guide for Best Management
and fill. Practices", released in 2014. The City's Fill and
Topsoil Disturbance By-law is currently being
reviewed. The development of soil re-use
strategies and the use of best practices for the
management of excess soil and fill will form part
of this review.
Section 3.4.4— Hamlet Policies:
Deletion of the policy that permitted the minor Instead of removing the policy, staff suggest
rounding out of hamlets, and permitting limited that the Province allow municipalities the
growth only through infill and intensification. opportunity to study the potential of minor
expansion of those hamlets that may be eligible
for minor growth. The Hamlet of Claremont is
the largest hamlet within the City and is also
subject to an outstanding development
application that pre-dates the implementation of
the Greenbelt Plan and the Oak Ridges
Moraine Conservation Plan. As such, the City
requests that the Province allow the City to
study the potential minor expansion of this
hamlet.
This matter is further addressed in section 5.2
of the report.
General Policies for the Protected Countryside
Section 4.2.1 (2) (f) — General Infrastructure
Policies:
A new policy requiring new or expanding This policy puts "prime agricultural" lands on an
"infrastructure" to avoid "specialty crop areas" equal footing to the natural heritage system.
and "prime agricultural areas", unless need has
been demonstrated and there is no reasonable
alternative, in which case an "agricultural
assessment" would be required.
Page 5 of 7
Table 3 - Proposed Changes to the Greenbelt Plan
Proposed Change Response
Section 4.2.3 (2) — Stormwater Management
and Resilient Infrastructure Policies:
A new policy requiring municipalities to assess Hamlets also contain municipal infrastructure
infrastructure vulnerability within TownsNillages that may be vulnerable to climate change.
in accordance with policy 3.2.1.4 of the Growth Hamlets should therefore be included in this
Plan. policy.
Section 4.2.3 (4) (c) — Stormwater
Management and Resilient Infrastructure
Policies:
The policy, which refers to a list of requirements A subwatershed plan may not exist or be
that must be addressed as part of applications necessary in every instance, in which case the
for development or site alternation in the recommendations and standards of the
Protected Countryside, is revised by replacing watershed plan may suffice. It is therefore
the word "watershed plans" with "subwatershed suggested that the words "watershed plans" not
plans or equivalent". be removed from this policy.
Section 4.3.2 (4) — Non-Renewable Resource
Policies:
Where an application for a new mineral Proposed Amendment 27 to the Pickering
aggregate operation is proposed in prime Official Plan has already added new sub-
agricultural areas, an agricultural impact sections that require all applications for new
assessment shall be undertaken. Where mineral aggregate operations to satisfy all the
possible, proposals shall seek to maintain or requirements of the Regional Official Plan, and
improve connectivity of the Agricultural System. where the lands are within the Greenbelt Plan
to also satisfy all the requirements of the
Greenbelt Plan.
•
Section 4.4 (1) — Cultural Heritage
Resources:
A new policy requiring "significant cultural The cultural heritage, landscapes, built form
heritage resources", "built heritage resources", and archeological resources in Pickering are
"cultural heritage landscapes" and not only important for developing a sense of
"archaeological resources" within the Protected place, but it helps shape the identity of
Countryside of the Greenbelt Plan to be Pickering and create various opportunities for
conserved, in order to foster a sense of place education, conservation, tourism and
and benefit communities. employment.
Page 6of7
Table 3 - Proposed Changes to the Greenbelt Plan
Proposed Change Response
Implementation
Section 5.7.1 — Growing the Greenbelt:
New policies stating the Province's intention to The principle of the Province leading the way in
lead the process in identifying potential areas to potentially growing the Greenbelt is welcomed,
be added to the Greenbelt and to consider provided that a transparent and consistent
requests from municipalities to grow the approach be followed to consult the local
Greenbelt. municipalities, stakeholders and affected
communities.
Section 6.2 — Urban River Valley Policies:
New policy clarifying that only publicly owned The urban river valleys form part of greater
lands are subject to the policies of the Urban natural heritage system, and land parcels within'
River Valley designation. them should be subject to the same rules and
principles, irrespective of ownership. This
matter is further addressed in section 5.2 of the
report.
• Page7of7
Attachment #4 to
Report PLN 15-16
Table 4
Proposed Changes to the Oak Ridges Moraine
Conservation Plan (ORMCP)
Table 4 - Proposed Changes to the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan
(ORMCP)
Proposed Changes Response
Land Use Designations
Section 11 — Natural Core Areas:
Allowing "on-farm diversified uses" (e.g., By providing more flexibility to farmers within
agri-tourism) in prime agricultural areas within the ORMCP to diversify and sustain farming
the Natural Core Area designation. operations brings the ORMCP in closer
alignment with the Provincial Policy Statement
of 2014, and it is consistent with similar policy
revisions in the Greenbelt Plan.
Section 12 — Natural Linkage Areas:
Allowing "on-farm diversified uses" and By providing more flexibility to farmers within
"agriculture-related uses" (e.g., grain dryers) in the ORMCP to diversify and sustain farming
prime agricultural areas within the Natural operations brings the ORMCP in closer
Linkage Area designation. alignment with the Provincial Policy Statement
of 2014, and it is consistent with similar policy
revisions in the Greenbelt Plan.
Section 15 — New lots in Countryside Areas:
Deletion of the policy that permitted the minor The City requested that consideration be given
rounding out of Rural Settlements, and to allowing the City to study the potential minor
permitting minor infill within Rural Settlements expansion of the Hamlets of the Claremont and
only. Greenwood. The Hamlet of Claremont, which is
located on the Oak Ridges Moraine (ORM), is
the largest hamlet within the City and contains a
hub of community facilities. This hamlet is
subject to an outstanding development
application which pre-dates the implementation
of the ORMCP. As such, the City requests that
the Province allow the City to study the potential
minor expansion of this hamlet.
This matter is further addressed in section 5.3
of the report.
Section 18 (2)(c.1) — Settlement Areas:
A new policy objective that promotes the This new policy is consistent with the newly
location of two or more compatible public proposed policy 3.2.8 in the Growth Plan and
services in one building or place (community with policy 3.4.2 (2) in the Greenbelt Plan
hubs) within settlement areas. regarding the development of community hubs
in settlement areas.
Page 1 of 6
Table 4 - Proposed Changes to the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan
(ORMCP)
Proposed Changes Response
Section 18 (2)(c.2-4) — Settlement Areas:
A new policy objective to develop Settlement These policies will strengthen the City's
Areas in a manner that reduces greenhouse corporate priority of"Sustainable Placemaking";
gas emissions, to conserve cultural heritage assist with the development of complete
resources, and to ensure the sustainable uses communities; and complement the newly
of water resources. proposed Greenbelt Plan climate change goal
to promote the integration of climate change
considerations into planning and managing
growth in rural settlements located on the ORM.
Protecting Ecological and Hydrological Integrity
Section 22 — Key natural heritage features:
A new policy exempting building and structures This exemption will provide much relief to
for "agricultural uses", "agriculture-related farmers and farm operations that are already
uses", and "on-farm diversified uses" from the subject to various restrictions and impediments,
requirement to undertake natural heritage while ensuring that certain key conditions are
evaluations, while still ensuring that any still being met. This new policy is consistent
ecological impacts are minimized. with proposed changes to section 3.2.5 (8) of
the Greenbelt Plan.
Section 24 —Watershed plans:
New policies requiring watershed plans under Given the fact that watersheds and sub-
the ORMCP to include an evaluation of the watersheds may extend beyond the boundaries
assimilative capacity of the watershed to deal of the ORMCP, this proposed new policy should
with sewage from the surrounding area, and to also be considered for inclusion in section 3.2.3
assess climate change impacts. (Water Resource System Policies) of the
Greenbelt Plan.
Section 26 — Key Hydrologic Features:
A new policy exempting building and structures This exemption will provide much relieve to
for "agricultural uses", "agriculture-related farmers and farm operations that are already
uses", and "on-farm diversified uses" from the subject to various restrictions and impediments,
requirement to undertake hydrological while ensuring that certain key conditions are
evaluations, while still ensuring that any still being met. This new policy is consistent
ecological impacts are minimized. with proposed changes to section 3.2.5 (8) of
the Greenbelt Plan.
Page 2 of 6
Table 4 - Proposed Changes to the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan
(ORMCP)
Proposed Changes Response
Section28 —Wellhead protection areas:
A new policy that exempt any agricultural land The standards established under the Nutrient
from the certain requirements in the ORMCP Management Act, 2002, and the relevant
that prohibit certain uses in wellhead protection requirements under the Clean Water Act, 2006,
areas and in the zero to 2 year time of travel are apparently sufficient to provide this specific
zone of a wellhead protection area, provided exemption to agricultural operations. This new
that the owner or operator of the agricultural policy is to be addressed through the City's
operation complies with all standards steps to bring its Official Plan into conformity
established under the Nutrient Management with the Credit Valley, Toronto and Region, and
Act, 2002, and any applicable requirements Central Lake Ontario (CTC) Source Protection
under the Clean Water Act, 2006. Plan, dated July 28, 2015.
Section 29 —Areas of high aquifer
vulnerability:
A new policy that exempt any agricultural land The standards established under the Nutrient
from the certain requirements in the ORMCP Management Act, 2002, are apparently
that prohibit certain uses in areas of high sufficient to provide this specific exemption to
aquifer vulnerability, if the owner or operator of agricultural operations. This new policy is to be
the agricultural operation is carrying out addressed as part of the City's steps to bring its
operations that are regulated under the Nutrient Official Plan into conformity with the CTC
Management Act, 2002, and complies with all Source Protection Plan, dated July 28, 2015.
standards established under the Act.
Specific Land Use Policies
Section 36.1 — Excess soil and fill:
A new policy requiring municipalities and This new policy is consistent with the Province's
industry to use best practices to ensure excess guideline document entitled "Management of
soil is re-used, either on-site or locally, to the Excess Soil —A Guide for Best Management
maximum extent possible, and to ensure that Practices", released in 2014. The City's Fill and
soil received at a site will not cause an adverse Topsoil Disturbance By-law is currently being
effect on the current or proposed uses of the reviewed. The development of soil re-use
property or the natural environment. strategies and the use of best practices for the
management of excess soil and fill will form part
of this review.
This new policy is also consistent with section
3.4.2 (6) of the Greenbelt Plan.
Page 3of6
Table 4 - Proposed Changes to the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan
(ORMCP)
Proposed Changes Response
Section 38 — Major recreational uses:
New policies requiring the recreational plan Although low impact development techniques
associated with an application of a new or and green technologies are already considered
expanded major recreational use to also and implemented through the development
demonstrate that energy-conserving review process, this new policy provides greater
technologies will be used in clubhouses and emphasis on the implementation of these
restaurants, and that green infrastructure and techniques and technologies for buildings and
low impact development techniques will be structural elements associated with major
used to capture and treat runoff from areas with recreational uses.
impervious surfaces.
Section 41 (1.2) — Infrastructure:
A new policy requiring municipalities to ensure The term "development" does not fully capture
that the development of new infrastructure is the message. Staff suggest that it be replaced
supported by necessary studies such as by the words "planning, design and
infrastructure master plans, asset management construction".
plans and watershed/sub-watershed studies.
Tying new infrastructure projects to certain
necessary studies such as infrastructure master
plans, asset management plans and watershed
plans, provide greater public accountability, and
a more holistic and integrated approach
towards public infrastructure planning and
environmental planning.
Section 41 (1.2)(c) — Infrastructure:
A new policy stipulating that the studies to be It is unclear as to what is meant by the words
prepared in support of the development of new "appropriate scales". Please consider
infrastructure need to "address stormwater alternative wording.
management at appropriate scales throughout
the land use planning process".
Section 41 (1.2)(d) — Infrastructure:
The policy stipulates that the studies to be The use of green infrastructure may not be
prepared in support of the construction of new always appropriate. Staff suggest that the
infrastructure needs to "utilize green words "where appropriate" be added after the
infrastructure". word "infrastructure".
Page 4 of 6
Table 4 - Proposed Changes to the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan
(ORMCP)
Proposed Changes Response
Section 41 (1.2)(e) — Infrastructure:
A new policy requiring the development of new This new policy brings the topic of climate
infrastructure or the upgrading or extension of change adaptation and mitigation to the
existing infrastructure to demonstrate that forefront, and provides a more holistic and
greenhouse gas emission reductions and integrated approach towards public
adaptation to climate change impacts have infrastructure and environmental planning.
been assessed.
Section 41 (2.1) — Infrastructure:
A new policy requiring an applicant for an The new provision elevates the importance of
infrastructure project that would be located in agricultural lands to a similar level than that of
prime agricultural areas to demonstrate the natural heritage features. The completion of an
need for the project and that there is no agricultural assessment will help inform
reasonable alternative, and complete an decisions regarding trade-offs made during the
agricultural impact assessment demonstrating implementation of future public infrastructure in
that impacts to the prime agricultural area would the rural area. An assessment may render
be avoided or mitigated. outcomes that could potentially minimize
impacts on prime agricultural lands to the extent
feasible, and generate best practices (e.g.,
erosion control, construction management,
etc.).
This new policy is consistent with the newly
proposed policy 3.1.3 (3) in the Greenbelt Plan.
Section 43 (1) — Sewage and water services:
The policy refers to "major development" — a For consistency with the rest of the document, it
defined term that is not italicized. is suggested that the term "major development"
be italicized.
Section 43 (d.1) — Sewage and water
services:
A new policy stating that the assimilative The message conveyed in this policy is unclear
capacity of receiving lakes, rivers or streams and vague. Please consider alternative "lay
with respect to sewage from surrounding areas man" terms to explain the intent of this policy.
will not be exceeded and the attenuation
capacity of groundwater with respect to
subsurface sewage service systems will not be
exceeded.
Page 5 of 6
Table 4 - Proposed Changes to the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan
(ORMCP)
Proposed Changes Response
Section 45 (0.1) & (0.2) — Stormwater
management:
A new policy requiring municipalities to develop The principle of good stormwater management
stormwater master plans for Settlement Areas practices in settlements within the ORM is
that would be informed by watershed studies, understood and fully supported. However, Staff
incorporate green infrastructure elements and does not support the notion that stormwater
identify opportunities for stormwater retrofits master plans be required for all type of
where appropriate. development, or for settlements where no large
scale stormwater management problems are
experienced. New (or revised) stormwater
master plans should only be required where
major development is proposed, or where
settlement-wide stormwater management
systems are failing.
Furthermore, it is suggested that in the new
policy 45 (0.1) (b) the words "where
appropriate" be added after words "green
infrastructure elements", because green
infrastructure are not always appropriate or
practical.
Section 45 (3) —Stormwater management:
A policy revision stating that the municipality, in It is unclear what the proposed revision means.
considering an application for development or Please revise the wording to be more
site alteration, shall also seek to "increase instructive.
capacity to adapt to climate change".
Section 46 — Stormwater management plans:
A new policy requiring stormwater management These matters strengthen the agenda for low
plans prepared for major development impact development techniques, and climate
applications to minimize disruption of natural change mitigation and adaptation.
drainage patterns, address climate change
impacts, minimize reliance on end-of-pipe
controls, increase the municipality's ability to
adapt to climate change, and retrofit existing
stormwater management works where it is
necessary and feasible to do so.
Page 6 of 6