Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOctober 5, 2020 Planning & Development Committee Meeting Agenda October 5, 2020 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Councillor Brenner For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca Due to COVID-19 and the Premier’s Emergency Orders to limit gatherings and maintain physical distancing, the City of Pickering continues to hold electronic Council and Committee Meetings. Members of the public may observe the meeting proceedings by viewing the livestream. A recording of the meeting will also be available on the City’s website following the meeting. Page 1. Roll Call 2. Disclosure of Interest 3. Statutory Public Meetings Statutory Public Meetings are held to receive input and feedback on certain types of planning applications. Due to the need to hold electronic meetings during the COVID -19 pandemic, members of the public who wish to address the Planning & Development Committee for any matters listed under Statutory Public Meetings may do so via an audio connection into the electronic meeting. To register as a delegate, visit www.pickering.ca/delegation and complete the on-line delegation form or email clerks@pickering.ca by 12:00 noon on the business day prior to the meeting. Please ensure that you provide the telephone number you wish to be called at so that you can be connected via audio when it is your turn to make a delegation. Please be advised that your name and address will appear in the public record and will be posted on the City’s website as part of the meeting minutes. 3.1 Information Report No. 12-20 1 Revised Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 13/17 (R2) Avonmore Ventures Inc. Part of Lot 18, Concession 3 (North of William Jackson Drive, South of the CPR Corridor) 4. Delegations Due to COVID-19 and the Premier’s Emergency Orders to limit gatherings and maintain physical distancing, members of the public looking to provide a verbal delegation to Members of the Planning & Development Committee for any matters listed under Planning and Development Reports, may do so via an audio connection into the electronic meeting. To register as a delegate, visit www.pickering.ca/delegation, and Planning & Development Committee Meeting Agenda October 5, 2020 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Councillor Brenner For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca complete the on-line delegation form or email clerks@pickering.ca. Persons who wish to speak to an item that is on the agenda must register by 12:00 noon on the last business day before the meeting. All delegations for items not listed on the agenda shall register ten (10) days prior to the meeting date. The list of delegates who have registered to speak will be called upon one by one by the Chair and invited to join the meeting via audio connection. A maximum of 10 minutes shall be allotted for each delegation. Please ensure you provide the phone number that you wish to be contacted on. Please be advised that your name and address will appear in the public record and will be posted on the City’s website as part of the meeting minutes. 5. Planning & Development Reports 5.1 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 19-20 18 City Initiated Official Plan Amendment Application: Drinking Water Source Protection - Conformity to the Credit Valley, Toronto and Region, and Central Lake Ontario Source Protection Plan - Recommended Amendment 36 to the Pickering Official Plan - Recommended Informational Revision 24 to the Pickering Official Plan - File: OPA 19-002/P Recommendation: 1. That Official Plan Amendment Application OPA 19 -002/P, initiated by the City of Pickering, to amend existing policies and a schedule and introduce new policies and a schedule to the Pickering Official Plan with regard to the protection of drinking water sources, as set out in Exhibit ‘A’ to Appendix I to Report PLN 19-20 be approved; 2. That the Draft By-law to adopt Amendment 36 to the Pickering Official Plan, to amend existing policies and a schedule, and introduce new policies and a schedule to the Pickering Official Plan with regard to the protection of drinking water sources, as set out in Appendix I to Report PLN 19-20, be forwarded to Council for enactment; Planning & Development Committee Meeting Agenda October 5, 2020 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Councillor Brenner For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca 3. That Council adopt Recommended Informational Revision 24 to the Pickering Official Plan as set out in Appendix II to Report PLN 19-20; and, 4. That the City Clerk forward the Notice of Adoption to the Region of Durham and to each person or public body that provided written or verbal comments at the Open House, the Public Meeting, the Planning & Development Committee or the City Council meetings. 5.2 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 20-20 56 Proposed Telecommunication Tower Installation Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. Installation #69 Part of Lot 17, Concession 4 (west side of Sideline 16, north of Taunton Road) Recommendation: That Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. be advised that City Council does not object to the 29.0 metre high radio telecommunication tower installation proposed to be located on the west side of Sideline 16, north of Taunton Road, based on the design and other details submitted with this request. 5.3 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 21-20 73 Proposed Telecommunication Tower Installation Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. Installation #70 Part Lot 18, Concession 8, Now Part 3, 40R-13684 (4905 Brock Road) Recommendation: That Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. be advised that City Council does not object to the 27.4 metre high radio telecommunication tower installation proposed to be located at 4905 Brock Road, based on the design and other details submitted with this request. 6. Other Business 7. Adjournment Information Report to Planning & Development Committee Report Number: 12-20 Date: October 5, 2020 From: Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Chief Planner Subject: Revised Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 13/17 (R2) Avonmore Ventures Inc. Part of Lot 18, Concession 3 (North of William Jackson Drive, South of the CPR Corridor) 1.Purpose of this Report The purpose of this report is to provide preliminary information regarding a revised application for Zoning By-law Amendment, submitted by Avonmore Ventures Inc., to permit a residential condominium development. This report contains general information on the applicable Official Plan and other related policies, and identifies matters raised to date. This report is intended to assist members of the public and other interested stakeholders to understand the revised proposal. The Planning & Development Committee will hear public delegations on the revised application, ask questions of clarification and identify any planning issues. This report is for information and no decision on this application is being made at this time. Staff will bring forward a recommendation report for consideration by the Planning & Development Committee upon completion of a comprehensive evaluation of the proposal. 2.Property Location and Description The subject lands are located on the east side of Brock Road, north of William Jackson Drive and south of the Canadian Pacific Railway (CPR) Corridor within the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood (see Location Map, Attachment #1). The subject lands comprise 2 properties, having a combined area of approximately 1.99 hectares of which approximately 1.22 hectares are developable. The remaining environmentally sensitive lands, having an area of approximately 0.77 of a hectare, are to be conveyed to the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA). The lands have approximately 42 metres of frontage along Brock Road, and no road frontage along William Jackson Drive. In order to access the development from William Jackson Drive, a permanent easement from the City of Pickering is required. A single storey detached dwelling currently occupies the site, which is proposed to be removed. Mature trees and other vegetation are located along the northern and eastern limits of the subject lands, and within the valley lands associated with the Urfe Creek (see Air Photo Map, Attachment #2). Surrounding land uses include: North: CPR Corridor, and further north vacant lands designated as “Open Space Systems – Seaton Natural Heritage System”. East: Urfe Creek and associated valley lands designated as “Open Space System – Natural Areas”. - 1 - Information Report No. 12-20 Page 2 South: An existing medium density residential subdivision comprising freehold semi-detached and townhouse dwelling units. A future Village Green is located between the residential subdivision and Brock Road, to be constructed by the City. Vacant lands owned by Infrastructure Ontario immediately to the south of proposed apartment building. West: Across Brock Road, vacant lands designated as “Mixed Use Areas – Mixed Corridors”. The lands at the northwest corner of Brock Road and Zents Drive, which are owned by the City, are planned for a future Fire Hall and headquarters. 3. Background In 2017, Avonmore Ventures Inc. submitted an application for a zoning by-law amendment to facilitate a residential condominium development consisting of 178 stacked townhouse units within 7 residential blocks as shown in Figure 1 below. Included in the application, was 0.3 of a hectare of land owned by Infrastructure Ontario, which the applicant was in the process of acquiring. Figure 1: Original Concept Plan (2017) A public open house was held on February 22, 2018, and a statutory public meeting was held on April 3, 2018. The following is a list of key concerns/comments that were expressed by the area residents regarding this proposal:  concerned with the loss of mature vegetation and wildlife habitat, and that the removal of the vegetation will result in excess noise and vibration impacts on the existing res idential properties in the area;  commented that the proposal will increase traffic congestion in the area, and that vehicular access be aligned with the north-bound portion of William Jackson Drive and designed as a three-way stop; and  concerned about the lack of park space and outdoor private amenity within the proposal and within the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood to serve both existing and future residents. Environmental Lands to be conveyed to TRCA Crash Wall Townhouse Blocks Townhouse Blocks - 2 - Information Report No. 12-20 Page 3 In response to concerns raised, the applicant submitted a revised zoning by-law amendment application on December 21, 2018, to facilitate a residential condominium development containing a total of 205 units consisting of a 7-storey apartment building and 5 residential townhouse blocks. The principal access for the residents was proposed from William Jackson Drive, and a second access was proposed for emergency and fire services east of the principal access as shown in Figure 2 below. The application also proposed a 2.1 metre high concrete crash wall for protection along the CP Rail corridor. Figure 2: Revised Concept Plan (2018) A second statutory public meeting was held on April 1, 2019. The following is a list of key concerns/comments that were expressed by the area residents at the Planning & Development Committee:  concerned that the proposed three-way stop will create traffic congestion along William Jackson Drive;  concerned with the loss of trees and lack of tree protection;  requested that the subject lands remain as green space;  concerned with privacy issues given the height of the building;  concerned that the proposed crash wall design is too low;  concerned with the proximity to the CP Rail tracks and safety concerns;  concerned that there is not sufficient bus service in the area to accommodate new residents with reduced parking standards;  concerned about the potential noise impacts of garage vent fans ;  concerned about vibration impacts of the proposed development and surrounding area when the mature vegetation removed;  requested additional boulevard planting along William Jackson Drive;  requested clarification on the types of units and tenure (rental or condominium); and  requested clarification if accessible units will be provided. - 3 - Information Report No. 12-20 Page 4 4. Applicant’s Revised Proposal (July 2020) The applicant is now requesting another revision to their zoning by-law amendment application to facilitate a residential condominium development containing a total of 212 units. This revision is necessitated as a result of a request to utilize the Bonus Zoning provisions of the City’s Official Plan to increase the maximum permitted density beyond what is allowed by the Official Plan, from 140 units per net hectare to 174 units per net hectare, in exchange for the provision of a community benefit under Section 37 of the Planning Act. Section 5.5 of this report provides further information on the City’s Bonus Zoning Policies. The revised proposal removes the IO lands from the proposal, located south east of subject lands fronting William Jackson Drive. As shown on the Revised Concept Plan below on Figure 3 and in Attachment #3, this proposal consists of an 8-storey building containing 130 apartment units and 82 stacked townhouse units within 5 residential blocks. The apartment building is proposed to be located on the easterly portion of the developable lands and the townhouses are located on the westerly portion of the subject lands. The applicant has indicated that the valley lands associated with the Urfe Creek, including required buffer lands, as shown as Block 2 on Figure 3 below, will be conveyed to the TRCA. The environmental lands are approximately 0.77 of an hectare in size . Figure 3: Revised Concept Plan Parkettes s Berm Area 8-Storey Apartment Building Townhouse Blocks Environmental Lands to be conveyed to TRCA Block 2 Underground access - 4 - Information Report No. 12-20 Page 5 Figure 4: Revised Rendering Plan The CPR corridor is located adjacent to the lands along the northern property line. The buildings are setback approximately 25 metres from the CPR corridor, and a berm is proposed to be constructed within the setback. The berm is 3.0 metres above the grade at the property line for protection along the CP Rail corridor. The previous submission proposed a crash wall design. Vehicular site access is proposed via a three-way stop controlled intersection from William Jackson Drive, west of Starboard Mews. Given that the lands do not have frontage along William Jackson Drive, an access easement for a 6.5 metre wide private road to the development is required from the City of Pickering through a portion of the future village green immediately to the south. Resident parking is provided within a single level underground garage accessed from the apartment building. Surface parking spaces are also provided for residents and visitors. Rooftop patio areas and balconies are proposed for the stacked townhouse units, and balconies are proposed for the apartment units as shown on Revised Rendering Plan, Attachments #4 & #5 and Figure 4 above. Two parkettes are proposed on the north side of the apartment building having a total area of 390 square metres (see Revised Rendering Plan, Attachments #5). The table below summarizes the key details of the proposal: Total Area 1.99 hectares Total Net Developable Area 1.22 hectares Density 174 units per net hectare (Density Bonus Request) Floor Space Index 1.37 Total Number of Units Apartment Building: 130 units Stacked Townhouses: 82 units Total: 212 units - 5 - Information Report No. 12-20 Page 6 Number of Storeys & Building Height Apartment Building: 8-storeys (26 metres) Stacked Townhouses: 4-storeys (13 metres) Total Outdoor Amenity Space – Private Parkette 390 square metres located within 2 separate outdoor amenity areas Residential Parking Ratio Apartment Building: 1.0 space per unit Stacked Townhouses: 1.0 space per unit Total: 212 parking spaces Visitor Parking Ratio Apartment Building: 0.2 spaces/unit Stacked Townhouses: 0.2 spaces/unit Total: 43 parking spaces Bicycle Parking 65 bicycle parking spaces for the apartment units located within the underground parking garage Total Parking 255 parking spaces The proposal will be subject to site plan approval and an application for draft plan of condominium will be required at a later date. 5. Policy Framework 5.1 Region of Durham Official Plan The Regional Official Plan (ROP) designates the subject lands as “Living Areas” with a “Regional Corridor” overlay along Brock Road. Living Areas shall be developed predominately for housing purposes. Limited office development and limited retailing of goods and services, in appropriate locations, as components of mixed use developments, are also permitted. In the consideration of development proposals, regard shall be had to achieving a compact urban form, including intensive residential, office, retail, service and mixed uses along arterial roads, in conjunction with present and potential transit facilities. Regional Corridors shall be planned and developed in accordance with the underlying land use designation, as higher density mixed use areas, supporting higher order transit services and pedestrian oriented design. Regional Corridors are intended to support an overall, long-term density target of at least 60 residential units per gross hectare and a floor-space index (FSI) of 2.5, with a wide variety of building forms, generally mid-rise in height, with some higher buildings, as detailed in municipal official plans. Brock Road is designated as a Type ‘A’ Arterial Road and High Frequency Transit Network in the ROP. Type ‘A’ Arterial Roads are designed to carry large volumes of traffic at moderate to high speeds, have some access restrictions and generally have a right -of-way width ranging from 36 to 45 metres. Roads designated High Frequency Transit Network are recognized for planned High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes, or buses in mixed traffic, with transit signal priority at major intersections and other measures to ensure fast and reliable transit service. - 6 - Information Report No. 12-20 Page 7 5.2 Pickering Official Plan The Pickering Official Plan designates the developable portion of the subject lands as “Mixed Use Areas – Mixed Corridors” within the Duffin Heights Neighborhood. Mixed Use Areas are recognized as lands that have or are intended to have the widest variety of uses and highest levels of activity in the City. The Mixed Corridors designation is intended primarily for residential, retail, community, cultural and recreational uses at a scale serving the community, and provides for a range of commercial uses and residential development at a density range of over 30 units up to and including 140 units per net hectare and a maximum FSI up to and including 2.5. The following table outlines the maximum permissible and proposed density for the development. Units per Net Hectare Resulting Total Number of Units Maximum permitted density by the City’s Official Plan 140 units/ha 170 units Proposed Maximum Density 174 units/ha 212 units Difference between maximum permitted density and proposed density additional 34 units/ha additional 42 units To facilitate the proposal, the applicant is requesting an increase in the maximum permitted density by 34 units per net hectare, which results in an additional 42 units beyond the maximum permitted density within the City’s Official Plan. The proposed development has a net residential density of approximately 174 units per net hectare and an FSI of 1.37. The portion of the subject lands containing the Urfe Creek and associated valley lands and buffers are designated as “Open Space – Natural Areas”. Lands designated as part of the open space system are intended to be used primarily for conservation, restoration, environmental education, recreation and ancillary purposes. As noted above, these lands will be conveyed to the TRCA through the site plan approval process. 5.3 Duffin Heights Neighbourhood Policies The Duffin Heights Neighbourhood policies of the Pickering Official Plan require a broad mix of housing by form, location, size and affordability within the neighbourhood. Policies for the Mixed Use Areas – Mixed Corridors designation in this neighbourhood require the following:  new development to provide a strong and identifiable urban image by establishing buildings closer to the street, providing safe and convenient pedestrian access and requiring all buildings to be multi-storey;  higher intensity multi-unit housing forms on lands adjacent to Brock Road and restrict grade related residential development to lands adjacent to collector or local roads ; and  require proponents of new development abutting or containing existing naturalized open space features designated Natural Areas, to submit an Edge Management Plan to the satisfaction of the City, in consultation with the TRCA, that: - 7 - Information Report No. 12-20 Page 8  address the protection of the natural heritage features and functions from the impacts of any new development through such mechanism as tree management, tree preservation, invasive species management, construction management and stormwater management; and  identifies road and engineering designs that maintain the ecological integrity of the tableland coniferous and mixed forest. The Duffin Heights Neighbourhood policies of the Pickering Official Plan also require landowners to demonstrate how the proposal is consistent with the Duffin Heights Environmental Servicing Plan to the satisfaction of the Region, City and TRCA. As a condition of approval, the landowners are required to become a party to the cost sharing agreement for Duffin Heights or receive an acknowledgement from the Trustee of the Duffin Heights Landowners Group Inc. that the benefitting landowner has made satisfactory arrangements to pay its proportion of the shared development costs. The application will be assessed against the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood policies and provisions of the Pickering Official Plan during the further processing of the application. 5.4 Duffin Heights Neighbourhood Guidelines The Duffin Heights Neighbourhood Development Guidelines provide design objectives for the neighbourhood. The intent of the Guidelines is to further the objectives of the Official Plan and to achieve the following:  an accessible pedestrian-oriented residential area, distinct in character and harmonious with the larger neighbourhood;  a streetscape which is attractive, safe and encourages social interaction with the neighbourhood;  a central focus to the neighbourhood which is safe, lively and attractive;  a diversity of uses to support neighbourhood and City functions;  preserve and maintain the ecological function of the tableland forest and valleylands;  promote site development and building/construction that is consistent with the City’s Sustainable Development Guidelines; and  a mix of housing types, forms, affordability and tenure on a variety of lot frontages. The developable portion of the subject lands are delineated as Brock Road Streetscape on the Tertiary Plan, which encourages higher density, mid -rise and mixed use buildings with a high level of architectural quality. The application will be assessed against the provisions of the Duffin Heights Neigbourhood policies and Development Guidelines during the further processing of the application. - 8 - Information Report No. 12-20 Page 9 5.5 Bonus Zoning Policies Section 37 of the Planning Act authorizes municipalities with appropriate Official Plan provisions to pass zoning by-laws for increases in height or density beyond what is permitted by the zoning by-law, in return for the provision by the applicant of community benefits. On May 27, 2019, Council approved a Bonus Zoning Policy to ensure a consistent and transparent approach when identifying eligible developments and community benefits, calculating the value of the applicant’s contribution towards a community benefit, and negotiating the required Section 37 agreements. The objective of this policy is to implement the Bonus Zoning provisions of Section 16.17 of the Pickering Official Plan, in accordance with Section 37 of the Planning Act, as amended. The City’s Official Plan contains such policy provisions which permit City Council to pass by-laws that grant an increase in height of a building or an increase in density not exceeding 25 percent of the density permitted by the Official Plan providing:  the density or height bonus is given only in return for the provision of specific services, facilities or matters as specified in the by-law, such as but not limited to: additional open space or community facilities, assisted or special needs housing, the preservation of heritage buildings or structures, or the preservation of natural heritage features and functions;  when considering an increase in density or height, and allowing the provision of benefits off-site, the positive impacts of the exchange should benefit the social/cultural, environmental and economic health of surrounding areas experiencing the increased height and/or density;  the effects of the density or height bonus have been reviewed and determined by Council to be in conformity with the general intent of the Official Plan, by c onsidering matters such as:  the suitability of the site for the proposed increase in density and/or height in terms of parking, landscaping, and other site-specific requirements; and  the compatibility of any increase in density and/or height with the chara cter of the surrounding neighbourhood, and  as a condition of granting a density or height bonus, the City requires the benefiting landowner(s) to enter into one or more agreements, registered against the title of the lands, dealing with the provision and timing of specific facilities, services or matters to be provided in return for the bonus. The applicant is proposing to use the Bonus Zoning provisions of the City’s Official Plan to permit an additional 42 units beyond the maximum permitted density by the Official Plan. In return for the additional density, the applicant is proposing a cash contribution that may be used to assist the City in the acquisition of IO lands located adjacent to the site to provide additional open space, community facility or other community benefits to the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood. The City is currently assessing the appropriateness of the applicant’s request to use the density bonus provisions of the Official Plan and the proposed community benefit. - 9 - Information Report No. 12-20 Page 10 5.6 Zoning By-law 3037 The subject lands are currently zoned “A” – Rural Agriculture Zone within Zoning By-law 3037, as amended, which permits a detached dwelling, home occupation and various agricultural and related uses. The applicant is requesting to rezone the developable portion of the subject lands to an appropriate residential zone category with site-specific performance standards to facilitate the proposal. The lands associated with the Urfe Creek, including the required buffer lands, are to be rezoned to “OS” – Open Space Areas. 6. Comments Received 6.1 Resident Comments As of the writing of this report, no comments or concerns have been received from the public regarding the revised application. Resident comments were received regarding previous submissions as noted in Section 3 of this report. 6.2 Agency Comments At the time of writing this report, no comments have been received from the Region of Durham – Planning & Economic Development Department and Canadian Pacific Railway (CPR). 6.2.1 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA)  TRCA has no objection to the approval of the revised Zoning by-law amendment subject to minor revisions;  TRCA requires an easement to access the environmental lands that are planned to be conveyed to the TRCA (shown as Block 2 on Figure 4). 6.3 City Department Comments 6.3.1 Engineering Services Department  no comments received at the time of writing this report 7. Planning & Design Section Comments The following is a summary of key concerns/issues or matters of importance raised to date. These matters, and others identified through the circulation and detailed review of the proposal, are required to be address by the applicant prior to a final recommendation report to Planning & Development Committee:  ensure conformity with the City’s Official Plan and Duffin Heights Neighbourhood policies;  assess the suitability and appropriateness of the site for the proposed increase in density;  determine if the proposed community benefit (cash contribution to assist the City in the acquisition of IO lands for additional open space lands) for the additional increase in density and the suitability for the community;  require an appraisal of the land to determine the value of Section 37 contribution;  ensure the proposal addresses the goals and objectives of the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood Development Guidelines with respect to building siting and setbacks; building heights and massing; orientation of the dwelling units fronting the future village green; architectural features and materials; on-site landscaping, and pedestrian connectivity within and external to the site; - 10 - Information Report No. 12-20 Page 11  ensure the proposal is compatible with the surrounding established residential area;  assess the appropriateness and suitability of the proposed parking ratios for resident and visitor parking;  assess whether the size, location and configuration of the proposed private outdoor amenity spaces are appropriate;  review on-site circulation to ensure appropriate turnarounds for fire trucks and waste collection vehicles;  assess the location and design of the proposed access to ensure: that there are no operational issues with the proposed 3-way stop; that it provides for safe and appropriate access to the site for vehicles and pedestrians, including emergency access for fire services; and that it is designed in accordance with City standards;  ensure that the berm design protection along the CP Rail corridor is acceptable to CPR;  explore opportunities for the development to include affordable or rental units ;  ensure the proposal complies with TRCA’s policies and regulations, and that the limits of development, including appropriate buffer areas adjacent to the Urfe Creek, are provided to the satisfaction of the TRCA;  ensure that appropriate compensation (financial and replacement planting) is provided for the removal of the existing vegetation and loss of ecosystem services; and  ensure that the applicant becomes a party to the cost sharing agreement for Duffin Heights or receives an acknowledgement from the Trustee of the Duffin Heights Landowners Group Inc., that the benefiting landowner has made satisfactory arrangements to pay its proportion of the shared development cost. Further issues may be identified following receipt and review of comments from the circulated departments, agencies and public. The City Development Department will conclude its position on the application after it has received and assessed comments f rom the circulated departments, agencies and public. 8. Information Received Copies of the plans and studies submitted for the revised application and listed below are available for viewing on the City’s website at pickering.ca/devapp or in person at the office of the City of Pickering, City Development Department:  Covering Letter, prepared by the Biglieri Group Ltd., dated June 30, 2020  Conceptual Site Plan and Underground Parking Plan, dated June 22, 2020  Revised Renderings and Elevation Plans, dated August 4, 2020  Environmental Noise and Vibration Impact Study, prepared by Aercoustics Engineering Ltd., dated August 10, 2020  Addendum to the Environmental Impact Study, prepared by Beacon Environmental Limited, dated August 5, 2020  Functional Servicing and Stormwater Management Report, prepared by Lithos Group Inc., dated August 11, 2020  Transportation Impact Study, prepared by TMIG Ltd., dated June 20, 2020  Sustainability Report, prepared by The Biglieri Group Ltd., dated August 21, 2020 - 11 - Information Report No. 12-20 Page 12 9.Procedural Information 9.1 General written comments regarding this proposal should be directed to the City Development Department; oral comments may be made at the Electronic Statutory Information Meeting; all comments received will be noted and used as input to a Planning Report prepared by the City Development Department for a subsequent meeting of Council or a Committee of Council; any member of the public who wishes to reserve the option to appeal Council’s decision must provide comments to the City before Council adopts any by-law for this proposal; and any member of the public who wishes to be notified of Council’s decision regarding this proposal must request such in writing to the City Clerk. 10.Owner/Applicant Information The owner of this property is Avonmore Ventures Inc. and is represented by The Biglieri Group Ltd. Attachments 1.Location Map 2.Air Photo Map 3.Revised Concept Plan 4.Revised Rendering Plan 5.Revised Rendering Plan Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Chief Planner Original Signed By:Original Signed By: Cristina Celebre, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner, Development Review Original Signed By: Nilesh Surti, MCIP, RPP Manager, Development Review & Urban Design CC:ld Date of Report: September 18, 2020 - 12 - W ill iam J a c k s on Dri ve Huckleberry CrossingBrockRoadCarousel DriveRex Heath Drive Tally Street Zents Drive Taunton Road ForbrockStreet © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © Queens Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.;© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, Department of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers all rights reserved.; © Municipal Property Assessment Corporation and its suppliers all rights reserved.; City Development Department Location Map File: Applicant: Property Description: A 13/17 (R2) Date: Sep. 17, 2020 ¯ E Avonmore Ventures Inc. Part of Lot 18, Concession 3 (William Jackson Drive) Subject Lands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\A\2017\A 13-17 Avonmore Ventures Inc\A13_17(R2)_LocationMap.mxd 1:4,000 SCALE: THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. Infrastructure OntarioOwned LandsE Starboard MewsEarl Grey AvenueCarousel Mews Calico Mews Attachment #1 to Information Report 12-20 - 13 - W i l l i am J a c k s o n Dr i ve JackpineC ros s ing Huckleberry CrossingBrockRoadCarousel DriveCalico Mews Rex Heath Drive Mayapple CrossingCarousel Mews Tally Street EarlGreyAvenueZents Drive Starboard MewsTaunton Road ForbrockStreet 1:4,000 SCALE: © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © Queens Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.;© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, Department of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers all rights reserved.; © Municipal Property Assessment Corporation and its suppliers all rights reserved.; City Development Department Air Photo Map File: Applicant: Property Description: THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. Date: Aug. 26, 2020 L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\A\2017\A 13-17 Avonmore Ventures Inc\A13_17(R2)_AirPhoto.mxd ¯ A 13/17 (R2) Avonmore Ventures Inc. Part of Lot 18, Concession 3 (William Jackson Drive)ESubjectLands Attachment #2 to Information Report 12-20 - 14 - L:\Planning\01-MapFiles\A\2017 Aug 26, 2020DATE: Applicant: Property Description: File No: Revised Concept Plan FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. City Development Department A 13/17 (R2) Avonmore Ventures Inc. Part of Lot 18, Concession 3 (William Jackson Drive) N Attachment #3 to Information Report 12-20 - 15 - L:\Planning\01-MapFiles\A\2017 Sept 17, 2020DATE: Applicant: Property Description: File No: Revised Rendering Plan FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. City Development Department A 13/17 (R2) Avonmore Ventures Inc. Part of Lot 18, Concession 3 (William Jackson Drive) Looking northwest from William Jackson Drive Attachment #4 to Information Report 12-20 - 16 - L:\Planning\01-MapFiles\A\2017 Sept 17, 2020DATE: Applicant: Property Description: File No: Revised Rendering Plan FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. City Development Department A 13/17 (R2) Avonmore Ventures Inc. Part of Lot 18, Concession 3 (William Jackson Drive) Looking southwest BROC K R O A D Attachment #5 to Information Report 12-20 - 17 - Report to Planning & Development Committee Report Number: PLN 19-20 Date: October 5, 2020 From: Kyle Bentley Director, City Development & CBO Subject: City Initiated Official Plan Amendment Application: Drinking Water Source Protection -Conformity to the Credit Valley, Toronto and Region, and Central Lake Ontario Source Protection Plan -Recommended Amendment 36 to the Pickering Official Plan -Recommended Informational Revision 24 to the Pickering Official Plan -File: OPA 19-002/P Recommendation: 1.That Official Plan Amendment Application OPA 19-002/P, initiated by the City of Pickering, to amend existing policies and a schedule and introduce new policies and a schedule to the Pickering Official Plan with regard to the protection of drinking water sources, as set out in Exhibit ‘A’ to Appendix I to Report PLN 19-20 be approved; 2.That the Draft By-law to adopt Amendment 36 to the Pickering Official Plan, to amend existing policies and a schedule, and introduce new policies and a schedule to the Pickering Official Plan with regard to the protection of drinking water sources, as set out in Appendix I to Report PLN 19-20, be forwarded to Council for enactment; 3.That Council adopt Recommended Informational Revision 24 to the Pickering Official Plan as set out in Appendix II to Report PLN 19-20; and 4.That the City Clerk forward the Notice of Adoption to the Region of Durham and to each person or public body that provided written or verbal comments at the Open House, the Public Meeting, the Planning & Development Committee or the City Council meetings. Executive Summary: The purpose of Amendment 36 is to amend the City of Pickering Official Plan to bring it into conformity with the Credit Valley, Toronto and Region, and Central Lake Ontario Source Protection Plan, March 25, 2019, in accordance with the Clean Water Act, 2006. The full amendment is contained in Exhibit ‘A’ to Appendix l to Report PLN 19-20. A general description of the amendment is provided in Section 2.2 of this report. Related changes to the explanatory text and sidebars of the Pickering Official Plan are provided in Informational Revision 24 (see Appendix ll). A general description of the Informational Revision is provided in Section 2.3 of this report. Financial Implications: No direct costs to the City are anticipated as a result of the Recommended Amendment. - 18 - Report PLN 19-20 October 5, 2020 Subject: Official Plan Amendment Application OPA 19-002/P Page 2 Discussion: 1.Purpose 1.1 As a result of the contamination of the drinking water supply in Walkerton in the year 2000, the Province enacted the Clean Water Act, 2006. 1.2 In accordance with the Clean Water Act, 2006, municipalities are required to amend their Official Plans to conform to the applicable Source Protection Plan. The City of Pickering is within the Credit Valley, Toronto and Region, and Central Lake Ontario Source Protection Region. The City is subject to the Credit Valley, Toronto and Region, and Central Lake Ontario Source Protection Plan (SPP), which came into effect in 2015. On March 25, 2019 amendments to the Credit Valley, Toronto and Region, and Central Lake Ontario SPP was approved by the Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks, and is now in effect. 1.3 Council’s passing of the By-law to adopt the Recommended Amendment and approval of the Recommended Informational Revision will complete the City’s required conformity exercise. In accordance with Section 17 (24.5) of the Planning Act, there is no appeal to Official Plan Amendments that apply to vulnerable areas as defined within the Clean Water Act, 2006. 2.Recommended Amendment 2.1 Lands Affected The Recommended Amendment contains policies that apply city-wide including rural and urban areas and establishes protection zones around municipal wells located in The Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville; protection zones for the Ajax Water Treatment Plant; and identifies areas where aquifers are sensitive. 2.2 Recommended Amendment 36 Exhibit ‘A’ to Appendix I is the Recommended Amendment 36 to the City of Pickering Official Plan. It identifies Wellhead Protection Areas, Intake Protection Zones and Event Based Areas on a new Schedule (Schedule lll F: Resource Management: Vulnerable Areas, refer to Schedule “B” to the Recommended Amendment 36) and introduces new policies in Chapter 10 – Resource Management to provide direction on the requirements for development within a Wellhead Protection Area , Intake Protection Zone, and Event Based Area. More specifically, key proposed amendments to the Official Plan add: Definitions for Groundwater Recharge Area; Significant Groundwater Recharge Area; Wellhead Protection Area; Intake Protection Zone; Event Based Area and Vulnerable Area; Revisions to Schedule lll D: Resource Management: High Aquifer Vulnerability, Ground Water Recharge Areas (refer to Schedule “A” to the Recommended Amendment 36 to the City of Pickering Official Plan); Policies that require snow storage to be located where melting snow cannot carry contaminants and salt loads directly into vulnerable areas; - 19 - Report PLN 19-20 October 5, 2020 Subject: Official Plan Amendment Application OPA 19-002/P Page 3 Policies that prohibit or restrict land use activities within W ellhead Protection Areas Classes B and C (W HPA-B WHPA-C) which pose a significant drinking water quality threats (see Schedule III F); A policy requiring all planning and building permit applications for lands within a WHPA-A,-B or C, in the City of Pickering to be circulated to Durham Region’s Risk Management Official for review. Durham Region will then forward the application to York Region for review by their Risk Management Official; and Policies to protect water quantity that: may restrict certain land use activities that take water without returning it to the same source, or which reduce recharge to an aquifer in the York-Durham Wellhead Protection Area – Water Quantity (York-Durham WHPA-Q1/Q2); require a water balance study for major development within the York-Durham WHPA-Q1/Q2; require major development and small-scale development, within the York-Durham WHPA-Q1/Q2, to implement best management practices with the goal to maintain pre-development recharge rates; and may restrict rural settlement area boundary expansions into the York-Durham WHPA-Q1/Q2. 2.3 Recommended Informational Revision Appendix II is the Recommended Informational Revision 24 (Informational Revision) to the Pickering Official Plan. The purpose of this Revision is to update the informational text contained within the Official Plan in relation to the new policies and new and/or updated recommended schedules introduced as part of the Official Plan Amendment to implement Drinking Water Source Protection. 2.4 Statutory Public Meeting and Open House In accordance with the Planning Act, a notice of the statutory public meeting and open house was published in the Pickering News Advertiser on May 29, 2019 and again on June 5, 2019. In addition, notice of the statutory public meeting and open house was advertised on the City of Pickering website. The statutory public meeting and open house was held on June 17, 2019. There were no attendees at the open house and no members of the public who spoke to the Draft Amendment at the statutory public meeting. - 20 - Report PLN 19-20 October 5, 2020 Subject: Official Plan Amendment Application OPA 19-002/P Page 4 3. Agency Consultation 3.1 The Draft Amendment, the Draft Informational Revision, and Information Report Number 10-19 were circulated to public agencies on May 24, 2019. W ritten submissions were received from the following: (a) Enbridge Gas Inc.; (b) Toronto and Region Conservation Authority; (c) Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority; (d) The Regional Municipality of Durham; and (e) Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. 3.2 Table 1: Staff Response To Agency Comments on Draft Official Plan Amendment 36 provides the detailed staff responses to the comments submitted by the agencies (see Attachment #1). 3.3 In response to comments received, staff have made minor technical changes to the Draft Amendment, and revised the corresponding informational text and mapping in the Draft Informational Revision 24, where appropriate. These minor technical changes do not detract from the original intent or purpose of Amendment 36. 3.4 On a very technical matter, the two key comments received relate to terminology used in describing vulnerable areas. They are discussed below: (a) Groundwater Recharge Area Currently the Pickering Official Plan uses the term “Groundwater Recharge Area” to refer to areas of significant groundwater recharge. The City is being requested to use the term “Significant Groundwater Recharge Area” instead, in order to be consistent with the Clean Water Act, 2006. City staff agree that the change in terminology will add clarity and consistency with the Clean Water Act, 2006 and with terminology used by other municipalities and agencies. (b) Highly Vulnerable Aquifers Currently the Pickering Official Plan uses the term “High Aquifer Vulnerability” or “High Vulnerable Aquifer” to refer to areas containing highly vulnerable aquifers. The City is being requested to use the term “Highly Vulnerable Aquifers” in order to be consistent with the Clean Water Act, 2006. Although the methodology used to determine “areas of high aquifer vulnerability” as prescribed by the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan differs from the methodology used to determine Highly Vulnerable Aquifers for the Credit Valley, Toronto and Region, and Central Lake Ontario Source Protection Plan, recommended Schedule III D: Resource Management: Highly Vulnerable Aquifers and Significant Groundwater Recharge Areas, identifies both “areas of high aquifer vulnerability” on the Oak Ridges Moraine and “Highly Vulnerable Aquifers” under the single heading of Highly Vulnerable Aquifers. - 21 - Report PLN 19-20 October 5, 2020 Subject: Official Plan Amendment Application OPA 19-002/P Page 5 City staff agree that the change in terminology will add clarity and consistency with the Clean Water Act, 2006. 3.5 In response to comments received, staff have added Intake Protection Zone 2 (IPZ-2), Intake Protection Zone 3 (IPZ-3) and Event Based Areas (EBAs) on Schedule lll F: Resource Management: Vulnerable Areas, which were not included in the Draft Amendment and associated mapping. In addition, new policies regarding Vulnerable Areas, which include lands identified as IPZ-2, IPZ-3 and EBAs, are added to Recommended Amendment 36. 3.6 The Regional Municipality of Durham has confirmed that Recommended Amendment 36 is exempt from Regional approval, in accordance with the Region’s By-law 11-2000, and as noted in Section 1.3 of this report, Council’s adoption of this Amendment is not appealable. 4. Conclusion 4.1 The City of Pickering is required to amend its Official Plan to conform to the relevant policies of the Credit Valley, Toronto and Region, and Central Lake Ontario Source Protection Plan and mapping from the Toronto and Region Assessment Report. Recommended Amendment 36 and Recommended Informational Revision 24 inco rporate appropriate modifications to the Draft Amendment 36 and Draft Informational Revision 24 that addresses comments received through the consultation process and that further strengthens the City’s Official Plan policies to protect drinking water sources. 4.2 Staff recommend that Council endorse Recommended Amendment 36 to the Pickering Official Plan by passing the by-law to adopt Amendment 36, as set out in Appendix I to Report PLN 19-20. 4.3 Staff recommend that Council adopt the Recommended Informational Revision 24 to the Pickering Official Plan as set out in Appendix II to Report PLN 19-20. Appendices Appendix l Draft By-law to adopt Recommended Amendment 36 to the Pickering Official Plan Appendix ll Recommended Informational Revision 24 to the Pickering Official Plan Attachment: 1. Table 1: Staff Response To Agency Comments On Draft Official Plan Amendment 36 - 22 - Report PLN 19-20 October 5, 2020 Subject: Official Plan Amendment Application OPA 19-002/P Page 6 Déan Jacobs, MCIP, RPP Manager, Policy & Geomatics MK:ld Prepared By: Original Signed By: Margaret Kish, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner, Policy Original Signed By Approved/Endorsed By: Original Signed By: Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Chief Planner Original Signed By Kyle Bentley, P. Eng. Director, City Development & CBO Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Original Signed By: Marisa Carpino, M.A.. Interim Chief Administrative Officer - 23 - Appendix No. I to Report No. PLN 19-20 By-law to Adopt Amendment 36 to the City of Pickering Official Plan - 24 - The Corporation of the City of Pickering By-law No. XXXX/20 Being a by-law to adopt Amendment 36 to the Official Plan for the City of Pickering (OPA19-002/P) Whereas pursuant to the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.p. 13, subsections 17(22) and 21(1), the Council of the Corporation of the City of Pickering may by by-law adopt amendments to the Official Plan for the City of Pickering; Whereas pursuant to Section 17(10) of the Planning Act, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing has by order authorized Regional Council to pass a by-law to exempt proposed area municipal official plan amendments from its approval; Whereas the Clean Water Act, 2006, directs The Corporation of the City of Pickering to prepare and adopt an amendment to its Official Plan to bring the City of Pickering Official Plan into conformity with the significant threat policies and designated Great Lakes policies set out in the Credit Valley, Toronto and Region, and Central Lake Ontario (CTC) Source Protection Plan; Whereas the Region has advised that, in accordance with By-law 11-2000, Amendment 36 to the City of Pickering Official Plan is exempt from Regional approval; Now therefore the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as follows: 1.That Amendment 36 to the Official Plan for the City of Pickering, attached hereto as Exhibit “A”, is hereby adopted; 2.That the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to forward to the Regional Municipality of Durham the documentation required by Procedure: Area Municipal Official Plans and Amendments; 3.This By-law shall come into force and take effect on the day of the final passing hereof. By-law passed this XX day of XXXX, 2020. ________________________________ David Ryan, Mayor ________________________________ Susan Cassel, City Clerk Draft Draft Draft - 25 - Exhibit “A” to By-law XXXX/20 Recommended Amendment 36 to the City of Pickering Official Plan - 26 - Recommended Amendment 36 to the Pickering Official Plan Purpose: The purpose of Amendment 36 is to amend the City of Pickering Official Plan to bring it into conformity with the Credit Valley, Toronto and Region, and Central Lake Ontario Source Protection Plan, March 25, 2019 (CTC SPP) in accordance with the Clean Water Act, 2006. Location: The Amendment contains policies that apply city-wide including rural and urban areas and establishes protection zones around municipal wells located in The Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville; protection zones for the Ajax Water Treatment Plant; and identifies areas where aquifers are sensitive. Basis: The Clean Water Act, 2006 enabled the establishment of Source Protection Regions and Areas throughout the province to address threats to municipal groundwater supplies (drinking water wells) and municipal surface water supplies (drinking water intakes). Each Source Protection Committee is responsible for the development of: Assessment Reports that, based on technical studies, identify and assess threats to municipal drinking water systems; and Source Protection Plans that have detailed policies on how to address those threats. The City of Pickering is within the Credit Valley, Toronto and Region, and Central Lake Ontario (CTC) Source Protection Region. The CTC Source Protection Plan came into effect December 31, 2015, and was subsequently amended in March of 2019. The policies in each Source Protection Plan have been written to ensure that for every area identified in an Assessment Report as an area where an activity is, or would be, a significant drinking water threat, the activity never becomes a significant drinking water threat or ceases to be a significant drinking water threat. Municipalities are required to amend their Official Plan s to conform to the applicable Source Protection Plan. The City’s Official Plan must therefore be amended to conform to the Clean Water Act, 2006 and the policies of the CTC Source Protection Plan. Actual The City of Pickering Official Plan is hereby amended by: Amendment: (New text is shown as underlined text, deleted text is shown as strikeout text, and retained text is shown as unchanged text.) 1. Revising Schedule III D – Resource Management: High Aquifer Vulnerability, Groundwater Recharge Areas to reflect additional Significant Groundwater Recharge Areas and Highly Vulnerable Aquifers identified in the Toronto and Region Assessment Report, March 25, 2019 as illustrated on Schedule “A” attached to this Amendment, and rename Schedule III D – Resource Management: High Aquifer Vulnerability, Groundwater Recharge Areas to Schedule lll D: Highly Vulnerable Aquifers, Significant Groundwater Recharge Areas. - 27 - Recommended Amendment 36 to the Pickering Official Plan Page 2 2. Adding new Schedule III F – Resource Management: Vulnerable Areas to illustrate: Wellhead Protection Areas B, C and D (WHPA-B, WHPA-C and WHPA-D) associated with municipal drinking water wells in Whitchurch-Stouffville; York-Durham Wellhead Protection Areas – Water Quantity (WHPA-Q1/Q2); York-Durham Wellhead Protection Areas Q1/Q2 Downgradient Line; Intake Protection Zones 2 and 3 (IPZ-2, IPZ-3); and Event Based Areas (EBAs) as illustrated on Schedule “B” attached to this Amendment. 3. Revising City Policy 10.2, Resource Management Objectives, in Chapter 10 – Resource Management, by deleting “and” at the end of subsection (f); deleting the period “.” and adding “; and” at the end of subsection (g); and adding new subsection (h) as follows: “(f) coordinate with other levels of government, public and private agencies, and other groups to identify, research, protect, and manage the City’s natural resources, and institute regular environmental monitoring and reporting; and (g) involve the public, business-people, landowners, relevant public agencies, and other interested groups and individuals in resource management decisions affecting the City. ; and (h) protect water quality and water quantity for municipal drinking water systems.” 4. Revising City Policy 10.8, Stormwater Management, in Chapter 10 – Resource Management, to add a new subsection (a) (iii) as follows: “(iii) require that designated areas for snow storage are located where melting snow cannot carry contaminants and salt loads directly into Significant Groundwater Recharge Areas and/or Highly Vulnerable Aquifers; and” 5. Revising City Policy 10.13, Areas of Groundwater Protection, in Chapter 10 – Resource Management, by adding “/balance” following “water budget” in subsection (e), adding “and” at the end of subsection (f); deleting subsections (g) and (h), and adding a new subsection (g) as follows: “(e) require, where appropriate, the recommendations of a Hhydrogeology and Wwater Bbudget/balance Sstudy, Ggroundwater Iimpact Sstudy, Eenvironmental Rreport (see Sections 16.8 and 16.10), and any evaluation reports referenced in Section 16.14, as applicable, to be implemented; (f) despite Sections 10.13(b), (c) and (e), not require further studies addressing groundwater recharge or areas of high aquifer vulnerability Highly Vulnerable Aquifers, for proposed development that was addressed through the Master Environmental Servicing Plan for the Seaton Community; and (g) participate with other area municipalities as members of the Lake Ontario Collaborative Group to undertake actions or tasks to protect Lake Ontario as an important source of drinking water.; and - 28 - Recommended Amendment 36 to the Pickering Official Plan Page 3 (h) ensure that planning decisions conform with or are not in conflict with the policies of the approved Credit Valley, Toronto and Region and Central Lake Ontario Source Protection Plan.” (g) where development is proposed within a Significant Groundwater Recharge Area and/or a Highly Vulnerable Aquifer where the application of road salt would be a moderate or low drinking water threat, require the submission of a salt management plan as part of a complete development application to address the: (i) design of roads, sidewalks and parking lots in order to minimize the need for repeat applications of road salt, while maintaining public safety; and (ii) location of snow storage so that contaminants and salt loads from snow melt are not carried into Significant Groundwater Recharge Areas and/or Highly Vulnerable Aquifers. 6. Revising City Policy 10.17, Lake Ontario Waterfront and Frenchman’s Bay, in Chapter 10 – Resource Management, by deleting “and” at the end of subsection (f); deleting the period “.” and adding “;” at the end of subsection (g); adding new subsection (h) as follows: “(f) encourage and support actions by public agencies and others to improve and restore the quality of Lake Ontario, including programs to address concerns regarding nutrient loads and the proliferation of invasive species, chemical contaminants and algae growth; and (g) require, where appropriate, that the recommendations of an Eenvironmental Rreport to be implemented (see Sections 16.8 and 16.10) and.; (h) require that designated areas for snow storage are located where melting snow cannot carry contaminants and salt loads directly into a Significant Groundwater Recharge Area and/or Highly Vulnerable Aquifers. 7. Adding new policies 10.27, 10.28, 10.29, 10.30, 10.31 and 10.32 to the end of Chapter 10 – Resource Management as follows: “10.27 City Council recognizes that, in Vulnerable Areas around municipal drinking water wells, certain land use activities may pose a threat to water quality; accordingly, Council shall: (a) identify Wellhead Protection Areas (WHPA) on Schedule III F – Resource Management: Vulnerable Areas, which are intended to function as an overlay to the primary land use designations; - 29 - Recommended Amendment 36 to the Pickering Official Plan Page 4 (b) prohibit or restrict land uses within a WHPA-A, B and/or C which pose significant drinking water quality threat activities as identified in the Credit Valley, Toronto and Region, and Central Lake Ontario Source Protection Plan; (c) where the application of road salt would be a moderate or low drinking water threat within a WHPA-B, C, D, require that the proponent to submit a salt management plan as part of a complete application to address the: (i) design of roads, sidewalks and parking lots in order to minimize the need for repeat applications of road salt, while maintaining public safety; and (ii) location of snow storage so that contaminants and salt loads from snow melt are not carried into Significant Groundwater Recharge Areas and/or Highly Vulnerable Aquifers. 10.28 City Council recognizes that the Region of York, through an agreement with the Region of Durham, has assumed enforcement related to activities that may be a threat to water quality within any WHPA, associated with a municipal drinking w ater well in the Region of York; accordingly, Council shall: (a) require all applications made under the Planning Act, Condominium Act and Building Code Act within a WHPA-A, B and C in the City of Pickering to be circulated to the Region of Durham for submission to and review by the Region of York’s Risk Management Official. 10.29 City Council recognizes that, in Vulnerable Areas around municipal drinking water wells, certain land use activities that take water without returning it to the same source, or which reduce recharge to an aquifer in the York-Durham Wellhead Protection Area – Water Quantity (York-Durham WHPA-Q1/Q2) may be a threat to water quantity; accordingly, Council shall: (a) identify the York-Durham WHPA-Q1/Q2 on Schedule III (b) F – Resource Management: Vulnerable Areas, which are intended to function as an overlay to the primary land use designations; (c) for lands within the York-Durham WHPA-Q1/Q2, deem the policies in this section to prevail in the event of a conflict with any other policy of this Plan; - 30 - Recommended Amendment 36 to the Pickering Official Plan Page 5 (d) only permit development within the York-Durham WHPA-Q1/Q2 with a significant risk level, as identified in the Credit Valley, Toronto and Region, and Central Lake Ontario Source Protection Plan, if it does not require a new or amended Permit To Take Water; (e) notwithstanding Section 10.29 (c), permit new development within the York-Durham WHPA-Q1/Q2 that requires a new or amended Permit To Take Water if the relevant provincial ministry determines that the activity will not have a negative impact on the municipal water wells; (f) require a water balance study for major development which poses a significant threat to drinking water quantity, as identified in the Credit Valley, Toronto and Region, and Central Lake Ontario Source Protection Plan, on lands north of the Downgradient Line within the York-Durham WHPA-Q1/Q2; (g) require major development which poses a significant threat to drinking water quantity, as identified in the Credit Valley, Toronto and Region, and Central Lake Ontario Source Protection Plan, on lands north of the Downgradient Line within the York-Durham WHPA-Q1/Q2, to maintain predevelopment recharge to the greatest extent feasible, based on a water balance study; (h) require major development which poses a significant threat to drinking water quantity, as identified in the Credit Valley, Toronto and Region, and Central Lake Ontario Source Protection Plan, on lands north of the Downgradient Line within the York-Durham WHPA-Q1/Q2, to implement and maximize off-site recharge, within another site within the York-Durham WHPA-Q1/Q2 to compensate for any predicted loss of recharge from the development, based on a water balance study; (i) require major development on lands south of the Downgradient Line within the York-Durham WHPA-Q1/Q2, to implement best management practices with the goal to maintain pre-development recharge rates, based on a water balance study; (j) require small-scale development and agricultural uses, agriculture-related uses and on-farm diversified uses, with the exception of agricultural uses, agriculture-related uses and on- farm diversified uses identified in Section 10.29 (j), within the York-Durham WHPA-Q1/Q2 to implement best management practices with the goal to maintain pre-development recharge rates; (k) encourage agricultural uses, agriculture-related uses and on- farm diversified uses where the total impervious surface does not exceed 10 percent of the total lot area, to implement best management practices such as low impact development methods with the goal to maintain pre-development recharge rates; and - 31 - Recommended Amendment 36 to the Pickering Official Plan Page 6 (l) require that a water balance study, as referred to in Sections 10.29 (e), 10.29 (f), 10.29 (g), and 10.29 (h), at a minimum, identifies recharge characteristics of the site, and anticipated long-term and short-term impacts of the proposed development; recommends measures to maintain pre-development recharge on site to the greatest extent feasible through best management practices; and, where pre-development recharge cannot be maintained on site, recommends measures to locate compensating recharge on another site within the York-Durham WHPA-Q1/Q2. 10.30 City Council recognizes that, in Vulnerable Areas around municipal surface water intakes, certain land use activities may pose a threat to water quality; accordingly, Council shall: (a) identify Intake Protection Zones and Event Based Areas on Schedule lll F, Resource Management: Vulnerable Areas, which are intended to function as an overlay to the primary land use designations; and (b) encourage the protection of these areas to support safe and clean drinking water sources. 10.31 City Council recognizes that within Highly Vulnerable Aquifers and Significant Groundwater Recharge Areas the handling and storage of dense non-aqueous phase liquid and organic solvent are considered a moderate and/or low drinking water threat; accordingly, Council shall encourage industrial, commercial and institutional land uses to follow best management practices to prevent their release into the environment. 10.32 Where there is a conflict between the policies of the Pickering Official Plan, Durham Regional Official Plan and the Source Protection Plan, the more restrictive policy shall apply.” 8. Revising City Policy 13.1, Preparation of Rural Settlement Plans, in Chapter 13 – Rural Settlements, by deleting “and” at the end of subsection (c); deleting the period “.” and adding “; and” at the end of subsection (d); and adding new subsection (e) as follows: “(c) indicate the location of new public road connections, where known, and endeavour to ensure the construction of such road connections through development proposals and government initiatives; and (d) indicate the general location of existing and new community facilities, where known, and endeavour to ensure the construction of such facilities through development proposals and government initiatives.; and - 32 - Recommended Amendment 36 to the Pickering Official Plan Page 7 (e) in addition to subsection (b), only consider amendments to rural settlement area boundaries that would result in an expansion into the York-Durham WHPA Q1/Q2 as part of a Regional municipal comprehensive review , where it has been demonstrated that recharge functions will be maintained on lands identified as Significant Groundwater Recharge Areas on Schedule III D – Resource Management: Highly Vulnerable Aquifers, Significant Groundwater Recharge Areas.” 9. Adding a definition for the term “Event Based Area (EBA)” in alphabetic order to Section 15.15, Glossary, in Chapter 15 – Implementation, as follows: “Event Based Area means the area delineated by a spill or “event”, such as a chemical or pathogen release, which might impact the drinking water intakes for the Great Lakes.” 10. Adding a definition for the term “Groundwater Recharge Area” in alphabetic order to Section 15.15, Glossary, in Chapter 15 – Implementation, as follows: “Groundwater Recharge Area means an area where an aquifer is preferentially replenished from natural processes, such as the infiltration of rainfall and snowmelt and the seepage of surface water from lakes, streams and wetlands; and from human interventions, such as the use of stormwater management systems. The Director’s rules will specify the acceptable methodology to determine groundwater recharge rates i.e., what qualifies as a significant groundwater recharge area.” 11. Adding a definition for the term “Groundwater Recharge Area, Significant” in alphabetic order to Section 15.15, Glossary, in Chapter 15 – Implementation, as follows: “Groundwater Recharge Area, Significant means an area within which it is desirable to regulate or monitor drinking water threats that may affect the recharge of an aquifer.” 12. Replace the term “groundwater recharge area” with “Significant Groundwater Recharge Area” as appropriate, throughout the Official Plan. 13. Replacing the terms “High Aquifer Vulnerability or High Vulnerable Aquifer” in Section 15.15, Glossary, in Chapter 15 – Implementation, with “Highly Vulnerable Aquifer and amend the definition as follows: “High Aquifer Vulnerability or Highly Vulnerable Aquifer means an aquifer on which external sources have or are likely to have a significant adverse effect, due to the permeability and thickness of overlying layers. Notwithstanding the foregoing, on the Oak Ridges Moraine, Highly Vulnerable Aquifer includes areas that are prescribed as “high aquifer vulnerability” in the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan.” - 33 - Recommended Amendment 36 to the Pickering Official Plan Page 8 14. Replace the term “high aquifer vulnerability” or “high vulnerable aquifer” with “Highly Vulnerable Aquifer” in the Table of Contents, the Index and subsections 10.13, 15.15, 16.5A, 16.14, and 16.43 of the Official Plan. 15. Adding a definition for the term “Intake Protection Zone” in alphabetic order to Section 15.15, Glossary, in Chapter 15 – Implementation, as follows: “Intake Protection Zone means the contiguous area of land and water immediately surrounding a surface water intake, which includes:  the distance of a 1 kilometer radius from the intake;  the area where a spill of a contaminant might reach the intake before the plant operator can respond;  the area associated with potential impacts from specific modelled scenarios.” 16. Adding a definition for the term “Vulnerable Area” in alphabetic order to Section 15.15, Glossary, in Chapter 15 – Implementation, as follows: “Vulnerable Area means an area defined as vulnerable, in accordance with provincial standards, by virtue of their importance as a drinking water source and includes; a groundwater recharge area, a highly vulnerable aquifer, a surface water intake protection zone, or a wellhead protection area.” 17. Adding a definition for the term “Wellhead Protection Area (WHPA)” in alphabetic order to Section 15.15, Glossary, in Chapter 15 – Implementation, as follows: “Wellhead Protection Area (WHPA) means the surface and subsurface area surrounding a water well or well field that supplies a municipal residential system or other designated system through which contaminants are reasonably likely to move so as to eventually reach the water well or well field. 18. Revising City Policy 16.5A in Chapter 16 – Development Review by deleting the text in subsection (xxxvi) and replacing it with new text; and adding a new subsection (xxxvii) as follows: (xxxvi) a water management plan verifying that there is sufficient water supply to support the proposed uses, and on a cumulative sustainable basis, confirm that there is no negative impact on surrounding water users and the natural environment which cannot be appropriately mitigated for development applications (excepting wetland restoration projects and domestic usage and livestock operations) that require a permit to take water under the Ontario Water Resources Act, or that have the potential to impact water quantity. a water balance study, as referred to in Sections 10.29 (e), 10.29 (f), 10.29 (g), 10.29 (h), and 10.29 (k); and - 34 - Recommended Amendment 36 to the Pickering Official Plan Page 9 (xxxvii) a salt management plan as referred to in Sections 10.13 (g), and 10.27 (c).” 19. Revising City Policy 16.5B in Chapter 16 – Development Review, by deleting “and” at the end of subsection (xxv); deleting the period “.” and adding a semicolon “;” at the end of subsection (xxvi); and adding new subsections (xxvii) and (xxviii) as follows: “(xxv) a construction management plan; and (xxvi) a railway corridor safety study. ; (xxvii) a water balance study, as referred to in Sections 10.29 (e), 10.29 (f), 10.29 (g), 10.29 (h), and 10.29 (k); and (xxviii) a salt management plan as referred to in Sections 10.13 (g) and 10.27 (c).” Implementation: The provisions set forth in the City of Pickering Official Plan, as amended, regarding the implementation of the Plan shall apply in regard to this Amendment. In light of the numerous components of the Official Plan that are being revised concurrently, the numbering of the policy sections in this amendment is subject to change in accordance with the sequencing of approvals. Interpretation: The provisions set forth in the City of Pickering Official Plan as amended, regarding the interpretation of the Plan shall apply in regard to this Amendment, except as revised by this amendment. OPA 19-002/P City Initiated - 35 - Highway 407 WhitesRoadFairport RoadGreenwoodRoadLiverpoolRoadRougemountDriveH ig h w a y 4 0 1 Eighth Concession Road Brock RoadK in g sto n R oa d Finch Avenue Salem RoadCentral Street Sheppard Avenue Westney RoadWestShoreBoulevardKinsale RoadNorth RoadGlena n naRoad Sideline 14Notion RoadThird Concession Road Highway 7 Fifth Conc ession Road Altona RoadMajor O a ksRoadMowbray StreetS trou ds La n eP i c k er i ng P a r k w a yVal l eyFarmRoadDixie RoadSeventh Concession Road Whitevale Road Glendale DriveSquires Beach RoadYork Durham LineMarkham-Pickering Townline RoadPet er M at t hews Drive Twyn Rivers Drive Rosebank RoadClements Road Six t h Conc es s i on Road Montgomery Pa rkRo adBayly Street DillinghamRoad Ninth Concession Road Sideline 22Church Street SMcKay RoadSideline 20Taunton RoadFourthConcessionRoad Scarborough Pickering TownlineSideline 30Sideline 8Sideline 34Paddock RoadGolfClubRoadSideline 24Sideline 28Sideline 12Sideline 6Sideline 4Sideline 2Audley Road NSideline 32Sideline 16Sideline 26Sideline 26Brock RoadWestney RoadSideline 14Sideline 2Sideline 4Sideline 6Sideline 12Sideline 20Sideline 24Sideline 26Sideline 24North RoadAltona RoadWhites RoadSideline 28Seventh Concession RoadSideline 32C.P.R. Trans-Northern P i p e l i n e C.P.R.C.N.R.C.N.R.Trans-Canada Pipeline Greenwood Claremont Balsam Forest Creek Estates Spring Creek Cherrywood EastCherrywood West Whitevale Kinsale Barclay Estates Staxton Glen Green River Brougham 407 407 401 24 1 22 2 31 23 7 5 23 38 4 27 222 38 38 27 4 29 37 1 4 7 7 31 1 5 27 30 30 30 5 7 ¹Lake Ontario Resource Management: Highly Vulnerable Aquifers and Significant Groundwater Recharge Areas Frenchman's Bay City of Pickering City Development Department © August 2020 This Map Forms Part of the Pickering Ofiicial Plan and Must Be Read in Conjunction with the Other Schedules and the Text. Schedule III D to the Edition 8 Pickering Official Plan Oak Ridges Moraine Significant Groundwater Recharge Areas (SGRA) Highly Vulnerable Aquifers (HVA) Recomended Schedule "A" - 36 - Greenwood Claremont Balsam Spring Creek Cherrywood EastCherrywood West Whitevale Kinsale Barclay Estates Staxton Glen Green River Brougham ¹Lake Ontario Resource Management: Vulnerable Areas Frenchman's Bay City of Pickering City Development Department © July 2020 This Map Forms Part of Edition 8 of the Pickering Official Plan and Must Be Read in Conjunction with the Other Schedules and the Text. Schedule III F to the Edition 8 Pickering Official Plan Recommended Schedule "B" Oak Ridges Moraine C.P.R.Event Based Areas (EBAs) EBAs Wellhead Protection Areas (WHPA) Water Quality Wellhead Protection Areas (WHPA) Water Quantity WHPA-B WHPA-C WHPA-D York-Durham WHPA-Q1/Q2 Downgradient Line York-Durham WHPA-Q1/Q2 Intake Protection Zones (IPZ) IPZ - 2 IPZ - 3 - 37 - Appendix II to Report PLN 19-20 Recommended Informational Revision 24 to the Pickering Official Plan - 38 - Recommended Informational Revision 24 to the Pickering Official Plan Purpose: The purpose of this Recommended Revision is to change the informational text contained within the Pickering Official Plan in order to provide clarity to the policies introduced as part of the Official Plan Amendment to implement Drinking Water Source Protection. The Recommended Revision also updates references to new Recommended Schedules to be added to the Pickering Official Plan. Location: Applies city-wide. Basis: In reviewing the informational text contained in the Official Plan, various technical revisions have been determined to be necessary and appropriate to assist users with understanding the changes to the Official Plan text implemented through the associated Official Plan Amendment. Proposed The City of Pickering Official Plan is hereby revised by: Revision: 1. Revising the last sentence of the third informational paragraph on page 119, under Chapter 10 – Resource Management, so that it reads as follows: “The Resource Management Schedule identifies the various resource features and areas (see Schedules IIIA to IIIEF to this Plan, found at the end of the Plan).” 2. Adding the following new Section to the end of Chapter 10 – Resource Management: “Source Protection Plans Source Protection Plans identify threats to the quality and quantity of municipal drinking water sources (drinking water wells and surface water intakes) and their associated vulnerable areas. The City of Pickering is subject to the Credit Valley, Toronto and Region, and Central Lake Ontario Source Protection Plan (SPP). The Lake Ontario based Ajax Water Supply Plant, which is operated by the Region of Durham, is the City’s source of municipal drinking water. Implementation of policies within the Credit Valley, Toronto and Region, and Central Lake Ontario SPP addressing drinking water threats to the Ajax Water Supply Plant is the responsibility of the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks and the Region of Durham. However, the City of Pickering is committed to working with other municipalities and the Lake Ontario Collaborative Group to undertake actions that protect Lake Ontario as a source of drinking water. The City of Pickering does not have any municipal drinking water wells . However, there are portions of the City that are within Wellhead Protection Areas for water quality for two municipal drinking water wells located in the Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville. The City is also within Wellhead Protection Areas, in terms of water quantity. The Wellhead Protection Areas are identified on Schedule III F: Resource Management: Vulnerable Areas of the Official Plan. A Wellhead Protection Area (WHPA) is a vulnerable area on the land around a municipal drinking water well that is delineated to protect water quality or water quantity.” - 39 - Recommended Informational Revision 24 to the Pickering Official Plan Page 2 Cross Reference: OPA 19-002/P 3. Adding a subtitle “City Policy Wellhead Protection Areas for Water Quality” for newly added Section 10.27; 4. Adding the following informational sidebar, which relates to the size and shape of Wellhead Protection Areas referred to in new Sections 10.27, 10.28 and 15.15: 5. Adding a subtitle “City Policy Review of Applications within a Wellhead Protection Area for Water Quality” for newly added Section 10.28; 6. Adding a subtitle “City Policy Wellhead Protection Areas for Water Quantity” for newly added Section 10.29; 7. Adding the following informational sidebar which relates to “A Permit to Take Water” referred to in Section 10.29: 8. Adding a subtitle “City Policy Intake Protection Zones and Event Based Areas” for newly added Section 10.30; 9. Adding the following informational sidebar which relates to Intake Protection Zones and Events Based Areas referred to in Section 10.30 and shown on Schedule lllF; The size and shape of each Wellhead Protection Area (WHPA) (B, C, D or E) is a function of how water travels underground. Time of travel is important because it is an indication of how quickly a contaminant can move through the WHPA to a municipal well. Time of travel can be influenced by a number of factors such as the slope of land, and the type of soil (for example, water travels faster through sand than it does through clay). Wellhead Protection Areas were drawn based on scientific research that took all these factors into consideration. A Permit to Take Water is a provincial permit issued by the relevant provincial ministry. In addition to the WHPAs, Pickering also has Intake Protection Zones with Event Based Areas (EBAs). EBAs are areas within Intake Protection Zones located in one of the Great Lakes, where modelling scenarios have shown that the release and transport of contaminants to a surface water intake under extreme weather events pose a risk to a drinking water system. In Pickering, the EBAs were modelled for Nuclear Generating Station Tritium Spills, Pipelines Fuel/Oil spills and Wastewater Treatment Plant disinfection failures / Sanitary Sewer breaks. - 40 - Recommended Informational Revision 24 to the Pickering Official Plan Page 3 Cross Reference: OPA 19-002/P 10. Adding a subtitle “City Policy Dense Non-aqueous Phase Liquids and Organic Solvents” for newly added Section 10.31; 11. Adding a subtitle “City Policy Relationship with the Durham Regional Official Plan and the Source Protection Plan” for newly added Section 10.32; 12. Add the following informational sidebar which relates to Significant Groundwater Recharge Areas referred to in Section 15.15, Glossary, and shown on Schedule lllD; and 13. Add the following informational sidebar which relates to Highly Vulnerable Aquifers and “areas of high aquifer vulnerability” referred to in Section 15.15, Glossary, and shown on Schedule lllD: The term “Director” in the definition of Groundwater Recharge Area refers to the Director of the relevant provincial ministry. The methodology used to determine “areas of high aquifer vulnerability” as prescribed by the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, differ from the methodology used to determine Highly Vulnerable Aquifers for the Credit Valley, Toronto and Region, and Central Lake Ontario Source Protection Plan. Schedule IIID: Resource Management: Highly Vulnerable Aquifers, Significant Groundwater Recharge Areas, identifies “areas of high aquifer vulnerability” on the Oak Ridges Moraine and “Highly Vulnerable Aquifers” under the heading of Highly Vulnerable Aquifers. - 41 - Table 1: Staff Response to Agency Comments on Draft Official Plan Amendment 36 Updated: September 14, 2020 Page 1 of 14 Number Page Reference OPA Item and (Section) Comments City Staff Response TRCA/CTCSPA Comments General Comments 1. 6 8 (13.1 e) There is a definition for Groundwater Recharge Area. This definition comes from the Glossary of the Toronto and Region Assessment Report, however for consistency with the Clean Water Act, 2006, the terminology that should be used is Significant Groundwater Recharge Area. Agreed. The definition for “Significant Groundwater Recharge Area”, as defined by the Clean Water Act, 2006, has been added. See Recommended OPA 36 – Item 11. The term “Significant Groundwater Recharge Area” is now referenced throughout the Pickering Official Plan as appropriate. See Recommended OPA 36 – Item 12. In addition, a definition for “Groundwater Recharge Area”, as defined by the Approved Source Protection Plan: CTC Source Protection Region, Effective December 31, 2015 and as Amended March 25, 2019, has been added. See Recommended OPA 36 – Item 10. 2. 2 5 (10.13 f) There is reference to areas of high aquifer vulnerability. As above, this terminology is not consistent with the Clean Water Act (CWA), 2006 which uses Highly Vulnerable Aquifers (HVAs) to describe the fourth vulnerable area. High aquifer vulnerability is consistent with the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan. Although the delineation of these areas is similar, they are not the same. Please ensure all terminology is consistent with the CWA. 10.13 (f) is an existing policy concerning the Seaton MESP. Agreed. The definition of the term “Highly Vulnerable Aquifer” is refined in the Glossary (Section 15.15) and replaces the term “areas of high aquifer vulnerability” or “High Vulnerable Aquifer” throughout the Pickering Official Plan as appropriate. See Recommended OPA 36 – Items 13 and 14. Attachment #1 to Report #PLN 19-20 - 42 - Table 1: Staff Response to Agency Comments on Draft Official Plan Amendment 36 Updated: September 14, 2020 Page 2 of 14 Number Page Reference OPA Item and (Section) Comments City Staff Response 3. Schedule lllD Please note that the CTC Source Protection Region and the Region of Durham are considering updates to the Highly Vulnerable Aquifers (HVA) mapping. The mapping included in item (b), Schedule lllD, is therefore subject to future changes. Noted. Comments on Proposed Amendment 36 4. 1 Location Please revise name of the Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville. Agreed. The spelling of the name “Whitchurch-Stouffville” has been corrected. See Recommended OPA 36 – Location. 5. 1 Basis Please revise sentence: “The City of Pickering is within the Credit Valley – Toronto and Region and – Central Lake Ontario (CTC) Source Protection Region Area. Agreed. The reference to “Credit Valley – Toronto and Region – Central Lake Ontario (CTC) Source Protection Region” has been corrected to state “Region”. See Recommended OPA 36 – Basis. 6. 2 4 (10.8 a (iii)) This statement should specify SGRAs, as “vulnerable areas” is vague. HVAs could also be included, but this might be problematic since they are so widespread. Agreed. The term “vulnerable areas” is replaced with “Significant Groundwater Recharge Areas and/or Highly Vulnerable Aquifers” for clarity and consistency with the CTC Source Protection Plan. See Recommended OPA 36 – Item 4. 7. 3 6 (10.17 h) Please see item 6 above. Agreed. The term “vulnerable areas” is replaced with “Significant Groundwater Recharge Areas and/or Highly Vulnerable Aquifers”. See Recommended OPA 36 – Item 6. 8. 3 7 (10.27 b) Consider the addition of WHPA-A to the list of areas where activities could be prohibited or restricted. Although there is currently no WHPA-A in the boundaries of the City of Pickering, Agreed. “WHPA-A” is added to the list of areas where activities could be prohibited or restricted. See Recommended OPA 36 – Item 7. - 43 - Table 1: Staff Response to Agency Comments on Draft Official Plan Amendment 36 Updated: September 14, 2020 Page 3 of 14 Number Page Reference OPA Item and (Section) Comments City Staff Response making this revision ensures that the policy conforms in its entirety with the CTC Source Protection Plan. 9. 3 7 (10.27 b) WHPA-D should be removed from the areas where activities could be restricted or prohibited. Since significant drinking water threats cannot occur in the WHPA-D, policies in the CTC SPP cannot restrict or prohibit activities in this area. Agreed. WHPA-D has been removed from the list. See Recommended OPA 36 – Item 7. 10. 3 7 (10.27 c) To conform with Policy SAL-10 in the CTC Source Protection Plan, Significant Groundwater Recharge Areas (SGRAs) and Highly Vulnerable Aquifers (HVAs) should be added to the list of areas where Part (c) of policy 10.27 would apply. Agreed. New policy (g) is added to City Policy 10.13 that addresses Significant Groundwater Recharge Areas and Highly Vulnerable Aquifers. See Recommended OPA 36 – Item 5. 11. 4 7 (10.27 c (ii)) Please see item 6 above Agreed. The term “vulnerable areas” is replaced with “Significant Groundwater Recharge Areas and/or Highly Vulnerable Aquifers”. See Recommended OPA 36 – Item 7. 12. 4 7 (10.29) References to “WHPA-Q1/Q2” could be refined to be more specific; please note that recharge policies apply specifically to WHPA-Q2. WHPA-Q1 refers to the water demand/water use management area, while WHPA-Q2 is the groundwater recharge management area. Noted. 13. 4 7 (10.28 a) A significant drinking water threat cannot occur in the WHPA-D. Unless the City has an arrangement to send all Agreed. WHPA-D is removed from the list. See Recommended OPA 36 – Item 7. - 44 - Table 1: Staff Response to Agency Comments on Draft Official Plan Amendment 36 Updated: September 14, 2020 Page 4 of 14 Number Page Reference OPA Item and (Section) Comments City Staff Response applications within WHPAs to the Durham Region, consider removal of WHPA-D from this list. 14. 4 7(10.29 c) Remove Part (c) from Policy 10.29 since a Salt Management Plan is related to a water quality threat and this policy is specific to the WHPA-Q1/Q2, an area where only water quantity threats are applicable. Agreed. Proposed policy 10.29 (c) has been removed. See Recommended OPA 36 – Item 7. 15. 5 7 (10.29 d) This section should be revised to reflect that there is only one risk assignment for the WHPA-Q1/Q2. Future consumptive takings are a significant drinking water threat. Existing consumptive uses are a moderate threat. Agreed. The reference to “moderate” threat is removed. See recommended policy 10.29 (c). See Recommended OPA 36 – Item 7. 16. 5 7 (10.29 e) Consider replacing the current text with "... determines that the activity will not have a negative impact on the municipal water wells." Agreed. The text is replaced with: “(d) notwithstanding Section 10.29 (c), permit new development within the York- Durham WHPA-Q1/Q2 that requires a new or amended Permit To Take Water if the relevant provincial ministry determines that the activity will not have a negative impact on the municipal water wells;”. See recommended policy 10.29 (d). See Recommended OPA 36 – Item 7. 17. 5 7 (10.29 f) Remove the words ‘or moderate’ from Part (f). Part (f) of Policy 10.29 corresponds with Policy REC-1 of the CTC Source Protection Plan. Although the York-Durham WHPA-Q is classified as a moderate risk level, in the future the policy is addressing a future Agreed. The words “or moderate” are removed from proposed policy 10.29 (f). See recommended policy 10.29 (e). See Recommended OPA 36 – Item 7. - 45 - Table 1: Staff Response to Agency Comments on Draft Official Plan Amendment 36 Updated: September 14, 2020 Page 5 of 14 Number Page Reference OPA Item and (Section) Comments City Staff Response significant drinking water quantity threat. There is no ‘moderate’ threat from a recharge perspective. “…require a Water Balance Assessment for major development which poses a significant or moderate threat to water quantity…” 18. 5 7 (10.29 g) Remove the words ‘or moderate’ from Part (g). See explanation under Part (f). Only significant threats are possible. Agreed. The words “or moderate” are removed from proposed policy 10.29 (g). See recommended policy 10.29 (f). See Recommended OPA 36 – Item 7. 19. 5 7 (10.29 h) Remove the words ‘or moderate’ from Part (h). See explanation under Part (f). Only significant threats are possible. Agreed. The words “or moderate” are removed from proposed policy 10.29 (h). See recommended policy 10.29 (g). See Recommended OPA 36 – Item 7. 20. 5 7 (10.29 i) Please note, rather than on a case by case basis, all development with more than 10% increase in impervious cover within the WHPA-Q1/Q2 requires a water balance assessment. Even south of the downgradient line, a water balance assessment is the only available tool to determine whether best efforts have been pursued. Proposed policy 10.29 (i) is removed since this is addressed through proposed policy 10.29 (j) (now recommended policy 10.29 (h)). See Recommended OPA 36 – Item 7. 21. 7 (10.32) Please change “Source Water Protection Plan” to “Source Protection Plan”, to accurately reflect the title of that document. Agreed. The title to the document has been corrected. 22. 6 9 (15.15) definition of Groundwater Recharge Area Consider adding ‘preferentially’ before ‘…replenished from natural processes…’. Agreed. The word ‘preferentially’ is added before the words ‘replenished from natural processes …’. See Recommended OPA 36 – Item 10. - 46 - Table 1: Staff Response to Agency Comments on Draft Official Plan Amendment 36 Updated: September 14, 2020 Page 6 of 14 Number Page Reference OPA Item and (Section) Comments City Staff Response 23. 7 10 (15.15) Consider adding a definition of vulnerable area, as noted above. Agreed. A definition of the term ‘vulnerable area’ has been added to the Glossary. See Recommended OPA 36 – Item 16. 24. 7 17 (15.15) definition of Wellhead Protection Area Please revise the Wellhead Protection Area definition to be consistent with the wording in the CTC Source Protection Plan on page 181. Agreed. The text for the definition of Wellhead Protection Area (WHPA) is changed to be the wording in the CTC Source Protection Plan on page 181. See Recommended OPA 36 – Item 17. 25. 7 10 (ii) (15.15) Please note, in York Region, WHPA-Q1 and WHPA-Q2 are coincident. Noted. Comments on Proposed Informational Revision 24 26. 1 Purpose For conformity with the Clean Water Act, 2006, we suggest text refer to Drinking Water Source Protection or Source Protection Planning, as opposed to Source Water Protection. Agreed. The term “Source Water Protection” is replaced with “Drinking Water Source Protection” in the Purpose section of the Recommended Informational Revision 24. See Recommended Informational Revision 24 – Purpose. 27. 2 Source Protection Plans Consider the addition of text as follows: “The City of Pickering is subject to the CTC Source Protection Plan (CTC SPP), which gets its name from the first letter of each of the three Source Protection Areas: Credit Valley, Toronto and Region, and Central Lake Ontario which form the CTC Source Protection Region”. Noted. 28. 2 Source Protection Plans Consider the addition of text as follows: “However, the City of Pickering is committed to working with other municipalities as members of the Lake Ontario Collaborative Group to Agreed. The word “Group” is added after “Lake Ontario Collaborative” as suggested in the second paragraph under “Source. Protection Plans”. See Recommended Informational Revision 24 – Item 2. - 47 - Table 1: Staff Response to Agency Comments on Draft Official Plan Amendment 36 Updated: September 14, 2020 Page 7 of 14 Number Page Reference OPA Item and (Section) Comments City Staff Response undertake actions that protect Lake Ontario as a source of drinking water.” 29. 4 Size and Shape of Wellhead Protection Area Consider the revision of text as follows: “….how quickly a contaminant can move from a through the WHPA into to a municipal well…Wellhead protection areas are were drawn based on scientific research that took all these factors into consideration.” Agreed. The text in the informational sidebar in Item 4 has been revised as suggested. See Recommended Informational Revision 24 – Item 4. 30. 4 Size and Shape of Wellhead Protection Area Add a “.” at the end of this sidebar. Agreed. See Recommended Informational Revision 24 – Item 4. 31. 3 Item 2 Explanation of Wellhead Protection Area Please revise the Wellhead Protection Area definition to be consistent with the wording in the CTC Source Protection Plan on page 181. Noted. It is not necessary to provide the full definition in this explanatory text since it is provided the Glossary in section 15.15. Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority Comments Comments on Proposed Amendment 36 32. 8 (13.1 e) 5 (10.13 f) We recommend that the amendment incorporate the terms “Significant Groundwater Recharge Area (SGRA)” and “Highly Vulnerable Aquifers (HVA)” in the relevant policy sections. Agreed. See response to Numbers 1 and 2 above. 33. 4 (10.8 a (iii)) 6 (10.17 h) 7 (10.27 c (ii)) Three proposed policies, 10.8 (a) (iii), 10.17 (h), and 10.27 (c) (ii), each seek to direct the location of snow storage in order to avoid directing contaminants into vulnerable areas. We recommend that the city identify the vulnerable areas subject to this policy in order to permit effective implementation of this policy direction. Identified vulnerable Agreed. The term “vulnerable areas” in proposed policy 10.8 (a) (iii) and 10.17 (h) is replaced with “Significant Groundwater Recharge Areas and/or Highly Vulnerable Aquifers”. See response to Numbers 1 and 2 above. See Recommended OPA 36 – Items 4 and 7. - 48 - Table 1: Staff Response to Agency Comments on Draft Official Plan Amendment 36 Updated: September 14, 2020 Page 8 of 14 Number Page Reference OPA Item and (Section) Comments City Staff Response areas could include SGRA’s and potentially HVA’s as well. 34. 2 (Schedule IIIF) 3 (10.2 h) 6 (10.17) We understand that in discussions between CTC Source Protection Region staff and staff at the Source Protection Programs Branch, Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks, that ministry staff have advised that Intake Protection Zone mapping should be included in the Official Plan via this amendment. Accordingly, we recommend that proposed Schedule III F be revised to incorporate Intake Protection Zone mapping from the Source Protection Plan (IPZ-1, -2 and - 3). W hile there are no proscribed land use policies in the Source Protection Plan in relation to Intake Protection Zones, this mapping would further integration between the Source Protection Plan and the policy directions contained in proposed Policy 10. 2 (h) – Resource Management Objectives and 10.17 – Lake Ontario Waterfront and Frenchman’s Bay. Agreed. Intake Protection Zone mapping from the Source Protection Plan (IPZ-2 and IPZ-3) has been added to Schedule lllF: Vulnerable Areas for further clarity and consistency with the CTC Source Protection Plan. There are no IPZ-1 areas within, or immediately adjacent to the City of Pickering. See Recommended OPA 36 – Item 2. In addition, a definition for the term “Intake Protection Zone” has been added to Recommended OPA 36. See Recommended OPA 36 – Item 15. Regional Municipality of Durham General Comments 35. The following policy should be added to the amendment: “Where there is a conflict between the policies of the Pickering Official Plan, Durham Regional Official Plan (ROP) Agreed. New policy 10.32 is added. See Recommended OPA 36 – Item 7. - 49 - Table 1: Staff Response to Agency Comments on Draft Official Plan Amendment 36 Updated: September 14, 2020 Page 9 of 14 Number Page Reference OPA Item and (Section) Comments City Staff Response and the Source Water Protection Plans, the more restrictive policy shall apply.” The policy would provide greater clarity and transparency. 36. The Amendment refers to Groundwater Recharge Areas and High Aquifer Vulnerability. The terms are not consistent with source water protection terminology. The terms Significant Groundwater Recharge Areas (SGRAs) and Highly Vulnerable Aquifers (HVAs) should be used. Agreed. See response to Numbers 1 and 2 above. 37. There are policies in the CTC Source Protection Plan that apply to HVAs and SGRAs throughout the City of Pickering. The policies require applicants in these areas to adhere to or have regard for the use of best management practices when applying road salt or handling and storing hazardous chemicals. The following policies must be addressed:  SAL-10  SAL-12  DNAP-3  OS-3 SAL-10 and SAL-12 are addressed in policies 10.8 (a) (iii), 10.17 (h), 10.27 (c) and 16.5A (xxxvii). See Recommended OPA 36 – Items 4, 6, 7 and 18 respectively. DNAP-3 and OS-3 are addressed in policy 10.31. See Recommended OPA 36 – Item 7. 38. There are a number of references to the ROP throughout the proposed amendment, specifically in policies 10.27 and 10.29. The ROP has not yet been updated to incorporate SWP policies, as such, the policies should Agreed. Reference to the ROP has been replaced with “Credit Valley, Toronto and Region, and Central Lake Ontario Source Protection Plan” where appropriate. - 50 - Table 1: Staff Response to Agency Comments on Draft Official Plan Amendment 36 Updated: September 14, 2020 Page 10 of 14 Number Page Reference OPA Item and (Section) Comments City Staff Response only reference the applicable CTC Source Protection Plan policies. 39. As part of the Region of Durham’s Municipal Comprehensive Review exercise, the Region of Durham is in the process of preparing a proposed amendment to the Regional Official Plan (ROP) in order to bring it into conformity with the Source Protection Plans. Further revisions to the City’s Recommended Amendment 36 may be required following the completion of the Region’s Comprehensive Review exercise. Noted. Comments on Proposed Amendment 36 40. Basis The three deliverables from the SPC are the Terms of Reference, Assessment Report and Source Protection Plan. The CTC SPP came into effect December 31, 2015. Noted. “December 31” has been added to the text to reflect the precise date that the CTC SPP came into effect. See Recommended OPA 36 – Basis. 41. Item 2 (Schedule B) This map is missing Intake Protection Zone #3 from the CTC Source Protection Plan. Please include this area in Schedule B. Agreed. Mapping of Intake Protection Zone 3 from the CTC Source Protection Plan has been added to Schedule lllF to more completely represent Vulnerable Areas in the City of Pickering. See Recommended OPA 36 – Item 2. 42. Item 3 Schedule IIID, the term used in Source Protection is Significant Groundwater Recharge Areas and Highly Vulnerable Aquifers. Agreed. See response to Numbers 1 and 2 above. 43. Item 5 Policy 10.17 (i) Lake Ontario Collaborative policy LO-G-3 is aimed at Peel, Toronto, and Agreed. Proposed Policy 10.17 (i) has been removed as it does not apply to the City of Pickering. However, there is reference to the - 51 - Table 1: Staff Response to Agency Comments on Draft Official Plan Amendment 36 Updated: September 14, 2020 Page 11 of 14 Number Page Reference OPA Item and (Section) Comments City Staff Response Durham. All other LOC policies are the responsibility of MECP. City working with other municipalities and the Lake Ontario Collaborative to protect Lake Ontario as a source of drinking water, in the recommended preamble to the Source Protection Plans section of the Official Plan. See Recommended OPA 36 - Item 5 and Recommended Informational Revision 24 – Item 2. 44. Item 7 Policy 10.29 (d) In order to avoid confusion around the Permit to Take Water program, it should be added that a Permit To Take Water is a provincial permit issued by the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks. Agreed. The text “A Permit To Take Water is a provincial permit issued by the relevant provincial ministry.” has been added as a sidebar to policy 10.29. See Informational Revision 24 – Item 7. 45. Item 7 Policy 10.29 (e) It is suggested that the “significant water quantity threat” be replaced with “significant drinking water threat” to be consistent with Source Water Protection terminology. Agreed. The text in policy 10.29 (e) has been changed in accordance with the comments from TRCA/CTCSPA Comments (See Number 16 above). See Recommended OPA 36 – Item 7. 46. Item 7 Policy 10.29 (i) This policy requires a geographical identifier. A reference that the policy applies in the York Durham WHPA- Q1/Q2 should be added for clarity. The York Durham WHPA-Q1/Q2 is identified in policy 10.29 (a). 47. Item 7 Policies 10.29 (i) and (j) 10.29 i) references small-scale development and agricultural development, whereas 10.29 j) references agricultural uses. It is suggested that common terminology be used. Agreed. Proposed Policy 10.29 (i) now refers to agricultural uses, agriculture-related uses and on-farm diversified uses”. See Recommended OPA 36 – Item 7. 48. Item 8 Policy 13.1 (e) A Place to Grow, the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe requires rural settlement boundaries be added to the ROP. As such, the term “Regional See response to Number 49 below. - 52 - Table 1: Staff Response to Agency Comments on Draft Official Plan Amendment 36 Updated: September 14, 2020 Page 12 of 14 Number Page Reference OPA Item and (Section) Comments City Staff Response and” should be added to the policy, so that it reads as follows: “notwithstanding subsection (b) only consider amendments to rural settlement area boundaries that would result in an expansion into the York- Durham WHPA Q1/Q2 as part of a Regional and municipal comprehensive review …” 49. Item 8 Policy 13.1 (e) It is suggested that the word “and” between “Region” and “municipal comprehensive review” be deleted and the term “Regional” be used. Agreed. The term “Regional municipal comprehensive review” is used. See Recommended OPA 36 – Item 8. 50. Item 4 (Policy 10.8 (a) (iii)); Item 5 (Policy 10.13 (g) (ii)); Item 6 (Policy 10.17 (h)); and Item 7 (Policy 10.27 (c) (ii)) Snow storage has not been identified as a significant threat anywhere in the Region and can only exist as a significant threat in the WHPA-A (Existing, Future) WHPA-B (VS=10) or WHPA-E (VS>= 9). Also, snow storage is not considered a threat to HVAs or SGRAs in accordance with the SPP. Noted. Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH) Comments on Proposed Informational Revision 24 51. Item 2 The following revision to Section 2 is recommended for your consideration (bold represents additions and strikethrough represents deletions): “Source Protection Plans identify threats to the quality and quantity of municipal drinking water sources (drinking water wells and surface water Agreed. Textual changes have been made for clarity. See Informational Revision 24 Item 2. - 53 - Table 1: Staff Response to Agency Comments on Draft Official Plan Amendment 36 Updated: September 14, 2020 Page 13 of 14 Number Page Reference OPA Item and (Section) Comments City Staff Response intakes supply plants) and their associated vulnerable areas.” Comments on Proposed Amendment 36 52. Item 2 (Schedule B) We suggest that maps should also be included that identify, at a minimum, the EBAs (Event Based Areas (IPZ 3)) and IPZ 2 (Intake Protection Zone 2) in the City’s shoreline area in order to reflect the other designated vulnerable areas in the City. As you are aware, the PPS requires municipalities to protect all designated vulnerable areas (Policy 2.2.1.e). Agreed. IPZ-2, IPZ-3 and EBA have been added to Schedule lllF for further clarity and consistency with the Credit Valley, Toronto and Region, and Central Lake Ontario Source Protection Plan. There are no IPZ-1 areas in, or adjacent to, the City of Pickering. See Recommended OPA 36 – Item 2. New policy 10.30 has been added to address Intake Protection Zones. See Recommended OPA 36 – Item 7. In addition, a definition for the term “Intake Protection Zone” has been added to Recommended OPA 36. See Recommended OPA 36 – Item 15. 53. Comment on Revised Draft OPA 36 The comment table indicated that a definition for the term “Intake Protection Zone” was added to OPA 36 under item 12, however item 12 was actually a definition for “Vulnerable Area”. Considering the definitions for other vulnerable areas are included in OPA 36, the City may consider also including a definition for “Intake Protection Zone” for consistency. The CTC Source Protection Plan has a definition that the City may borrow: Intake Protection Zone (IPZ): Noted. A definition for the term “Intake Protection Zone” has been added to Recommended OPA 36. See Recommended OPA 36 – Item 15. - 54 - Table 1: Staff Response to Agency Comments on Draft Official Plan Amendment 36 Updated: September 14, 2020 Page 14 of 14 Number Page Reference OPA Item and (Section) Comments City Staff Response The contiguous area of land and water immediately surrounding a surface water intake, which includes:  the distance from the intake;  a minimum travel time of the water associated with the intake of a municipal residential system or other designated system, based on the minimum response time for the water treatment plant operator to respond to adverse conditions or an emergency;  the remaining watershed area upstream of the minimum travel time area (also referred to as the Total Water Contributing Area) – applicable to inland water courses and inland lakes only; Enbridge Gas Inc. General Comments 54. Enbridge Gas Inc. does not object to the proposed application. Noted. - 55 - Report to Planning & Development Committee Report Number: PLN 20-20 Date: October 5, 2020 From: Kyle Bentley Director, City Development & CBO Subject: Proposed Telecommunication Tower Installation Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. Installation #69 Part of Lot 17, Concession 4 (west side of Sideline 16, north of Taunton Road) Recommendation: 1. That Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. be advised that City Council does not object to the 29.0 metre high radio telecommunication tower installation proposed to be located on the west side of Sideline 16, north of Taunton Road, based on the design and other details submitted with this request. Executive Summary: Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. (Enbridge Gas) is proposing to erect a 29.0 metre high monopole radio telecommunication tower at a proposed underground pump station site on the west side of Sideline 16, north of Taunton Road and south of Fifth Concession Road. The proposed telecommunication tower will facilitate internal radiocommunication coverage for Enbridge Gas and ensure proper monitoring of natural gas pressure at the site . Infrastructure Ontario (IO) currently owns the subject lands. Enbridge Gas is working with IO to obtain a permanent easement to use the lands for this purpose. On behalf of Enbridge Gas, FONTUR International Inc. (FONTUR) has completed the public consultation process in accordance with Industry Canada requirements and the City’s Radiocommunication and Broadcasting Antenna System Protocol. FONTUR has advised that no public or agency comments were received. As a result, the applicant is requesting that City Council provide a statement of concurrence in support of the installation. City staff are supportive of the proposed installation. This telecommunication tower will assist Enbridge Gas by providing improved operations efficiency and improving internal on -site communication for Enbridge Gas staff. City staff recommends that Enbridge Gas be advised that Council does not object to the proposed tower. Financial Implications: No direct costs to the City are anticipated as a result of the proposed development. - 56 - Report PLN 20-20 October 5, 2020 Subject: Proposed Telecommunication Tower Installation #69 Page 2 1. Background 1.1 Property Description The subject property is currently owned by Infrastructure Ontario (IO), and is located on the west side of Sideline 16, north of Taunton Road and south of Fifth Concession Road . The property has an area of approximately 138 hectares. Enbridge Gas is working with IO to obtain a license agreement to allow Enbridge Gas access to approximately 900 square metres on the northeast portion of the property. Following this, Enbridge Gas will work with IO to obtain a permanent easement to use the lands (see attached Air Photo Map, Attachment #1). Natural areas currently surround the subject lands. The lands are designated as "Open Space System – Natural Areas" within the City's Official Plan and are currently zoned as "A" – Rural Agricultural within Zoning By-law 3037, as amended. Telecommunication towers are federally regulated and therefore exempt from local zoning regulations. 1.2 Applicant’s Proposal The City has received and is currently reviewing a site plan application from Enbridge Gas on the subject site to construct a 30 metre by 30 metre fenced-in gas regulating station compound (File Number S 05/20). Enbridge Gas currently has an existing pipeline on the east side of Sideline 16 to which the proposed station facility will connect. Landscaping and screening measures will be addressed through the site plan approval process. Enbridge Gas is proposing to erect a 29 metre high monopole radio telecommunication tower on the north end of the subject property. The tower is incorporated into a larger site plan, which includes the proposed gas regulation station (see Proposed Site Plan, Attachment #2, and Submitted Elevation Plan, Attachment #3). Vehicular access to the site will be from Sideline 16 with access to the entire compound being controlled with chain link fencing. The proposed radio telecommunication tower will improve the internal monitoring of natural gas pressure, and maintain the safety and integrity of the current Enbridge network. For safety and security, Enbridge has advised that future co -location is not a possibility since the tower will be located within a private fenced-in compound. For this reason, the tower will not be structurally designed to facilitate co-location. 2. Comments Received 2.1 Public Notification has been completed FONTUR has completed the public consultation in accordance with the City’s Cell Tower Protocol. As this proposal is located in a rural area, the minimum circulation radius of 500 metres from the tower location was applied. A total of 4 property owners were notified by mail, with 2 properties located within the Town of Ajax. - 57 - Report PLN 20-20 October 5, 2020 Subject: Proposed Telecommunication Tower Installation #69 Page 3 The applicant has advised that no written comments were received as a result of the public circulation (see Applicant’s Site Selection & Justification & Report, Attachment #4). No concerns were received from City Departments or external agencies. 3. Assessment of the Proposal against the City’s Cell Tower Protocol The City’s Telecommunication Tower Protocol (the Protocol) was established to provide direction for proponents on the location and design of antenna towers and provides criteria for staff to assess a proposal. City Development staff have reviewed the proposed tower against the location and design criteria of the City's Protocol. 3.1 Co-location opportunities have been examined The installation and creation of separate, stand-alone radio communications towers and broadcasting facilities are discouraged unless all other co-location options have been explored and are considered unfeasible. FONTUR has advised that there are no suitable towers/structures within their search area given the purpose of this telecommunication tower. 3.2 Proposed Tower Location and Design is Acceptable FONTUR has indicated that the telecommunication tower height has been minimized as much as possible to reduce the visual impact and has minimal land use conflict with the surrounding properties. The monopole design is acceptable given the current rural nature of the surrounding area. No residential properties are within the 500 metre circulation radius of the subject property. Furthermore, lands surrounding the subject property are designated as “Open Space System – Natural Areas” within the City’s Official Plan and are adequately buffered from future developable lands within the Seaton residential areas. Given the context of the site and the efforts already made to reduce the visual impact of the tower, the location and design of the proposal are acceptable. Figure 1: Tower Simulation looking south on Sideline 16 - 58 - Report PLN 20-20 October 5, 2020 Subject: Proposed Telecommunication Tower Installation #69 Page 4 Staff support the proposed location of this telecommunication tower as it will assist Enbridge Gas to improve their internal communications and monitoring of natural gas pressure. 4.Conclusion Staff recommend that City Council endorse the recommendation in this Report as the installation satisfies the requirements of the City’s Telecommunications Tower Protocol. Attachments: 1.Air Photo Map 2.Proposed Site Plan 3.Submitted Elevation Plan 4.Applicant’s Site Selection & Justification Report Prepared By: Felix Chau Original Signed By: Planner I Original Signed By: Nilesh Surti, MCIP, RPP Manager, Development Review & Urban Design FC:ld Approved/Endorsed By: Original Signed By: Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Chief Planner Original Signed By: Kyle Bentley, P.Eng. Director, City Development & CBO Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Original Signed By: Marisa Carpino, M.A. Interim Chief Administrative Officer - 59 - !Brock RoadFifth Concession Road Taunton Road WSideline 16TauntonRoad Whitevale Road W ill i a m Jackson Drive ForbrockStreet #* 1:10,000 SCALE: © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © Queens Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.;© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, Department of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers all rights reserved.; © Municipal Property Assessment Corporation and its suppliers all rights reserved. City Development Department THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. Date: Sep. 14, 2020 SubjectLands EL:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\S\CommunicationTowers\Installation# 69 - Fontur International Inc\CT69_AirPhoto_v2.mxd ¯ Air Photo Map File: Applicant: Property Description: Installation #69 Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. Part of Lot 17, Concession 4 CT69ETown of AjaxCity of PickeringAttachment #1 to Report #PLN 20-20 - 60 - Proposed Site Plan City Development Department Sep. 14, 2020FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. Installation #69 Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc.Applicant: Property Description: DATE: File No: Part of Lot 17, Concession 4 L:\Planning\01-MapFiles\S\CommunicationTowers\ Telecommunications Tower Proposed Attachment #2 to Report #PLN 20-20 - 61 - L:\Planning\01-MapFiles\S\CommunicationTowers\ Sep. 14, 2020DATE: Applicant: Property Description: File No: Submitted Elevation Plan FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. City Development Department Installation #69 Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. Part of Lot 17, Concession 4 Attachment #3 to Report #PLN 20-20 - 62 - September 10, 2020 Site Selection & Justification Report Radiocommunications Tower Site Pickering Sideline 16 Road, Pickering, Ontario Attachment #4 to Report #PLN 20-20 - 63 - Contents Introduction ........................................................................... 3 Description of Proposed System ............................................. 4 Control of Public Access ......................................................... 5 Transport & NAV Canada Assessment .................................... 5 Distance to Residential ........................................................... 5 Engineering Practices ............................................................. 6 Public Consultation ................................................................ 6 Conclusion .............................................................................. 6 - 64 - Introduction Enbridge Gas Distribution is Canada’s largest gas distribution utility, delivering natural gas to 3.7 million retail customers. Enbridge owns and operates more than 148,800 kilometers of gas distribution mainlines and services lines and 4,800 kilometers of transmission pipelines. Enbridge owns 278.7 billion cubic feet of net working storage in southwest Ontario. In order to maintain safe operations for employees, equipment and customers Enbridge Gas Distribution owns and operates a SCADA (Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition) radiocommunications system across Ontario. This system is comprised of tower and antenna sites distributed across Enbridge properties used for regulating and monitoring of natural gas pressure and operations. These antenna systems are needed in order for each pumping station to communicate with each other and relay information to the central system in addition to supporting maintenance and operations staff’s international communication network. Purpose - Background & Coverage Requirement A radio antenna and a tower are the two most important parts of a radio communication system. The antenna is needed to send and receive signals for the radio station. The tower raises the antenna above obstructions such as trees and buildings so that it can send and receive these signals clearly. Each radio station and its antenna system (including the tower) provide radio coverage to a specific geographic area, often called a cell. The antenna system must be carefully located to ensure that it provi des a good signal over the whole cell area, without interfering with other stations. Currently, there is a gap in radiocommunication coverage for the Enbridge Gas internal communication and monitoring network. This gap does not allow for seamless internal communications and monitoring of natural gas pressure and operations. An installation at the subject property would allow Enbridge to fill this gap in coverage and ensure seamless communications throughout their network. Selection & Justification of Siting The proposed location, Sideline 16 Road was chosen due to the existing underground pump station. The radio antenna at this site is necessary in order for Enbridge to receive information from the pump station. The proposed location (Figure 1.) is set back approximately 35 metres west of Sideline 16 Road and approximately 1 kilometre south of the intersection of Concession Road 5 and Sideline 16 Road. - 65 - Description of Proposed System The proposed radiocommunication system is a 29 metre monopole tower. The tower will be surrounded by a 30 metre x 30 metre fenced-in compound. The tower and associated equipment shelter will be located on a concrete pad. Statement Indicating Need for Tower Height The proposed height of 29 metres will allow Enbridge to improve internal communications and pressure monitoring at the Sideline 16 Road pump station. This height is required in order for the radiocommunications tower to function as intended and ensure there are no lapses in coverage. Proposed Location - 66 - Control of Public Access The site facility would include a locked, alarmed and electronically monitored mechanical equipment shelter. Fencing would be installed around the base of the tower and equipment shelter(s) and would include one locked gate access point. Transport & NAV Canada Assessment Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. attests that the radio antenna system described in this notification package will comply with Transport Canada / NAV Canada aeronautical safety requirements. Enbridge has made all necessary applications to Transport Canada and NAV Canada. Distance to Residential The proposed radiocommunications tower is approximately 250 metres from the nearest residential property. ~250m - 67 - Engineering Practices Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. attests that the radio antenna system described in this report will be constructed in compliance with the National Building Code of Canada and comply with good engineering practices including structural adequacy. Public Consultation After the completion of the original justification report on November 7, 2019, a public circulation and consultation has been undertaken in accordance with the City’s established telecommunication tower facility policy document. The public was notified of the proposed tower in accordance with the City’s Consultation Process and Innovation, Science and Economic Development’s CPC 2-0-03. Accordingly, residents and property owners within a radius of 150 metres (measured from the base of the tower) were sent an information brochure via regular mail (Appendix A) that was mailed out on June 22, 2019. A total of seven property owners/agencies were contacted (Appendix B), an additional notice to Innovation, Science and Economic Development. The total commenting period was 30 days and there were no comments from the public. Conclusion Enbridge Gas has determined that a radio installation at Sideline 16 Road, Pickering is necessary to maintain effective communication and proper monitoring of natural gas pressure. To that end, an improvement upon the current radio system is necessary in order to maintain the safety and integrity of the current Enbridge network. As the public comment period regarding this site has expired and that the public has not voiced objection to this installation, Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. is formally requesting that the City formally acknowledge this report as the conclusion of consultation procedures for this telecommunication tower and issue a letter of concurrence. Should you have any further questions or concerns pertaining to the consultation process associated with this proposal please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Sincerely, Brendan Chiu FONTUR International Inc. On Contract to Signum Wireless Inc. - 68 - Appendix A- Public Notification Brochure (Side 1) - 69 - Appendix A- Public Notification Brochure (Side 2) - 70 - Appendix B- Public Mailing List (Pickering) - 71 - Appendix B- Public Mailing List (Ajax) (END) - 72 - Report to Planning & Development Committee Report Number: PLN 21-20 Date: October 5, 2020 From: Kyle Bentley Director, City Development & CBO Subject: Proposed Telecommunication Tower Installation Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. Installation #70 Part Lot 18, Concession 8, Now Part 3, 40R-13684 (4905 Brock Road) Recommendation: 1.That Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. be advised that City Council does not object to the 27.4 metre high radio telecommunication tower installation proposed to be located at 4905 Brock Road, based on the design and other details submitted with this request. Executive Summary: Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. (Enbridge Gas) is proposing to erect a 27.4 metre high tripole lattice-style radio telecommunication tower at 4905 Brock Road, a property owned by Enbridge Gas that is currently being used as a natural gas pumping station. The site is located on the east side of Brock Road, south of Ninth Concession Road, immediately east of the Hamlet of Claremont. The proposed radio telecommunication tower will facilitate internal radiocommunication coverage for Enbridge Gas and ensure proper monitoring of natural gas pressure at the site. On behalf of Enbridge Gas, FONTUR International Inc. (FONTUR) has completed the public consultation process in accordance with Industry Canada requirements and the City’s Radiocommunication and Broadcasting Antenna System Protocol. FONTUR has advised that no public or agency comments were received. Enbridge Gas is requesting that City Council provide a statement of concurrence in support of the installation. City staff are supportive of the proposed installation. This radio telecommunication tower will assist Enbridge Gas by providing improved operations efficiency and improving internal on-site communication for Enbridge Gas staff. Staff recommends that Enbridge Gas be advised that Council does not object to the proposed tower. Financial Implications: No direct costs to the City are anticipated as a result of the proposed development. - 73 - Report PLN 21-20 October 5, 2020 Subject: Proposed Telecommunication Tower Installation #70 Page 2 1.Background 1.1 Property Description The subject property is located on the east side of Brock Road, south of Ninth Concession Road, adjacent to the Hamlet of Claremont. The property has an area of approximately 0.47 of a hectare (see Air Photo Map, Attachment #1). The lands to the south and to the east are intended for agricultural uses. Across Brock Road, properties to the north and to the west are residential properties within the Hamlet of Claremont. The lands are designated as “Oak Ridges Moraine Countryside Area”, and are currently zoned as “ORM-A” and “ORM-EP” within Zoning By-law 3037, as amended. Telecommunication towers are federally regulated and therefore exempt from local zoning regulations. 1.2 Applicant’s Proposal Enbridge Gas is proposing to erect a 27.4 metre high tripole lattice-style telecommunication tower. The tower is proposed to be located along the southerly property line, setback approximately 60.0 metres from Brock Road (see Proposed Site Plan, Attachment #2, and Submitted Elevation Plan, Attachment #3). The tower and associated equipment shelter will be located on a concrete pad within a 10.0 metre by 4.5 metre fenced-in compound. Vehicular access to the fenced compound exists from Brock Road and is controlled with a chain-link fence. Enbridge Gas has advised that there is a gap in radiocommunication coverage for the internal communication and monitoring network. This gap does not allow for seamless internal communication and monitoring of natural gas pressure at the Claremont pumping station. The proposed radio telecommunication tower will fill this coverage gap, improve internal monitoring of natural gas pressure, and maintain the safety and integrity of the current Enbridge network. For security and safety, Enbridge has advised that future co-location is not a possibility since the tower will be located within a private fenced -in compound. For this reason, the tower will not be structurally designed to facilitate co-location. 2.Comments Received 2.1 Public Notification has been completed FONTUR has completed the public consultation in accordance with the City’s Cell Tower Protocol. As this proposal is located in a rural area, the minimum circulation radius of 500 metres from the tower location was applied. A total of 105 property owners were notified by mail. The applicant has advised that no written comments were received as a result of the public circulation (see Applicant’s Justification & Consultation Summary Report, Attachment #4). No concerns were received from City Departments or external agencies. - 74 - Report PLN 21-20 October 5, 2020 Subject: Proposed Telecommunication Tower Installation #70 Page 3 3. Assessment of the Proposal against the City’s Cell Tower Protocol The City’s Telecommunication Tower Protocol (the Protocol) was established to provide direction for proponents on the location and design of antenna towers, and provides criteria for staff to assess a proposal. City Development staff have reviewed the proposed radio telecommunication tower against the location and design criteria of the City’s Protocol. 3.1 Co-location opportunities have been examined The installation and creation of separate, stand-alone, radiocommunications towers and broadcasting facilities are discouraged unless all other co-location options have been explored and are considered unfeasible. FONTUR has advised that there are no suitable towers/structures within their search area given the purpose of this telecommunication tower. 3.2 Proposed Tower Location and Design is Acceptable FONTUR has indicated that the radio telecommunication tower height has been minimized as much as possible to reduce the visual impact and will have minimal land use conflict with the surrounding properties. The tripole lattice -style design is acceptable given the rural character of the surrounding area. The nearest residential property is approximately 125.0 metres from the proposed location of the tower. The compound is setback approximately 60.0 metres from Brock Road and the existing mature vegetation along Brock Road will help diminish the visual impact of the tower. Figure 1: Tower Simulation - 75 - Report PLN 21-20 October 5, 2020 Subject: Proposed Telecommunication Tower Installation #70 Page 4 Staff support the proposed location of this radio telecommunication tower as it will assist Enbridge Gas to improve their internal communications and monitoring of natural gas pressure. 4.Conclusion Staff recommend that City Council endorse the recommendation in this Report as the installation satisfies the requirements of the City’s Telecommunications Tower Protocol. Attachments: 1.Air Photo Map 2.Proposed Site Plan 3.Submitted Elevation Plan 4.Applicant’s Justification & Consultation Summary Report Prepared By: Felix Chau Original Signed By: Planner I Original Signed By: Nilesh Surti, MCIP, RPP Manager, Development Review & Urban Design FC:ld Approved/Endorsed By: Original Signed By: Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Chief Planner Original Signed By: Kyle Bentley, P.Eng. Director, City Development & CBO Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Original Signed By: Marisa Carpino, M.A. Interim Chief Administrative Officer - 76 - ! Central Street Acorn Lane Brock RoadWellington Street Ninth Concession Road Lorn StreetVictoriaStreetLivingston StreetBovingdon Place CLAREMONT MEMORIAL PARK #* 1:4,000 SCALE: © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © Queens Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.;© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, Department of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers all rights reserved.; © Municipal Property Assessment Corporation and its suppliers all rights reserved.; City Development Department Air Photo Map File: Applicant: Property Description: Installation #70 Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. Pt Lot 18, Concession 8, Now Part 3, 40R-13684 THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. Date: Sep. 10, 2020 SubjectLands (4905 Brock Road) L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\S\CommunicationTowers\Installation# 70 - Enbridge Gas\CT70_AirPhoto.mxd ¯ CT70E E60 m Attachment #1 to Report #PLN 21-20 - 77 - L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\S\CommunicationTowers\Installation# 70 - Enbridge Gas Sep. 10, 2020DATE: Applicant: Property Description: File No: Proposed Site Plan FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. City Development Department Installation #70 Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. Pt Lot 18, Concession 8, Now Part 3, 40R-13684 Proposed Telecommunications Tower (4905 Brock Road) Attachment #2 to Report #PLN 21-20 - 78 - Submitted Elevation Plan City Development Department Sep. 10, 2020FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. Installation #70 Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc.Applicant: Property Description: DATE: File No: Pt Lot 18, Concession 8, Now Part 3, 40R-13684 L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\S\CommunicationTowers\Installation# 70 - Enbridge Gas (4905 Brock Road) Attachment #3 to Report #PLN 21-20 - 79 - September 9, 2020 Justification & Consultation Summary Report Radiocommunications Tower Site 4905 Brock Road, Claremont, Pickering, Ontario Attachment #4 to Report #PLN 21-20 - 80 - Contents Introduction ........................................................................... 3 Description of Proposed System ............................................. 4 Control of Public Access ......................................................... 4 Transport & NAV Canada Assessment .................................... 5 Distance to Residential ........................................................... 5 Engineering Practices ............................................................. 6 Public Consultation ................................................................ 6 Conclusion .............................................................................. 6 - 81 - Introduction Enbridge Gas Distribution is Canada’s largest gas distribution utility, delivering natural gas to 3.7 million retail customers. Enbridge owns and operates more than 148,800 kilometers of gas distribution mainlines and services lines and 4,800 kilometers of transmission pipelines. Enbridge owns 278.7 billion cubic feet of net working storage in southwest Ontario. In order to maintain safe operations for employees, equipment and customers Enbridge Gas Distribution owns and operates a SCADA (Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition) radiocommunications system across Ontario. This system is comprised of tower and antenna sites distributed across Enbridge properties used for regulating and monitoring of natural gas pressure and operations. These antenna systems are needed in order for each pumping station to communicate with each other and relay information to the central system in addition to supporting maintenance and operations staff’s international communication network. Purpose - Background & Coverage Requirement A radio antenna and a tower are the two most important parts of a radio communication system. The antenna is needed to send and receive signals for the radio station. The tower raises the antenna above obstructions such as trees and buildings so that it can send and receive these signals clearly. Each radio station and its antenna system (including the tower) provide radio coverage to a specific geographic area, often called a cell. The antenna system must be carefully located to ensure that it provi des a good signal over the whole cell area, without interfering with other stations. Currently, there is a gap in radiocommunication coverage for the Enbridge Gas internal communication and monitoring network. This gap does not allow for seamless internal communications and monitoring of natural gas pressure and operations. An installation at the subject property would allow Enbridge to fill this gap in coverage and ensure seamless communications throughout their network. Selection & Justification of Siting The proposed location, 4905 Brock Road was chosen due to the existing pump station. This property is owned and operated by Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. Locating the radio antenna at this site is necessary in order for Enbridge to receive information from the pump station. Existing access and available power also make this an ideal site from a construction perspective, as there will be limited disruption needed in order to construct the antenna system. The proposed location (Figure 1.) is set back approximately 60 metres east of Brock Road and approximately 255 metres northeast of the intersection of Old Brock Road and Brock Road. - 82 - Description of Proposed System The proposed radiocommunication system is a 27.43 metre steel self -support tower. The tower will be surrounded by a 10 metre by 4.50 metre fenced-in compound. The tower and associated equipment shelter will be located on a concrete pad. Statement Indicating Need for Tower Height The proposed height of 27.43 metres will allow Enbridge to improve internal communications and pressure monitoring at the 4905 Brock Street pump station. This height is required in order for the radiocommunications tower to function as intended and ensure there are no lapses in coverage. Control of Public Access The site facility would include a locked, alarmed and electronically monitored mechanical equipment shelter. Fencing would be installed around the base of the tower and equipment shelter(s) and would include one locked gate access point. Proposed Location - 83 - Transport & NAV Canada Assessment Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. attests that the radio antenna system described in this notification package will comply with Transport Canada / NAV Canada aeronautical safety requirements. Enbridge has made all necessary applications to Transport Canada and NAV Canada. Both agencies have yet to complete their review of the proposed installation. Enbridge Gas will endeavor to provide the results of each respective assessment to the City of Pickering as soon as they become available. Distance to Residential The proposed radiocommunications tower is approximately 125 metres from the nearest residential property. ~125m - 84 - Engineering Practices Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. attests that the radio antenna system described in this report will be constructed in compliance with the National Building Code of Canada and comply with good engineering practices including structural adequacy. Public Consultation After the completion of the original justification report on November 6, 2019, a public circulation and consultation has been undertaken in accordance with the City’s established telecommunication tower facility policy document. The public was notified of the proposed tower in accordance with the City’s Consultation Process and Innovation, Science and Economic Development’s CPC 2-0-03. Accordingly, residents and property owners within a radius of 150 metres (measured from the base of the tower) were sent an information brochure via regular mail (Appendix A) that was mailed out on June 22, 2019. A total of 105 property owners/agencies were contacted (Appendix B), an additional notice to Innovation, Science and Economic Development. The total commenting period was 30 days and there were no comments from the public. Conclusion Enbridge Gas has determined that a radio installation at 4905 Brock Road, Pickering is necessary to maintain effective communication and proper monitoring of natural gas pressure. To that end, an improvement upon the current radio system is necessary in order to maintain the safety and integrity of the current Enbridge network. As the public comment period regarding this site has expired and that the public has not voiced objection to this installation, Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. is formally requesting that the City formally acknowledge this report as the conclusion of consultation procedures for this telecommunication tower and issue a letter of concurrence. Should you have any further questions or concerns pertaining to the consultation process associated with this proposal please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Sincerely, Brendan Chiu FONTUR International Inc. On Contract to Signum Wireless Inc. - 85 - Appendix A- Public Notification Brochure (Side 1) - 86 - Appendix A- Public Notification Brochure (Side 2) - 87 - Appendix B- Public Mailing List (Page 1) - 88 - Appendix B- Public Mailing List (Page 2) - 89 - Appendix B- Public Mailing List (Page 3) - 90 - Appendix B- Public Mailing List (Page 4) - 91 - Appendix B- Public Mailing List (Page 5) - 92 - Appendix B- Public Mailing List (Page 6) - 93 - Appendix B- Public Mailing List (Page 7) - 94 - Appendix B- Public Mailing List (Page 8) (END) - 95 -