Loading...
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