HomeMy WebLinkAboutDecember 6, 2004 Council Meeting
Agenda
Monday, December 6, 2004
7:30 PM
(i)
INVOCATION
Mayor Ryan will call the meeting to order and lead Council in the saying of the
Invocation.
(11)
ADOPTION OF MINUTES
Special Meeting of November 9, 2004
Regular Meeting of November 15, 2004
1.
DELEGATIONS
John Wager, representing Greenwood & Area Ratepayers Association, will
address Council concerning the Draft Greenbelt Plan.
(IV)
1.
RESOLUTIONS
To adopt the Executive Committee Report, Appendix II, dated
November 22, 2004
PAGE
1-3
2. To consider Planning & Development Report ~47-04 concerning 4-70
the Draft Greenbelt Plan: October 2004.
(V) BY-LAWS
By-law Number 6407/04 7t
Being a by-law to dedicate that part of Lot 28, Range 3, Broken Front
Concession, Pickering, designated as Part 12, Plan 40R-22824 as public
highway and name it "Delta Boulevard".
By-law Number 6408/04 72
Being a by-law to appoint By-law Enforcement Officers for certain
purposes (Parking Regulation- 1555 Finch Ave., 1865 Kingston Road
and St. Martin's Anglican Church, 1203 St. Martin's Drive.)
-1-
Council Meeting
Agenda
Monday, December 6, 2004
7:30 PM
(VI)
1.
NOTICE OF MOTION
Moved by Councillor Brenner
Seconded by Councillor McLean
WHEREAS the voter turnout across Canada has been steadily
decreasing over the years at Federal, Provincial and Municipal
elections; and
WHEREAS young people have expressed that they do not feel
engaged in the electoral process; and
WHEREAS young people have a good knowledge of the electoral
process and the way the three levels of government operate
through school programs that start in the early grades; and
WHEREAS a lowering of the voting age from eighteen to sixteen
will have the advantage of reinforcing a pattern of voter
participation that will stay with our youth throughout life; and
WHEREAS the Member of Parliament for Ajax-Pickering, Mark
Holland, has introduced Bill C-261 that if enacted would have the
effect of lowering the voting age for Federal elections to sixteen
while at the same time ensuring that a candidate must be at least
eighteen years of age;
NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Corporation of the City of
Pickering hereby states its support for Bill C-261 to lower the voting
age from eighteen to sixteen at the Federal level; and
FURTHER THAT the Legislature of the Province of Ontario be
requested to amend the Elections Act which governs Provincial
elections and the Municipal Elections Act, 1996 which governs
Municipal elections to lower the voting age from eighteen to
sixteen; and
FURTHER THAT this resolution be forwarded to:
· The Right Honourable Paul Martin, Prime Minister of Canada
Mark Holland, MP, Ajax-Pickering
· Dan McTeague, MP, Pickedng-Scarborough East
· The Honourable Dalton McGuinty, Premier of Ontario
73-74
-2-
Council Meeting
Agenda
Monday, December 6, 2004
7:30 PM
· The Honourable John Gerretsen, Minister of Municipal Affairs &
Housing
· The Association of Municipalities of Ontario
· Federation of Canadian Municipalities
· All Ontario Municipalities
Moved by Councillor Pickles
Seconded by Councillor Johnson
75-76
WHEREAS by Resolution #212/98 the Federal Minister of
Transport was advised that Council and residents of Pickering do
not support the development of an airport; and
WHEREAS in April 2001, the Federal Transport Minister
announced that the Greater Toronto Airports Authority (GTAA) had
been asked to determine the need for a future regional reliever
airport on the Picketing lands; and
WHEREAS a report prepared for the GTAA and released in
September 2002 entitled "Pickering Lands Airport Planning ~nitiative
- Financial Assessment Analysis" concluded that an airport based
on a preliminary business model was feasible; and
WHEREAS a Pickering Airport Draft Plan Report was released by
the GTAA in November 2004, outlining a conceptual airport site
layout, timeframes, and justification for an airport in Picketing, and
that the GTAA announced that the Financial Assessment Analysis
will be updated; and
WHEREAS these reports are important early components of the
rationale for the potential establishment of an airport in Pickering
and were important sources in the development of an
environmental assessment for the proposed airport, therefore, the
City of Picketing should review the Analysis and provide a
response to the GTAA; and
WHEREAS these reports are very technical documents and provide
a very specialized field of analysis that staff of the City of Pickering
do not have the expertise to review and comment on in a
meaningful way; and
-3-
Council Meeting
Agenda
Monday, December 6, 2004
7:30 PM
WHEREAS the City has received sufficient funding from
proponents in special planning studies and reviews impacting the
City of Pickering, including but not limited to, Special Study Areas,
Ontario Power Generation's Return to Service of Picketing 'A',
Ontario Power Generation's Waste Facility Expansion Study, and
the Growth Management Study;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT it is essential for the
City of Pickering to obtain an independent review of the Pickering
Airport Draft Plan Report and updated Financial Assessment
Analysis at this time, prior to the initiation of an environmental
assessment, to protect the interests of the residents and The
Corporation of the City of Pickering; and
THAT City of Picketing acquire the consulting services to undertake
a peer review of the Pickering Airport Draft Plan Report and
updated Financial Assessment Analysis; and
THAT City of Pickering staff prepare appropriate terms of
reference, procedure (e.g. request for proposals), and proposed
budget for a peer review of the Pickering Airport Draft Plan Report
and updated Financial Assessment Analysis for Council's
consideration at a scheduled Council meeting to be no later than
the end of January 2005; and
THAT the City of Pickering in the interim request that the Federal
Transport Minister and the CEO of the Greater Toronto Airports
Authority (GTAA) provide sufficient funding in order for the City of
Pickering to acquire the appropriate qualified expert services to
review the GTAA Financial Assessment Analysis and provide
meaningful comments and recommendations to the Council and
City of Pickering; and
THAT the Mayor, on behalf of the City of Pickering, formally make
this request in writing to the Transport Minister and the President
and CEO of the GTAA, with a copy to the Members of Parliament
for Ajax-Pickering and Pickering-East Scarborough, and Members
of Provincial Parliament for Ajax-Pickering and Uxbridge.
Councillor Pickles will be makinq a motion to have this Notice
of Motion considered at the Council Meeting of December 20,
2004.
4
Council Meeting
Agenda
Monday, December 6, 2004
7:30 PM
(VI) OTHER BUSINESS
(VIII) CONFIRMATION BY-LAW
(IX) ADJOURNMENT
-5-
RESOLUTION OF COUNCIL
DATE
MOVED BY
SECONDED BY
That the Report of the Executive Committee EC 2004-19, Appendix II, dated
November 22, 2004, be adopted.
002.
PICKERING
Appendix II
Executive Committee Report
EC 2004-19
That the Executive Committee of the City of Picketing having met on November 22,
2004, presents its nineteenth report to Council and recommends:
CORPORATE SERVICES REPORT CS 48-04
2005 INTERIM SPENDING AUTHORITY
That Report CS 48-04 from the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer,
concerning 2005 Interim Spending Authority, be received; and
That the 2005 Interim Operating Expenditures be approved at 50% of the
prior years' budget including exceptions as contained in Attachment I,
pending approval of the formal 2005 Current Budgets by Council; and
That the Treasurer be authorized to transfer to the Ajax Pickering Transit
Authority (APTA) a maximum of 50% of APTA (City of Pickering's share)
prior years budget, pending approval of the formal APTA 2005 Current
Budgets by Council; and
That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the
necessary actions to give effect thereto.
CORPORATE SERVICES REPORT CS 50-04
SECTION 357/358 OF THE MUNICIPAL ACT
-ADJUSTMENT TO TAXES
That Report CS 50-04 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer
concerning Section 357/358 of the Municipal Act - Adjustment to Taxes, be
received; and
That the write-off of taxes as provided under Section 357/358 of the
Municipal Act 2001, be approved; and
That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take
the necessary actions to give effect hereto.
-8-
Appendix II
Executive Committee Report
EC 2004-19
CORPORATE SERVICES REPORT CS 51-04
SECTION 357/358 OF THE MUNICIPAL ACT
-ADJUSTMENT TO TAXES
That Report CS 51-04 of the Director, Corporate Services, concerning
Section 357~358 of the Municipal Act - Adjustment to Taxes, be received;
and
That the write-off of taxes as provided under Section 357 and 358 of the
MunicipalAct, R.S.O. 2001, as amended, be approved; and
That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take
the necessary action to give effect hereto.
CORPORATE SERVICES REPORT CS 53-04
CASH POSITION REPORT AS AT SEPTEMBER 30, 2004
That Report CS 53-04 from the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer,
concerning Cash Position Report as at September 30, 2004, be received for
information.
9
RESOLUTION OF COUNCIL
DATE
MOVED BY
SECONDED BY
That Picketing Council RECEIVE, and ENDORSE Report PD 47-04 as its
comments on the provincial Draft Greenbelt Plan, dated October 2004,
EBR Registry Number: PF04E0006; and
That Picketing Council ADVISE the Minister of Municipal Affairs and
Housing,:
(a) That Pickering Council continues to support the concept of a
permanent greenbelt in the Golden Horseshoe; and
(b) That the southern part of the Agricultural Assembly (the
Cherrywood community) be excluded from the greenbelt Plan and
that lands east of the Hamlet of Whitevale be added; and
That the other Greenbelt land use and boundary issues be
addressed as set out in Sections 3.0 and 5.0 of this Report; and
That the approval of the draft Greenbelt Plan should be delayed
until such time as municipalities and other stakeholders have had
an opportunity to review the Ministry's supporting documentation;
and
That the draft Greenbelt Plan for the Golden Horseshoe as well as
other provincial initiatives such as the Planning Act reform are
released as a comprehensive package for further consultation;
(c)
(d)
(e)
That Pickering Council authorize City staff to continue to review and
provide technical comments on the draft Greenbelt Plan to the Province
after the deadline date of December 12, 2004 to address the issues raised
in Sections 3.0 and 5.0 of this Report; and
That the City Clerk FORWARD a copy of Report PD 47-04 to the Minister
of Municipal Affairs and Housing; the Minister of Public Infrastructure
Renewal; the Region of Durham; Durham Region Area Municipalities; the
Town of Markham; the Region of York and the Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority.
004
REPORT TO
COUNCIL
Report Number: PD 47-04
Date: December 2, 2004
Neil Carroll
Director, Planning & Development
Subject:
Draft Greenbelt Plan:
October 2004
Recommendation:
That Pickering Council RECEIVE, and ENDORSE Report PD 47-04 as its
comments on the provincial Draft Greenbelt Plan, dated October 2004,
EBR Registry Number: PF04E0006;
That Pickering Council ADVISE the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, that:
(a) Pickering Council continues to support the concept of a permanent
greenbelt in the Golden Horseshoe;
(b) the southern part of the Agricultural Assembly (the Cherrywood
community) be excluded from the Greenbelt Plan and that lands east of
the Hamlet of Whitevale be added;
(c) the other Greenbelt land use and boundary issues be addressed as set out in
Sections 3.0 and 5.0 of this Report;
(d) the approval of the draft Greenbelt Plan should be delayed until such time
as municipalities and other stakeholders have had an opportunity to
review the Ministry's supporting documentation; and
(e) the draft Greenbelt Plan should not be approved until such time as the
Province's Growth Plan for the Golden Horseshoe as well as other
provincial initiatives such as the Planning Act reform are released as a
comprehensive package for further consultation;
That Pickering Council authorize City staff to continue to review and provide
technical comments on the draft Greenbelt Plan to the Province after the
deadline date of December 12, 2004 to address the issues raised in Sections 3.0
and 5.0 of this Report; and
That the City Clerk FORWARD a copy of Report PD 47-04 to the Minister of
Municipal Affairs and Housing; the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal; the
Region of Durham; Durham Region Area Municipalities; the Town of Markham;
the Region of York and the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority.
Executive Summary: In late October 2004, the Province released its draft
Greenbelt Plan for consultation, following the release of the Provincially-appointed
Greenbelt Task Force's advice and recommendations report to the Minister of Municipal
Affairs and Housing in August 2004.
Report PD 47-04
Subject: Draft Greenbelt Plan
December 2, 2004
005
Page 2
The greenbelt area generally includes lands under the jurisdiction of the Greater
Toronto Area Regions of Durham, York, Halton and Peel; the Cities of HamiLton and
Toronto; the tender fruit and grape lands as designated in the Region of Niagara Official
Plan; the Niagara Escarpment Plan; and the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan.
Smaller areas within the County of Simcoe and the County of Wellington are also
located in the Greenbelt.
Previously, Pickering Council provided comments to the Greenbelt Task Force on its
Discussion Paper entitled Toward a Golden Horseshoe Greenbelt. The City agreed
with the Task Force on the use of comprehensive planning studies to support urban
area expansions and requested the Task Force to consider incorporating the Phase 2
results of Pickering's Growth Management Study into its final recommendations.
Despite the City's sound rationale for accommodating urban growth on the southern
part of the Agricultural Assembly lands, the Province has chosen to include all of the
area west of West Duffins Creek within the Greenbelt Plan. Other lands in Pickering
also contained within the Greenbelt Plan include an area located generally south of
Highway 7 to Urban Ajax, and parts of the Rosebank, Rougemount and Rouge Park
Neighbourhoods.
No technical information supporting the proposed Greenbelt Area boundary and
associated land area has been provided to local municipalities. There was no
consultation on a map for the greenbelt by the Province prior to the release of the draft
Greenbelt Plan. The Province should delay the approval of a Greenbelt Plan until such
time as municipalities and other stakeholders have had an opportunity to review the
Ministry's supporting documentation and comment on a revised boundary together with
the provincial Growth Plan.
It is recommended that the Province incorporate comments provided in Report
PD 47-04, and that Report PD 47-04 be also forwarded to the Ministry of Public
Infrastructure Renewal for consideration as part of its Greater Golden Horseshoe
growth management planning exercise.
Financial Implications: Not Applicable.
Background:
1.0 The Greenbelt Task Force released its Discussion Paper entitled
Toward a Golden Horseshoe Greenbelt for public consultation in May 2004.
Last May, the Greenbelt Task Force released its Discussion Paper entitled
Toward a Golden Horseshoe Greenbelt. The Task Force, in its Discussion
Paper considered five 'layers' that would provide the framework for the proposed
greenbelt: environmental protection; agricultural protection, including tender fruit
and grape lands, and the Holland Marsh; transportation and infrastructure;
natural resources, particularly mineral resources; and culture, tourism and
recreation opportunities. In addition, two overarching themes included:
008
Report PD 47-04
Subject: Draft Greenbelt Plan
December 2, 2004
Page 3
1.1
1.2
2.0
· Ontario's growth management and other related initiatives as the context for
development of a permanent Golden Horseshoe Greenbelt; and
· implementation and administration approaches, models and tools for
establishing and administering a greenbelt.
During the months of May and June, stakeholder and public sessions were held
in the Golden Horseshoe area. City staff attended various stakeholder sessions.
The City provided detailed comments to the Greenbelt Task Force on its
Discussion Paper through Report PD 28-04.
On June 29, 2004, Pickering Council passed Resolution #101/04 endorsing
Report PD 28-04. Although City staff supported the concept of a permanent
greenbelt in the Golden Horseshoe, the Task Force was requested to consider
incorporating the results of local growth management studies, such as the City's
Growth Management Study, into its final recommendations. The Task Force was
also requested to coordinate its work with the Province's work on a Growth Plan for
the Golden Horseshoe as well as other initiatives such as the Planning Act reform
work, prior to making its final recommendations to the Province.
The Task Force provided the Minister with its final advice and
recommendations on greenbelt protection.
In August 2004, the Greenbelt Task Force submitted its report entitled Toward a
Golden Horseshoe Greenbelt: Advice and Recommendations to the Minister of
Municipal Affairs and Housing. The recommendations provided principles for
identifying lands for protection from development in order to preserve Ontario's
natural heritage, sensitive environmental areas, vital agricultural communities,
natural resources, and opportunities for tourism, recreation and cultural heritage.
No map of a proposed greenbelt was prepared.
The Task Force recommended that the Province undertake a multi-disciplinary,
multi-stakeholder approach to defining the greenbelt, and that the provincial
greenbelt and the growth management initiatives proceed simultaneously.
Further, the Task Force noted that there is a great deal of knowledge resting at
the local level with municipalities and others that will prove essential when
drawing the lines that will define the greenbelt lands.
Recent Provincial Greenbelt Initiatives
On October 28, 2004, the Province introduced Bill 135 - Proposed Greenbelt Act,
2004 and released a draft Greenbelt Plan. A copy of the draft Greenbelt Plan is
provided as Attachment #13.
The effect of these initiatives would be to protect about one million acres of
environmentally sensitive and agricultural land in the Golden Horseshoe from
urban development, in addition to the approximately 800,000 acres already
protected by the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan and the Niagara
Escarpment Plan.
Report PD 47-04
Subject: Draft Greenbelt Plan
December 2, 2004
Page 4
007
2.1
2.2
Bill 135 - Proposed Greenbelt Act, 2004
The Province released draft legislation on October 28, 2004, which provides for
the establishment of a Greenbelt Area and a Greenbelt Plan. The highlights of
the proposed legislation are provided in Attachment #1. It is anticipated the Act
will receive Royal Assent on or before December 16, 2004.
Of note, only the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing can propose
amendments to the Greenbelt Plan in respect of areas designated as Protected
Countryside. The Bill outlines the process by which the Province may consider
amendments to the Greenbelt Plan, including consulting with the municipality,
other affected public bodies and the public. Decisions on amendments are
made by the Minister and are not subject to appeal.
Draft Greenbelt Plan
The draft Greenbelt Plan establishes a framework to protect environmentally sensitive
and agricultural lands. These lands are identified as Protected Countryside. The
Plan also includes lands within the Niagara Escarpment Plan and Oak Ridges
Moraine Conservation Plan. The draft Plan aims to:
· ensure the environment, including its water systems, remains healthy to
support existing and future generations of both people and wildlife;
· encourage growth in cities and towns outside the Greenbelt while supporting
vibrant rural communities within the Greenbelt;
· support agriculture as a source of commerce, employment and domestic
food production; and
· provide outdoor recreational and other leisure opportunities to support the
needs of our rapidly expanding population.
A significant portion of Pickering, approximately 43% of the City's land area, is
included in the Greenbelt Plan. Besides the Oak Ridges Moraine in north
Pickering, the entire Agricultural Assembly and other lands generally south of
Highway 7 to Urban Ajax are within the Protected Countryside. For the Rural
Settlement Areas, only the Hamlets of Cherryvvood and Greenwood are identified
on the Greenbelt Plan maps. Omitted from the maps are the Hamlets of
Brougham, Claremont, Green River and Whitevale.
There are two major areas of land that are neither part of the existing urban area
nor part of the greenbelt on the Greenbelt Map (see Attachment #2 - Greenbelt
Map). One area coincides with the southeast part of the Federal airport lands,
and the other includes part of northeast Pickering, from just south of Highway 7
and extending north to the Oak Ridges Moraine. These lands are potential
future urban areas of Pickering, subject to further land use studies to determine
appropriate designations.
OO8
Report PD 47-04
Subject: Draft Greenbelt Plan
December 2, 2004
Page 5
3.0
3.1
The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing has requested comments on the
Bill 135 - Proposed Greenbelt Act, 2004 by November 27, 2004 and on the draft
Greenbelt Plan by December 12, 2004. However, we understand through Ministry
staff that the Ministry's time for review of comments and preparation of the final
Greenbelt Plan may be extended to February.
Discussion
Staff's main comments are structured around four topics of strategic
concern to the City.
The topics relate to both the Greenbelt legislation and draft Plan, as follows:
· Lack of rationale for the Greenbelt Plan boundary.
· Conclusion and background work of the City's Growth Management Study
ignored.
· Conclusion on broader range of countryside uses for Pickering ignored.
· Lack of rationale for including the western portion of the Hamlet of
Greenwood in the Greenbelt Plan.
Lack of rationale for the Greenbelt Plan boundary.
Although the Greenbelt Plan specifies that the Protected Countryside lands have
been identified through a "combination of best science available, consideration of
existing and future patterns of urbanization, and local knowledge and advice", no
rationale is provided in the document justifying the extent of the proposed
Greenbelt Area or the lands proposed to be included within it. In fact, there was
no consultation by the Province on a specific boundary prior to the release of the
draft Greenbelt Plan.
According to Provincial representatives, one of the intents of the draft
Greenbelt Plan is to protect the prime agricultural areas identified in upper-tier
and single-tier Official Plans and to separate the greenbelt from urban areas.
However, in the City's case, the Greenbelt Plan excludes a large prime
agricultural area located northeast of the Hamlet of Greenwood while it includes
the Cherrywood community (of the Agricultural Assembly) that abuts the current
urban boundary. Parts of urban Pickering includinq the Rouge Park
Neighbourhood, as well as properties located east of the I~ouge River are also
identified within the Greenbelt Plan area.
On November 24, 2004, Pickering and other municipal and conservation authority
staffs met with representatives of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing to
discuss the Greenbelt legislation and draft Plan. At the meeting, municipal and
conservation authority staffs indicated that the lack of scientific analysis and
background information relating to the features and boundary makes it difficult for
municipalities to advise the Province on the relevancy of the boundary for a
permanent greenbelt. Despite some explanation by Ministry staff on the Plan's
boundary, it appeared that the delineation of the boundary was very subjective.
Report PD 47-04
Subject: Draft Greenbelt Plan
December 2, 2004
Page 6
00,9
Clearly, there are inconsistencies with the way the criteria were applied by the
Province in determining the Greenbelt boundary for Pickering. The release of
the Province's analysis may assist City staff in tracing the rationale for the
Greenbelt boundary in Pickering. Without this documentation, it will be very
difficult for the City to defend its conforming official plan and zoning by-law
amendments at any Ontario Municipal Board hearing. It is recommended that
the Province defer approving the draft Greenbelt Plan for a period of
approximately six months in order to provide sufficient time for local
municipalities and other stakeholders to review the Province's supporting
documentation.
Conclusion and background work of the City's Growth Management Study
ignored.
The Greenbelt boundary in Pickering is proposed in direct conflict with the City's
input provided to the Greenbelt Task Force and to the Province. In this regard,
the Phase 2 report of Pickering's Growth Management Study (GMS)
comprehensively documented the appropriateness of the south part of
Agricultural Assembly lands (the Cherrywood community) to accommodate
future urban growth. This logical extension of Pickering's urban area provided an
opportunity to link Cherrywood and Seaton communities with south Pickering, make
efficient and economic use of existing and proposed infrastructure, while maintaining
the environmental resources of the urban area and protecting the countryside area
around the Hamlet of Whitevale.
Instead, the Province chose to ignore the Greenbelt Task Force
recommendations that key agricultural lands be identified for protection using
criteria including: science; socioeconomic factors such as fragmentation,
urban/suburban encroachments, loss of agricultural support mechanisms and
rural development; and regional and local official plan designations and criteria.
The GMS quite clearly documented the constraints to economically viable
farming in the Cherrywood community and concluded that the Cherrywood
community is more appropriately used in the long term for urban purposes than
for agriculture. The redesignation of the southerly portion of the Agricultural
Assembly (Cherrywood community) for urban purposes is reflected in the City's
proposed Official Plan Amendment 13.
The Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing has publicly stated that the
preservation of the entire Agricultural Assembly is based on fulfilling the
Government's election platform and on science. As stated above, there has
been no technical information provided by the Province that supports the
Cherrywood community for permanent agricultural protection. It is
recommended that the Province exclude the Cherrywood community from the
draft Greenbelt Plan and add the lands east of the Hamlet of Whitevale on the
basis of the GMS results, which is beinq implemented throuqh Amendment 13
('see Maps 1 and 2, Attachments 6 and 7).
0 _0
Report PD 47-04
Subject: Draft Greenbelt Plan
December 2, 2004
Page 7
Conclusion on broader range of countryside uses for Pickering ignored.
The City had commented to the Greenbelt Task Force that there should be a
distinction between the more pure "agricultural areas" and "countryside areas",
where a broader range of uses could be permissible. In that comment, it was
suggested that the non-urban lands south of the Oak Ridges Moraine (at least in
western Durham) be considered as "countryside areas" and lands north of the
Moraine be retained as "agricultural areas".
The draft Greenbelt Plan identifies a single Protected Countryside designation,
which is further differentiated into an Agricultural System and a Natural Heritage
System. In the Agricultural System, the lands are either "prime agricultural" or
"rural" areas, with the rural areas permitting a broader range of uses including
recreational uses. Under the Greenbelt Plan, all lands in Pickering's Agricultural
System will be considered "prime agricultural" as they are designated Permanent
Agricultural Reserve in the Regional Official Plan.
The prime agricultural areas would only permit agricultural, agriculture-related
and secondary uses as defined by the Provincial Policy Statement. In contrast,
the City's proposed Countryside Area designation under the Growth
Management Study and in Amendment 13 would also permit non-traditional
agricultural related uses such as country inns, rural theatres, country spa's, and
antique stores. It is recommended that the Province be requested to consider a
rural designation for the north part of the Aqricultural Assembly lands, and the
lands around Whitevale, thereby permittinq a broader ranqe of near urban uses
A similar request will be made to the Region as part of the City's comments on
the Regional Official Plan Review to eliminate the distinction between prime and
rural designations. Local planning controls could then be used to determine if
further restrictions are required in light of the local context.
Under the Greenbelt Plan, intensive beef and hog operations could potentially be
established in the southern part of the Agricultural Assembly adjacent to the
south Pickering urban area, subject only to the minimum distance separation
(MDS) formulae. These uses are inappropriate on the rural/urban fringe where
there is the potential for adverse dust, odour and noise impacts on nearby urban
residents. It is recommended that the Province be requested to consider
restricting intensive farm operations in close proximity to urban areas.
Lack of rationale for including the western portion of the Hamlet of
Greenwood in the Greenbelt Plan.
The Greenbelt boundary appears to follow the Lake Iroquois shoreline through the
Hamlet of Greenwood. This results in the west part of Greenwood being included
in the greenbelt. Although there are good agricultural lands north and east of the
hamlet, these lands were not included in the Greenbelt. As noted earlier, this area
could potentially be a future urban area of Pickering. Staff does not understand
the rationale for establishing the greenbelt in the vicinity of Greenwood.
Report PD 47-04
Subject: Draft Greenbelt Plan
December 2, 2004
Page 8
Staff, in reviewing the Greenbelt boundary for the Greenwood area, considered
two options. The first option would be based on a long term vision for
Greenwood as a rural hamlet within a permanent countryside of agriculture and
open space lands. To this end, consideration could be given to expanding the
Greenbelt boundary to include the entire hamlet and other lands to the north and
east. Input from Greenwood residents could be obtained in early January to
meet the Ministry's timetable.
The second option would be based on eliminating "provincial" restrictions on
private landowners within an established settlement (the City's approved Official
Plan and zoning by-law address land use in detail), and leaving future land use
studies to establish the long term vision for the hamlet (which could include
retaining open space around it). Accordingly, this option would remove from the
greenbelt the lots on the west side of the hamlet (generally west of Trimbles Lane).
Staff also considered other emerging initiatives influencing the area such as:
· the Individual Environmental Assessment for the eastern extension
of
Highway 407;
· the Greater Toronto Airport Authority's recommended Interim Airport
Planning Protection Area (IAPA) for a possible future regional airport, which
implements a higher standard of the 25 Noise Exposure Forecast contour.
This IAPA would restrict establishment of new, noise-sensitive uses. If the
final decision is made by the Federal government following an environmental
assessment to construct an airport, then any further residential and other
noise-sensitive land uses may be permanently restricted in this area;
· the Regional Official Plan Review Recommended Direction to limit hamlet
growth to an increase of 25%;
· the Province's draft Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe identifies
lands in northeast Pickering as a future urban area but would be subject to
further study by the City and Region; and
· the Pleasant Growth exercise for Greenwood and the Greenwood Area
Ratepayers Association community survey dated October 2004 supported a
moderate level of growth for Greenwood.
In order to provide better consideration of the opportunities and constraints of the
various initiatives following City, regional and community input on Greenwood, it
is premature to request the Province to include the lands in and around the
Hamlet in the greenbelt at this time. Staff is recommendinq that the Province
exclude the western part of the hamlet from the Greenbelt Plan.
,. Report PD 47-04
01 .
Subject: Draft Greenbelt Plan
December 2, 2004
Page 9
4.0
5.0
Impact on Planning Act Applications
In December 2003, the Province introduced Bill 27, the Greenbelt Protection Act.
This Act had the effect of putting 'on-hold' three applications in Pickering for
"urban uses" outside "urban settlements" as defined by the Act. The three
development proposals were all in the vicinity of the Hamlet of Greenwood, and
included the following: the 2001 Bitondo Markets 13-1ot hamlet residential
proposal; the Clancey driving range proposal; and the Berrywoods Farms Inc.
381-1ot hamlet expansion proposal.
The Greenbelt Protection Act will be repealed on December 16, 2004, and the
moratorium on processing the above-noted proposals will end. However,
processing of these applications will now be required to meet the requirements of
the Province's new legislation (proposed Bill 135, the Greenbelt Act, 2004) and
the Greenbelt Plan.
Staff has reviewed the effects of the new legislation (as currently drafted) and
the draft Greenbelt Plan on the three planning proposals. Both the Clancey and
the Bitondo Markets proposals lie outside the proposed Greenbelt, and can be
processed as usual. The southern part of the Berrywoods proposal lies within
the proposed Greenbelt. As the Berrywoods proposal was submitted after the
introduction of Bill 27, it will be considered as if it is received after
December 16, 2004, and will be required to comply with the Greenbelt Plan. A
table summarizing the status of these applications, and a map showing their
locations are attached (see Attachment #3).
Pickering has several other country residential proposals, or approved but unbuilt
country residential subdivisions that lie within the draft Greenbelt. These include
the following: Staxton Glen Phase 2 (Bitondo/Brown) country residential;
Birchwood Estates country residential; Barclay Estates country residential; and
Forest Creek country residential. As all of the applications pre-date by many
years the December 16, 2004 date, processing of the applications and issuance
of building permits are "grandfathered" and do not have to conform to the
Greenbelt Plan. A map showing these proposals is attached (see Attachment #-4).
Also, there are applications located within the
Neighbourhoods that are shown in the Greenbelt.
Inc., 812723 Ontario Inc., and Pine Ridge
"grandfathered" (see Attachment #5).
Rouge Park and Rosebank
These applications, by Nicou
Land Assembly, are also
Summary of Requested chanqes to the Greenbelt Plan Boundary
As part of the City's review, staff is requesting the Province make the following
changes to the Greenbelt Plan boundary:
1. delete the Protected Countryside designation from the southern part of the
Agricultural Assembly (the Cherrywood community);
Report PD 47-04
Subject: Draft Greenbelt Plan
December 2, 2004
Page 10
013
6.0
2. add the lands located on the east side of the West Duffins Creek surrounding
the Hamlet of Whitevale to the Greenbelt as part of the "rural" agricultural
system;
3. delete the Protected Countryside designation from the Rouge Park
Neighbourhood, which is within Pickering's existing urban area as identified in
the City and Regional Official Plans;
4. delete the Protected Countryside designation from all of the residential lots
approved in Registered Plans of Subdivision along the edge of the Rouge
River, south of the Rouge Park neighborhood to Lake Ontario;
5. delete the Protected Countryside designation from the Hamlet of Greenwood;
6. examine boundaries, extent and rationale of proposed greenbelt for lands along
East Duffins Creek; and
7. examine boundary and rationale of the proposed greenbelt for lands through the
Fifth Concession, east of Brock Road.
All of the above changes were discussed with the Ministry of Municipal Affairs
and Housing at the November 24, 2004 meeting. Changes are shown on Maps
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 (see Attachments 6 to 12). The Ministry also agreed to
meet with the City and the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority to review
Greenbelt boundary issues. Issues 4 and 5 are not discussed further on this
Report as we understand MMAH staff agree to these changes. Issues 6 and 7
are not discussed further as Ministry staff advised they would be available to
discuss these boundaries in more detail.
The approval of the Greenbelt Plan is premature until the Province releases a
comprehensive package of all of its initiatives,
Last summer, the Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal released a discussion
paper on a proposed Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. Comments
through Report PD 33-04 were provided to the Province. At that time, Pickering
Council requested the Province to release a comprehensive package of all its
initiatives for further consultation including all planning reform initiatives, the
above noted Growth Plan, Greater Golden Horseshoe Transportation Strategy, the
10-year Strategic Infrastructure Investment Plan, and the proposed
Greenbelt Plan, prior to finalizing the growth plan.
A common theme being voiced at recent meetings with stakeholders and the
public on the draft Greenbelt Plan was the need for the Province to release a
comprehensive package of all of its initiatives for consultation, prior to any of the
initiatives being finalized.
Report PD 47-04
Subject: Draft Greenbelt Plan
December 2, 2004
Page 11
7.0
The Province's planninq process under the Ontario Planninq and
Development Act (OPDA) supercedes the Greenbelt Plan as it relates to the
A.qricultural Assembly.
As discussed earlier, the draft Plan identifies the entire Agricultural Assembly
within the Greenbelt Plan. Concurrently, the Province is undertaking a planning
process under the OPDA for the Agricultural Assembly and Seaton lands.
Under the proposed Greenbelt Act, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing
can make a plan or an amendment to a plan under the OPDA even if the
Greenbelt Plan is in effect in the area to be covered by the Plan. Therefore, a
development plan approved by the Minister for the Agricultural Assembly lands
would supercede the Greenbelt Plan.
8.0 Next Steps
Staff will follow-up with the Province on the recommended changes to the draft
Greenbelt Plan and will advise Council of the release of the final Greenbelt Plan.
ATTACHMENTS:
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
Highlights of Bill 135 - Proposed Greenbelt Act, 2004
Extract for Pickering of draft Greenbelt Map
Current Planning Applications Table and Map
Map of Planning Applications "Grandfathered" in the. Rural Area
Map of Planning Applications "Grandfathered" in the Urban Area
Map 1 - South portion of the Agricultural Assembly (Cherrywood Community)
Map 2 - Lands surrounding the Hamlet of Whitevale
Map 3 - Rouge Park Neighbourhood
Map 4 - Rosebank, Rougemount, and Highbush Neighbourhoods
Map 5 - Hamlet of Greenwood
Map 6 - Lands around East Duffins Creek
Map 7 - Lands within the Fifth Concession, east of Brock Road
Copy of Draft Greenbelt Plan
Report PD 47-04
Subject: Draft Greenbelt Plan
December 2, 2004
Page 12
Prepared By:
Grant McGregor, MCIF~, RPP
Principal Planner-Policy
Approved / Endorsed By:
Neil Carrel -IP PP
arro_l~PP_
Director, Planning & Development
Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP
Manager, Policy
GM:jf:ld
Copy: Chief Administrative Officer
(Acting) Chief Administrative Officer
Division Head, Corporate Projects & Policy
Recommem ~nsideration of
Pickering~~
Z,homas O. Qu~rl/me ~inistrative Officer
~iF~'OR'i ~ PD
Bill 135 - Proposed Greenbelt Act, 2004
The purpose of the Bill is to establish a Greenbelt Plan for all or part of the
Greenbelt Areas that is designated by regulation. Highlights of the Bill are as
follows:
the Greenbelt Plan may be established for all or part of the Greenbelt Area
and is retroactive to December 16, 2004;
the objectives for the Greenbelt Plan include: to establish a network of
countryside and open space areas; to provide protection to the land base
needed to maintain, restore and improve the ecological and hydrological
functions of the Greenbelt Area; to promote connections between lakes and
the Oak Ridges Moraine and Niagara Escarpment; and to control
urbanization of the lands to which the Greenbelt Plan applies;
the Greenbelt Plan may set out policies with respect to the lands to which the
Greenbelt Plan applies, including land use designations and policies to
support coordination of planning and development among municipalities and
related to the programs of the Province;
the Greenbelt Plan may set out policies for areas designated by it as
Protected Countryside including policies prohibiting or restricting the use of
land or erection of buildings; policies relating to land and resource protection
and land development; and policies for the economic and physical
development of land;
all decisions made under the Planning Act, Ontario Planning and
Development Act or the Condominium Act shall conform to the Greenbelt
Plan. Municipalities shall not undertake any public work or other undertaking
or pass a by-law that conflicts with the Greenbelt Plan. This does not apply
to any matters commenced before December 16, 2004 related to areas
designated as Protected Countryside;
· applications, procedures and matters commenced before December 16, 2004
will be subject to transition provisions (not yet released);
the Greenbelt Plan prevails in the case of a conflict between it and an official
plan, zoning by-law or policy statement issued under section 3 of the
Planning Act;
if there is a conflict between the Greenbelt Plan and the Oak Ridges Moraine
Conservation Plan, the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan prevails;
municipalities located within areas designated as Protected Countryside in the
Greenbelt Plan shall be required to amend their official plans to conform with the
Greenbelt Plan (in conjunction with a five-year review of the official plan);
a review of the Greenbelt Plan will be carried out every 10 years;
the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing may propose amendments to
the Greenbelt Plan in respect of areas designated as Protected Countryside.
The Bill outlines the process for considering amendments to the
Greenbelt Plan, including consulting with the municipality, other affected
public bodies and the public. Decisions on amendments are final and not
subject to appeal;
· amendments to the Greenbelt Plan proposed by the Minister shall not have
the effect of reducing the total land area within the Greenbelt Plan;
· the Minister may establish a Greenbelt Advisory Council to advise the
Minister on matters related to the Act;
any appeals or referrals to the OMB for matters related to land within the
areas designated as Protected Countryside in the Greenbelt Plan may be
deferred by the Minister. The Minister may appoint a hearing officer to
conduct a hearing on the matter and the hearing officer will make
recommendations to the Minister. The Minister's decision on the matter is
final and not subject to appeal.
It is anticipated that the Act will receive Royal Assent and come into effect on or before
December 16, 2004, the last date the Greenbelt Protection Act, 2004 is in effect.
018
LAKE ONTARIO
EXCERPT FROM SCHEDULE 1:
GREENBELT PLAN AREA
'rEIS MAP WAS PRODUCED BY THE CITY OF PICKERING PLANNING &
DEVELOPMENT DEP, N:~rMENT, PLANNING INFORMATION SERVICES
DIVISION MAPPING AND DESIGN, NOV. 30, 2004-.
AT?ACHMEN? #, ~) TO
REPORI' # PD_ ~'7
0!,9
Anticipated Effect of the
Proposed Greenbelt Act (Bill 135) and the Draft Greenbelt Plan on
Current Planning Applications
Affected by the Greenbelt Protection Act, 2004
~ii~a~i~n File ~i~ ~ ~te~tio~ ~ i ~[a~
Bitondo Markets Ltd.: Applications "Stayed" Not within proposed Not applicable
SP 2001-04; A 16/00 Greenbelt
West side of Westney
Road, abutting south side of
Hamlet of Greenwood
Bill & Anne Clancey: Applications "of no Not within proposed Not applicable
OPA 02-004/P; A 21/02 effect" Greenbelt
South side of Concession 6,
east of Sideline 14 road
allowance
Berrywoods Farms Inc,: Applications "of no Southern part is Decisions on applications
OPA 04-001/P; effect" within proposed submitted on or after
SP 2004-03; A 02/04 Greenbelt December 16, 2004, must
comply with Greenbelt
East and west of Westney Plan
Road, north of Fifth
Concession Road, south
and east of Hamlet of
Greenwood
A'rTACHUEI~T
REPORT
,,LE]/I HAA __40 NAAC;/
~ LU
~ 0 z~
ATTACHMENT #_ L.[ TO 0 4,, .L
REPOR'I' ,f PD_ ~47-Q[~
AS/I HM _-I 0 N M 0 J._
~"-m .... ~-'~-~ ...... ,~-'-~w ...... ~ r ~"~
Z~
~ :r2 w ~~. ~~~V°~"~ ' ',',
/ ~ ~ / /~
~ ~/ ~,n~a,s I~ ,- .... '_ 1
~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~i ,,,,,,,,
I~~ ~ ~ff""'~""'~'~'] ~um~ ~ ~ ~,/ . ~,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,H~ ~ , ~,iin~ :~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~
,,~, ~ ~ ,~, ~ ~ ..........
~:-I ~ ,~ ~ , ~ '"'"': ~
Gity of Piokering Pl~nnin~ & Development Depa~ment
P~NNING APPLICATIONS AFFECTED
BY PROPOSED GREENBELT ACT (BILL
~35) ]- NICOU INC.
~ - 812723 ONTARIO INC. ~
~- PINE RIDGE ~ND ASSEMBLY
DATE NOV, 23, 2004
South Portion of the Agricultural Assembly
IILegend
llAmas in Question Green Belt Nat:mai Heritage System(NHS) Agricultural Systems
Ill ADD *-Watercourses NHS - Woodlands~NHS - Wetlands ~GB Agricultural
IIrIDELETE Greenbelt Boundary [::3NHS - ANSI :-~NHS - Other
Ill CITY OF PICKERING PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Map 1 of 7
IDATE NOV. 30, 2004
ATTACHMENT ~,_ ~ l'O
RE~ORi # PD~
Lands ,Surrounding
the
Hamlet of Whitevale
Legend
Areas in Question
ADD
~DELETE
Green Belt Natrual Heritage System(NHS)
--Watercourses NHS - Woodlands ,"~. NHS - Wetlands
Greenbelt Boundary r-~NHS - ANSI -~NHS - Other
CITY OF PICKERING PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
: I'
Map 2 of 7
Agricultural Systems ¢
~GB Agricultural
JDATE NOV. 30, 2004
A ?ACHMENI' #__ ~, TO
REPORI ~ PD q-7-(~-~
025
Rouge Park Neighbourhood
Map 3 of 7
Legend
Areas in Question Green Belt Natmal Hedtacje System(NHS)
ADD -- Watercourses N HS - Woodlands ~JNHS - Wetlands
~DELETE Greenbelt Boundary e:3NHS - ANSI ~NHS - Other
CITY OF PICKERING PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Agricultural Systems
~GB AgdcuRural
IDATE NOV. 30, 2004
028
Rosebank, Rougemount, and Highbush Neighbourhoods
Map 4 of 7
Legend
Areas in Question Green Belt Natrual Heritage System(NHS) Agricultural Systems
ADD *-Watercourses NHS - Woodlands ~NHS - Wet~ands ~GB Agricultural
~DELETE Greenbelt Boundary r'~NHS - ANSI ZZNHS - Other
CITY OF PICKERING PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT I DATE NOV. 30, 2004
02?'
Hamlet of Greenwood
Legend
Areas in Question Green S~lt Nat]ual Heritage System(NHS)
ADD --Watercourses NHS- Woodlands ~NHS - Wetlands
BDELETE Greenbelt Boundary rmNHS - ANSI *-~-*NHS - Olher
CITY OF PICKERING PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Agricultural Systems
L:)GB Agricultural
Map 5 of 7
DATE NOV. 30, 2004
O23,
I
I
I
i
I
Ii
I
--I
I
I
'i 6
Lands Around East Duffins Creek
Legend
Status Green Belt Natrual Hedtage System(NHS)
tDELETE --Watercourses NHS- Woodlandsr~NHS- Wetlands
Greenbelt Boundary r-~NHS - ANSI m~- NHS - Olher
CITY OF PICKERING PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Agricultural Systems
~GB Agricultural
Map 6 of 7
¢
IDATE NOV. 30, 2004
O25
!
I
I
I
I
I
!;
I
I
I
I
Legend
~m I~DELETE --Watercourses NHS - Woodlands ~NHS - WeUands
III~.eREVIEW Greenbelt Boundary r-~NHS - ANSI =:NHS - Other
I~ICKERING PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DATE NOV. 30, 2004
ATTACHMENT #~TO ,,
030
Ontario
October
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Context
1.2 Vision and Goals
1.3 General Authority
1.4 How to Read this Plan
2.0
2.1
2.2
2.3
GREENBELT PLAN
Lands within the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan Area
Lands within the Niagara Escarpment Plan Area
Lands within the Protected Countryside Area
3.0
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
GEOGRAPHIC SPECIFIC POLICY AREAS IN THE PROTECTED
COUNTRYSIDE
Agricultural System
3.1.1 Description
3.1.2 Specialty Crop Area Policies
3.1.3 Prime Agricultural Area Policies
3.1.4 Rural Area Policies
3.1.5 External Connections
Natural System
3.2.1 Description
3.2.2 Natural Heritage System Policies
3.2.3 Water Resource System Policies
3.2.4 Key Natural Heritage and Key Hydrologic Features Polices
3.2.5 External Connections
Parkland, Open Space and Trails
3.3. 1 Description
3.3.2 Parkland, Open Space and Trail Policies
Settlement Areas
3.4.1 Description
3.4.2 Town and Village Policies
3.4.3 Hamlet Policies
3.4.4 Shoreline Policies
032
4.0
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
GENERAL POLICIES IN THE PROTECTED COUNTRYSIDE
Non-Agricultural Uses
4.1.1 General Non-Agricultural Use Policies
4.1.2 Recreation and Tourism Use Policies
Infrastructure
4.2.1 General Infrastructure Policies
4.2.2 Sewer and Water Infrastructure Policies
4.2.3 Stormwater Management Infrastructure Policies
Natural Resources
4.3.1 Renewable Resource Policies
4.3.2 Non-renewable Resource Policies
Cultural Heritage Resources
Existing Uses
Lot Creation
5.0 IMPLEMENTATION
5.1 Status and Effect
5.2 Municipal Implementation of Protected Countryside Policies
5.3 Relationship of the Plan to the Land Use Planning System
5.4 Boundaries
5.4.1 Boundary of the Greenbelt Plan
5.4.2 Schedules and Appendix
5.5 Plan Review
5.6 Plan Amendments
5.7 Monitoring/Performance Measures
5.8 Greenbelt Advisory Council
033
DEFINITIONS
SCHEDULES
1. Greenbelt Plan Area
2. Niagara Peninsula Tender Fruit and Grape Area
3. Holland Marsh
4. Natural Heritage System
APPENDIX
1. Greenbelt in the Greater Golden Horseshoe Growth Plan
iii
,¥r*rACHUE.T , 13 TO
REPORT # PD~
034
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Context
The Golden Horseshoe is one of the fastest-growing regions in North America.
The Greenbelt is a cornerstone of Ontario's proposed Greater Golden Horseshoe
Growth Plan, an overarching strategy that will provide clarity and certainty about
what should be built and where, and what must be protected for our own and
future generations.
The Greenbelt Plan identifies where urbanization is not to occur in order to
provide permanent agricultural and environmental protection.
The Greenbelt Plan includes and builds on lands within the Niagara Escarpment
Plan (NEP) and Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP).
The additional Protected Countryside lands identified in this Plan, which link and
enhance the Niagara Escarpment and Oak Ridges Moraine to create the
Greenbelt, have been identified through a combination of the best science
available, a consideration of existing and future patterns of urbanization, and
local knowledge and advice.
This Protected Countryside is made up of an Agricultural System and a Natural
System, together with a system of settlement areas.
The Agricultural System is made up of specialty crop, prime agricultural and rural
areas. The settlement areas, including Towns and Villages, Hamlets and
Shoreline areas, are found throughout the Agricultural System.
The Natural System identifies lands that support both natural heritage and water
resource features and functions, while maintaining connections to the broader
natural systems of southern Ontario.
While providing permanent agricultural and environmental protection, the
Greenbelt also supports a wide range of recreation and tourism opportunities and
a vibrant and evolving agricultural and rural economy.
1 of 34
035
/~TTACHMENT #_ 13 _TO
1.2 Vision and Goals
Vision:
The Greenbelt is a broad band of permanently protected countryside that:
· Provides for a diverse range of rural communities, agriculture, tourism,
recreation and resource uses;
· Gives permanent protection to the natural systems that sustain ecological
and human health and that form the environmental framework around
which major urbanization in south-central Ontario will be organized; and
· Supports agriculture as the predominant land use.
Goals:
To enhance our urban and rural areas and overall quality of life by achieving the
following within the Protected Countryside:
Agricultural Protection
Protecting the Specialty Crop Area land base while allowing supportive
infrastructure and value-added uses necessary for sustainable agricultural
uses and activities;
Supporting the Niagara Peninsula Specialty Crop Area as a destination
and centre of agriculture focused on valued-added uses for the agri-food
sector and agri-tourism related to grape and tender fruit production,
Protecting prime agricultural areas by preventing further fragmentation
and loss of the agricultural land base caused by lot creation and the re-
designation of prime agricultural areas;
Providing the appropriate flexibility to allow for agricultural land uses,
value-added uses, normal farm practices and an evolving agricultural/rural
economy; and
· Creating certainty for the agricultural sector to foster long-term investment
in, improvement to, and management of the land.
2 of 34
ATTACHMENT #~TO
O38
Environmental Protection
Protecting, maintaining and, where possible, enhancing the natural
heritage, key hydrologic and landform features and functions of the
Greenbelt;
Protecting natural and open space connections between the Oak Ridges
Moraine, the Niagara Escarpment, Lake Ontario, Lake Simcoe and the
major river valley lands, while also maintaining connections to the broader
natural systems of southern Ontario beyond the Golden Horseshoe such
as the Great Lakes Heritage Coast, Carolinian Canada and the Algonquin
to Adirondacks corridor;
· Maintaining and/or enhancing the quality and quantity of ground and
surface water within the Greenbelt; and
Providing long-term guidance on the management of natural heritage and
water resources when contemplating such matters as development,
infrastructure, open space planning and management, aggregate
rehabilitation and private or public stewardship programs.
Culture, Recreation and Tourism Opportunities
· Supporting the conservation and promotion of cultural heritage resources;
Providing for a wide range of publicly accessible built and natural settings
for recreation including facilities, parklands, open space areas, trails and
water-based resources; and
· Enabling continued opportunities for sustainable tourism development.
Rural Communities
Supporting a strong rural economy by allowing for the social, institutional
and commercial uses needed by the local population of the Greenbelt's
existing towns, villages and hamlets; and
· Sustaining the character of the countryside and rural communities.
3 of 34
037
Infrastructure and Natural Resources
Supporting infrastructure which achieves the social and economic aims of
the Greenbelt and the proposed Growth Plan while seeking to minimize
environmental impacts, and;
Recognizing the benefits of protecting renewable and non-renewable
natural resources within the Greenbelt, while providing for the sustainable
use of those resources critical to the region's social, environmental,
economic and growth needs.
1.3 General Authority
This Plan derives its authority from the proposed Greenbelt Act, 2004, which
authorizes the Lieutenant Governor in Council, by regulation, to designate an
area of land as the Greenbelt Area. The proposed Greenbelt Act, 2004 further
authorizes the Lieutenant Governor in Council to establish a Greenbelt Plan for
all or part of the Greenbelt Area.
The Greenbelt Plan would apply to the lands delineated in Ontario Regulation
XX/XX, as shown on Schedule 1.
1.4 How to Read this Plan
The Greenbelt is governed by the policies of the Niagara Escarpment Plan, the
Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan and the Protected Countryside policies
that follow in this Plan.
The Greenbelt Plan must be read in its entirety.
Within the Protected Countryside there are Geographic Specific Policy Areas as
well as General Policies governing particular land uses.
The first step in determining how this Plan affects a property or
development is to determine if it is located in the Niagara
Escarpment Plan or Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan areas.
These areas are identified on Schedule 1 of the Plan. If the property
is located in either of these areas, then the policies of either the
Niagara Escarpment Plan or the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation
Plan apply.
Within the Protected Countryside, the Geographic Specific Policy Areas apply to
an Agricultural System, a Natural System, Settlement Areas, and Parkland, Open
Space and Trails. Outside settlement areas, proposals for development must
4 of 34
ATTACHMEr~7 #_,~. ......
O35
conform to the relevant geographic specific policy. Where policies of both the
Agricultural and Natural Systems overlap in a particular area, the more restrictive
Natural Systems polices apply. As well, proposals for development must
conform to Parkland, Open Space and Trails policies.
The second step in determining how this Plan affects a property or
development/infrastructure proposal is to identify whether the lands
are within the Agricultural System or Natural System, or both and to
determine if any of the Parkland, Open Space and Trails policies
apply.
The Greenbelt Plan also contains General Policies that apply to particular types
of land uses (e.g. non-agricultural uses, infrastructure, mineral aggregates)
regardless of the geographic specific policy area where they are located. The
General Policies also identify how existing uses, lot creation and transitional
appfications are to be treated within the Protected Countryside areas.
The third step in using this Plan is to determine what, if any, General
Policies apply to a given proposal.
The Greenbelt Plan builds upon the existing policy framework established in the
Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) and municipal official plans.
With respect to the PPS, the Greenbelt Plan includes policies that represent a
higher or different policy standard than the PPS. Unless otherwise stated, this
Plan defers to the PPS, including the definitions in the PPS (defined terms are
shown in italics).
With respect to municipal official plans, the Greenbelt Plan defers to official plans
for the exact delineation of prime agricultural and rural lands within the
Agricultural System and for the precise boundaries of Settlement Areas. The
Province will delineate the Natural Heritage System or provide criteria that will
allow the municipality to delineate the boundary.
The fourth step in using this Plan is to determine the underlying
municipal official plan policies.
The Greenbelt Plan must also be read in conjunction with all other applicable
land use planning direction, as amended from time to time, including the
Provincial Policy Statement, the proposed Greater Golden Horseshoe Growth
Plan, other provincial plans, upper, lower and single-tier municipal official plans,
zoning by-laws, as well as other pertinent legislation and regulations (e.g.
Minister's zoning orders). Where more specific provincial plans or regulations
exist or are promulgated within the Greenbelt, the more specific plan or
regulation shall prevail.
5 of 34
The fifth step is to determine if there are any other provincial plans
or regulations applying to the lands.
2.0 GREENBELT PLAN
The Greenbelt, as proposed to be defined by Ontario Regulation XX/XX, is
governed by this Greenbelt Plan, which includes lands within the Oak Ridges
Moraine Conservation Plan, the Niagara Escarpment Plan and lands designated
as Protected Countryside within this Plan (see Schedule 1 ).
2.1 Lands within the Oak Ridqes Moraine Conservation Plan Area
The requirements of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (Ontario
Regulation 140/02), as enabled under the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Act,
2001 continue to apply.
2.2 Lands within Niaqara Escarpment Plan Area
The requirements of the Niagara Escarpment Plan, as enabled under the
Niagara Escarpment Planning and Development Act continue to apply.
2.3 Lands within the Protected Countryside Area
Outside the Oak Ridges Moraine and Niagara Escarpment, the "Protected
Countryside" lands of the Greenbelt are subject to the entirety of this Greenbelt
Plan.
6 of 34
O4O
3.0
GEOGRAPHIC SPECIFIC POLICIES IN THE PROTECTED
COUNTRYSIDE
There are three Geographic Specific Policies that apply to specific lands within
the Protected Countryside: Agricultural System, Natural System and Settlement
Areas. The Parkland, Open Space and Trails policies apply across the
Greenbelt.
3.1 Aqricultural System
3.1.1 Description
The Protected Countryside contains an Agricultural System that provides a
continuous and permanent land base area necessary to support long-term
agricultural production and economic activity. The Agricultural System is made
up of Specialty Crop Areas, Prime Agricultural Areas and Rural Areas. The
Agricultural System includes expansive areas where prime agricultural and
specialty crop lands predominate and active agricultural and related activities are
ongoing. A Land Evaluation and Area Review (LEAR) undertaken by the Ministry
of Agriculture and Food, as well as a consideration of long-term urban growth
patterns, guided the delineation of the Agricultural System.
There are two Specialty Crop Areas: the Niagara Peninsula Tender Fruit
and Grape Area and the Holland Marsh. The delineation of the Niagara
Peninsula Tender Fruit and Grape Area (see Schedule 2) is based on
provincial soil and climate analysis of potential tender fruit and grape
production areas. The Holland Marsh boundary is based on provincial
muck soil analysis and current agricultural production in both the Region
of York and the County of Simcoe (see Schedule 3).
Prime Agricultural Areas are those lands designated as such within
municipal official plans, and are where prime agricultural lands (i.e.
Canada Land Inventory Classes 1, 2, and 3 soils) predominate.
Rural Areas are those lands, outside of Settlement Areas, generally
designated as rural or open space within municipal official plans. Rural
areas are typically characterized by a mixture of agricultural lands, natural
features and recreational and historic rural land uses.
Municipalities can reassess their municipal designations for prime agriculture and
rural/open space when they bring their municipal plans in conformity with the
Greenbelt Plan, subject to the criteria identified in section 5.2.
7 of 34
04i.
ATTACHMEN? #~TO
REPORT ~' PD__..~ ......
3.1.2 Specialty Crop Area Policies
Specialty Crop Areas support normal farm practices and a full range of
agricultural, agriculture-related and secondary uses.
Specialty Crop Area lands cannot be re-designated in municipal official plans for
non-agricultural uses, as described in section 4.1.
Other uses, as described in sections 4.2 to 4.6, may be permitted subject to the
policies of those sections.
Urban expansions are not permitted onto Specialty Crop Areas.
New and expanding livestock facilities will comply with the minimum distance
separation formulae.
3.1,3 Prime Agricultural Area Policies
Prime Agricultural Areas support normal farm practices and a full range of
agricultural, agriculture-related and secondary uses.
Prime agricultural areas cannot be re-designated in municipal official plans for
non-agricultural uses, as described in section 4.1, except as identified in section
5.2.
Other uses, as described in sections 4.2 to 4.6, may be permitted subject to the
policies of those sections.
Urban expansions are not permitted onto Prime Agricultural Areas,
except as identified in the policies on Towns and Villages in section 3.4.2.
New and expanding livestock facilities will comply with the minimum distance
separation formulae.
3.1.4 Rural Area Policies
Rural Areas support a range of agricultural, recreational, tourism, and resource-
based commercial and industrial uses. Normal farm practices and a full range of
agricultural, agriculture-related and secondary uses do and will continue to occur
in rural areas.
Rural areas are the primary location for recreational, tourism and leisure based
uses, subject to the policies of this Plan and municipal official plans.
Settlement area expansions are not permitted into Rural Areas, except as
identified in section 3.4.
8 of 34
042
New multiple units or lots for permanent residential dwellings, (e.g., estate
residential subdivisions and adult lifestyle or retirement communities) are not
permitted in Rural Areas.
New land uses, including the creation of new lots, and new and expanding
livestock facilities will comply with the minimum distance separation formulae.
3.1.5 External Connections
The Greenbelt Agricultural System is connected both functionally and
economically to the prime agricultural resources and agricultural sector beyond
the boundaries of the Greenbelt. To support the connections between the
Greenbelt's Agricultural System and the prime agricultural resources of southern
Ontario:
· Municipalities, farming organizations, and other agencies and levels of
government are encouraged to consider how activities and changes in
land use, both within and abutting the Greenbelt, relate to the broader
agricultural system and economy of southern Ontario. They should also
plan appropriately to ensure both functional and economic connections
are maintained or strengthened.
3.2 Natural System
3.2.1 Description
The Protected Countryside contains a Natural System that provides a continuous
and permanent land base necessary to human and ecological health in the
Greenbelt and beyond. The Natural System policies protect areas of significant
and/or sensitive natural heritage, key hydrologic and landform values that in turn
support fundamental ecological functions and biodiversity. The Natural System is
made up of a Natural Heritage System and a Water Resource System:
The Natural Heritage System (see Schedule 4) includes areas of the
Protected Countryside where the distribution and concentration of natural
heritage, hydrologic and landform features need to be managed as a
connected natural heritage system. The system builds upon, and is
integrated with, the natural heritage systems contained in the Niagara
Escarpment Plan and Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan together
with management plans developed by conservation authorities,
municipalities and other agencies. Together with the surrounding
landscape within the Greenbelt as a whole, these systems currently
comprise, and continue to function as, a connected natural heritage
system.
9 of 34
0 4 3
~TI'ACHMEN? #_ /~ TO
This system is part of, and connected to, broader natural heritage systems
in southern Ontario such as the Lake Ontario shoreline, including its
remaining coastal wetlands, the Great Lakes Heritage Coast, Carolinian
Canada and the Algonquin to Adirondacks corridor. Long-term
management of the Natural Heritage System identified in this Plan relies
on its integration with other natural heritage systems, at both local,
regional and broader scales.
The Water Resource System is made up of both ground and surface
water features and their associated functions, which provide a clean,
abundant and healthy aquatic ecosystem for both human consumption
and ecological purposes. The Oak Ridges Moraine and Niagara
Escarpment Plans comprise the foundations of the Water Resource
System since they include the primary recharge, headwater and discharge
areas within the Greenbelt. The Protected Countryside adds several
areas of hydrologic significance, including the upper reaches of
watersheds to the west of the Niagara Escarpment; lands around the
primary discharge zones; the portions of the major river valleys between
the Moraine/Escarpment and the approved urban boundaries to the south;
and, the major discharge areas associated with the former Lake Iroquois
shoreline.
3.2.2 Natural Heritage System Policies
For lands falling within the Natural Heritage System of the Protected Countryside
the following policies shall apply:
· The full range of existing normal farm practices and agricultural,
agricultural-related and secondary uses can continue to occur.
New agricultural buildings or structures are not subject to the Natural
Heritage System policies below, but are subject to the policies on key
natural features as identified in section 3.2.4.
New development or site alteration in the Natural Heritage System must
demonstrate that:
o There will be no negative effects on the feature or its ecological
function;
o Connectivity between key natural heritage and key hydrologic
features is maintained, or where possible, enhanced for the
movement of native plants and animals across the landscape;
o The removal of other natural features not identified as key natural
heritage and key hydrologic features (e.g. wetlands less than 0.5
ha; hedgerows) shall be kept to a minimum; and
10 of 34
~,TTACHMEIgT #---./.,~TO
O44
0
With the exception of mineral aggregate operations, the disturbed
area of any site generally does not exceed 25 per cent, and the
impervious surface does not exceed 10 per cent, of the total
developable area.
3.2.3 Water Resource System Policies
The following Water Resource System policies apply throughout the Protected
Countryside:
Watersheds are the most meaningful scale for hydrological planning, and
municipalities are expected to complete watershed plans, to guide
planning and development decisions within the Protected Countryside.
The protection of wellhead areas and inherently susceptible aquifer areas
from land uses that could adversely affect the quality or quantity of water
is an important approach to sustainable management of ground and
surface water resources.
Within the Protected Countryside, municipalities are encouraged to
identify and map their wellhead protection areas and inherently
susceptible aquifer areas within their official plans and, as appropriate and
in accordance with any provincial directives on source water protection,
prohibit certain land uses in these identified areas.
3.2.4 Key Natural Heritage and Key Hydrologic Features Policies
Key natural heritage features located within the Natural Heritage System include
the following and are subject to the policies of this section:
· Significant habitat of endangered, threatened and provincially rare
species;
· Fish habitat;
· Wetlands
· Life Science Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest (ANSIs);
· Significant Valleylands;
· Significant Woodlands;
· Significant Wildlife habitat;
· Sand barrens, savannahs and tall grass prairies; and
· Alvars.
Key natural heritage features beyond the Natural Heritage System (as shown on
Schedule 4) are subject to the definitions and policies of the Provincial Policy
Statement.
11 of 34
045
Key hydrologic features include the following: · Streams;
· Natural lakes/shorelines;
· Seepage areas and springs; and
· Wetlands.
Key hydrologic features are subject to the policies of this Plan, whether within or
beyond the limits of the Natural Heritage System (as shown on Schedule 4).
Development or site alteration is not permitted within key hydrologic features or
key natural heritage features within the Natural Heritage System.
Expansions to existing agricultural buildings and structures and farm and non-
farm dwellings, together with accessory uses, can be considered in key natural
heritage features, subject to the policies on existing uses in section 4.5 of this
Plan.
New development or site alteration within 120 metres of a key hydrologic feature
or a key natural heritage feature within the Natural Heritage System will identify a
vegetation protection zone of sufficient width to be established and maintained in
a self-sustaining natural vegetative condition to protect the key natural heritage
feature and its functions from the impacts of the proposed change and
associated activities that will occur before, during, and after, construction, and
where possible, restore or enhance the feature and/or its function.
Notwithstanding the above, new buildings and structures for agricultural uses will
be required to provide a 30 metre vegetation protection zone from a key natural
heritage or key hydrologic feature, but may be exempted from the requirement of
establishing a self-sustaining natural vegetation condition if the zone is, and will
continue to be, used for agricultural purposes.
In the case of wetlands, fish habitat, seepage areas and springs, streams and
their meander belt, natural lakes, and significant woodlands, the vegetation
protection zone shall be no less than 30 metres wide measured from the outside
boundary of the key natural heritage feature.
The vegetation protection zones as they relate to the major river valleys and/or
streams connecting Lake Ontario to the Oak Ridges Moraine and the Niagara
Escarpment (that are beyond the approved urban boundaries of municipal official
as depicted by solid green lines in Schedules 1 and 4), will be defined in
accordance with section 5.4.1
3.2.5 External Connections
The Natural Heritage System is connected to the natural heritage and water
resource systems beyond the boundaries of the Greenbelt.
12 of 34
ATTACHMENT#_ //~ TO
REPORT # PD YT'OY _
To support the connections between the Greenbelt's Natural System and the
broader natural heritage systems of southern Ontario, such as the Lake Ontario
shoreline, including its remaining coastal wetlands, the Great Lakes Heritage
Coast, Carolinian Canada and the Algonquin to Adirondack Corridor,
municipalities, conservation authorities, other agencies, levels of government and
stakeholders are encouraged to:
· Consider how activities and land use change both within and abutting the
Greenbelt relate to the areas of external extensions identified in this Plan;
and
· Promote and undertake appropriate planning and design to ensure the
external connections are maintained and/or enhanced.
Given development pressures on the Golden Horseshoe area, the river valleys
that run through existing or approved urban areas and connect the Greenbelt to
Lake Ontario are a key component in the long-term health of the Natural System.
In recognition of the function of the urban river valleys, municipalities and
conservation authorities are encouraged to:
· Continue with stewardship, remediation and appropriate park and trail
development that maintains and, to the extent possible, enhances the
ecological features and functions found within these valley systems; and
· In considering land conversions or redevelopments in or abutting an urban
river valley, strive for planning approaches that:
o Establish or increase the extent or width of vegetation protection
zones in a self-sustaining vegetative state, especially in the most
ecologically sensitive areas (i.e. within 30 metres of the stream and
on the steeply sloping valley walls);
o Increase or improve fish habitat in streams and in the adjacent
riparian lands;
o Include landscaping and habitat restoration that increase the ability
of native plants and animals to use valley systems as both wildlife
habitat and movement corridors; and
o Seek to avoid, minimize and/or mitigate the introduction of urban
run-off into the valley systems.
In addition to the urban river valleys, portions of the "Lake Iroquois shoreline"
within Durham Region traverse existing or approved urban areas. Municipalities
are encouraged to consider planning, design and construction practices that
maintain or where possible enhance the size, diversity and connectivity of key
natural heritage and key hydrologic features and functions of those portions of
the Lake Iroquois shoreline within their approved urban boundaries.
These external connections are generally depicted by a dotted green line in
Schedule 1 and 4, but are not within the regulated boundary of the Greenbelt
Plan.
13 of 34
3.3 Parkland, Open Space and Trails
3.3.1 Description
A system of parklands, open spaces, water bodies, and trails across the
Greenbelt is necessary to provide opportunities for recreation, tourism and
cultural/natural heritage appreciation, as well as support environmental
protection. This system currently supports a variety of passive and active uses,
as well as health, economic and other quality of life benefits within the Greenbelt.
It must be recognized that parkland, open space and trails exist within
surroundings of predominantly privately held lands. While private land owners
may, and do, through agreements with such groups as hiking and snowmobile
associations, allow public access through portions of their property for trails
associated with these activities, this is with the consent of the landowner.
Maintaining and expanding the supply of publicly accessible parkland, open
space and trails is encouraged through strategic planning activities that identify,
plan for and protect these resources for current and future generations. The
planning and activity associated with parkland, open space and trail uses should
maximize the opportunity to cooperate with all landowners while always
respecting the needs and rights of private landowners.
Throughout the Greenbelt, there is existing public parkland and open space, as
well as existing major trails such as the Bruce and Trans Canada Trails, the
Niagara Greenway and the Lake Ontario Waterfront Trail. This system of parks
and trails provides significant economic benefits and opportunities for a multitude
of uses and activities compatible with the Greenbelt. This system should serve
as a base for future decisions on parkland and open space use and trail
development.
3.3.2 Parkland, Open Space and Trail Policies
The Province should, in partnership with municipalities, conservation authorities,
non-government organizations, and other interested parties:
· Encourage the development of a system of publicly accessible parkland,
open space and trails where people can pursue the types of recreational
activities envisaged by this Plan, and to support the connectivity of the
Natural Heritage System;
· Encourage the development of a Trail Plan and a coordinated approach to
trail planning and development in the Greenbelt to enhance key existing
trail networks and to strategically direct more intensive activities away
from sensitive landscapes; and
· Promote good stewardship practices for public and private lands within the
Greenbelt, including clear demarcation of where public access is
permitted.
14 of 34
REPORT ~ PDt.
Municipal Parkland, Open Space and Trail Strategies
Municipalities should provide for a full range of publicly accessible built and
natural settings for recreation including public and private facilities, commercial-
based uses, parklands, open space areas, trails and water-based resources.
Municipalities should develop and incorporate strategies (such as community-
specific levels of provision) into Official Plans to guide the adequate provision of
municipal recreation facilities, parklands, open space areas and trails.
Municipal parkland and open space strategies should include the following
considerations:
· Providing for current and future populations;
· Providing facilities, parklands, open space areas and trails that particularly
support an active, healthy community lifestyle;
· Identifying key areas or sites for the future development of major facilities
that avoid sensitive landscapes;
· Identifying and targeting under-serviced areas for improved levels of
protection;
· Protecting the recreation and tourism values of waterfront areas as a high
priority; and
· Coordinating planning and development activities, where practical.
Municipal trail strategies should include the following considerations:
· Preserving the continuous integrity of corridors (e.g. abandoned railway
rights-of-way and utility corridors);
· Planning trails on a cross-boundary basis to enhance interconnectivity
where practical;
· Incorporating the existing system of parklands and trails where practical;
· Restricting trail uses that are inappropriate to the reasonable capacity of
the site (notwithstanding the right to continue existing uses) where
practical and appropriate;
· Providing for multi-use trail system which establishes a safe and
compatible system for motorized and non-motorized uses; and
· Ensuring the protection of the sensitive key natural heritage and key
hydrologic features and functions of the landscape.
Provincial parks and conservation authority lands are also important components
in the development of parkland open space and trail strategies. Ongoing
management of these lands for publicly accessible active and passive recreation,
in keeping with environmental management plans and strategies for such areas
and the policies of this Plan, is important in providing access to this system.
Where geographic specific park or public land management plans exist, such as
the Rouge Park and Rouge North Management Plans, municipalities, agencies
and other levels of government must consider such plans when making decisions
on land use or infrastructure proposals.
15 of 34
04g
3.4 Settlement Areas
3.4.1 Description
Settlement areas within the Greenbelt support and provide significant economic,
social and commercial functions to the rural and agricultural area. They are an
integral part of the long-term sustainability of the Greenbelt and this Plan
envisions that they continue to evolve and grow in keeping with their rural
character.
All or portions of a number of Towns and Villages are within the Protected
Countryside, such as: Acton, Beaverton, Cannington, Port Perry, Sunderland,
Uxbridge, Binbrook, Waterdown, Beamsville, Fonthill, Grimsby, Homer, Niagara-
on-the-Lake, Queenston, St. Davids, Thorold, Vineland, Orangeville, Caledon
East, Erin, Hillsburgh, Keswick, King City, Mount Albert, Nobleton, Pefferlaw,
Schomberg, Stouffville, Sunderland and Sutton.
Towns and Villages have the largest concentrations of population, employment
and development within the Protected Countryside, have municipal water and
sewer services and are identified on Schedule 1. Hamlets are smaller rural
settlements, and identified on Schedule 1 with dots. For the exact designated
boundaries of Towns, Villages and Hamlets, refer to municipal official plans.
The shorelines of Lakes Ontario, Simcoe, and Scugog and other inlahd lakes
also contain substantial amounts of both seasonal and permanent development.
The shoreline areas, including the littoral zones, are particularly important and
sensitive given the significant ecological features and functions and because of
the connectivity that shorelines provide for flora and fauna. In addition, the
shorelines support a range of recreational venues and opportunities, including
trail systems such as the Lake Ontario Waterfront Trail. For the purposes of this
Plan, shoreline areas are defined in municipal official plans or through the extent
of either existing or approved shoreline development.
3.4.2 Town and Village Policies
Unless otherwise addressed by the policies below, Towns and Villages continue
to be governed by municipal official plans and related programs or initiatives.
Municipalities are encouraged to continue their efforts to support the long-term
vitality of these settlements through appropriate planning and economic
development approaches which seek to maintain, intensify and/or revitalize these
communities. This includes modest growth that is compatible with the long-term
role of these settlements as part of the Protected Countryside and the capacity to
provide locally based sewage and water services.
16 of 34
/J
05O
Settlement areas outside the Greenbelt are not permitted to expand into the
Greenbelt area.
No new Great Lake-based water and sewer systems, or extensions or
expansions to existing Great Lake-based systems, are permitted for the purpose
of serving settlement areas within the Protected Countryside.
At the 10-year Plan review period, modest growth may be possible for Towns
and Villages, provided the proposed growth:
· Would not exceed the assimilative and water production capacities of the
local environment;
· Is consistent with any applicable watershed plan;
· Does not extend into the Natural Heritage System;
· Does not extend into the Specialty Crop Area; and
· Appropriately implements the requirements of any other provincial
policies, plans, strategies or regulations, including requirements for
assessment of need, Iocational and similar considerations.
3.4.3 Hamlet Policies
Infill development and intensification is permitted along with minor rounding out
of Hamlet boundaries at the time of municipal conformity, all in keeping with the
environmental capacity to provide sewage and water services and subject to
municipal official plan policies.
3.4.4 Shoreline Policies
Minor rounding out, infill development, redevelopment and resort development is
permitted along the shorelines of Lake Simcoe, Lake Scugog and other inland
lakes, subject to the following criteria:
Municipalities and conservation authorities ensure that the development is
integrated with existing or proposed parks and trails and/or does not
constrain ongoing or planned stewardship and remediation efforts;
To the extent possible, such development enhances the ecological
features and functions in shoreline areas; and
In considering land use conversions, redevelopments and/or resort
development, opportunities will be sought to:
o Establish or increase the extent and width of a vegetation
protection zone along a shoreline to a minimum of 30 meters;
o Increase or expand the extent of fish habitat in the littoral zone;
o Decrease erosion and sedimentation and promote planning, design
and construction practices that maintain or improve water quality;
o Improve the efficiency of sewage disposal facilities in order to
reduce nutrient inputs to groundwater and the lake;
17 of 34
055
0
0
Integrate landscaping and habitat restoration into the design of the
proposal to enhance the ability of native plants and animals to use
the shoreline as both wildlife habitat and a movement corridor; and
In the case of development requiring municipal sewer and water
services, an analysis of the assimilative capacity of the receiving
water body must be considered. In the case of Lake Simcoe, any
such analysis must be considered in the context of the Lake
Simcoe Environmental Management Strategy.
4.0 GENERAL POLICIES FOR THE PROTECTED COUNTRYSIDE
4.1 Non-Aqricultural Uses
The rural areas of the Protected Countryside are intended to support a range of
both passive and active recreational and tourism uses (such as trails, parks, golf
courses, serviced playing fields and campgrounds, ski hills, and horseracing
tracks), as well as a variety of commercial, industrial and institutional uses
serving the rural and agricultural sectors.
4.1.1 General Non-Agricultural Use Policies
Non-agricultural uses are not permitted in the Specialty Crop Area or within
Prime Agricultural Areas (as designated in municipal official plans) except for the
policies governing existing uses in section 4.5.
Where permitted in the Protected Countryside, outside settlement areas:
· Proposals for non-agricultural uses must demonstrate that:
o The use is not appropriate for location in a settlement area;
o The type of water and sewer servicing proposed is appropriate for
the type of use;
o There are no negative impacts on key natural heritage and/or key
hydrologic features or their functions; and
o There are no negative impacts on the biodiversity or connectivity of
the Natural Heritage System.
· These uses can include accessory or ancillary buildings and structures
such as dining areas, viewing platforms, washrooms, etc., provided they
occupy a minor or subordinate portion of the total developable area;
· Buildings or structures must not occupy more than 25 per cent of the total
developable area or detract from the open space nature of the site and its
surroundings; and
· Where contemplated within the Natural Heritage System, applicants must
demonstrate that at least 30 per cent of the total developable area of the
site will remain or be returned to a self-sustaining vegetative state and
18 of 34
ATTACHMEIk"T .... 'i U
052
provide connectivity along the system and between key natural heritage or
key hydrologic features located within 240 metres of each other.
4.1.2 Recreation and Tourism Use Policies
In addition to the policies of section 4.1.1 above, recreational uses are also
subject to the policies below:
· Residential dwelling units, other than for an employee, shall not be
permitted in association with recreation and tourism uses.
An application to establish or expand a non-passive or commercial
recreational use in the Natural Heritage System will be accompanied by a
vegetation enhancement plan that incorporates planning, design,
landscaping, and construction measures that:
o Maintain or, where possible, enhance the amount of natural self-
sustaining vegetative cover on the site and the connectivity
between adjacent key natural heritage or key hydrologic features;
o Wherever possible, keep intermittent stream channels and drainage
swales in a free-to-grow, Iow-maintenance condition;
o Minimize the application and use of pesticides and fertilizers; and
o Locate new natural vegetation cover in areas that maximize the
ecological health of the area.
An application to expand or establish a major recreation use shall be
accompanied by a conservation plan demonstrating how water use and
nutrient and biocide will be kept to a minimum, including the establishment
and monitoring of targets.
Small-scale structures for Iow-intensity recreational uses (such as
boardwalks, footbridges, fences, docks and picnic facilities) within the
Natural Heritage System should minimize the adverse effects on the
ecological integrity of the Protected Countryside area.
4.2 Infrastructure
Infrastructure - such as water, sewer and gas pipelines; hydro and
telecommunications transmission facilities; transit and rail corridors and facilities;
provincial and municipal highways and roads - is fundamental to economic well-
being, human health and quality of life in southern Ontario and the Greenbelt.
There is already extensive infrastructure within the greenbelt to serve its
settlements, agricultural and resource sectors and the rural economy. Existing
infrastructure must be maintained and new infrastructure will be needed to
continue serving existing and permitted land uses within the Greenbelt.
19 of 34
053
~?EPOR',~// PD z/'~?..~_~. .......
In addition, major infrastructure serving national, provincial and inter-regional
needs traverses the Greenbelt. It is anticipated that new and/or expanded
facilities will be needed in the future.
4.2.1 General Infrastructure Policies
All infrastructure that is approved under the Ontario Environmental Assessment
Act, by the National Energy Board, the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act,
or similar environmental approval is considered essential and is permitted within
the Protected Countryside, subject to the policies of this section and provided it
meets one of the following objectives:
To support agriculture, recreation and tourism, rural settlement areas and
the rural economic activity that exists and is permitted within the
Greenbelt; or,
To accommodate the significant growth and economic development
expected in Southern Ontario, the proposed Greater Golden Horseshoe
Growth Plan contemplates that growth will occur south of the Greenbelt in
the GTA and around existing priority growth centres in Southern Ontario.
To facilitate this growth and ensure strong interconnections between these
urban growth centres and Ontario's borders, it is expected that in some
instances, new or expanded infrastructure (water, sewer and gas
pipelines; hydro and telecommunications transmission facilities; transit
and rail corridors and facilities, highways and major roads) will be required
within the Greenbelt.
For example, the proposed Niagara to GTA, 407 East and the GTA West
Corridors are identified as areas of transportation deficiencies, where key
new transportation improvements are being contemplated to support the
Growth Plan.
Infrastructure location and construction, as well as infrastructure expansions,
extensions, operations and maintenance in the Protected Countryside, are
subject to the following:
· Planning, design and construction practices will minimize adverse effects
and disturbance of the existing landscape;
· Proposals will seek, where practicable, to maximize existing capacity and
coordination with different infrastructure services so that new urban
development is not encouraged within the Protected Countryside;
· New or expanding infrastructure should avoid key natural heritage or key
hydrologic features unless it has been established that no practical
alternative exists; and
· Where infrastructure does cross key natural heritage or key hydrologic
features, planning, design and construction practices will minimize
adverse effects and disturbance of key natural heritage features, key
20 of 34
054
hydrologic features and landform features or their related functions, and
where reasonable, maintain or improve natural and recreational
connections.
4.2.2 Sewer and Water Infrastructure Policies
In addition to the above general infrastructure policies and the policies of section
3.4 regarding Settlement Areas, the following policies apply to sewer and water
infrastructure proposals.
As appropriate for the scale and size of a proposal, proponents of infrastructure
within or crossing the Protected Countryside must demonstrate that:
· Sustainable sewer and water servicing can be provided that does not
negatively impact natural features and functions, quality and quantity of
ground and surface water, or stream baseflows;
· Applicable watershed plans and water budgets are considered; and
· Any servicing installation be planned, designed and constructed to
minimize groundwater disruption.
4.2.3 Stormwater Management Infrastructure Policies
As appropriate for the scale and size of a proposal, as determined by the
municipality, applications for development and site alteration in the Protected
Countryside must be accompanied by a storm water management plan that
demonstrates that:
· Planning, design and construction practices will minimize vegetation
removal, grading and soil compaction, sediment erosion and impervious
surfaces;
· Where appropriate, an integrated treatment approach will be used to
minimize stormwater management flows and structures through such
measures as lot level controls and conveyance techniques such as grass
swales; and
· Applicable watershed plans and water budgets are considered.
Storm water management ponds are prohibited in key natural heritage or key
hydrologic features or their vegetation protection zones.
The objectives of a stormwater management plan are to: · Maintain groundwater quality and flow and stream baseflow;
· Protect water quality;
· Protect aquatic species and their habitat;
· Prevent increases in stream channel erosion; and
· Prevent any increase in flood risk.
21 of 34
055
4.3 Natural Resources
4.3.1 Renewable Resource Policies
Renewable resources are those non-agriculture-based natural resources that
support uses and activities such as forestry, water taking, fisheries, conservation,
and wildlife management.
Activities related to the use of renewable resources are permitted in the
Protected Countryside, subject to all other applicable legislation, regulations and
municipal planning documents.
Within a key natural feature, renewable natural resource activities should be
carried out in a manner that maintains or where possible improves key natural
features and their functions.
4.3.2 Non-Renewable Resource Policies
Non-renewable resources are those non-agriculture based natural resources that
have a finite supply, including mineral aggregate resources.
Activities related to the use of non-renewable resources are permitted in the
Protected Countryside, subject to all other applicable legislation, regulations and
municipal planning documents.
Within the Natural Heritage System, mineral aggregate operations are subject to
the following additional requirement(s):
· No mineral aggregate operation, wayside pit, quarry, or any ancillary or
accessory use thereto will be permitted in the following key natural
features - significant wetlands as defined in the PPS and significant
habitat of threatened or endangered species;
· A mineral aggregate operation or wayside permit may only be permitted in
significant woodlands where:
o The woodland is occupied by young plantation or early
successional habitat (as defined by the Ministry of Natural
Resources); and
o The application demonstrates that:
· Long-term ecological integrity will be maintained, or where
possible, improved or restored;
· The extraction of mineral aggregates from the area within the
significant woodland feature will be completed, and the area will
be rehabilitated, as early as possible in the life of the operation;
and
· The area from which mineral aggregates are extracted will be
rehabilitated by establishing or restoring it to a state of equal or
greater ecological value.
22 of 34
REPORT # PD,, /-/7-C'z[ __.~
058
When
·
An application for a mineral aggregate operation or wayside pit may only
be permitted in other key natural features not identified in the policies
above and any associated vegetation protection zone where the applicant
demonstrates:
o If there are key natural features on the site or on adjacent lands,
the health, diversity, size and connectivity of these key natural
features will be restored and where possible improved; and
o The area, from which the mineral aggregate is extracted, will be
rehabilitated to a state of equal or greater ecological value.
Any application for the expansion or establishment of a mineral aggregate
operation shall be required to demonstrate how the connectivity between
key natural features will be maintained before, during and after the
extraction of mineral aggregates.
undertaking rehabilitation of mineral aggregate operation sites:
The province will work with the municipalities and the mineral aggregate
industry to encourage the development and implementation of
comprehensive rehabilitation plans in areas of high concentration of
mineral aggregate operations;
· The expansion of an existing mineral aggregate operation will only be
permitted where substantial progress has been made in the rehabilitation
of the disturbed area within the existing licensed area. This shall generally
be considered to be no less than 50 per cent of the disturbed area of the
existing licensed area rehabilitated to a viable after use. A lesser standard
may be considered by the Ministry of Natural Resources where it can be
demonstrated that the rehabilitation goals of the site are better served by
waiting until a later stage of the site's operation; and
· In the Natural Heritage System, no less than 30 per cent of the area of
mineral aggregate operations shall be rehabilitated to a natural self-
sustaining condition, including aquatic habitat.
4.4 Cultural Herita.qe Resources
Cultural heritage resources can be defined as man-made or natural features,
including structures, objects, neighbourhoods, landscapes and archaeological
sites, that have been identified as significant and meaningful components of a
community's cultural heritage, or identity, by the local municipality or the
province.
Greenbelt municipalities are encouraged to work with aboriginal groups and other
stakeholders to identify and protect cultural heritage resources and plan toward
maintaining, developing and using these resources in a manner that will benefit
the local community and be compatible with other Greenbelt priorities.
23 of 34
Municipalities are also encouraged to build cultural components into their
municipal plans and planning processes, including creating inventories of cultural
heritage resources and planning for their ongoing protection and appropriate use.
Municipal cultural plans should draw from and promote an integrated vision of
local cultural development that emphasizes connections across the full range of
arts, heritage, cultural industries, libraries, archives and other cultural activity.
4.5 Existinq Uses
All existing uses lawfully in existence the day before the Greenbelt Plan comes
into effect are permitted with the Protected Countryside.
Single dwellings are permitted on existing lots of record, provided they were
zoned for such as of the date the Greenbelt Plan came into effect.
Expansions to existing buildings and structures and accessory uses are
permitted in the Protected Countryside, outside of settlement areas, provided that
the expansion:
· Does not require new urban servicing;
· Does not expand into key natural heritage and key hydrologic features,
unless there is no other alternative in which case the expansion should be
limited in nature and kept within close proximity to the existing structure.
Expansions to existing agricultural buildings and structures, residential dwellings
and accessory uses to both, can be considered within key natural heritage and
key hydrologic features if:
· There is no alternative and the expansion, alteration or establishment is
directed away from the feature to the extent possible; and
· The expansion or alteration minimizes its impact on the feature and its
functions to the extent possible.
Expansion of existing infrastructure is permitted, subject to the policies of section
4.2.
4.6 Lot Creation
Lot creation is permitted in the Protected Countryside for the range of uses
permitted by the policies of this Plan.
Lot creation is also permitted for the following:
· Land acquisition for infrastructure purposes, subject to section 4.2;
24 of 34
058
Facilitating conveyances to public bodies or non-profit entities for natural
heritage conservation, provided it does not create a separate lot for a
residential dwelling in Specialty Crop or Prime Agricultural Areas; and
Minor lot adjustments, provided it does not create a separate lot for a
residential dwelling in Specialty Crop or Prime Agricultural Areas and
there is no increased fragmentation of a key natural heritage and key
hydrologic feature.
More specifically, within the Specialty Crop Area and Prime Agricultural Area, lot
creation is permitted for:
· Agricultural uses where the severed and retained parcels are intended for
agricultural uses and provided the minimum lot size is 50 acres within
Specialty Crop Area and 100 acres within Prime Agricultural Areas;
· Existing agriculture-related uses, provided that any new lot will be limited
to a minimum size needed to accommodate the use, including a sewage
and water system appropriate for such a use; and
· Surplus farm dwellings where an existing farm residence is rendered
surplus to the farm as a result of farm consolidation, and provided no
residential development is permitted in perpetuity on the retained parcel of
farmland created by this severance. Approaches to ensuring no
residential development on the remnant vacant parcel of farmland may be
recommended by the Province, or municipal approaches that achieve the
same objective may be considered.
25 of 34
ATTACHMEN? # /_~ TO
REPORT # PD .... q'?-~6/ ~
5.0 IMPLEMENTATION
5.1 Status and Effect
The proposed Greenbelt Act, 2004, allows for the Greenbelt Plan to be created
through an Order In Council, which was filed as OIC XX/XX. The proposed
Greenbelt Act, 2004, also requires that all decisions on planning applications
shall conform to the policies in the Greenbelt Plan.
Decisions on applications made under the Ontario Planning and Development
Act, 1994, the Planning Act or the Condominium Act, 1998, which were
commenced on or after December 16, 2004 (the effective date of this Plan) and
relate to the areas in this Plan designated as Protected Countryside, are required
to conform to all applicable policies and provisions of this Plan.
For applications made under the Ontario Planning and Development Act, 1994,
the Planning Act or the Condominium Act, 1998, which were commenced before
December 16, 2004, relating to areas in this Plan designated as Protected
Countryside, the proposed Greenbelt Act, 2004 authorizes the application of
prescribed policies.
The policies of this Plan do not affect any Aboriginal or treaty right recognized or
affirmed by the Constitution Act. The Ontario government shall consult with
Aboriginal peoples about decisions that may affect the use of Crown land and
resources within the Greenbelt Plan area that are subject to Aboriginal treaty
rights.
5.2 Municipal Implementation of Protected Countryside Policies
Municipalities are required to include a map of, and policies for, the Natural
Heritage System, key natural heritage and key hydrologic features and any
associated vegetation protection zones when they amend their official plans to
conform with the Greenbelt Plan. The identification of the Natural Heritage
System will form the basis for applying the policies of section 3.2.
Municipalities are also encouraged to include a map of wellhead protection areas
and inherently susceptible aquifer areas together with associated policies for
these areas within their official plans, as appropriate and in accordance with any
provincial directives on source water protection.
Despite the policies in this Greenbelt Plan, there is nothing in this Plan that limits
the ability of decision makers on planning applications to adopt policies that are
more stringent than the requirements of the Plan, unless doing so would conflict
with any of the policies or objectives of the Plan. Official plans and zoning bylaws
26 of 34
060
shall not, however, contain provisions that are more restrictive than the policies
of this Plan or the Provincial Policy Statement as they relate to agricultural and
mineral aggregate resources.
Municipalities may adjust their designation for prime and/or rural/open space at
the time they bring their official plans into conformity with this Plan, only under
the following conditions:
· If the upper-tier or single-tier municipality has not adjusted its prime
agriculture/rural designations to reflect the 1994 Provincial Policy
Statement; or
· Through a comprehensive official plan review by an upper or single tier; or
· In the case of lower tier municipalities, to conform to an upper tier plan
which has been amended in accordance with either of the above
provisions.
5.3 Relationship of Plan to the Land Use Plannin.q System
This Plan works in conjunction with other provincial legislation, plans and
regulations as well as planning and management documents of municipalities
and other agencies such as conservation authorities.
Unless otherwise addressed by the policies of this Plan, land use within the
Protected Countryside will be governed by the Planning Act, the Provincial Policy
Statement and municipal official plans and Qntario's existing planning system
whereby the province and/or upper tiers provide review and approvals of
municipal planning documents.
The policies of this Plan must be considered within processes and requirements
set out in other legislation and regulations, but nothing in this Plan affects the
need for land use and infrastructure proposals to meet the requirements set out
in other such legislation and regulations.
Where other provincial plans or regulations are more specific and/or restrictive as
they apply to lands within the Protected Countryside, the more specific or
restrictive policy applies.
5.4 Boundaries
5.4.1 Boundary of the Greenbelt Plan
The Boundary of the Greenbelt Plan is proposed to be established by Ontario
Regulation XX/XX, as enabled by the proposed Greenbelt Act, 2004. This
boundary is to be specifically defined by the Surveyor General, which allows for
the boundary to be located with precision.
27 of 34
001
For those portions of the major river valleys connecting Lake Ontario to the Oak
Ridges Moraine and the Niagara Escarpment that are beyond the approved
urban boundaries of municipal official plans, the boundary of the Greenbelt Plan
shall be defined as:
i) In situations where there is no defined valley, a minimum of 60 metres
from both sides of a river's edge. Where hazard lands associated with
these rivers extend beyond the 60 metres, the boundary shall be the
extent of the hazard lands and any setback associated therewith; or,
ii) In situations where there is a defined valley, a minimum of 60 metres
from the valley wall.
Where key hydrologic features or key natural heritage features, as defined in
Section 3.2.4 abuts any portion of the 60-metre zone under either of the above
scenarios, the outer boundary of the Greenbelt Plan shall be defined to include
the entire feature plus a 30-metre zone from the edge of the feature.
Municipalities and conservation authorities will be responsible for delineating
these zones in the field.
5.4.2 Schedules and Appendix
The Greenbelt Plan contains four schedules, identifying: 1. The Greenbelt Plan area, which delineates the Niagara Escarpment Plan
Area, the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan Area and Protected
Countryside (including Towns, Villages and Hamlets);
2. The boundary of the Niagara Peninsula Tender Fruit and Grape Area;
3. The boundary of the Holland Marsh; and
4. The Natural Heritage System.
In addition, the Plan contains an Appendix that is a map showing the Greenbelt
within the context of the proposed Greater Golden Horseshoe Growth Plan.
5.5 Plan Review
As time passes, new information may lead to the need to review policies, which
could include changes to the levels of protection afforded to key features and
lands. Through the requirement for a 10-year review, the province is ensuring
that the Greenbelt Plan will not remain static and will not become irrelevant over
time.
The 1 O-year review is to include review of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation
Plan, the Niagara Escarpment Plan and the Protected Countryside policies.
28 of 34
O02
The purpose of the review is to assess the effectiveness of the policies contained
in the Plan (using information gathered through the monitoring program), and
make amendments, if appropriate, to update or include new information and/or
improve the effectiveness and relevance of the policies.
The review can only consider modifications to the urban boundaries within the
Greenbelt if the upper or single-tier municipality provides a comprehensive
justification or growth management study.
5.6 Plan Amendments
Under the proposed Greenbelt Act, 2004, amendments to those areas of the
Plan designated as Protected Countryside can only be proposed by the Minister
of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Amendments are subject to the approval of the
Lieutenant Governor in Council.
Amendments to the Plan shall not have the effect of reducing the total land area
of the Greenbelt Plan.
Amendments may be considered outside the 10-year review only in the following
circumstances:
· There are major unforeseen circumstances, or major new Provincial
policy, legislation or regulation that creates the need for an amendment;
· The overall effectiveness and integrity of the Plan would be threatened if
the amendment were deferred to the next 10-year review; and/or
· The effectiveness and/or relevance of the Plan's policies would be
improved through an amendment.
Amendments to the Niagara Escarpment Plan will continue to be initiated within
the Niagara Escarpment Plan in accordance with the provisions of the Niagara
Escarpment Planning and Development Act. Amendments to the Oak Ridges
Moraine Conservation Plan remain governed by the Oak Ridges Moraine Act.
5.7 Monitorin.q/Performance Measures
The objective of the monitoring framework is to evaluate the effectiveness of the
policies of the Plan in achieving its goals, as identified in section 1.2.
Performance measures are to be established through the Ministry of Municipal
Affairs and Housing's Municipal Performance Measurement Program.
29 of 34
In this regard, the Ontario Government will work with other ministries,
municipalities and other stakeholders to:
· Identify appropriate performance indicators to measure the effectiveness
of the Plan;
· Identify roles and responsibilities among partners in the collection and
analysis of the indicators; and
· Provide for periodic collation, publication and discussion of the results.
5.8 Greenbelt Advisory Council
The Province may establish an Advisory Council and provide it with a varied
mandate, which could evolve over time. Initially, it is anticipated that the
Advisory Council will consider how the implementation of the plan is proceeding,
including the identification of issues arising from implementation.
Subsequently, and building on the understanding gained from the implementation
stage, it is envisaged that the Advisory Council will provide input and advice on
the identification and establishment of performance measures which will be used
to track the success of the Greenbelt Plan in achieving its goals. Such advice
should take advantage of the local knowledge of the Council's members and
other local stakeholders, with a view to identifying the most effective and least
costly performance measures that build on the ability of local communities and
associations to provide meaningful input and information.
Over the short to mid term, the Advisory Council could play a meaningful role in
helping to coordinate efforts of municipalities, conservation authorities,
associations and other stakeholders in matters which cross municipal boundaries
such as trail systems, water resources, watershed plans and programs and
agricultural activities. The Advisory Council could also provide advice on ways of
promoting the Greenbelt.
Over the long-term and particularly as the time for the lO-year review of the
Greenbelt Plan approaches, it is expected that the Advisory Council will play an
important role in helping to shape and/or focus the nature and/or content of the
review. This could be achieved through Council conducting its own process to
obtain stakeholder views, which would then form the basis for the government to
frame the formal review required by the proposed Greenbe/t Act, 2004.
The composition of the Advisory Council could also change over time, but it
should include representation from the environmental, agricultural, recreational,
resource, municipal and development sectors.
30 of 34
Definitions
Agricultural Uses
As defined by the Provincial Policy Statement.
Agricultural-Related Uses
As defined by the Provincial Policy Statement.
Connectivity
Means the degree to which key natural heritage or key hydrologic features
are connected to one another by links such as plant and animal movement
corridors, hydrologic and nutrient cycling, genetic transfer, and energy flow
through food webs.
Development
Means the creation of a new lot, a change in land use, or the construction
of buildings and structures, any of which require approval under the
Planning Act, the Environmental Assessment Act, but does not include:
(a) The construction of facilities for transportation, infrastructure and
utilities used by a public body;
(b) Activities or works under the Drainage Act; or
(c) The carrying out of agricultural practices on land that was being used
for agricultural uses on the date the Plan came into effect.
Ecological Value
The value of vegetation in maintaining the health of the key natural
heritage or key hydrologic feature and the related ecological features and
ecological functions, as measured by factors such as the diversity of
species, the diversity of habitats, and the suitability and amount of habitats
that are available for rare, threatened and endangered species.
Ecological Function
Means the natural processes, products or services that living and non-
living environments provide or perform within or between species,
ecosystems and landscapes, including hydrologic functions and biological,
physical, chemical and socio-economic interactions.
31 of 34
065
Estate Residential
Non-agricultural residential development outside of approved urban
boundaries, whether proposed as a single dwelling or by plan of
subdivision.
Existing Uses
Uses legally established prior to the date that the Greenbelt Plan came
into effect. Existing agricultural accessory buildings and structures
including farm dwellings can expand on the same lot subject to the
provisions of the municipal zoning by-law.
Farm
Consolidation
Means the acquisition of additional farm parcels to be operated as one
farm operation.
Inherently Susceptible Aquifer
Areas where contamination of aquifers is more likely to occur due to
surface contamination; linked to the time of travel of water, and
contaminants that move in the water, from the surface to the aquifer.
Minimum D/stance Separation Formula
As defined by the Provincial Policy Statement.
Natural Hazards
As defined by the Provincial Policy Statement.
Normal Farm Practices
As defined by the Provincial Policy Statement.
Prime Agricultural Areas
As defined by the Provincial Policy Statement.
Secondary Uses
As defined by the Provincial Policy Statement.
Significant
With respect to key natural heritage features, means identified by the
Ministry of Natural Resources using evaluation procedures established by
that Ministry as amended from time to time.
With respect to key hydrologic features, means identified by the Ministry of
the Environment using evaluation procedures established by that Ministry
as amended from time to time.
32 of 34
006
Site Alteration
Means activities such as filling, grading and excavation that would change
the landform and natural vegetative characteristics of land, but does not
include:
(a) The construction of facilities for transportation, infrastructure and
utilities uses by a public body;
(b) Activities or works under the Drainage Act; or
(c) The carrying out of agricultural practices on land that was being used
for agricultural uses on the date the Plan came into effect.
Specialty Crop Areas
As defined by the Provincial Policy Statement.
Stable Top of Bank
The edge of the channel or bank, if there is a sharp change from the steep
slope of the channel or bank to the shallower slope of the field area, or the
normal full extent of the watercourse when it contains the maximum
volume of water without flooding, if the change in slope does not exist.
Total Developable Area
Total developable area shall mean the total area of the property less the
area occupied by key natural features, including any related Vegetation
Protection Zone (see section 3.2.3).
Vegetation Protection Zone
A vegetated buffer area surrounding a key natural feature within which
only those land uses permitted within the feature itself are permitted. The
width of the vegetation protection zone is to be determined when new
development or site alteration occurs within 120 metres of a key natural
feature, and is to be of sufficient size to protect the feature and its
functions from the impacts of the proposed change and associated
activities that will occur before, during, and after, construction, and where
possible, restore or enhance the feature and/or its function.
Watershed Plans
Watershed plans shall include:
· A water budget and conservation plan;
· Land and water use and management strategies;
· A framework for implementation;
· An environmental monitoring plan;
· Requirements for the use of environmental management practices and
programs; and
33 of 34
06¥
· Criteria for evaluating the protection of water quality and quantity, and
key hydrologic features and functions.
Weflhead Protection Areas
Means the surface and subsurface area surrounding a water well or well
field that supplies a public water system and through which contaminants
are reasonably likely to move so as eventually to reach the water well or
well field.
34 of 34
ATTACHMENT # 13 TO
REPORT # PD 47-04
m
Iil
Z
I;3
ATTACHMENT # 13 TO
REPORT # PD 47-04
ATTACHMENT #
REPORT # PD
13 TO
47-04
070
Legend
DRAFT - Places to Grow - Conceptual Flap
Priority Urban Centres ExL~ng Major Highways
Emerging Urban Centres .... Existing/Proposed
Transit
Future Economic/Transport
~' Corridors - Co~celXual
(net to scale) 6' InternatJeaal Nrports
Future C~owth Areas -
Co~ceptual (not to scale} {k~
Hajor Ports
Greater Golden
Greenbait Plan Area Horseshoe Area
~ Urban Areas
River Valley Connections
Source: Races t~ Grow, A Growth Ran for the Greate* Golden
Horseshoe, Discussion Paper, Summer 2004. & Draft Gmenbeit Plan
ZO 10 0 20 40 ~
I ~ I I I )
I.
THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING
BY-LAW NO. 6407/04
Being a By-law to dedicate that part of Lot 28, Range
3, Broken Front Concession, Pickering, designated as
Part 12, Plan 40R-22824 as public highway and name
it "Delta Boulevard".
WHEREAS The Corporation of the City of Pickering is the owner of that part of
Lot 28, Range 3, Broken Front Concession, Pickering, designated as Part 12,
Plan 40R-22824 and wishes to dedicate it as public highway; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the MunicipalAct, the Council of a local municipality may
pass By-laws for giving names to or changing the names of highways.
NOW THEREFORE, the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering
HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
That part of Lot 28, Range 3, Broken Front Concession, Pickering,
designated as Part 12, Plan 40R-22824 is hereby dedicated as public
highway; and
That part of Lot 28, Range 3, Broken Front Concession, Pickering,
designated as Part 12, Plan 40R-22824 is hereby named "Delta
Boulevard".
BY-LAW read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 6th day of
December, 2004.
David Ryan, Mayor
'C. Anne Greentree, Deputy Clerk
Roadded. 444
071
O72
THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING
BY-LAW NO. 6408~04
Being a bydaw to appoint By-law Enforcement Officers for certain
Purposes (Parking Regulation - 1555 Finch Ave., 1865 Kingston Road
and St. Martin's Anglican Church, 1203 St. Martin's Ddve.)
WHEREAS pursuant to section 15(I) of the Police Services Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.15, as
amended, a municipal council may appoint persons to enforce the by-laws of the
municipality; and
WHEREAS pursuant to section 15(2) of the said Act, municipal by-law enforcement
officers are peace officers for the purpose of enforcing municipal by-laws;
NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF
PICKERING HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
That the following persons be hereby appointed as municipal law enforcement
officers in and for the City of Pickering in order to ascertain whether the
provisions of By-law 2359/87 are obeyed and to enforce or carry into effect the
said By-law and are hereby authorized to enter at all reasonable times upon
lands municipally known as:
a) 1555 Finch Ave. and 1865 Kingston Road:
Robin Rodgers
Matteo Martire
Doug Pitcher
Tony Murray
Jonathan Fitches
Nick Koitsopoulos
Regan Lacey
Adrian Rozel
Richard Bell
Sean Stafford
Scoff Smith
Keith Pearson
Peter Lawrence
b) St. Martin's Anglican Church, 1203 St. Martin's Drive:
Selwyn D. Newton
Valede Byers
The authority granted in section 1 hereto is specifically limited to that set out in
section 1, and shall not be deemed, at any time, to exceed the authority set out in
section 1.
These appointments shall expire upon the persons listed in section l(a) ceasing
to be employees of Group 4 Falck or upon Group 4 Falck ceasing to be agents
for 1555 Finch Ave. or 1865 Kingston Road or upon the persons listed in section
l(b) ceasing to be officers of St. Martin's Anglican Church, 1203 St. Martin's
Ddve.
BY-LAW read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 6th day of December,
2004.
David Ryan, Mayor
C. Anne Greentree, Deputy Clerk
073
NOTICE OF MOTION
DATE: DECEMBER 6, 2004
MOVED BY: COUNCILLOR BRENNER
SECONDED BY: COUNCILLOR MCLEAN
WHEREAS the voter turnout across Canada has been steadily decreasing over the
years at Federal, Provincial and Municipal elections; and
WHEREAS young people have expressed that they do not feel engaged in the electoral
process; and
WHEREAS young people have a good knowledge of the electoral process and the way
the three levels of government operate through school programs that start in the early
grades; and
WHEREAS a lowering of the voting age from eighteen to sixteen will have the
advantage of reinforcing a pattern of voter participation that will stay with our youth
throughout life; and
WHEREAS the Member of Parliament for Ajax-Pickering, Mark Holland, has introduced
Bill C-261 that if enacted would have the effect of lowering the voting age for Federal
elections to sixteen while at the same time ensuring that a candidate must be at least
eighteen years of age;
NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Corporation of the City of Picketing hereby
states its support for Bill C-261 to lower the voting age from eighteen to sixteen at the
Federal level; and
FURTHER THAT the Legislature of the Province of Ontario be requested to amend the
Elections Act which governs Provincial elections and the Municipal Elections Act, 1996
which governs Municipal elections to lower the voting age from eighteen to sixteen; and
FURTHER THAT this resolution be forwarded to:
· The Right Honourable Paul Martin, Prime Minister of Canada
· Mark Holland, MP Ajax-Pickering
· Dan McTeague, MP Pickering-Scarborough East
· The Honourable Dalton McGuinty, Premier of Ontario
· The Honourable John Gerretsen, Minister of Municipal Affairs & Housing
· The Association of Municipalities of Ontario
· Federation of Canadian Municipalities
· All Ontario municipalities
CARRIED:
Btaylor:Notices of Motion:Voting Age
MAYOR
O73
NOTICE OF MOTION
DATE: DECEMBER 6, 2004
MOVED BY: COUNCILLOR PICKLES
SECONDED BY: COUNCILLOR JOHNSON
WHEREAS by Resolution #212/98 the Federal Minister of Transport was advised that
Council and residents of Pickering do not support the development of an airport; and
WHEREAS in April 2001, the Federal Transport Minister announced that the Greater
Toronto Airports Authority (GTAA) had been asked to determine the need for a future
regional reliever airport on the Pickering lands; and
WHEREAS a report prepared for the GTAA and released in September 2002 entitled
"Pickering Lands Airport Planning Initiative - Financial Assessment Analysis" concluded
that an airport based on a preliminary business model was feasible; and
WHEREAS a Picketing Airport Draft Plan Report was released by the GTAA in
November 2004, outlining a conceptual airport site layout, timeframes, and justification
for an airport in Pickering, and that the GTAA announced that the Financial Assessment
Analysis will be updated, and
WHEREAS these reports are important early components of the rationale for the
potential establishment of an airport in Pickering and were important sources in the
development of an environmental assessment for the proposed airport, therefore, the
City of Pickering should review the Analysis and provide a response to the GTAA; and
WHEREAS these reports are very technical documents and provide a very specialized
field of analysis that staff of the City of Pickering do not have the expertise to review and
comment on in a meaningful way; and
WHEREAS the City has received sufficient funding from proponents in special planning
studies and reviews impacting the City of Pickering, including but not limited to, Special
Study Areas, Ontario Power Generation's Return to Service of Pickering 'A', Ontario
Power Generation's Waste Facility Expansion Study, and the Growth Management
Study;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT it is essential for the City of Pickering to
obtain an independent review of the Pickering Airport Draft Plan Report and updated
Financial Assessment Analysis at this time, prior to the initiation of an environmental
assessment, to protect the interests of the residents and The Corporation of the City of
Pickering, and
THAT City of Picketing acquire the consulting services to undertake a peer review of the
Pickering Airport Draft Plan Report and updated Financial Assessment Analysis, and
THAT City of Pickering staff prepare an appropriate terms of reference, procedure (e.g.
request for proposals), and proposed budget for a peer review of the Pickering Airport
Draft Plan Report and updated Financial Assessment Analysis for Council's
consideration at a scheduled Council meeting to be no later than the end of January
2005, and
THAT the City of Pickering in the interim request that the Federal Transport Minister and
the CEO of the Greater Toronto Airports Authority (GTAA) provide sufficient funding in
order for the City of Pickering to acquire the appropriate qualified expert services to
review the GTAA Financial Assessment Analysis and provide meaningful comments
and recommendations to the Council and City of Picketing; and
THAT the Mayor, on behalf of the City of Pickering, formally make this request in writing
to the Transport Minister and the President and CEO of the GTAA, with a copy to the
Members of Parliament for Ajax-Pickering and Picketing-East Scarborough, and
Members of Provincial Parliament for Ajax-Pickering and Uxbridge.
Btaylor:Notices of Motion:GTAA
CARRIED:
MAYOR