Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPD 50-02 REPORT TO COUNCIL Report Number: 50-02 Date: October 18, 2002 From: Neil Carroll Director, Planning & Development Subject: Draft Principles on the North Pickering land Exchange and Development North Pickering land Exchange Review Panel Recommendation: That Pickering Council RECEIVE, and ENDORSE as its comments, Report to Council Number PO 50-02 about the Draft Principles on the North Pickering land Exchange and Development; 1. That Pickering Council ADVISE the Hon. Chris Hodgson, Minister of Municipal Affairs & Housing and David Crombie, Chair, North Pickering land Exchange Review Panel, that: 2. (a) (b) (b) (c) in February 2002, the City of Pickering initiated a Growth Management Study to plan the future use of lands within the City; the Province should revise its land Exchange processes to conform to the City's Growth Management Study process; Principle 6 is not supported and should be deleted as it is beyond the Panel's mandate; and the Panel's draft Principles and Recommendations that undermine local land use decision-making (including the March 31, 2003 timeframe (Principle 3) for completion of a secondary plan) are not supported and should be deleted to allow local and Regional planning processes, in consultation with the Province, to proceed; and That the City Clerk FORWARD a copy of Report to Council Number PO 50-02 to: the Hon. Chris Hodgson, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing; David Crombie, Chair, North Pickering land Exchange Review Panel; and the Clerk of the Region of Durham. 3. Executive Summary: As the City of Pickering initiates its Growth Management Study of the Seaton and Agricultural Assembly lands, the Provincially-appointed North Pickering land Exchange Review Panel has released Draft Principles on the North Pickering Land Exchange and Development. The Draft Principles address lands in the same area as the City's Study (see Attachment #1 - Growth Management Study Area Boundary Map). Report to Council PO 50-02 October 18, 2002 Subject: Draft Principles - North Pickering Land Exchange Review Panel Page 2 The work of David Crombie and the Province should be undertaken in the context of the City's Growth Management Study. Principle 6, (which proposes the Agricultural Assembly be maintained for agricultural uses in perpetuity), exceeds the mandate of the Panel to examine Crown-owned lands, and would undermine the process and results of Council's Growth Management Study. Accordingly, Principle 6 should be deleted. Principle 3 - Recommendation 3B, (which requires the preparation of a secondary plan for the North Pickering lands by March 31,2003), establishes an unrealistic timeframe that would frustrate the local planning process. This recommendation should be deleted. In addition to these unsupportable principles, other matters and inconsistencies in the draft document require clarification. However, several of the principles and concepts contained in the Draft Principles document fit with existing Pickering Official Plan policies and emerging themes for the Terms of Reference for the Growth Management Study (such as a priority on jobs, ecological integrity, respect for cultural heritage, mixed uses, transportation choices, quality urban design and staging of development). Financial Implications: Not Applicable. Background: 1.0 Pickerina Has Initiated A Growth Manaaement Study The City has initiated a Growth Management Study. Council's February 4, 2002 Resolution #29/02 directed that a report be prepared on the elements of a Growth Management Study, as a basis for an Official Plan Review. The study area includes the Seaton lands in the east, to the St. Lawrence & Hudson (formerly C.P. Belleville) Rail line in the south, the York-Durham boundary on the west, and Highway 7 to the north. Council's May 21, 2002 Resolution #79/02 received Report to Council GAO 05-02 (Revised). The Report established the key elements of the Growth Management Study as follows: an overall structure plan; detailed neighbourhood plans; and a community outreach program. The Report identified 'ground rules' for the Study including recognition of the Pickering Official Plan targets for Seaton of 90,000 people and 45,000 jobs. In addition, the Report authorized the establishment of a working group to prepare the study terms of reference. Report to Council PO 50-02 October 18, 2002 Subject: Draft Principles - North Pickering Land Exchange Review Panel Page 3 Subsequently, Council's July 29, 2002 Resolution #102/02 established the remaining working group members, and Resolution #105/02 reaffirmed Council's commencement of a land use planning study. Council also passed Interim Control By-law 6013/02 to restrict uses within the study area for a one-year period to accommodate the study process. The Working Group comprises representatives of Council, City staff, the Region of Durham, the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, landowners, and interested community groups. The Working Group is currently preparing a draft terms of reference for Council's consideration in December. On October 7, 2002, Pickering Council passed resolution #117/02, requesting that the Honourable Robert Thibault, Federal Minster of Fisheries and Oceans, undertake a full environmental assessment of the Seaton lands, under the Federal Environmental Assessment Act, in the form of a panel review. Further, Pickering Council requested that the Federal Department of Indian and Northern Affairs, in concert with Aboriginal First Nations, undertake an archaeological inventory and study of the Seaton lands. 2.0 Province's North Pickerina land Exchanae Review Panel Releases Draft 'Development Principles' Ahead of Growth Manaaement Study Findinas The Minister of Municipal Affairs appointed the North Pickering Land Exchange Review Panel, chaired by David Crombie, to recommend a set of principles to guide the valuation, exchange and subsequent development of the Seaton lands. The Province requested this information to assist with its initiative to protect part of the Oak Ridges Moraine. The initiative involves the transfer of Provincially-owned developable lands in Pickering to certain developers, in exchange for the protection of approximately 440 hectares of environmentally sensitive lands on the Oak Ridges Moraine in Richmond Hill and Uxbridge, owned by these developers. The Review Panel has released a document identifying Draft Principles on the North Pickering Land Exchange and Development (see Attachment #2, Letter and Draft Principles). The Panel proposes six draft Principles, each with several recommendations to put them into action, and Draft Development Guidelines. Prior to submitting final recommendations to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, the Panel is seeking public comment on the Draft Principles. To this end, the Panel held two public meetings in Pickering: one in the afternoon of October 18\ and the other in the evening of October 2nd. This Report to Council is the City's formal opportunity to voice its comments on the Draft Principles. The Panel requests comments by October 24th. Report to Council PO 50-02 October 18, 2002 Subject: Draft Principles - North Pickering land Exchange Review Panel Page 4 3.0 Discussion 3.1 With the Strong Exception of Two Principles, Certain Draft Principles Generally Align with the City's Growth Management Work To-Date Staff has reviewed the Panel's Draft Principles document in the context of existing official plan policies and the preliminary work conducted to-date on the City's Growth Management Study. With the exception of two principles (Principle 6 respecting perpetual agricultural use on lands outside the Panel's mandate, and Principle 3 - Recommendation 38 respecting the March 31,2003 time frame for a secondary plan), and the need for some clarification on others, staff finds that the Panel's work is generally aligned with Pickering Official Plan policies and emerging themes for the Terms of Reference for the Growth Management Study. The table below identifies where the Panel's Draft Principles are consistent with work to-date on the Growth Management Study. City's Growth Management Study Panel's Corresponding Draft 'Themes' Principles I Recommendations Jobs First Principle 3 - Development Guideline 3 Ecological Integrity Principle 4 Protect Cultural Heritage Principle 5 Mixed Use Community Principle 3 - Development Guideline 2 Transportation Choices Principle 3 - Development Guideline 7 Quality Urban Design Principle 3 - Recommendation 3A (in part) Staging to Achieve Principles Principle 3 - Recommendation 3A (in part) Despite the consistency of some of the Principles with the City's recent work, specific issues require further review by the Panel and the Province. Report to Council PO 50-02 October 18, 2002 Subject: Draft Principles - North Pickering Land Exchange Review Panel Page 5 3.2 Panel's Principle 6 on Agricultural Assembly is Outside Mandate Staff understands the mandate of the Panel refers to Crown-owned lands only. Despite this, the Panel determined the Provincially-owned lands in Markham were outside its mandate, but recommended agricultural uses in perpetuity on the privately-owned lands located west of West Duffins Creek, in Pickering. Priniciple 6 is outside the Panel's mandate, and premature without a study on rural and agricultural issues on the Agricultural Assembly as will be undertaken through the City's Growth Management Study. Further, Principle 6 would prejudice the outcome of Pickering's Growth Management Study given Council's ground rules to accommodate 90,000 people and 45,000 jobs within the City's Study Area. Emerging Terms of Reference for Pickering's Growth Management Study require an examination of agriculture, and a public outreach program will allow input from the farming community. The Study's conclusions will be drawn from analysis and community consultation, considering municipal objectives. Principle 6 should be deleted. 3.3 Panel's Recommendation 38 for Secondary March 31, 2003 Sets Unrealistic Time Frame Plan Approval by Principle 3 - Recommendation 38 sets an unrealistic timeframe of March 31,2003 for approval of a Secondary Plan for the Seaton lands. Pickering estimates a minimum 8 month timeframe for its Growth Management Study to gather relevant background information, undertake required analysis and synthesis, undertake meaningful public and agency consultation, and formulate conclusions. Staff suggests that the completion of secondary plans within such a tight timeframe could only be achieved through a Provincially-imposed process, and that such a process would limit both municipal and community consultation. Such a solution is neither equitable, nor in the public interest. The March 31, 2003 timeframe for approval should be deleted in recognition that the City will forward a secondary plan to the Region for approval following the results of the Growth Management Study. 3.4 Panel's Principles & Recommendations Disregard Local Planning Processes The Panel's principles and recommendations espousing respect for the planning responsibilities of the City and the Region are directly contradicted by other principles and recommendations. Contradictions include prescribing land use on the Agricultural Assembly lands ahead of the City's Growth Management Study, and setting a timeframe for approval of a secondary plan that is well ahead of the anticipated timing of Council's consideration of its Growth Management Study. Report to Council PO 50-02 October 18, 2002 Subject: Draft Principles - North Pickering land Exchange Review Panel Page 6 In addition, the Panel's recommendation to 'transplant' the highly restrictive Oak Ridges Moraine policies to the Seaton lands is inappropriate. These policies were established for a particular purpose following an extensive analysis and determination of ecological features and functions on the Moraine. While ecological integrity is anticipated to be a key 'principle' guiding the City's Growth Management Study, appropriate environmental protection and enhancement policies should be determined for the Seaton lands through the City's area-specific study process, and not imported from some other process. The Panel's recommendation to the Minister to use the Province's 'prerogative' to ensure perpetual agricultural land uses in the Agricultural Assembly is not respectful of local planning. Experience suggests normal planning and development activities, such as future land transactions, official plan amendment applications, and Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) decisions can work contrary to stated objectives of approved plans. To counter this possibility, the Panel recommendations appear to imply the use of some different controls for this part of Pickering to ensure 'certainty' in policy compliance. While certainty may be desirable, the imposition of new or higher Provincial controls over lands in Pickering would not be respectful of the local planning process. Planning for the Seaton and Agricultural Assembly lands should be done through the City's Growth Management Study. The Draft Principles should be revised to consistently embrace the local and Regional planning processes, and the Province's land exchange process should be revised to be undertaken in the context of the outcome of the City's study. 3.5 Panel's Other Principles & Recommendations: Some are Supportable; Some Contain Internal Inconsistencies and Require Clarification Staff supports lands being made available to local developers. To ensure that the land evaluation process is fair and equitable, staff also supports the use of an independent tribunal or judge to review land valuation and exchange. The release of information on the extent to which the exchange is consistent with the Principles is similarly supported. Further, staff supports fair market value being achieved for the Provincially-owned lands. Despite these supportable principles, there is a lack of clarity on how the vision set out in the proposed Development Guidelines is to be implemented. While there is support for innovative and leading development, there is a need to balance market interests and control. Many 'innovative' guidelines have sat 'on the shelf' because developers did not perceive them as an opportunity. Report to Council PD 50-02 October 18, 2002 Subject: Draft Principles - North Pickering Land Exchange Review Panel Page 7 The Panel's recommendation to exclude the natural heritage lands from the exchange are strongly supported. However, the Panel's inclusion of Oak Ridges Moraine policies to further define natural heritage features after the exchange will counter the stated objectives of providing developer certainty in the land exchange. The Panel and the Province should update their reference to this planning area as 'Seaton' (not North Pickering). Seaton has been used to reference these lands in local and Regional planning documents since the early 1980's. Significant expanses of Pickering lands exist 'north' of the Provincial lands, making Seaton more 'central' to Pickering than 'north'. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Map Showing Growth Management Study Area Boundary 2. Letter from the David Crombie, Chair, North Pickering Land Exchange Review Panel plus attached Draft Principles on North Pickering Land Exchange and Development Prepared By: Approved I Endorsed By: ~,d rant McGregor, M IP, RPP ::t~~~ Manager, Policy , RPP ning & Development GM:td Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Coun . ~ 1 omas J. Quinn, Chief Administrative Officer ATTACHMENT # I TO REPORT II PO .!) () - 0 .1. ~ LEGEND - ""'W,If,",".'" """""" '",,',.Y'fN<" ""'ff",""""""'A 'H"',"","',.' .e. ," "," """","".,"',"'8.'.. ",'..^"',""'" O,.,,<,"A;f~"".' ',>" ...',f", "'",,'.""',' ","""""""""fM.I t( -r. ATTf\f'...HMENT #~, ,", ,.-. ¡J l-.;Ei'úfH 11 t'u Sf)" 0 d- -;;, " Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing Planning and DeveloprnentDivision 'North PiCkering Land Exchange Team 777 Bay St.. 3rd Floor TorontoON MSG2E5 Telephone: (416) 585-6185 Fax: (416) 585-7305 Ministère des Affaires municipales et du Logement Division de la planification et de l'aménagemenidu territoire Comité d'étude sur l'échange de terrains - North Pickering 777, rue Bay 3' étage Toronto ON MSG 2E5 Téléphone: (416) 585-6185 Télécopieur: (416) 585.7305 - ~. Ontario September 13, 2002 His Worship Mayor Wayne Arthurs The City of Pickering 1 The Esplanade ' Pickering ON LI V 6K7 REceiVED SEP 1 7 2002 CITY OF PICKERING D PLANNING AND ...... EVELOPMENT OEPARTMI:iNT Dear Mayor Arthurs: As chair of the North Pickering Land Exchat;l.ge Review Panel, I am pleased to send you a cop-y of the panel's Draft Principles on North Pickering Land Exchange and Development These draft principles capture the panel's efforts since its establishment in May by Municipal Affairs and Housing Minister Chris Hodgson. Mr. Hodgson asked the panel to develop principles to guide the exchange and development of the North Pickering lands. We have crafted six principles that we believe are essential to a resolution that is in the best interests of the public, land owners, and the taxpayers of Pickering, Durham!llld Ontario. The principles, cover the land valuation and exchange and the subsequent development of the North Pickering ~ands. We have also developed recommendations in order to put each principle into action. . v Prior to finalizing our recommendations to the minister, we will be holding facilitated public workshops on October 1 and 2 in the O'Brien Meeting Room of the Pickering Recreation Complex. We look forward to these opportunities to get input from Pickering and Durham 'taxpayers and others with an interest in North Pickering. The public will also have the opportunity to comment via written submissions, email, the ministry web site and by telephone. In addition the Draft Principles will be posted on the Environmental Registry. We intend to make our final recommendations to the minister by the end of October. We would' therefore appreciate receiving formal responses to the Draft Principles ftom your council by , October 24. We look forward to hearing ftom you. ,Yours truly, ~~ David Crombie Chair North Pickering Land Exchange Review Panel Enclosure: Draft Principles 1322(Otll9S) ATTACHMENT' -i: TO REPORT # PO crt,. ':J- ~ Ontario RECEIVED SEP 1 7 2002 . CITY OF PICKERING PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT I Development (. North Pickering land Exchange Review Panel ÞT1ACHMEN1 #_2--10 1""'",.:'~1" PO cA" ())... r,t> iH.. ",-""..,/.' --,.., ",., Table of Contents Introduction Draft Principles Principles into Action Draft Development Guidelines Appendix A North Pickering Land Exchange (map) Appendix B Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan Sections 22(1), 23(1), 26(1) and 26(4) 1 3 4 9 15 17 ATTACHMEN'T I_~_TO EE?OR"T # PO SD' 0 ;2 North Pickering land Exchange Review Panel David Crombie (Chair) President, Chief Executive Officer Canadian Urban Institute Brian Buckles Retired business executive Director, Green Door Alliance Inc. Ron Christie Chair Rouge Park Alliance Debbe Crandall Executive Director Save the Oak Ridges Moraine Coalition Robert De Berardis, P. Eng., . Consulting Engineer and President De Berardis Associates Incorporated Consulting Engineering Jack Goodwin President ENA Realty Group Professor James McKellar Associate Dean, External Relations Director, Program in Real Property Schulich School of Business, York University John L. Riley National Director, Conservation Science and Stewardship Nature Conservancy of Canada' Ric Symmes Chair Oak Ridges Moraine Foundation ATTACHMENT' ';? TO REPORT I PO SD. () J. Introduction As part of the Government of Ontario's strategy to protect the Oak Ridges Moraine, the province is exchanging provincially owned lands in North Pickering for privately owned lands in Richmond Hill and Uxbridge. These lands are illustrated in Appendix A. Before the government took action in 2001 to protect the moraine, the Ontario Municipal Board was conducting hearings regarding the development of portions of the moraine in Richmond Hill and Uxbridge. If approved, these developments would have damaged the moraine and effectively blocked any opportunity for a continuous east-west natural comdor across the Oak Ridges Moraine. On the recommendation of the Oak Ridges Moraine Advisory Panel appointed by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, the Minister appointed a mediator to reach an agreement with certain private land owners to exchange provincially owned lands in North Pickering for the Richmond Hill and Uxbridge lands. Lands òn the moraine in Richmond Hill will become publicly owned parkland. The North Pickering lands, along with some adjacent lands in the Town of Markham, were assembled by the province in the early 1970s. The original intent was to develop a community of some 200,000 people in conjunction with federal government plans for a new international airport immediately to the north of the site. Since then, part of the provincial holdings have been preserved as part of the Rouge Park; part has been developed as the community of Cornell; and part is protected for agricultural use. A fourth part of the land holdings in North Pickering, often referred to as Seaton, is identified as land for the City of Pickering's future urban expansion, and the exchange involves lands in this area only. The Richmond Hill and Uxbridge private landowners and the provincial government have reached a general agreement to negotiate a hind exchange. To ensure that the exchange is appropriate, Municipal Affairs and Housing Minister Chris Hodgson appointed the North Pickering Land Exchange Review Panel, chaired by David Crombie, to recommend a set of principles to guide the valuation, exchange and subsequent development of the North Pickering lands. 1 ATTACHMENT #_~TO REPORT # PO SO - 0 J.. When considering the Draft Principles that follow, the panel recognizes that the province has several roles in the land exchange and the subsequent protection and development of the lands. These roles include: landowner; potential development partner; regulator; and guardian of the public interest. The involvement of the province and the size of the development presents a unique opportunity to create an exceptional community in North Pickering . .. a new standard in Ontario and North America. To that end, the panel has also developed draft development guidelines, which are included with this document. The panel seeks public comment on the Draft Principles prior to submitting the final recommendations to the Minister. You can find out more about the North Pickering Land Exchange by visiting the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing Web site at www.mah.~ov.on.ca and following the Oak Ridges Moraine links. You can submit your comments by mail to: North Pickering Land Exchange Review Panel, 3rd Floor, 777 Bay Street, Torontoj ON lliG~. . You can also submit comments bye-mail to NPLERP@mah.~ov.on.ca or through the Ministry Web site. Those who wish to do so may also take part in workshops on the Draft Principles, to be held October 1 and 2, 2002. Please call (416) 585-6366 for more infonnation, or to register to attend. 2 'rl""""""",I"# /) "1'0 ,1.."""'\,:,:;:1.1 _.~ ~{C;Uín II PO 50 - 0 :.2 Draft Principles The North Pickering Land Exchange Review Panel recommends that six principles should guide the process of valuation, exchange and development. Principle 1: The land valuation and exchange must be fair, equitable and consistent with the public interest. The valuation and exchange must take place according to a clear, accountable prøcess. Principle 2: The province, as a local landowner, potential development partner, regulator and guardian of the public interest, must remain an active participant in the subsequent protection and development of the North Pickering lands. Principle 3: Any development of lands in North Pickering must demonstrate innovation and sustainability while respecting the planning responsibilities of the City of Pickering, the Region of Durham, and the Province of Ontario. Principle 4: Environmentally significant forms, features and functions must be preserved and protected in North Pickering. Principle 5: Significant cultural heritage features in North Pickering must be protected. Principle 6: The lands referred to as the Duffm Rouge Agricultural Preserve as shown on Appendix A must remain in agricultural use, in perpetuity. 3 ATTACHMENT #_£< TO REPORT # PO 5 0 ~ 02 Principles into Action In order to put those six principles into action, the panel makes the following recommendations. Principle 1: The land valuation and exchange must be fair, equitable and consistent with the public interest. The valuation and exchange must take place according to a clear, accountable process. Recommendation 1A Recognizing that the land valuation and exchange results from Minutes of Settlement following mediation, and that negotiations on the purchase and sale ofland are generally conducted in private, the panel recommends the appointment of a Fairness Commissioner at the earliest possible time.! The Fairness Commissioner shall have access to all relevant material sufficient to: . monitor the land exchange process; and . report publicly, following the completion of the land exchange, on the extent to which the exchange was consistent with these principles, taking into account the rationale underlying the decisions on land valuation and the amount of land exchanged. Recommendation 1B The panel recommends that the Provincial Auditor also scrutinize the land valuation and exchange as part of his /her nonnal responsibilities. I Recognizing the importance of acting quickly on this recommendation, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing has already accepted it, and will act on it as quickly as possible 4 ATTACHMENT '_~TO REPORT # PO SO- 0'1.... Principle 2: The province, as a local landowner, potential development partner, regulator and guardian of the public interest, must remain an active participant in the subsequent protection and development of the North Pickering lands. Recommendation 2A An inftastructure cost-sharing agreement among all involved parties in North Pickering, including the local authorities, is required and should be approved as soon as possible. This agreement should provide certainty for all parties and equalize the burden of financing infTastructure for all beneficiaries. Recommendation 2B The province shall ensure that there is opportunity for the involvement oflocal businesses, including local homebuilders, to maintain healthy competition at every stage of development. Recommendation 2C In:&astructure design must respect the environmentally sensitive areas and all natural and cultural heritage features and mitigate the consequences of all incursions into, or through, these sensitive areas and heritage features. Principle 3: The subsequent development oflands in North Pickering must demonstrate innovation and sustainability while respecting the planning responsibilities of the City of Pickering, the Region of Durham, and the Province of Ontario. Recommendation 3A In addition to the normal requirements of a Secondary Plan (for example, that it: follow the requirements of the Environmental Assessment Act; set aside land for infrastructure and for the protection of environmental, cultural and hydrological features and functions; include a master plan for transportation, water and sewers), the Secondary Plan shall also: . designate the Duffin Rouge Agricultural Preserve for agricultural uses only; . set out "a clear vision for the "long-term development of North Pickering; 5 " ATTACHMENT #~TO REPORT' PO 50 - 0 2 . identify thoseìands to be set aside by the province to implement the principles; . identify the "net developable" lands that will be eligible for any land exchange; . establish best practices for innovative stonnwater management including "low impact development" practices; . through a water budget, maximize the potential for North Pickering to maintain infiltration rates, recharge rates and groundwater flow paths and to maintain and where possible enhance the existing quality of base flow of emergent streams; . include development guidelines that will promote innovation and sustainability (see Draft Development Guidelines, Page 9); . encourage compact and efficient development patterns that will support high levels of pedestrian access and transit usage; . include a range of housing types and densities that will . provide housing choices for all income levels, including those who require affordable housing; . protect the required rights-of-way for regional transit links to Toronto, York, South Pickering and Durham; . incorporate policies from Sections 22 through 29 of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan to protect natural, cultural and hydrologically sensitive features; . identify appropriate staging of development to ensure that each stage meets the required principles. Recommendation 3B The panel recommends that the province, through a consultative process, ensure the approval of the Secondary Plan by March 31, 2003. This is essential to ensure the timely and successful implementation of the land exchange. The Secondary Plan must also be matched with a timetable for implementing economic development and job creation, critical components for sustaining any community. 6 ATTACHMENT #-~TO !1EPORT # PO SO. Ó 2.. Principle 4: Environmentally significant forms, features and functions must be preserved and protected in North Pickering. Recommendation 4A Environmentally sensìtive land, natural heritage features, hydrologically sensitive features and appropriate protection zones, shall be deemed "non-developable" and shall not be included in any land exchange. These lands shall be held and managed in perpetuity by an appropriate public agency or not-for-profit org~zation, for the benefit of the public interest. RecoID.J;Dendation 4B The identification of "non-developable" lands should be undertaken by appropriate public agencies using the principles of Sections 22(1), 23(1), 26(1) and 26(4) of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (see Appendix B). Recommendation 4C The panel recommends that the Environmental Commissioner also scrutinize this work as part of his /her nonnal responsibilities. Principle 5: Significant cultural heritage features in North Pickering must be protected. Recommendation 5A North Pickering's cultural heritage, including significant architectural features, heritage roads and streets capes, and archaeological resources, must be identified and protected. Recommendation 5B Where feasible, cultural heritage features should be integrated into the pattern of development and their protection and preservation. supported by adaptive reuse. 7 An J,GHMHJ1 # _2<_TO REPORT # PO .5 () . () '). Principle 6: The lands referred to as the Duffin Rouge -- Agricultural Preserve as shown on Appendix A must remain in agricultural use, in perpetuity. . 2) Recommendation 6A It is recommended that the Duffin Rouge Agricultural Preserve should be retained in agricultural use in perpetuity: 1) To preserve the integrity of the agreement and prices for provincial sale of public lands to private individuals; To preserve viable food production activity close to the community to supply fresh local produce to enhance local understanding of agricultural food production in the community; To provide adjoining open space and context for the Pickering and other adjoining communities withbenefits including: Enhanced water recharge Clear urban boundaries and nearby rural open space environment. 3) Recommendation 6B. The panel recommends that, if necessary, the minister use the province's prerogative to ensure that these lands are maintained in their intended agricultural use, in perpetuity.. 8 ATTACHMENT#---~TO REPORT II PO 5 t) - O"L ..'-, Draft Development Guidelines Development Guidelines for North Pickering can serve three purposes: a) To implement the principles recommended by the North Pickering Land Exqhange Review Panel with specific reference to the stated objective that the subsequent development of these lands must demonstrate innovation and sustainability. b) To secure a built fonn that protects and enhances the environmentally significant fonns, features and functions and provides adequate protection for the cultural heritage of North Pickering. c) To ensure that North Pickering is a diverse community - both physically and socially - that responds to a broad set of community needs and preferences and provides a wide range of options in tenns of places to live and to work. Development guidelines must be sensitive to the needs of developers and investors, as well as the demands of future homebuyers and businesses that locate in North Pickering. These guidelines must also aclrnowledge the existence of various standards and requirements to protect life and safety, maintain levels of service within the community, and facilitate the installation and maintenance of the required infrastructure. Finally, these guidelines should embody new expectations for the way that resources are protected and consumed, including attitudes to sustainability. Hence, a sense of perspective is required. However, this should not diminish the commitment to a strong vision for North Pickering. This vision must be predicated on what is possible given the natural beauty of these lands; what is right in tenns of a lègacy for future generations; and what is feasible given the many interests that must be served. North Pickering represents an opportunity for the province and the City of Pickering to lead by example and invoke new benchmarks. This is an opportunity to create an alternative to the conventional, low-density suburb that now characterizes much of the recent new growth in the Greater Toronto Area. As principal landowner in 9 ATTACHMENTI_~TO REPORT # PO 5CJ -0 ~ North Pickering, the province is in a position to adopt a three- pronged strategy to achieve its objectives: a) First, the province can set aside those lands that are essential to protecting environmentally sensitive fonns, features and functions, and significant cultural heritage features. These lands and features should be entrusted to appropriate public authorities, or non-profit organizations, for the benefit of the public-at-Iarge. b) Second, through a Secondary Plan, the province can establish new parameters for the development that go beyond nonnal planning requirements. It is through the Secondary Plan that the province, working with the City of Pickering, can lay the groundwork for many of the features of Smart Growth. These features can range from new fonns of higher density housing, and more compact residential layouts that encourage pedestrian access and transit usage, to land use patterns that more effectively integrate residential and commercial uses. c) Finally, through a set of development guidelines governing the "net developable'~ lands, the province can secure adherence to its principles for North Pickering. Development guidelines are standard practice in the development industry and nonnally accompany the conveyance of new development sites. The difference in North Pickering will be the objectives that these guidelines address. . This is an exercise in preserving an important natural and cultural heritage and demonstrating that there are alternatives to low density suburban sprawl that are profitable to developers, attractive to homeowners, and embody the best development practices. The planners for North Pickering need not look beyond the boundaries of the provincially owned lands to see the critical elements that will shape this community and define the vision. The vision for North Pickering is a unique blend of three factors: a) a framework of natural coITidors of land that will remain virtually untouched by development except for the need to accommodate inftastructure; b) preservation of a large tract of agricultural land on the western edge that will forever define a close proximity between an 10 ,~,;r;..:';ili:;,!:.i\i;i'I"".::2.,,-,~JÙ ,¡' " 'R' l' oiJ' So - 0 ') ",cr\J tJ r "'~--""--~--"'~-"-" urban and a rural landscape that is unmatched in the Greater Toronto Area; and c) an urban pattern that maintains a strong relationship with the natural features and offers choice of location, housing type, density, amenities, and neighbourhood. If North Pickering is to set new standards consistent with best practices, then it must depart from some of the CUlTent planning practices that shape the pattern of conurbation that is widespread today. Forexample, two such practices are zoning by-laws that isolate employment locations, shopping and services, and housing locations from each other; and low-density residential building forms that require automobile access to increasing expanses of land. These are among the CUlTent practices that will not suffice when sustainability is an objective. Sustainability requires a transition from poorly-managed sprawl to land use planning practices that create and maintain efficient infrastructure, ensure close-knit neighborhoods and sense of community, and preserve natural systems. To achieve this transition change is necessary. The call for change is not a call for new levels of public intervention. In pursuing the vision the province need not invoke new regulatory powers, supercede local'planning powers, nor exclude the priv~te sector. Quite the opposite. In North Pickering, the province has the option of exercising its rights as a landowner and potential developer partner to achieve its objectives. North Pickering will still rely on homebuilders and the development industry to do what they do best - install streets and utilities; build a wide variety of housing types; develop retail centres and local convenience stores, as well as build offices, warehouses, and other places of business. What the province as landowner can influence are the guidelines affecting this development.' These guidelines should address the following objectives: 1. The overall land-use planning structure for North Pickering should be integrated within a larger transportation network built around transit rather than highways and freeways. A commitment to identifying suitable transit corridors that can link North Pickering to the region is essential to the success of this community. 11 ATTACHMENT #~ TO RE?ORT # PO .5 0 - C> ::2- 2. Neighbourhoods should be designed so that housing, jobs, daily needs and other activities are within easy walking distance of each other. As many activities as possible should be located within easy walking distance of transit stops. The location and character of each neighbourhood should be consistent with a larger transit network. 3. Each phase of any development should be economically sustainable. That means a commitment to job creation in tandem with the commitment to housing. Job creation in this context covers a broad spectrum of uses :trom offices, warehouses, and retail to various services including education and health care. Integration of these uses with residential land uses is essential to balancing each stage of the community. 4. Each phase of the development should be environmentally sustainable. This can range :trom "green buildings" that use a minimum of nonrenewable energy, produce a minimum of pollution, and cost a minimum of energy dollars, wWle increasing the comfort, health, and safety of the people who live and work in them to "green development" that can reduce operating and capital costs, improve health and productivity, . and offer Wgher perceived value and quality for the occupants. 5. Each phase should be socially sustainable. There should bea diversity of housing types and price ranges to address a cross- section of household preferences and to enable citizens :trom a wide range of economic levels and age groups to live and work within the boundaries of North Pickering. 6. The plan should embrace increased residential densities in locations where more intense use of land is justified in terms of access to amenities, transit, and community services. These locations can offer a more urban lifestyle with nearby shops and restaurants and more opportunity for social interaction that can attract households in search of not just housing, but place. 7. Fonns of compact or clustered development should be utilized to reduce overall land consumption, increase local open space, reduce surface water runoff, and enhance transportation alternatives to the car, including walking, biking and transit. 8. Lands to be set aside for futUre institutional uses such as schools, libraries, colleges, and support services should be . 12 ATTACHMENT#_~TO REPORT # POo. So - 0 2- located to reinforce walking, cycling, and the use of public transit. 9. As a complement to. the preserved natural features, developed areas should contain an ample supply of specialized open space in the fonD of squares, greens and parks whose frequent use is encouraged through placement and design. Where possible, the natural terrain, drainage and vegetation of the community should be preserved with superior examples contained within parks or greenbelts. 10. Streets, pedestrian paths and bike paths should contribute to a system of fully-connected and interesting routes to all destinations. Their design should encourage pedestrian and bicycle use by being small and spatially defined by buildings, trees and lighting; an,d by discouraging high speed traffic. 11. Development in North Pickering should set an example in the efficient use of water resources through the use ofnatural drainage, drought tolerant landscaping and water recycling. 12. Design standards for public infrastructure such as below and abovê' ground utilities, roads and highways, bridges and other supporting structures must reflect a heightened sensitivity to natural features and promote environmentally sensitive development. These objectives are bound to elicit response from those who. prefer the status quo. However, pressures continue to intensify for development that can accommodate growth and protect the environment. North Pickering can be developed with care, its natural and cultural resources can be enhanced, and it can address the developing pressures that now face the Town of Pickering if these objectives prevail. 13 APPENDIX A ... - = - ATTACHMENT #_~TO REPORT # PO SO, D '2... Seaton Study Area/EastDuffins Study Area (North Pickering Lands) Duffin-Rouge Agricutural Preserve Uxbridge Lands being exchanged Richmond Hill Lands being exchanged 0 0 5 Kilometres D 0 EZJ 10 . ~ Uppe~TIer8ounday Lowe~TIer8ounday Oak Ridges Marahe ",,-- Roads Lakes Rivers 'll"'H^pnIT #;¿ TO 1-<- h" ",.1:1, --- REPORL# PO so -- () '2- ". .', --CAppendix B Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan Sections 22(1), 23(1), 26(1) and 26(4) Key natural heritage features , 22. (1) The following are key natural heritage features: 1. Wetlands. , 2. Significant portions of the habitat of endangered, rare and threatened species. 3. Fish habitat. 4. Areas of natural and scientific interest (life science)~ 5. Significant valleylands. 6. Significant woodlands. . 7. Significant wildlife habitat. 8. Sand batTens, savannahs and tallgrass prairies. *** ~ Natural heritage evaluation' 23. (1) A natural heritage evaluation shall, (a) demonstrate that the development or site alteration applied for will have no adverse effects on the key natural heritage feature or on the relåted ecological functions;, -~- (b) identify planning~ design and construction practices that will maintain and, where possible, improve or restore the heaJ.th, diversity and size of the key natural heritage feature and its connectivity with other key natural heritage features; ( c) in the case of an application relating to land in a Natural Core Area, Natural Linkage Area or Countryside Area, demonstrate how connectivity within and between key natural heritage - features will be maintained and, where possible, improved or restored before, dUring and after construction; (d) if the Table to 'this Part specifies the dimensions of a minimum vegetation protection zone, determine whether it is sufficient, and if it is not sufficient, specify the dim~ions of the required minimum vegetation protection zone and provide for the maintenance and, where possible, improvement or ' restoration of natural self-sustaining veg~tation within it; (e) if the Table to this Part does not specify the dimensions of a minimum vegetation protection zone, determine whether one is required, and if one is required, specify the dimensions of 17 ;¿ So. LÌ .;2.. the required minimum vegetation protection zone and-provide for the maintenance and, where possible, improvement or restoration of natural self-sustaining vegetation within it; and (f) in the case of a key natural heritage feature that is fish habitat, ensure compliance with the requirements of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (Canada). (2) In the case of item 4 of the Table to this Part, the basis on which the detennination and specification mentioned in clause (1) (e) is done shall include, without limitation, an analysis of land use, soil type, slope class and vegetation type, using criteria established by the Govenunent of Ontario, as amended from time to time. *** Hydrologically sensitive features 26. (1) The following are hydrologically sensitive features: 1. Permanent and intermittent streams. 2. Wetlands. 3. Kettle lakes. 4. Seepage areas and springs. *** 26. (4) A hydrological evaluation shall, (a) demonstrate that the development or site alteration will have no adverse effects on the hydrologically sensitive feature or on the related hydrological functions; (b) identify planning, design and construction practices that will maintain, and where possible improve or restore, the health, diversity and size of the hydrologically sensitive feature; and ( c) determine whether the minimum vegetation protection zone whose dimensions are specified in the Table to this Part is sufficient, and if it is not sufficient, specify the dimensions of the required minimum vegetation protection zone and provide for the maintenance and, where possible, improvement or restoration of natural self-sustaining vegetati9n within it. 18 {1, fTlìGHMENT # _2?- TO "',',' "1' Ji Pn ' ::2.0 - 0 "L , "db 'Ii L .."..- - .~,- TABLE KEY NATURAL HERITAGE FEATURES, HYDROLOGICALLY SENSITIVE FEATURES AND AREAS OF NATURAL AND SCIENTIFIC INTEREST (EARTH SCIENCE):MINIMUM AREAS OF INFLUENCEAND MINIMUM VEGETATIÒN PROTECTION ZONES Minimum Vegetation Protection Zone Minimum Area of Influence (21,23, Item Feature (21) 26 (4), 30 (12» 1. Wetlands All land within 120 metres of All land within 30 metres of any part of feature, any part of feature šubject to clause 23 (d) if a natural heritage evaluation is required 2. Significant portions of All land within 120 metres of As determined by a natural heritage evaluation habitat of endangered, any part of feature carried out under section 23 rare and threatened species 3. Fish habitat All land within 120 metres of All land within 30 metres of any part of feature, any part of feature subject to clause 23 (1) (d) if a natural heritage evaluation is required 4. Areas of natural and All land within 120 metres of As determined by a natural heritage evaluation scientific interest (life any part of feature carried out under section 23 science) 5. Areas of natural and All land within 50 metres of any As determined by an earth science heritage scientific interest (earth part of feature evaluation carried out under subsection 30 (12) science) 6. Significant valleylands All land within 120 metres of All land within 30 metres of stable top of bank, stable top of bank subject to clause 23 (1) (d) if a natural heritage evaluation is required 7. Significant woodlands All land within 120 metres of All land within 30 metres of the base of outermost any part of feature tree trunks within the woodland, subject to clause 23 (1) (d) if a natural heritage evaluation is required 8. Significant wildlife All land within 120 metres of As determined by a natural heritage evaluation habitat any part of feature carried out under section 23 9. Sand barrens, savannahs All land within 120 metres of All land within 30 metres of any part of feature, and tal1grass prairies any part of feature subject to clause 23 (1) (d) if a natural heritage evaluation is required 10. Kettle lakes All land within 120 metres of the All land within the surface catchment area or surface catchment area within 30 metres of any part of feature, whichever is greater, subject to clause 26 (4) (c) if a hydrological evaluation is required 11. Pennanentand All land within 120 metres of All land within 30 metres of meander belt, subject intermittent streams meander belt to clause 26 (4) (c) and subsection 26 (5) if a hydrological evaluation is required 12. Seepage areas and All land within 120 metres of All land within 30 metres of any part of feature, spnngs any part of feature subject to clause 26 (4) (c) and subsection 26 (5) if a hydrological evaluation is required 19