Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJune 7, 2021Planning & Development Committee Meeting Agenda June 7, 2021 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Councillor Pickles 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 del egation 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. 10-21 1 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 02/21 Draft Plan of Subdivision Application SP-2021-01 Draft Plan of Condominium Application CP-2021-01 Highcastle (1939 Altona Rd.) Inc. (1939 Altona Road) 3.2 Information Report No. 11-21 19 Official Plan Amendment OPA 20-008/P Zoning By-law Amendment A 13/20 Brock & Kingston Holdings Inc. (1970 Brock Road) For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca Planning & Development Committee Meeting Agenda June 7, 2021 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Councillor Pickles 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 complete the on -line d elegation 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 28-21 46 Pickering Housing Strategy Study - Status Update, Phase 2 Recommendation: That Report PLN 28-21 of the Director, City Development & CBO, providing an update on the status of the City of Pickering Housing Strategy Study, be received for information. 5.2 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 29-21 59 The Municipal Comprehensive Review of the Durham Regional Official Plan: Proposed Policy Directions Recommendation: 1. That Council endorse the following recommendations regarding Envision Durham’s Proposed Policy Directions in support of a Prosperous Economy (Proposed Directions 1-4): For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca Planning & Development Committee Meeting Agenda June 7, 2021 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Councillor Pickles a. That the City Centre, Kingston Road Corridor and Brock Mixed Node Intensification Areas, Employment Lands in Seaton and along Highway 407, and the planned employment hub surrounding the Federal Airport lands be prioritized for adequate servicing to support economic growth and diversification an d to accommodate the 2051 growth forecasts; and, b. That the planned future Pickering Airport be recognized as a major catalyst for economic development and diversification; 2. That Council endorse the following recommendations regarding Envision Durham’s Proposed Policy Directions in support of Healthy Communities (Proposed Directions 5-28): a. That the Goals for Healthy Communities be expanded to: i. align with the Canadian Institute of Planners’ Healthy Communities Policy Statement to ensure individuals have access to healthy built, social, economic, and natural environments that give them the opportunity to live to their fullest potential, regardless of their race, ethnicity, gender, income, age, abilities, or other circumstances; and, ii. align with objectives or outcomes from the Region’s Community Safety and Well-being P lan, Age-Friendly Durham Strategy; b. That the City supports the inclusion of policies regarding the implementation of a region-wide building retrofit program, and recommends that the Regional Official Plan (ROP) include broader policy direction around additional initiatives and incentives to encourage and enable energy efficient construction and green building design, including net-zero and net-zero ready development; c. That the City supports the inclusion of tree canopy targets for urban areas and rural areas in the R OP, following t he identification of the current baseline, as well as the inclusion For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca Planning & Development Committee Meeting Agenda June 7, 2021 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Councillor Pickles of policy direction in support of Regional tree planting initiatives along regional roads and on regionally-owned properties where appropriate; d. That in addition to recognizing and supporting historic downtowns, the Region include robust policies in the ROP related to cultural heritage that conform with, and implement, provincial policy direction and other regional interests related to heritage; e. That with regard to the proposed policy directions related to Housing: i. the City supports the Region undertaking a Regional Housing Assessment Report (Assessment Report) and developing policies that would enable area municipalities to implement Inclusionary Zoning within their respective jurisdictions; ii. the City recommends the establishment of affordable housing targets for Strategic Growth Areas in the ROP be based on the outcome o f the Assessment Report, rather than assigning a 35 percent target prior to evaluation; iii. the City supports the policy direction to strengthen the rental to ownership housing conversion policies in the ROP and further recommends that when considering permission for conversion from a rental to ownership property, the Region: • consider increasing to greater than one year, the number of years required to maintain the minimum rental vacancy rate of 3 percent in both the region as a whole and the respective area municipality; and, • require a Regional Official Plan Amendment Application if the rental vacancy rate is below 3 percent; For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca Planning & Development Committee Meeting Agenda June 7, 2021 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Councillor Pickles iv. the City supports the proposed policy direction to encourage area municipalities to protect existing rental housing from demolition by using tools, such as a demolition control by-law, and recommend this be expanded upon, particularly in locations such as Strategic Growth Areas or areas in proximity to transit, where existing rental housing may be older and therefore more susceptible to demolition and redevelopment; and, v. the City recommends policies be included in in the ROP to support “co-ownership housing” and that enable municipalities to address this type of housing i n a local and context-specific manner. 3. That Council endorse the following recommendations regarding Envision Durham’s Proposed Policy Directions regarding Supportive Infrastructure (Proposed Directions 29-33): a. That the City encourages the development of a Regional “Dig Once” policy as it would align with, and support, the City’s policy and interest in broadband deployment; and, b. That the City recommends policies be included in the ROP that encourage the Region to work with the provincial government to upgrade the existing infrastructure to support renewable and alternative energy projects; 4. That Council endorse the following recommendations regarding Envision Durham’s Proposed Policy Directions in support of a Vibrant Urban System (Proposed Directions 34-53): a. That the City supports the direction that Waterfront Places (e.g., Frenchman’s Bay) not be identified as Strategic Growth Areas and recommends that any policies referring to minimum density targets for these areas be removed if this designation is retained in the ROP; b. That the City supports removal of the existing specific policy prohibition on Places of Worship within Employment Areas, For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca Planning & Development Committee Meeting Agenda June 7, 2021 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Councillor Pickles and the proposed direction that area municipalities would regulate the location of these uses; c. That the City requests that the Employment Area Conversion submission for the Durham Live lands between Squires Beach Road and Church Street, which has been supported by City Council, be considered through the Land Needs Assessment; d. That the City requests that the Region have regard to Pickering Council Resolutions #140/19 and #173/19 (Attachments #2 and #3 to Report PLN 29-21) requesting, among other things, the inclusion of northeast Pickering in an urban area boundary expansion; and, e. That the City recommends the Land Needs Assessment consider a scenario reflecting a f uture airport and the potential implications it may have in terms of population and employment allocation and growth; 5. That Council endorse the following recommendations regarding Envision Durham’s Proposed Policy Directions in support of a Thriving Rural System (Proposed Directions 54-65): a. That the City recommends the goals and directions with regard to the Thriving Rural System in Durham be expanded to also support the provision of reliable internet services to the rural area; and, b. That the City requests that the designation of High Potential Aggregate Resource Areas on lands within the limits of Settlement Areas (e.g., Barclay Estates) be removed; 6. That Council endorse the following recommendations regarding Envision Durham’s Proposed Policy Directions in support of a Protected Greenlands System (Proposed D irections 66-85): a. That the Region consider requesting the Province to make resources available to Indigenous Peoples to facilitate the sharing of Traditional Ecological Knowledge; and, For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca Planning & Development Committee Meeting Agenda June 7, 2021 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Councillor Pickles b. That the City recommends the Region, through coordinated relationship-building and consultation with Indigenous communities, endeavour to provide guidance to local area municipalities in terms of establishing appropriate engagement processes to facilitate input on land use planning matters; 7. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report; and, 8. That a copy of Report PLN 29-21 and Council’s Resolution thereon be forwarded to the Regional Municipality of Durham and Durham Area Municipalities. 5.3 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 31-21 359 Northeast Pickering Area Request for Proposals Particulars for Preparation of a Community Plan for Northeast Pickering Funding Agreement for Consulting Assistance Funding Agreement for a Senior Project Manager Recommendation: 1. That Council approve the draft “Appendix D – Request for Proposals Particulars Northeast Pickering Community Plan”, which identifies the deliverables, including scope of work, project management, consultation and engagement, and timetable, for the consulting assignment for the preparation of an overall community plan for the Northeast Pickering A rea for the consideration of Council, generally as set out in Appendix I to Report PLN 31-21; 2. That Council approve the funding agreement between the North East Pickering Landowners Group Inc. and the City of Pickering, for the hiring of a planning consulting team to prepare a Community Plan for the Northeast Pickering Area, generally as set out in Appendix II to Report PLN 31-21; 3. That Council approve the funding agreement between the North East Pickering Landowners Group Inc. and the City of Pickering, for the hiring of a Senior Project Manager (contract) dedicated to managing the preparation of the overall community plan for the For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca Planning & Development Committee Meeting Agenda June 7, 2021 Electronic Meeting – 7:00 pm Chair: Councillor Pickles Northeast Pickering Area, generally as set out in Appendix III to Report PLN 31-21; 4. That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the funding agreements subject to any minor refinements acceptable to the Chief Administrative Officer, the Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor and the Director, Finance & Treasurer; 5. That staff be authorized to issue Request for Proposals for the overall Northeast Pickering Community Plan, subject to any minor refinements to the project particulars acceptable to the Director, City Development & CBO and the Director, Economic Development & Strategic Projects, following the execution of the funding agreements and the hiring of the contract Senior Project Manager; 6. That staff report back to Council on the recommended planning consulting team; and, 7. That Council authorize the appropriate City officials to undertake the necessary actions required to implement the above recommendations. 6. Other Business 7. Adjournment For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca Information Report to Planning & Development Committee Report Number: 10-21 Date: June 7, 2021 From: Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Chief Planner Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 02/21 Draft Plan of Subdivision Application SP-2021-01 Draft Plan of Condominium Application CP-2021-01 Highcastle (1939 Altona Rd.) Inc. (1939 Altona Road) 1. Purpose of this Report The purpose of this report is to provide preliminary information regarding applications for Zoning By-law Amendment, Draft Plan of Subdivision and Draft Plan of Condominium, submitted by Highcastle (1939 Altona Rd.) Inc., to facilitate 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 proposal. The Planning & Development Committee will hear public delegations on the applications, ask questions of clarification, and identify any planning issues. This report is for information and no decision is to be 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 at the northeast corner of Altona Road and Sparrow Circle, immediately south of the hydro corridor within the Highbush Neighbourhood (see Location Map, Attachment #1). The subject lands have an area of approximately 1.068 hectares with approximately 25 metres of frontage along Altona Road. The subject lands currently support a landscaping and tree nursery business and are occupied by a detached dwelling and various accessory buildings, which are proposed to be removed. A 40.0-metre high telecommunications tower is also located at the far northeasterly quadrant of the subject lands and is intended to be removed to facilitate the proposed development. The tree nursery and commercial plantings extend onto the hydro lands immediately to the north. These lands are leased from Hydro One and do not form part of the submitted development applications. The tree nursery is not anticipated to continue should the subject lands be developed (see Air Photo Map, Attachment #2). - 1 - Information Report No. 10-21 Page 2 Surrounding land uses include: North: Immediately to the north is a Hydro Corridor. Further north is a residential common-element condominium development consisting of 2 and 3-storey townhouse dwellings, and environmentally sensitive lands owned by the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA). East: Abutting the subject property to the east are lands owned by the TRCA and form part of the Altona Forest. West: Across Altona Road are environmentally sensitive lands, owned by Infrastructure Ontario and form part of the Hydro Corridor. South: Abutting the south property line are 2 remnant parcels that are not owned by the applicant, identified as Blocks 15 and 16 on Plan 40M-1981. These 2 parcels were created as part of the original plan of subdivision for Sparrow Circle and were intended to be combined with the subject lands as part of a future development. Across Sparrow Circle is an established residential subdivision consisting of 2 and 3-storey freehold semi-detached and townhouse dwellings fronting Sparrow Circle, Hummingbird Court and Chickadee Court. 3. Applicant’s Proposal The applicant has submitted applications for Zoning By-law Amendment, Draft Plan of Subdivision, and Draft Plan of Condominium to facilitate a residential condominium development (see Submitted Conceptual Site Plan, Attachment #3). The Draft Plan of Subdivision proposes to create a total of 4 blocks, which are summarized in the table below (see Submitted Draft Plan of Subdivision, Attachment #4): Block Number Land Area Proposed Use Block 1 0.853 of a hectare Residential development block for standard and common-element condominiums. Block 2 0.061 of a hectare Environmental lands to be conveyed to the TRCA and rezoned to an appropriate open space zone category. Block 3 0.020 of a hectare Conveyance of a road widening along the entire frontage of Altona Road to the Region of Durham. Block 4 0.001 of a hectare A 0.3-metre reserve abutting Altona Road. Roads 0.133 of a hectare Completion and conveyance of Sparrow Circle to the City. Total 1.068 hectares Within Block 1, the applicant is proposing a standard condominium development consisting of 48 stacked townhouse dwellings and a common element condominium consisting of 13 street townhouse dwellings accessed through an internal private road from the north side of Sparrow Circle. - 2 - Information Report No. 10-21 Page 3 The submitted site plan illustrates 4 townhouse blocks (Buildings 1 to 4), consisting of 48 stacked townhouse units fronting Altona Road and Sparrow Circle with garage access and vehicle parking at the rear of the buildings. The remaining 3 townhouse blocks (Blocks 5 to 7) consist of a total of 13 street townhouse units and will have vehicular and garage access from the private road at the front of the units. The street townhouses are proposed to be 3-storeys in height and will have a private rear yard as amenity space (see Submitted Conceptual Elevations- Street Townhouses, Attachment #5). The stacked townhouse units are proposed to be three and a half storeys in height and will have balconies at the front and rear of the buildings as private amenity space (see Submitted Conceptual Elevations – Stacked Townhouses, Attachment #6). A 220.0 square metre common outdoor amenity area is provided immediately west of Building 5, adjacent to the north property line. Resident parking for both the stacked townhouse and street townhouse units is provided at a ratio of 2 parking spaces per dwelling unit (1 parking space within a private garage and 1 space on a surface driveway). Visitor parking is provided at a rate of 0.25 spaces per unit for a total of 16 parking spaces and is located along the north property line. Vehicular access to the internal private road is to be provided through a full-moves access at the easterly portion of the site from the north side of Sparrow Circle. The proposed private road will terminate in a hammerhead-type cul-de-sac between Buildings 1 and 2. The submitted site plan also indicates vehicular access at the most westerly portion of the subject lands, west of Building 2. However, this access is conceptual as the applicant does not currently own the parcel of land, identified as Block 15, 40M-1981. The applicant has advised they are currently working to obtain these lands, and should they be successful, a secondary access will be provided and an additional 3 stacked townhouse units can be accommodated within Building 1. As part of the proposed development, the applicant will provide for the re-alignment, widening and completion of Sparrow Circle to the City’s standards. Currently, the northerly section of Sparrow Circle immediately adjoining the subject property is temporary and was constructed as a part of the original subdivision to provide emergency and convenient access for the area residents until such time that the subject lands were to be developed. Upon completion of the Sparrow Circle re-alignment and reconstruction to City standards, the portions of land that the temporary section of the roadway are currently located, identified as Blocks 17 and 18, together with the reserve Blocks 27 and 28, 40M-1981, will no longer be required (see Submitted Draft Plan of Subdivision, Attachment #4). In accordance with the subdivision agreement for the original plan of subdivision for Sparrow Circle, Blocks 17 and 27 will be conveyed back to the original homebuilder to permit the construction of an additional townhouse unit at the northerly end of the current townhouse block. Block 18, together with reserve Block 28 are intended to be conveyed to the property owner at the southeasterly corner of Sparrow Circle and Hummingbird Court, 1565 Hummingbird Court, to enlarge the existing property, which currently supports a townhouse dwelling. - 3 - Information Report No. 10-21 Page 4 The applicant has submitted an application for a Zoning By-law Amendment application to rezone lands within Block 1 to an appropriate residential zone category to facilitate the proposal and rezone Block 3, which is intended to be conveyed to the TRCA to an appropriate open-space zone category. The proposed development will consist of 2 separate condominium corporations. The tenure of the stacked townhouses (Buildings 1 to 4) will be a standard condominium and the tenure of the street townhouses (Buildings 5 to 7) will be a common element condominium. The applicant has submitted an application for draft plan of condominium for the common element, which is intended to consist of the private road servicing the street townhouse units (see Submitted Draft Plan of Condominium, Attachment #7). A separate application for a draft plan of condominium (standard condominium) will be required and submitted at a later date specifically for stacked townhouses. It is contemplated that the private road, outdoor amenity area, and visitor parking area will be mutually shared between the future condominium corporations. Reciprocal easements will be established by providing access to these elements. A mutual use and cost-sharing arrangement will be established between the two condominiums to ensure an equitable arrangement regarding the use, long-term care, and maintenance of the shared features. The development will be subject to site plan approval. 4. Policy Framework 4.1 Durham Regional Official Plan The Regional Official Plan designates the subject lands as “Living Areas”. The “Living Areas” designation shall be used predominately for housing purposes. The plan also states that lands within the Living Area designation shall be developed in compact urban form through higher densities and by intensifying and redeveloping existing areas, particularly along an arterial road. Altona Road is designated as a Type ‘B’ Arterial Road. Type ‘B’ 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 30 to 36 metres. Type ‘B’ Arterial Roads generally permit private access located a minimum of 80 metres apart in Urban Areas. The applicant is required to convey a 4.7-metre wide road widening along the entire frontage of Altona Road to achieve the ultimate right-of-way width for Altona Road. The proposal conforms to the Durham Regional Official Plan. 4.2 Pickering Official Plan The subject lands are located within the Highbush Neighbourhood and are designated “Urban Residential Areas – Medium Density Area”, which provides for housing and related uses. This designation permits a net residential density of over 30 and up to and including 80 units per net hectare. The applicant’s proposal will result in a residential density of approximately 72 units per net hectare, which falls within the permitted density range. - 4 - Information Report No. 10-21 Page 5 The Official Plan states that in establishing performance standards, regard shall be had to protecting and enhancing the character of established neighbourhoods by considering matters such as building height, yard setbacks, lot coverage, access to sunlight, parking provisions and traffic implications. The Official Plan also states that where new development is proposed within an existing neighbourhood or established area, City Council shall encourage building design that reinforces and complements existing built patterns such as form, massing, height proportion, position relative to the street, and building area to site ratio. Lands immediately east of the subject lands are designated “Open Space System – Natural Areas”. The Natural Areas land use designation is further identified under Schedule IIIB as “Significant Woodlands” (Altona Forest) and “Significant Valleylands and Stream Corridors” (Petticoat Creek). These lands are also identified as being within the Altona Forest Policy Area. The Official Plan recognizes that the Altona Forest provides an integral linkage to the Rouge-Duffins Corridor and is an area of significant vegetation and diverse wildlife and requires a minimum vegetation protection zones from such features including a minimum setback of 10.0 metres from significant woodlands and 30.0 metres from wetlands. An Environmental Impact Study is required for proposals within 120 metres of natural heritage or hydrologic features. Sparrow Circle is identified as a local road within the City’s Official Plan. These roads are intended to provide access to individual properties, to other local roads and collector roads and carry local traffic. Generally, local roads have a right-of-way width of up to 20 metres. The applicant’s proposal will be assessed against these policies of the Official Plan during the further processing of the applications. 4.3 Zoning By-law 3036 The subject lands are currently zoned “A” – Rural Agricultural Zone within Zoning By-law 3036, as amended, which permits a detached dwelling, home occupation, agricultural and related uses, recreational and limited institutional uses. The applicant is requesting to rezone the subject lands to an appropriate residential zone category with site-specific performance standards to facilitate the proposal. The open space block proposed to be conveyed to the TRCA will be rezoned to an appropriate open space zone category to ensure long-term protection and preservation. 5. Comments Received 5.1 Resident Comments On April 22, 2021 an Electronic Public Open House meeting was hosted by the City Development Department to inform area residents about the development proposal. The City advertised the meeting by installing 2 development signs on the property, and a notice was distributed by mail to area residents within 150 metres of the subject lands. The radius was further extended in consultation with the area Councillors. A total of 3 individuals participated in the meeting. The video recording of this meeting, which is available on the City’s YouTube page, has been viewed 69 times. - 5 - Information Report No. 10-21 Page 6 Notice of the Electronic Statutory Public Meeting regarding these applications was provided through mail to all properties within 150 metres of the subject lands and any person who requested further notification. Also, 2 signs providing notice were installed along the Altona Road and Sparrow Circle frontage. The following is a list of key comments and concerns expressed by the residents at the Electronic Public Open House meeting and written submissions received from 7 residents: • concerned the proposed development will result in an increase in vehicular traffic along Sparrow Circle, which is already congested; • commented that the proposed development should be accessed solely from Altona Road to minimize the impact on adjacent residents; • commented that the proposed residential units should have a dedicated community mailbox contained within the subject lands to minimize vehicle trips through the neighbourhood to the existing community mailbox; • concerned the increase in traffic from the proposal will cause a safety issue for pedestrians and children along Sparrow Circle; • concerned with the proposed location of the most easterly site access, as it is located directly beside an existing driveway; • questioned whether the development will have an impact on the Altona Forest; • questioned if the location of the proposed dwellings immediately adjacent to the hydro corridor poses a safety concern to future residents; • questioned the volume of vehicles would utilize the east and west site access; • requested that a sidewalk be installed along Altona Road; • concerned with the loss of trees and vegetation on the site, specifically the cedar hedge along the south property line; • commented that compensation for the loss of existing trees should be through re-planting on the subject site; • questioned if a landscape buffer between the proposed development and Sparrow Circle would be maintained; • concerned the proposed development will result in negative dust, parking and noise from construction; and • questioned how garbage generated from the condominium will be addressed and if there will be a garbage enclosure area. 5.2 Agency Comments 5.2.1 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) • the subject lands are located within a TRCA Regulated Area of the Petticoat Creek Watershed and are regulated with respect to the Regulatory Floodplain associated with the Petticoat Creek to the west and the area of interference associated with a large wetland complex within Altona Forest to the northeast; • TRCA requests that a wetland risk assessment be undertaken to determine the effects of the proposed development on the provincially significant wetland located on and adjacent to the subject property; - 6 - Information Report No. 10-21 Page 7 • the submitted Environmental Impact Study appropriately identifies that the adjacent natural features are regulated by TRCA and mapped as Schedule III (A-D) under the City of Pickering’s Official Plan. However, the 5.0 metre proposed buffer to the feature is not supported by TRCA; • it is TRCA’s opinion that the required 10.0 metre buffer is achievable for this site and should be implemented; • accordingly, TRCA requests that the drawings be updated to show a minimum 10.0 metre restored buffer from the staked dripline; • a 20.0 metre buffer is currently proposed from the wetland. However, as this wetland is identified as a Provincially Significant Wetland (PSW) within the TRCA mapping, a 30.0 metre buffer applies; • a 10.0 metre setback from the staked dripline and a 30.0 metre setback from the PSW should be provided to determine which setback limit is further inland; and • request a letter be provided from the City of Pickering fire and emergency services department confirming that the emergency vehicles (fire and ambulance) can access the site given the potential depth of flooding and velocities of the Regulatory storm. 5.2.2 Region of Durham • lands are designated “Living Areas” within the Urban System under the Durham Regional Official Plan (ROP); • the proposed lot configurations are appropriate and respond to the policies of the ROP, which discourage reverse lot frontage conditions on arterial roads; • there are key natural heritage and hydrologic features located in proximity to the subject site immediately to the east; • the Region will rely on the TRCA to evaluate the appropriateness of the Environmental Impact Study’s recommendations and setbacks from the existing natural features; • the consideration of these applications may be premature until such a time as the hazard issues are resolved in accordance with Policy 2.2.7 of the ROP, and the appropriate setbacks to the Natural Heritage Features are addressed in accordance with Policy 2.3.43 of the ROP; • the submitted Noise Study, prepared by YCA Engineering Limited, is acceptable to the Region; • the applicant will be required to implement the recommended noise attenuation measures affecting the proposed development; • the submitted Stage 1 and Stage 2 Archeological Assessment report confirmed that the subject site does not contain archeological resources and no further archeological assessment will be required; • as a condition of approval, the Region will require that the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport (MTCS) review and approve the submitted archeological report and require MTCS's clearance letter advising that all archaeological requirements have been met to its satisfaction; • the submitted Phase One Environmental Site Assessment report identified four areas of potential environmental concern on the subject lands and concluded that a Phase Two Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) is required; • the applicant will be required to submit a Phase Two ESA accompanied by a signed Region of Durham Reliance Letter; - 7 - Information Report No. 10-21 Page 8 • municipal water supply and sanitary sewer supply are available to service the proposed development; and • the applicant will be required to convey a road allowance widening of approximately 4.7 metres to the Region, which shall include a sight triangle at the northeast corner of Altona Road and Sparrow Circle. 5.2.3 Durham District School Board • no objection to the applications; and • students generated from this development will attend existing neighbourhood schools. 5.2.4 Durham Catholic District School Board • as of the date of this report, comments have not been received. 5.2.5 Hydro One • the development proposal is abutting a Hydro One high voltage transmission corridor; • outlined that prior to final approval, the following conditions shall apply: • the applicant must make arrangements satisfactory to Hydro One for lot grading and drainage; • works associated with the proposal must not block vehicular access to any hydro facilities located on the transmission corridor and during construction, there shall be no storage of materials or mounding of earth, snow or other debris on the transmission corridor; and • temporary fencing must be installed along the transmission corridor before and construction and permanent fencing must be erected along the common property line once constructions completed; • provided the following precaution to the applicant concerning the future construction: • “The transmission lines abutting the subject lands operate at either 500,000, 230,000 or 115,000 volts. Section 188 of Regulation 213/91 pursuant to the Occupational Health and Safety Act, require that no object be brought closer than 6 metres (20 feet) to an energized 500 kV conductor. The distance for 230 kV conductors is 4.5 metres (15 feet), and for 115 kV conductors, it is 3 metres (10 feet). It is the developer's responsibility to be aware and to make all personnel on-site aware, that all equipment and personnel must come no closer than the distance specified in the Act. They should also be aware that the conductors can raise and lower without warning, depending on the electrical demand placed on the line. 5.3 City Department Comments 5.3.1 Engineering Services • as of the date of this report, comments have not been received. 5.3.2 Fire Services • should the most westerly access to Sparrow Circle not be provided, the proposal would result in a roadway that terminates in a dead-end that exceeds the permitted length; - 8 - Information Report No. 10-21 Page 9 • any street that terminates in a dead-end greater than 150.0 metres in length requires an emergency access route leading to a public through fare within 150.0 metres from the furthest curb at the end of the cul-de-sac or similar turnaround; • the emergency access is still required to be 6.0 metres in width and maintain the necessary requirements to accommodate a fire truck; and • fire hydrants are required to be located within 90.0 metres of each principal entrance. 6. 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 addressed by the applicant before a final recommendation report to Planning & Development Committee: • ensure conformity with the City’s Official Plan policies; • require the proposal to be revised to provide a minimum 10.0 metre restored buffer from the staked dripline of the natural feature (Altona Forest) and a minimum 30.0 metre buffer from the Provincially Significant Wetland (PSW) to the satisfaction of the TRCA; • require the submission of a wetland risk assessment, which will determine the effects of the proposed development on the PSW, to the satisfaction of the TRCA; • require the applicant acquire the 2 remnant blocks, identified as Blocks 15 and 16 on Plan 40M-1981, to be combined and developed with the proposed development and rezoned to an appropriate zone category; • should the applicant be unable to acquire the remnant blocks, the internal private road is to be redesigned to provide a secondary access to maintain the minimum access requirements for emergency vehicles; • ensure that the lands required to accommodate the road widening and sight triangle along Altona Road are provided to the satisfaction of Durham Region; • explore the opportunity to convert the proposed street townhouses from a common- element condominium tenureship to freehold lots having frontage along a public road, which would be in keeping with the established lotting pattern and built form along Sparrow Circle; • evaluate the appropriateness of the proposed site layout, building heights and setbacks, massing and landscaping to ensure the City’s urban design objectives are achieved; • review the location of the proposed site access on Sparrow Circle and ensure it is adequately setback from the adjacent residential properties • require the applicant to increase the size of the private outdoor amenity area to a minimum of 5 percent of site to ensure the size of the amenity area is suitable to provide for play structures, seating areas, landscaping and a community mailbox location; • identify appropriate locations for a water meter room and hydro transformers outside of the private outdoor amenity area; • explore options to provide municipal garbage collection for the entire development; • review pedestrian connections to the existing and future sidewalks along Sparrow Circle to ensure a safe barrier-free path of travel; • require a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment be submitted to the satisfaction of the Region of Durham; - 9 - Information Report No. 10-21 Page 10 • require compensation to be provided for the loss of tree canopy in accordance with the City’s Tree Compensation By-law; and • ensure reciprocal access easements are provided between the individual condominium corporations. 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 applications after it has received and assessed comments from the circulated department, agencies and public. 7. Information Received Copies of the plans and studies listed below are available for viewing on the City’s website at pickering.ca/devapp or in person at the offices of the City of Pickering, City Development Department: • Draft Plan of Subdivision, prepared by KLM Planning Partners Inc., dated December 8, 2020; • Draft Plan of Condominium, prepared by KLM Planning Partners Inc., dated December 7, 2020; • Conceptual Site Plan, prepared by S & C Architects Inc., dated January 18, 2021; • Conceptual Elevation and Floor Plans, prepared by S & C Architects Inc., dated November 22, 2020; • Planning Justification Report, prepared by KLM Planning Partners Inc., dated January 2020; • Draft Zoning By-law Amendment, prepared by KLM Planning Partners Inc., dated December 2020; • Traffic Impact Brief, prepared by December 1, 2020; • Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment, prepared by Archeoworks Inc., dated July 2020; • Environmental Impact Study, prepared by GHD, dated August 12, 2020; • Tree Inventory and Preservation Plan, prepared by Henry Kortekaas & Associates Inc., dated February 3, 2020; • Geotechnical Investigation, prepared by Soil Engineers Limited, dated December 2019; • Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment, prepared by Soil Engineers Limited, dated December 14, 2020; • Functional Serving Brief, prepared by N. Mensink, undated; • Stormwater Management Brief, prepared by Candevcon East Limited, dated December 16, 2020; • Construction Management & Erosion and Sediment Control Plans, prepared by Candevcon East Limited, dated December 16, 2020; • Site Grading Plan, prepared by Candevcon East Limited, dated December 16, 2020; • Site Servicing Plan, prepared by Candevcon East Limited, dated December 16, 2020; • Traffic Management Implementation Plan, prepared by Candevcon East Limited, dated December 16, 2020; and • Noise Assessment, prepared by YCA Engineering Ltd., dated November 2020. - 10 - Information Report No. 10-21 Page 11 8.Procedural Information 8.1 General •written comments regarding this proposal should be directed to the City Development Department; •oral comments may be made at the Electronic Statutory Public 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. 9.Owner/Applicant Information The owner of this property is Highcastle (1939 Altona Rd.) Inc. and is represented by KLM Planning Partners Inc. Attachments 1.Location Map 2.Air Photo Map 3.Submitted Conceptual Site Plan 4.Submitted Draft Plan of Subdivision 5.Submitted Conceptual Elevations – Street Townhouses 6.Submitted Conceptual Elevations – Stacked Townhouses 7.Submitted Draft Plan of Condominium Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Original Signed By Original Signed By Cody Morrison Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner, Development Review Chief Planner Original Signed By Nilesh Surti, MCIP, RPP Manager, Development Review & Urban Design CM:ld Date of Report: May 17, 2021 - 11 - Attachment #1 to Information Report 10-21 Finch Avenue Shadow Place daoR anotlAHydroLands HydroLands EtruoCedlcrirbCignwSubject miomrrHuapLands SChickadeePark truntoeCcseeeCrtChic k adsruhdnaSevirD nordlveA venue eroMGnePi¯ Location MapFile:A02/21, SP-2021-01 & CP-2021-01Applicant:Highcastle (1939 Altona Rd.) Inc.Municipal Address:1939 Altona RoadCity Development © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: Department © Queens Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, Department Date: May. 04, 2021of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights reserved.; © Municipal PropertyAssessment Corporation and its suppliers. All rights reserved. TSHISC ISA NLOTE :1:4,000 A PLAN OF SURVEY. L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\SP\2021\SP-2021-01 Highcastle (1939 Altona Road) Inc\A02_21_LocationMap_v2.mxd - 12 - Altona RoadPineGroveA venue Stallion ChaseSparrowCircleShadow Place Meldron DriveHummingbirdCourtFinch Avenue Chic k adeeCourtSandhurstCrescentAir Photo MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: A02/21, SP-2021-01 & CP-2021-01 Date: May. 07, 2021 ¯EHighcastle (1939 Altona Rd.) Inc.1939 Altona Road SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\SP\2021\SP-2021-01 Highcastle (1939 Altona Road) Inc\A02_21_SP-2021-01_AirPhoto_v2.mxd 1:4,000 SCALE:THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. © 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, Departmentof Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights reserved.; © Municipal PropertyAssessment Corporation and its suppliers. All rights reserved. City DevelopmentDepartment ÑTelecommunications towerEAttachment #2 to Information Report 10-21 - 13 - L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\SP\2021 May 10, 2021DATE: Applicant: Municipal Address: File No: Submitted Conceptual Site Plan FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. City Development Department A 02/21, SP-2021-01 & CP-2021-01 1939 Altona Road Highcastle (1939 Altona Rd.) Inc.NLands not currently owned by the applicant (Blocks 15 & 16, 40M-1981) Access to Sparrow Circle Building 5 Building 1Building 2 Building 3 Buil d i n g 4 Building 6Building 7Environmental lands to be conveyed to TRCA Street Townhouses Stacked Townhouses Outdoor amenity area Loading space and visitor parking area Conceptual secondary access Garbage enclosure Attachment #3 to Information Report 10-21 - 14 - L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\SP\2021 May 5, 2021DATE: Applicant: Municipal Address: File No: Submitted Draft Plan of Subdivision FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. City Development Department A 02/21, SP-2021-01 & CP-2021-01 1939 Altona Road Highcastle (1939 Altona Rd.) Inc. Attachment #4 to Information Report 10-21 - 15 - L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\SP\2021 May 5, 2021DATE: Applicant: Municipal Address: File No: Submitted Conceptual Elevations - Street Townhouses FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. City Development Department A 02/21, SP-2021-01 & CP-2021-01 1939 Altona Road Highcastle (1939 Altona Rd.) Inc. Attachment #5 to Information Report 10-21 - 16 - L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\SP\2021 May 5, 2021DATE: Applicant: Municipal Address: File No: Submitted Conceptual Elevations - Stacked Townhouses FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. City Development Department A 02/21, SP-2021-01 & CP-2021-01 1939 Altona Road Highcastle (1939 Altona Rd.) Inc. Attachment #6 to Information Report 10-21 - 17 - Submitted Draft Plan of Condominium City Development Department May 5, 2021FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. A 02/21, SP-2021-01 & CP-2021-01 Highcastle (1939 Altona Rd.) Inc.Applicant: Municipal Address: DATE: File No: 1939 Altona Road L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\SP\2021 N Attachment #7 to Information Report 10-21 - 18 - Information Report to Planning & Development Committee Report Number: 11-21 Date: June 7, 2021 From: Catherine Rose, MCIP RPP Chief Planner Subject: Official Plan Amendment OPA 20-008/P Zoning By-law Amendment A 13/20 Brock & Kingston Holdings Inc. (1970 Brock Road) 1. Purpose of this Report The purpose of this report is to provide preliminary information regarding applications for Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment, submitted by Brock & Kingston Holdings Inc., to permit a high-density mixed-use 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 proposal. The Planning & Development Committee will hear public delegations on the applications, ask questions of clarification and identify any planning matters. This report is for information and no decision is to be 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 property is located at the northwest corner of Kingston Road and Brock Road within the Village East Neighbourhood (see Location Map, Attachment #1). The property has an area of approximately 1.19 hectares, with approximately 55 metres of frontage along Brock Road and approximately 105 metres of frontage along Kingston Road. The property contains 3 single-storey commercial buildings and a 1 ½ storey heritage building, known as the Post Manor, which currently contains personal service uses (see Air Photo Map, Attachment #2). The Post Manor is designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act, by By-law 2570/87. Mature trees and other vegetation are located along the north and west property lines, along the Kingston Road frontage and adjacent to the Post Manor heritage building. Surrounding land uses include: North: A residential condominium development consisting of 3-storey townhouses. Further north, across Finch Avenue, is the East Duffins Creek and the Brock Ridge Community Park. - 19 - Information Report 11-21 Page 2 South: The Post Cemetery is located at the southwest corner of Kingston and Brock Road. Two and three-storey townhouses are located west and south of the cemetery accessed from Denmar Road. At the southeast corner of Kingston Road and Brock Road is an automobile service station (Petro Canada), and immediately east of the service station is the Brockington Plaza, which contains a range of commercial and retail uses. East: Durham Regional Police Services, West Division, is located at the northeast corner of Kingston Road and Brock Road. Further east of it is a Canada Post office fronting Kingston Road. West: An existing single-storey commercial plaza fronting Kingston Road, and, two and three-storey townhouses fronting Royal Road are to the west of the site. 3. Applicant’s Proposal The applicant has submitted applications for Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to facilitate redevelopment of the subject lands for a high-density development consisting of: • 2 mixed-use buildings having heights of 31 and 34-storeys connected by a 6-storey podium fronting onto Kingston Road; • a 12-storey residential building; • 25 3-storey townhouses along the north and west portions of the site; • a total of 860 dwelling units; • 1,430 square metres of at grade commercial use; • 3 levels of underground parking garage containing 817 spaces, and • an at-grade outdoor amenity area, approximately 2,541 square metres in size, which will be a Privately Owned Publicly-Accessible Space (a POPS), proposed to integrate the interpretive landscaping surrounding the relocated Post Manor heritage building. Figure 1: Proposed Rendering looking northeast from Kingston Road and Brock Road - 20 - Information Report 11-21 Page 3 Figure 2: Proposed Rendering looking southwest As part of the proposal, the applicant proposes to retain the Post Manor heritage building and move it to the northeast corner of the site fronting Brock Road. Right-in and right-out accesses are proposed from Kingston Road and Brock Road (see Submitted Conceptual Site Plan, Attachment #3) The purpose of the Official Plan Amendment application is to request a site-specific exception to increase the maximum permitted residential density from 140 units per net hectare to 722 units per net hectare, and increase the maximum permitted floor space index from 2.5 to 5.7. The intent of the Zoning By-law Amendment application is to rezone the subject lands to an appropriate zone category and establish appropriate zoning performance standards to implement their proposal. The table below summarizes the key details of the proposal: Number of Residential Units 860 Total Residential Units (25 Townhouses and 835 Apartment units) Residential Density 722 units per net hectare Floor Space Index (FSI) 5.7 Tower Floor Plate Size Maximum 750 square metres - 21 - Information Report 11-21 Page 4 Number of Storeys and Building Heights • 34-storey tower and 31-storey tower connected by a 6-storey podium with commercial units on the ground floor • 12-storey mid-rise residential building • 25, 3-storey townhouses Unit Types Apartment Buildings: 25% 1 bedroom units 25% 1 bedroom plus den 25% 2 bedroom units 25% 2 bedroom + den Commercial Gross Floor Area 1,430 square metres Vehicular Parking 0.80 Parking Spaces per dwelling unit plus 0.15 of a parking space per dwelling unit for visitors and commercial uses Outdoor Amenity Space Privately Owned Publicly-Accessible Space: 2,541 square metres The proposal will be subject to site plan approval and approvals as required under the Ontario Heritage Act. 4. The Post Manor The property includes the Post Manor, a heritage building, which is designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act as described in By-law No. 2580/87. The Post Manor was built in the early 1840s fronting Brock Road, built by Scottish stonemasons, with millwork by ships’ cabinet-makers based out of the nearby Frenchman's Bay. It is a one-and-a-half-storey fieldstone house with a single-storey rear wing, designed in a Georgian vernacular style with a Regency-style porch. The original finishes such as interior and exterior wood trim, marble fireplaces and other details reflect the Posts' relative wealth and prominence in Pickering and are reflected in the current designation By-law. Figure 3: Post Manor c. 1880, Pickering Public Figure 4: Post Manor c. 2020, City of Pickering Library - 22 - Information Report 11-21 Page 5 Jordan and Matilda Post were the first occupants. Jordan Post III also operated a sawmill along Duffin’s Creek, near Brock Road. Sources indicate he was a successful businessman, exporting milled lumber via Frenchman’s Bay. The Post Cemetery is located across the road at the southwest corner of Brock Road and Kingston Road. It was originally established by Jordan Post, adjacent to a church, which is no longer existing. The Post farmhouse, church, cemetery, and sawmill and other homes and farmsteads formed a small community at the corner. 5. Policy Framework 5.1 Durham Regional Official Plan The subject lands are designated as “Living Areas” with a “Regional Corridor” overlay in the Durham Regional Official Plan (ROP). Lands within the Living Areas designation are predominately intended for housing purposes and limited office development and commercial uses. In the consideration of development proposals, regard shall be had to achieving a compact urban form, including intensive residential, office, retail and 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 Kingston Road is designated as a Type ‘B’ Arterial Road in the ROP. Both designations 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. Type ‘A’ Arterial Roads are designed to permit private access generally located a minimum of 200 metres apart in Urban Areas, mixed-use developments and higher density developments with shared or combined access. Type ‘B’ Arterial roads are designed to permit private access generally located a minimum of 80 metres apart in Urban Areas and promote higher densities with shared or combined access. Brock Road is designated as a High-Frequency Transit Network and Kingston Road is designated as a Rapid Transit Spine. Development along Transit Spines and High-Frequency Transit Networks shall provide for complementary higher density and mixed uses at an appropriate scale and context, buildings oriented towards the street to reduce walking distances, facilities which support non-auto modes of transportation, and limited surface parking and the potential redevelopment of surface parking. 5.2 Pickering Official Plan The subject lands are located within the Village East Neighbourhood and are designated “Mixed Use Areas – Mixed Corridors” in the Pickering Official Plan. - 23 - Information Report 11-21 Page 6 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 FSI. The applicant is requesting a site-specific amendment to the City’s Official Plan to permit a maximum residential density of 722 units per net hectare and a maximum FSI of 5.7. Chapter 8 of the Official Plan identifies a cultural heritage goal for the City which is that City Council shall respect its cultural heritage, and conserve and integrate important cultural heritage resources from all time periods into the community. City Council, in consultation with its heritage committee, where warranted shall implement the provisions of the Ontario Heritage Act, including the designation of heritage sites. In consideration of the use and reuse of heritage resources, City Council shall maintain, if possible, the original use of heritage structures and sites, and if possible, retain the original location and orientation of such structures. 5.3 Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Intensification Plan and Draft Urban Design Guidelines The Village East Neighbourhood policies of the Pickering Official Plan identify that the Kingston Road Corridor Development Guidelines apply to the subject lands. The Guidelines are intended to guide the design of Kingston Road, as well as the developments that flank or front Kingston Road. The Kingston Road Corridor Development Guidelines, which were adopted by Pickering Council in 1997, do not reflect the new vision for the Kingston Road Corridor established by the Council endorsed Draft Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Urban Design Guidelines. The 1997 Development Guidelines are intended to be superseded by the new draft Urban Design Guidelines. On December 2, 2019, the Planning & Development Committee endorsed in principle the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Intensification Plan (Intensification Plan) and the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Draft Urban Design Guidelines (Draft Urban Design Guidelines). The Intensification Plan and Draft Urban Design Guidelines were prepared as a result of the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Intensification Study, which represented the second phase of the South Pickering Intensification Study. The Intensification Plan contains a comprehensive framework for redevelopment and intensification along the Corridor and within the Retailing Node. The Draft Urban Design Guidelines articulate the vision set by the Intensification Plan and provide specific design considerations. The subject lands are located in the Brock Precinct within the Intensification Plan (see Brock Precinct Intensification Plan, Attachment #4). The recommended land use for the subject lands within the Intensification Plan is “Mixed Use Type A” on the lands located at the northwest corner of Kingston Road and Brock Road. The Intensification Plan further identifies the area at the intersection of Kingston Road and Brock Road as a “Gateway” location with a preferred office location, potential community facility and Privately Owned Publicly-Accessible Spaces (POPS). - 24 - Information Report 11-21 Page 7 The policy recommendations of the Plan outline that “Mixed Use A – Residential/Retail Office” should feature a combination of residential, retail and office uses in mixed-use buildings or separate buildings on mixed-use sites. Mixed Use A areas are intended to have the greatest densities and represents the highest intensity uses. Office uses are encouraged to be located in Mixed Use A areas with preferred office locations at major intersections where access to existing and planned transportation infrastructure is greatest, including higher-order transit facilities. The Intensification Plan included several recommended policies as it relates to the subject lands, which are summarized in Attachment #5 to this report. The Draft Urban Design Guidelines also included several key urban design objectives concerning heritage buildings, block structure, built form, site design, landscaping, building design, pedestrian connections, parking and transition and massing as it relates to the proposal. The Guidelines are summarized in Attachment #6 to this report. The City is in the process of preparing an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to implement the Intensification Plan. The applications will be assessed against the framework and policy recommendations of the Intensification Plan and the design priorities of the Draft Urban Design Guidelines. 5.4 Zoning By-law 3036 The subject lands are currently zoned “LCA-4” – Local Central Area within Zoning By-law 3036, as amended, which permits an automobile service station, bakery, business office, food store, financial institution, restaurants and other commercial uses. The applicant is requesting to rezone the subject lands to an appropriate zone category with site-specific performance standards to facilitate the proposal. 6. Comments Received 6.1 Comments Received from the Public Open House and Written Submissions On March 9, 2021, an Electronic Public Open House meeting was hosted by the City Development Department to inform area residents about the development proposals. The City advertised the meeting by posting the notice on the City’s social media pages, installing 2 development signs on the property and distributing the notice by mail to area residents within 150 metres. The radius was further extended in consultation with the local and regional Councillors. The video recording of this meeting, which is available on the City’s YouTube page, has been viewed 140 times. A total of 7 residents participated in the meeting. Notice of the Electronic Statutory Public Meeting regarding these applications was provided through a mailing of all properties within 150 metres of the subject lands and any person who requested further notification. Also, 2 development notice signs installed on the subject lands were updated to provide notice of this meeting to members of the public. The following is a list of key comments and concerns expressed by the residents at the Electronic Public Open House meeting and written submissions received from approximately 30 residents, landowners and businesses: - 25 - Information Report 11-21 Page 8 6.1.1 Traffic and Access • concerned with the proximity of the proposed vehicular access on Brock Road to the intersection of Kingston Road and Brock Road and may cause safety issues for southbound vehicles on Brock Road and pedestrians; • concerned that the restricted right-in and right-out accesses on Brock Road and Kingston Road will cause the future residents and visitors to increase traffic on existing local roads; and • concerned that the low parking ratios will cause parking to spill onto local roads. 6.1.2 Height and Density • supportive of Council direction to increase density and provide more housing options, but requested that the proposed building heights be reduced near existing low rise dwellings; and • concerned that the proposed density and level of intensification does not provide adequate on-site private or public amenity spaces to support the future residents of this development. 6.1.3 Sunlight and Privacy • concerned that the existing dwellings on the east side of Royal Road will lose their easterly sunlight during the morning hours due to the proposed building heights; and • concerned about overlook and decreased privacy on properties immediately north of the subject property. 6.1.4 Heritage House • questioned whether the Post Manor is structurally stable to be moved and how it will be protected during construction; and • commented that the proposal should be revised to incorporate the Post Manor in its current location. 6.1.5 Other Comments • supportive of a mixed-use development to continue to provide retail and amenities for the wider community; • concerned that dust and noise pollution during the construction period will negatively impact surrounding homes; • requested drawings to demonstrate that the streetscape next to the proposed development in the perspective of a pedestrian; and • concerned that the proposal does not adhere to the Kingston Road Corridor Intensification Plan, the Draft Urban Design Guidelines and the concurrent City-initiated Official Plan Amendment to implement the policies. - 26 - Information Report 11-21 Page 9 6.2 Agency Comments 6.2.1 Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee The proposal was presented to the Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee on April 28, 2021. The Committee received a memo from City Development staff and a presentation from the applicant’s heritage consultant, ERA Architects. The committee provided the following comments: • concerned that the proposed strategy isolates the Post Manor, and requested that heritage building be sited on the site to be visible from the intersection of Kingston Road and Brock Road; • requested that the relationship between the Post Manor and the Post Cemetery, located at the southwest corner of Kingston Road and Brock Road, is maintained for the Post Manor to recognize its heritage aspect; • concerned that the proposed location for the Post Manor is being overshadowed by the large buildings; • concerned that the relocation of the Post Manor to the northerly portion of the site does not maintain a prominent element of the plan; and • requested whether there were any existing examples of similar proposals of heritage properties in urban settings. Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee passed the following motion at their meeting on April 28, 2021: • That the presentation by ERA Architects Inc. and the Biglieri Group Inc. be received; • That the Heritage Impact Assessment be revised as per the recommendations of Branch Architecture; and • That the comments and discussion of Heritage Pickering be included by staff in a future Information Report to the Planning & Development Committee. 6.2.2 Region of Durham • At the time of writing this report, no comments have been received. 6.2.3 Durham Catholic District School Board • No objections; and • Students will attend St. Wilfred C.S. and St. Mary Catholic Secondary School. 6.2.4 Durham District School Board • At the time of writing this report, no comments have been received. - 27 - Information Report 11-21 Page 10 6.3 City Department Comments 6.3.1 Engineering Services • The Functional Servicing Report is to be revised to address drainage, stormwater management and servicing issues; • The Traffic Impact Assessment is to be revised to address technical issues and must address how overflow traffic into the local neighbourhoods will be reduced due to the right-in and right-out accesses into the proposed development; and • The applicant should address how the POPS (Privately Owned Publicly Accessible Spaces) on the site will be used and programmed. 6.3.2 Fire Services • The applicant shall identify the fire route to each building in compliance with Ontario Building Code; and • The 3-storey townhouse building does not appear to have a fire route. 6.3.3 City’s Heritage Consultant (Branch Architecture) The City of Pickering has retained Branch Architecture to review the Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) submitted by the applicant. Branch Architecture found that the HIA needs to provide further investigation and information on the negative impacts of the proposed development, specifically: • The HIA does not provide a convincing rationale for the proposed building relocation, and considering the negative impacts of the proposed development on the heritage attributes of the Post Manor, the building would be best served in its current location and within a landscaped setting at the corner of Kingston Road and Brock Road. Further, the HIA does not include enough information on the feasibility of moving the building, such as an assessment by a heritage building mover. • The HIA does not identify or address several significant negative impacts on the cultural heritage value and heritage attributes of the Post Manor building including: • shadows that will be created by the proposed tower buildings where the proposed landscaping and wood shingle roof would be in the shade for a significant amount of time; • the negative impact created by the height, proximity and massing of the new construction; and • the isolation of the heritage attribute from its surrounding context (the Post Manor being removed from its original setting and away from the Post Cemetery, along with its visual prominence as a landmark along Kingston Road). • The HIA does not address the significant ‘test’ of the compatibility of the proposed development set out in the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Urban Design Guidelines. The proposed high-density development does not reflect the scale or architectural style of the one-and-a-half storey Regency cottage and the submission material does not provide information on the building materials of the proposed buildings. The design of the new buildings – placement, massing, height, scale, style and materials – should complement and enhance Post Manor and its setting within a new interpretive landscape. - 28 - Information Report 11-21 Page 11 • Further, Branch Architecture notes that as part of the ongoing approvals process, the heritage consultant/architect should prepare and submit a Conservation Plan to the City for their review and approval and that the owner enters into a Heritage Easement Agreement with the City. 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 addressed by the applicant before a final recommendation report to Planning & Development Committee: 7.1 Land Use Policies • ensure conformity with all applicable statutory policies of the Provincial Policy Statement (2020), the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2017), and the Region of Durham Official Plan; • assess the appropriateness of the proposal, including the requested increase in density and FSI, in the context of the Council Kingston Road Corridor and the Specialty Retailing Node Intensification Plan and Draft Urban Design Guidelines; • ensure that sufficient retail and commercial gross floor area is being replaced given the removal of existing service-commercial and retail uses that currently service the surrounding community; • secure opportunities to provide affordable housing, accessible units, and a variety of unit types, sizes and tenures (including rental); and • require the inclusion of office space given that office uses are directed to the identified gateway location at Brock Road and Kingston Road. 7.2 Site Design and Built Form • evaluate the appropriateness of the proposed site layout, building setbacks, building height and massing, pedestrian connections and landscaping to ensure the proposed built form is in keeping with the design goals and objectives of the Council endorsed Draft Urban Design Guidelines for the Kingston Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node; • review that the proposed building massing and height is scaled to be compatible with adjacent streets and open space to create an attractive human-scaled environment, respect existing scale and character and appropriately respond to the local context, • require tower heights to be located within the recommended 45-degree angular plane requirements as established in the Council endorsed Urban Design Guidelines along Brock Road and Pickering Parkway adjacent to existing low-rise development; • ensure the proposed tower floor plate sizes are consistent with the recommended maximum tower floor plate size in the Council endorsed Draft Urban Design Guidelines for the Kingston Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node; • ensure the proposed development demonstrates design excellence, through built form and other means such as landscaping, public seating, weather protection and public art, given the site’s location within a gateway and key transit junction; • review proposed building heights and tower placements to minimize any potential shadowing and wind impacts on residential properties to the north and west, internal open space, and ensure adequate sunlight penetration, and sky views are being maintained; - 29 - Information Report 11-21 Page 12 • require the proposed privately-owned publicly open space to be visible and assessable from Kingston Road and Brock Road, and require additional information on the program of this space; and • ensure accessible paths of travel are provided throughout the site, including pedestrian connections to street networks, public transit, and other outdoor amenity spaces. 7.3 Post Manor Heritage House • require the Post Manor heritage building to be sited generally in its original location at the corner of Kingston Road and Brock Road to maintain its prominent view; • ensure that the siting, size, massing, scale and materials of the proposed buildings complement or enhance the heritage attributes of the Post Manor; • require further information regarding the feasibility of moving the building and how will it be protected during construction; and • require the submission of a conservation plan for the Post Manor heritage building. 7.4 Traffic, Vehicular Access and Parking • review the location of the proposed vehicular accesses to ensure there are no conflicts with the Kingston Road and Brock Road intersection; • assess whether the proposal will result in any significant traffic impacts and/or operational issues on the intersection of Brock Road and Kingston Road, and other roads and intersections within the neighbourhood; • assess whether the proposed restricted vehicular access will cause increased traffic infiltration on nearby local roads such as Royal Road, Guild Road and Finch Avenue; • assess the proposed residential parking standards and the shared parking ratio for visitor and commercial parking to ensure there is a sufficient supply of on-site parking to support the development; and • evaluate the design of the pedestrian connections within the site and to the transit locations to ensure a barrier-free path of travel. 7.5 Other matters to be addressed • ensure that all engineering requirements have been addressed and that sufficient servicing capacity (sanitary, storm sewer and water) is available to service this redevelopment; and • require compensation to be provided for the loss of tree canopy in accordance with the City’s Tree Compensation By-law. 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 from the circulated departments, agencies, and public. - 30 - Information Report 11-21 Page 13 8. Information Received Copies of the plans and studies submitted in support of the application(s) are listed below and available for viewing on the City’s website at pickering.ca/devapp or at the offices of the City of Pickering, City Development Department: • Architectural Drawings, prepared by CMV Group Architects, dated November 2020; • Functional Servicing Report, prepared by Valdor Engineering Inc., dated November 2020; • Heritage Impact Assessment, prepared by ERA Architects Inc., dated November 2020; • Noise and Vibration Impact Study, prepared by RWDI, dated November 2020; • Pedestrian wind Assessment, prepared by RWDI, dated November 2020; • Phase One Environmental Site Assessment, prepared by BAE Environmental, dated December 2019; • Phase Two Environmental Site Assessment, prepared by BAE Environmental, dated January 2020; • Planning Rationale Report, prepared by The Biglieri Group Ltd., dated November 2020; • Transportation Impact Study, prepared by TMIG, dated November 2020; • Tree Inventory Report, prepared by ERA Architects Inc., dated November 2020; • Tree Protection Plan, prepared by ERA Architects Inc., dated November 2020. 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 Public 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. 9.2 Official Plan Amendment Approval Authority (OPA Applications Only) • the Region of Durham may exempt certain local official plan amendments from Regional approval if such applications are determined to be locally significant, and do not exhibit matters of Regional and/or Provincial interest; and • at this time, the Region has not yet determined whether this official plan amendment application is exempt from Regional Approval. - 31 - Information Report 11-21 Page 14 10. Owner/Applicant Information The owner of the property is Brock & Kingston Holdings Inc. and is represented by The Biglieri Group Ltd. Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Air Photo Map 3. Submitted Conceptual Site Plan 4. Brock Precinct Intensification Plan 5. Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Intensification Plan – Recommended Policies Related to the Proposal 6. Draft Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Urban Design Guidelines – Relevant Design Recommendations Related to the Proposal Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Original Signed By Original Signed By Elizabeth Martelluzzi Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Planner II, Heritage Chief Planner Original Signed By Nilesh Surti, MCIP, RPP Manager, Development Review & Urban Design EM:NS:ld Date of Report: May 19, 2021 - 32 - Attachment #1 to Information Report 11-21 DenmarRoadKingston Road Finch Avenue A lw inC ircle Brock RoadRoyal RoadGuild RoadJaywinCircleDianaPrincess OfWales Park Denmar Park BrockridgeCommunityPark City DevelopmentDepartment Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: OPA 20-008/P & A 013/20 Date: May. 17, 2021 ¯EBrock & Kingston Holdings Inc.1970 Brock Road SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\OPA\2020\OPA 20-008P, A013-20 - Brock and Kingston Holdings Inc\OPA 20-008P A013-20_LocationMap_v2.mxd 1:4,000 SCALE:THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. © 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, Departmentof Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights reserved.; © Municipal PropertyAssessment Corporation and its suppliers. All rights reserved.- 33 - Attachment #2 to Information Report 11-21 Beaton Way Kingston RoadDuberryDri v e P i c ke r in g ParkwayDenmarRoadFinch Avenue BluebirdCr esc ent BrockRoadRoyal RoadGuild RoadJ a y w inC ircleAlwin Circle Air Photo MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: OPA 20-008/P & A 013/20 Date: May. 14, 2021 ¯ Brock & Kingston Holdings Inc.1970 Brock Road L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\OPA\2020\OPA 20-008P, A013-20 - Brock and Kingston Holdings Inc\OPA 20-008P A13-20_AirPhoto_v2.mxd 1:5,000 SCALE:THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. © 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, Departmentof Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights reserved.; © Municipal PropertyAssessment Corporation and its suppliers. All rights reserved. City DevelopmentDepartment ESubjectLands - 34 - Attachment #3 to Information Report 11-21 L:\Planning\01-MapFiles\OPA\2020 May 17, 2021DATE: Applicant: Municipal Address: File No: Submitted Conceptual Site Plan FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. City Development Department OPA 20-008/P & A 013/20 Brock & Kingston Holdings Inc. 1970 Brock Road N - 35 - Attachment #4 to Information Report 11-21 L:\Planning\01-MapFiles\OPA\2020 May 17, 2021DATE: Applicant: Municipal Address: File No: Brock Precinct Intensification Plan FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. City Development Department 1970 Brock Road N (1970 Brock Road) Subject Lands OPA 20-008/P & A 013/20 Brock & Kingston Holdings Inc. - 36 - Attachment #5 to Information Report 11-21 Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Intensification Plan – Recommended Policies Related to the Proposal The policy recommendations of the Intensification Plan outline that “Mixed Use A – Residential/ Retail/Office” should feature a combination of residential, retail and office uses in mixed use buildings, or in separate buildings on mixed use sites. Mixed Use A areas are intended to have the greatest densities and represents the highest intensity uses within the Corridor or Node. Office uses area encouraged to be located in Mixed Use A areas, with preferred office locations at major intersections or gateways where access to existing and planned transportation infrastructure is greatest, including higher order transit facilities. The Plan also provides the following key policy recommendations relevant to the proposed development: • Residential development should support the City’s affordable housing targets which encourage a minimum 25 percent of new residential construction to be of forms that would be affordable to households of low or moderate-income. • Tall buildings (consisting of buildings 13 storeys or greater) should be located within gateways and at the intersection of transit spines and major arterials, along the highway, and in proximity highway accesses. • Tall building towers should be separated from one another by a minimum distance of 25 metres and should have a maximum tower floor plate of 750 square metres. • Tall buildings should be located to minimize shadow impacts and wind tunnel effects on proximate parks, open spaces, primary frontage sidewalks and existing low-rise residential areas. • The general maximum height of tall buildings should be no more than 45 storeys; if the general intent of the Intensification Plan is met, flexibility with massing and height may be considered on a site specific basis. • Regarding mid-rise buildings (5 to 12 storeys in height), on Kingston Road and Brock Road built form should conform to an angular plane extended at a 45-degree angle from the front property line, beginning at a height 80 percent the width of the adjacent right-of-way. • For buildings along existing north-south public roads intersecting Kingston Road and buildings along Pickering Parkway, the front angular plane that applies to Kingston Road frontage will also apply to the secondary street frontage. • The transition for properties abutting low-rise residential will include a minimum setback of 7.5 metres from the property line (or edge of development) and a 45-degree angular plane from a height of 10.5 metres above the 7.5 metre setback line. This provides a lower building and a gradual transition. • Where there is a grade difference between the front and rear of the property, the rear angular plane should always be taken from the lowest grade elevation along the shared property line. This ensures that properties to the rear are not subject to additional shadow impacts resulting from changes in grade. • Where shallow redevelopment lots are immediately adjacent to designated established low-density residential properties, the City may also consider the implementation of other regulations to ensure built form compatibility in addition to the application of the angular plane. - 37 - • Low-rise buildings up to 4 storeys should maintain a minimum separation distance of 11.0 metres between facing buildings. Low-rise buildings should maintain an 8.0 metre separation distance between the face of a building containing primary living space, such as bedrooms and living rooms, and the side of another building. • Building articulation, including vertical projections, recessions, design treatments and other architectural details, is encouraged at gateway locations to create an enhanced visual interest and a human-scaled environment. • Gateways are identified at locations of significance to frame street corners, enhanced local character, create landmarks along the Corridor and within the Node, and act as the principal vehicular and pedestrian arrival points and individual precincts. • All buildings fronting Brock Road and Kingston Road should be setback 5.0 metres from the front property line and all buildings should be setback a minimum of 2.0 metres from new public and private streets that are internal to the development block. • Setback areas should be used to accommodate spill-out uses from commercial activity (i.e., patios, displays, waiting areas), public landscape elements (i.e., benches, planters, other amenities), or landscape elements that provide screening/privacy for grade related residential units as appropriate. • Secondary frontages are encouraged to have a minimum of 30 percent of the lot frontage for retail uses, commercial-service uses or consolidated office and residential entrances. • Podium portion of tall buildings should have a minimum height of 3 storeys and a maximum height of 6 storeys, with a minimum ground floor height of 4.5 metres. • Generally, buildings shall have a podium of at least 3 storeys before any building stepbacks are introduced. The first stepback for any building shall not occur higher than the 6th floor of a building. • Variety and variation on the streetwall will be provided through encouraging a fine-grain pattern of retail units/residential entrances, and the establishment of façade articulation and rhythm through building projections/recesses and the use of different façade materials. • Buildings of heritage significance should be preserved, through methods that are appropriate to the specific building and surrounding context. • Preservation may include keeping buildings in their existing location, moving buildings to a more appropriate location on the same site to incorporate with new development, or replacing buildings with an urban landscaped feature speaking to its significance and history (i.e., landscaped area with historical signage or plaque). • A Heritage Impact Assessment is required for development activity on or adjacent to heritage properties, as governed by the Ontario Heritage Act. • Any redevelopment on or adjacent to heritage properties should be completed in accordance with the Urban Design Guidelines. • Council should seek to coordinate the location and design of proposed future open spaces fronting Kingston Road and Brock Road, with transit stops. • Public parks will be provided through redevelopment in the Brock Precinct, and the precise location, size and design of the public parks within the development blocks where they are conceptually identified will be determined through the implementing zoning bylaw and detailed block planning. • Privately Owned Publicly-Accessible spaces (POPS) form a key part of the public realm network, providing valuable amenity space through developments. • Private landowners should provide public easements as necessary over POPS to provide access to the general public. - 38 - • Delivery of on-site Community Facilities is encouraged to be integrated into multi-storey, mixed-use developments (i.e., forming part of the podium of a residential tower). • Additional street trees should be incorporated within the existing streetscape on the east side of Brock Road to provide shade and comfort for pedestrians walking along Brock Road. • All public and private streets should be designed as “complete streets” which should accommodate facilities including pedestrian zones, cycling facilities or multi-use paths, and street trees. • New private street from Brock Road to Beechlawn Park should have a right-of-way width of 24.0 metres with on-street parking, sidewalks and landscaped boulevards on both sides. • New public street linking the north and south development parcels should have a proposed right-of-way of 17.0 metres to 19.0 metres. • Off-street parking and cycling infrastructure are encouraged to be provided within structured or underground parking within private properties to facilitate connectivity and minimize the heat island effect created by large surface parking. • Shared parking is encouraged in order to reduce the total number of parking spaces required, including combining off-street and on-street parking between landowners. • Reduced minimum parking standards are encouraged to reflect the area’s compact, high-density urban form and shift towards a pedestrian and transit-oriented environment. - 39 - Attachment #6 to Information Report 11-21 Draft Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Urban Design Guidelines – Relevant Design Recommendations Related to the Proposal The Draft Urban Design Guidelines support the goals, objectives, and vision for the area as set out in the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Intensification Plan and establish design priorities and principles related to built form, heritage buildings, placemaking, and connectivity. The following key priorities of the Guidelines are relevant to the proposed development. Built Form • Block layouts should be designed to maximize views and vistas through development blocks and towards gateways. • Entrances should be highly visible, front onto the public street, and connect to pedestrian walkways or sidewalks. Entrances should promote visibility and views between interior and exterior spaces. • Weather protection features such as canopies, awnings, overhangs and recessed entrances should be incorporated, where possible, to provide users shelter from wind, rain, snow and other harsh elements. • For tall buildings over 13 storeys in height, a minimum separation distance of 25 metres shall generally be maintained between towers. • A minimum separation distance of 15 metres shall generally be provided between facing buildings on sites with multiple buildings. On multi-building sites, it is encouraged that buildings are offset or angled away from each other to maintain privacy between facing units. • The following setback criteria should be applied: • Buildings fronting Brock Road shall be setback 5.0 metres from the front property lines; • Buildings shall be setback a minimum of 2.0 metres from new public and private streets that are internal to the development block; • All buildings shall be setback a minimum of 3.0 metres from parks and other open spaces; • Where retail and commercial uses are located, setback areas should accommodate spill-out uses from commercial activity (i.e., patios, displays, waiting areas) to improve the pedestrian experience. These areas should be primarily hardscaped to act as an extension of the sidewalk and accommodate for higher levels of foot traffic. • Site grading shall consider facilities designed to provide access for persons with disabilities, including the provisions of ramp access. • Entrances and access points should be integrated with at-grade design. Informational signage, pavements markings and soft landscaping can help orient users, enhance safety and minimize confusion. • Vehicular entrances and access points should have minimal impact on walkways and the pedestrian realm and where possible should be integrated with building design. • Surface parking is discouraged for main street retail, and high-density residential, office and mixed-use developments. In these areas, parking shall be provided underground, behind or inside a structure on upper floors with appropriate screening, or inside a building. • Structured underground parking is preferred over surface parking or above-grade structured parking to reduce the urban heat island effect and minimize blank walls. - 40 - • Parking structure design is encouraged to consider flexible designs, including designs which allow for future conversions into other uses. • Above-grade parking structures shall be encouraged to be designed with active uses on all sides. • The sides and rear of multi-storey above-grade parking structures facing adjacent developments shall be screened as to not create blank facades around the building. They are encouraged to incorporate glazing, cladding, landscaping, or exterior finishes to complement the surrounding streetscape. • At-grade parking structures shall be designed with active uses fronting the public street and other pedestrian uses, such as retail or amenity areas. These should incorporate visually- appealing architectural and landscape treatments. • Access points to parking structures should be located at the rear or side of buildings, and away from main streets and intersection corners. • Landscaping shall be an integral piece of the site design and be developed to unify and enhance the overall architecture of a development. High-quality, durable and diverse landscape elements shall be encouraged. • A minimum of 10 percent of each lot shall be landscaped, with a significant proportion of that being soft landscaping. • Landscaping shall support and define a consistent and attractive street edge. The selection and spacing of all plantings should relate to the street type and adjacent land use and site conditions. • Within sites, landscaping shall define pedestrian routes and enhance visual imagery of the site. Large tree canopies are encouraged along pedestrian routes to provide shade and comfort. • Landscape buffers shall be encouraged along surface parking lots adjacent to public streets to soften and screen parking lot edges. They shall also be encouraged on lots abutting low-density residential uses to provide a privacy buffer. These should have a minimum width of 3.0 to 3.5 metres. • Sustainable and Low Impact Development (LID) measures are encouraged for all development to reduce stormwater run-off and optimize water infiltration potential. This includes the use of bio-retention areas, rain gardens, grass swales, permeable pavement and vegetated filter strips. • The use of softscapes (e.g., trees, grass, shrubs, flowers and soils) should be encouraged on flat roofs of all buildings, including residential, commercial and mixed-use buildings. Green roofs are encouraged to act as public amenity spaces. • New buildings should be massed and scaled to establish compatible heights to adjacent streets and open spaces, while retaining a comfortable pedestrian scale. • Where mid and high-rise buildings are adjacent to low-rise buildings, increased setbacks or building setbacks should be employed, in consideration of an appropriate transition. • In cases where buildings have a height of 8 storeys or more proposed adjacent to the streetline, the upper storeys of the building should be sited on podiums having a minimum height of 3 storeys and a maximum height of 6 storeys. • Development shall incorporate building and landscape design which minimizes the extent and duration of shadows and maximizes access to sunlight for adjacent low-rise developments, parks, open space, primary frontages, and other intensively used areas of the public realm. • The shadow impact of buildings on adjacent residential buildings, public parks and privately owned publicly-accessible spaces shall be assessed through a shadow impact study, where appropriate, and minimized to the extent possible. - 41 - • Development shall incorporate building and landscape design which protects and buffers the pedestrian realm from prevailing winds. • To limit shadow and overlook impacts in low-rise residential areas, an angular plane shall be applied through the following: • From the rear yard of low-rise residential (i.e. where development backs directly on to stable low-rise neighbourhoods), built form shall conform to a 45 degree angular plane measured from a height of 10.5 metres, set back 7.5 metres from the rear property line. • To help create a human-scaled environment along public streets, an angular plane shall be applied through the following: • On Kingston Road and Brock Road, built form shall conform to an angular plane extended at a 45 degree angle from the front property line, beginning at a height 80 percent the width of the adjacent right-of-way. • A consistent streetwall should be maintained along Kingston Road. The minimum streetwall height along all streets shall be 3 storeys, with a minimum ground floor height of 4.5 metres to accommodate for retail uses. • The podium portion of tall buildings shall have a minimum height of 3 storeys and a maximum height of 6 storeys. • All street-related uses should have primary entrances fronting onto the public street and feature transparent windows and doors to provide outlook and animation onto the street edge. • Generally, buildings shall have a podium of at least 3 storeys before any building stepbacks are introduced. The first stepback for any building, shall not occur higher than the sixth floor of a building. • Building stepbacks should be a minimum of 2.5 metres. • A fine-grain pattern of retail units and/or residential entrances is encouraged to provide variety and variation in the streetwall. Variation in frontage width is encouraged to flexibly accommodate a range of street-related uses, including multiple internal formats and layouts for commercial/retail units. • Secondary Frontages are indicated in the Urban Design Guidelines. Secondary Frontages should contain street-related active retail or other commercial service uses at grade, with primary entrances oriented towards the street to encourage a vibrant public realm. Other street-related active uses, such as community and institutional uses, are also encouraged. • Gateways are entry points into significant streetscapes, areas or neighbourhoods, often signified by a distinctive public realm or built form and enhanced through site and building design. • Buildings with significant heights and massing should be located at gateway locations, including both mid-rise and tall buildings. Building and landscape design should aim to create a sense of arrival. • Gateways should incorporate public gathering spaces, such as plazas and urban squares. • Buildings at gateways are encouraged to include recessed corners to enlarge the public realm at key intersections to support additional spill-over space for active commercial uses. • Primary building entrances should be located at gateways. • Building articulation, including vertical projections, recessions, design treatments and other architectural details, is encouraged at gateway locations to create enhanced visual interest and a distinct sense of place. • Heights, massing and articulation of buildings at gateways shall consider the aesthetics and orientation of view corridors approaching gateways to ensure a cohesive and prominent streetscape. - 42 - • Tall buildings (over 13 storeys) should generally be located within gateways, including at the intersection of transit spines, major arterials, along the highway and proximate to highway access. • Tall buildings should appropriately transition in height, particularly where high-rise development is directly adjacent to existing low-rise neighbourhoods, parks and open spaces, and Privately Owned Publicly-Accessible Spaces (POPS). • Tall buildings should be designed and sited to minimize shadows, maximize sky views, and reduce negative micro-climate impacts, particularly where high-rise development is directly adjacent to low-rise neighbourhoods, parks and open spaces. • Building towers shall be subject to a minimum 25 metre separation distance, measured between the exterior edge of the building face. Buildings shall have a maximum tower floor plate of 750 square metres. • The base of a mid-rise building should be at least 3 storeys. Above three storeys, mid-rise buildings should be stepped back a minimum of 3.0 metres from the streetwall. • Mid-rise buildings should appropriately transition in height where they are directly adjacent to existing low-rise neighbourhoods, parks and open spaces, and POPS. • Low-rise building entrances are encouraged to be enhanced through features such as stoops, porches, landings, canopies, decorative railings, and front yard landscaping. They are encouraged to clearly delineate the boundary between the public and private realm through increased setbacks. • Low-rise buildings are encouraged to incorporate private outdoor amenity space, where possible. This can include raised or below-grade terraces, rooftop terraces, and balconies. Placemaking • Gateway Plazas are prominent publicly accessible spaces in high-traffic areas that provide places to gather and socialize, while adding aesthetic value to the built environment. • Gateway Plazas shall be physically and visually connected to the public street and well-designed to relate to surrounding buildings and create the impression of a cohesive public-realm. • Gateway Plazas should be framed by adjacent streets, landscape and buildings which are designed to the highest architectural standard. They should respond to the form and function of the site and surrounding uses. • Commercial and mixed-use buildings adjacent to plazas should provide active frontages with direct views and access. Patios are encouraged to be located adjacent to these locations. • POPS form a key part of the public realm network, providing valuable amenity space through development. POPS are owned and maintained by private landowners, but open to the general public to enjoy. They can take a variety of forms, including parks, linear parks and urban squares. • The locations of POPS will be identified in the implementing zoning by-law and their exact size, location and design shall be addressed through detailed block planning. The location and design of POPS should seek to physically and visually connect to public streets. • POPS should be framed by and relate to surrounding buildings; at-grade active uses shall support the programming of the open space and offer a surveillance element to promote safety. • POPS should maximize sun exposure and strive to achieve 5 consecutive hours of sun as measured on March 21 and September 21. - 43 - • POPS designed as Urban Squares should be located in commercial areas and be designed to accommodate relatively higher levels of pedestrian foot traffic, with more hardscaped areas relative to softscape. Urban squares should be larger than 100 square metres and should be sized based on local site conditions. They should be large enough to allow for active programming and public events. • Public art should be located in or with close proximity to community-oriented spaces, such as parks, open spaces, public squares, plazas, and gateways, to maximize visibility. It should be exhibited along streets and laneways that support a continuous flow of high pedestrian volumes. Heritage Buildings • Heritage resources play a valuable role in celebrating local history and preserving cultural identity. • Heritage buildings and historic elements should be integrated into the wider public realm, and connected to the surrounding public open space network when possible. • Built heritage features on focal sites should be accentuated to create a sense of place and enhance cultural identity. • Through the review of development proposals, the historical significance of designated heritage buildings and buildings with heritage merits shall be assessed to determine how the building or elements can be protected, enhanced or integrated into new development. I • Distinct historical eras in the history of Kingston Road in the City of Pickering should be celebrated through public realm treatments on lands with specific ties to those activities, and incorporated into the landscape, lighting, signage, interpretation and art. • New development should recognize heritage buildings and historic elements by facilitating opportunities for building and site design to reflect the scale, building materials, architectural style and other attributes of adjacent cultural heritage resources Connectivity • Sidewalks and pedestrian paths should provide a network of accessible and inter-connected pedestrian routes which relate directly to surrounding buildings and destinations. • Adequate space should be provided within the public right-of-way to allow for landscape and furniture zones adjacent to sidewalks and pedestrian paths. • Pedestrian paths should be well-designed and inviting to users, with features such as soft landscaping, plantings, public art, wayfinding signage and pedestrian-scaled lighting implemented where appropriate. Where possible, a generous urban tree canopy is encouraged. • On private sites where new road connections and blocks are established, pedestrians should be accommodated and given priority through stop signs or other signalization methods. • Private streets are designed to similar municipal standards as public streets, but remain in private ownership. Private streets must provide the same high-quality public realm and streetscape experience as public streets, are expected to adopt similar treatments and aesthetics to ensure that a uniform streetscape character is maintained across the precinct. • Private landowners shall be responsible for ongoing maintenance to ensure that publicly accessible spaces remain in a state of good repair. - 44 - • To bolster its character as a distinct urban avenue and enhance connectivity for pedestrians and cyclists, Kingston Road is recommended to adopt enhanced landscaping treatments and introduce additional active transportation facilities. The street is currently part of a Metrolinx-led planning, design and engineering study in anticipation of a proposed BRT route running between Scarborough Town center and Downtown Oshawa. • It is recommended that a 2.0 metre cycle track and treed and landscaped planting area be implemented on both sides of Kingston Road through road widening via redevelopment. This landscaped area is recommended to include street trees, street furniture, and planting strips. • Brock Road is a significant street which carries pedestrians, cyclist and vehicular traffic. Additional street trees should be incorporated on the east side of Brock Road to provide shade and comfort for pedestrians. - 45 - Report to Planning & Development Committee Report Number: PLN 28-21 Date: June 7, 2021 From: Kyle Bentley Director, City Development & CBO Subject: Pickering Housing Strategy Study - Status Update, Phase 2 - File: D-1300-014 Recommendation: 1. That Report PLN 28-21 of the Director, City Development & CBO, providing an update on the status of the City of Pickering Housing Strategy Study, be received for information. Executive Summary: Council directed staff to undertake a Housing Strategy Study that will result in a comprehensive strategy and action plan that addresses the need for delivering more lifecycle housing options, including affordable and accessible units, to support changing demographic conditions. Details of the purpose and objectives of the Housing Strategy Study can be found in the June 15, 2020 Report PLN 05-20 to the Planning & Development Committee. An update on the Study was provided in the March 1, 2021 Report PLN 11-21. The Study is currently in Phase 2.This report presents an update on the Study and the Draft Action Plan. Next steps include circulating the Draft Housing Strategy and Action Plan to internal departments, agencies and interested stakeholders for review and comment, and the preparation of a Recommended Housing Strategy and Action Plan for presentation to the Planning & Development Committee in the Fall of 2021. Financial Implications: There are no financial implications applicable to this report. Discussion: 1. Purpose The purpose of this report is to update Council on staff’s progress on the Housing Strategy Study, and to present the Draft Action Plan to Planning & Development Committee. 2. Background 2.1 Study Initiation On June 15, 2020, following the consideration of Report PLN 05-20, Council directed City Development staff to undertake a comprehensive Housing Strategy Study. A link to Report PLN 05-20 is available on the Housing Strategy Study page of the City’s website. - 46 - Report PLN 28-21 June 7, 2021 Subject: Pickering Housing Strategy Study Page 2 2.2 Study Purpose The purpose of the Housing Strategy Study is to: • establish the City’s role and priorities with facilitating opportunities for developing housing, affordable housing, and age-friendly housing in Pickering over the next 10 years (2021 – 2031); • assist Council with decision making; • provide a framework for staff in implementing its responsibilities, including those that relate to the coordination of actions with other agencies, organizations and governments; • assist in guiding residential growth within the City; • aid in the education and creation of general public awareness of what the City is doing on this issue; and • provide a mechanism to monitor progress as the City works to implement its plan. 2.3 Study Process The Housing Strategy Study consists of 3 phases: • Phase 1: Research and Gap Analysis; • Phase 2: Draft Housing Strategy and Action Plan; and • Phase 3: Recommended Housing Strategy and Action Plan. We are currently in Phase 2 of the Study. 3. Study Status Since the launch of the Study, City staff: • Hosted an electronic public open house on January 21, 2021; • Met with stakeholders on February 25, 2021, including, government, not-for-profit, and other agencies and associations, as well as the development and building industry; • Met with the Pickering Accessibility Advisory Committee on March 17, 2021; • Completed a Research and Gap Analysis Report, March 31, 2021 (the Report), which is the consolidation of the research and analysis done to determine the housing gaps within the City. In addition to collecting information and data on the City’s demographic profile, socio-economic characteristics of households and housing stock, and associated trends and forecasts, the Report contains information pertaining to the policy and legislative context for the provision of affordable housing. The Report was completed at the end of March 2021 and is available on the Housing Strategy Study page of the City website (https://www.pickering.ca/en/city- hall/resources/HSS/HSS_Phase1_ResearchGap_Analysis-ACC.pdf). • Prepared the Draft Action Plan; • Presented the Draft Action Plan at an electronic public open house on April 29, 2021 with 2 “live” delegates (as of the writing of this report, there have been 51 views of the YouTube recording of the meeting); and • Presented the Draft Action Plan to the Pickering Accessibility Advisory Committee on May 19, 2021. - 47 - Report PLN 28-21 June 7, 2021 Subject: Pickering Housing Strategy Study Page 3 4. Research and Gap Analysis Report The Research and Gap Analysis Report concluded that the City’s current housing stock is not fully addressing the needs of City residents. Key findings of the Report indicated that there is an overall need for housing options for low and moderate income earners, more affordable rental and ownership housing in a range of unit sizes, and accessible units. The primary rental market refers to units purposely built for the rental market. In particular, the Report identified the need for additional primary rental market units of all sizes, the protection of existing rental units, and the need for additional accessible rental units. In addition, the Report identified the need for home ownership housing options for moderate income earners in a range of unit sizes as well as accessible units. The Province of Ontario has completed several significant policy initiatives that have an impact on facilitating the provision and/or protection of affordable housing. They include: the adoption of the Promoting Affordable Housing Act, 2016; the adoption of the More Homes More Choices Act, 2019; the 2019 update to A Place to Grow, Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe; the 2020 update to the Provincial Policy Statement; and the adoption of the COVID-19 Economic Recovery Act, 2020. The City has an opportunity to address these policy gaps through the Housing Strategy and Action Plan. 5. Draft Housing Strategy and Action Plan The Draft Action Plan (see Attachment #1) contains a list of actions that the City may consider to address the affordable housing gaps identified through the Research and Gap Analysis Report, March 2021, and an associated lead department, timeframe and cost. The actions are grouped according to the following 6 themes: 1. Planning Policy; 2. Financial Incentives; 3. Partnerships; 4. Education; 5. Advocacy; and 6. Other Actions. The following lists the actions under consideration according to theme: 1. Planning Policy: • Changes to the Pickering Official Plan to: • Add definitions for ‘Affordable Housing’ and ‘Housing Options’; • Conform to recent changes to provincial policy and legislation; • Add policies to protect existing rental housing stock from conversion and demolition, and consider adding polices to implement Inclusionary Zoning; • Review and update the City zoning by-laws and Two Dwelling Unit By-law to reflect the provincial changes to permit secondary units in a detached, semi-detached or row house, as well as in a building or structure ancillary to a detached house, semi-detached or row house; - 48 - Report PLN 28-21 June 7, 2021 Subject: Pickering Housing Strategy Study Page 4 • Consider allowing secondary units in rural areas subject to the capacity of well and septic systems, reducing the parking requirement for secondary units located in areas well served by transit, as well as examine other existing zoning requirements that may be barriers to adding secondary units; • Consider removing or reducing the minimum requirement for parking spaces and allowing developers to propose alternative options for affordable housing and/or supportive housing; • Consider discouraging “down zoning” high and medium density residential development to a lower density; and • Add an application requirement for the submission of an Affordability and Accessibility Analysis. 2. Financial Incentives: • Consider waiving fees or providing a grant equivalent to certain development application fees, development charges, property taxes, parkland dedication requirements, and/or reductions in letters of credit for affordable rental, affordable ownership, and/or supportive housing developments; • Expedite approvals for projects which provide affordable rental, affordable ownership, supportive housing, and purpose-built rental housing units; • Consider establishing an annual budget item as part of the City’s annual operating budget; • Consider establishing a Housing Reserve Fund; • Consider establishing a corporate policy whereby surplus or underutilized City-owned lands are first considered for development of affordable rental housing; and • Consider establishing a Vacant Home Property Tax. 3. Partnerships: • Consider acting as a “broker” between developers and operators (of rental accommodation) to facilitate affordable primary rental accommodation; and • Communicate and work with Durham Region and developers on funding and other incentives that may be available to address the City’s housing needs. 4. Education: • Provide guidance to proponents of affordable and/or supportive housing on the planning and building approvals processes. 5. Advocacy: • Advocate for the Province to establish a minimum number or a percentage of accessible units for major residential development; and • Advocate for the school boards to reduce, waive, and/or defer their portion of Development Charges for affordable rental housing. - 49 - Report PLN 28-21 June 7, 2021 Subject: Pickering Housing Strategy Study Page 5 6. Other Actions: • Ensure there are no barriers to shared living arrangements in appropriate areas as of right; • Establish a Monitoring Plan to regularly review and update the baseline housing data to ensure the goals and objectives of the Housing Strategy are being met; • Encourage developers to design flexible spaces for shared living or multi-generational living; and • Encourage developers to add universally designed and constructed units to projects. Staff is preparing the Draft Housing Strategy and Action Plan Report, which contains a description of the draft actions and a rationale for implementing the draft actions. 6. Engagement Electronic Public Open House 2 was advertised on the Community Page of the News Advertiser on April 15 and 22, 2021, as well as on the City’s website. City staff also sent notice of the Electronic Public Open House 2 directly to members of the Accessibility Advisory Committee, Seniors Community Services Council, the Age Friendly Steering Committee, and participants at the February 25, 2021 Stakeholder Meeting. 6.1 Summary of April 29, 2021 Electronic Public Open House 2 Staff heard from two delegates at the April 29, 2021 Electronic Public Open House, and received a few emailed comments prior to, and during the Open House. A summary of comments/questions from Electronic Public Open House 2 is contained in Attachment #2 to this report. 7. Next Steps Next steps include, completing the Phase 2 engagement and initiating Phase 3, including the following tasks: • circulating the Draft Housing Strategy and Action Plan Report to internal departments, agencies and interested stakeholders for review and comment; • considering the feedback from the Phase 2 engagement opportunities; • preparing a Recommended Housing Strategy and Action Plan; and • providing a recommendation report to Planning & Development Committee in the Fall of 2021. Attachments: 1. Draft Action Plan 2. April 29, 2021 Electronic Public Open House 2, Summary of Comments/Questions - 50 - Report PLN 28-21 June 7, 2021 Subject: Pickering Housing Strategy Study Page 6 Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Margaret Kish, MCIP, RPP Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner, Policy Chief Planner Déan Jacobs, MCIP, RPP Kyle Bentley, P. Eng. Manager, Policy & Geomatics Director, City Development & CBO MK:ld Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer - 51 - Housing Strategy Study Draft Action Plan City of Pickering April 29, 2021 Page 1 of 5 Number Draft Action Gap Number Addressed Lead Department Timeframe Cost 1.0 Policy 1.1 Add a definition of “affordable housing” to the City’s Official Plan. Gap 4 City Development Short-term Low 1.2 Add a definition of “Housing Options” to the City’s Official Plan. Gap 4 City Development Short-term Low 1.3 Amend the City’s Official Plan to reflect the Provincial Policy Statement 2020 requirement for the municipality to maintain the ability to accommodate residential growth for a minimum of 15 years (as opposed to 10 years as currently written). Gap 4 City Development Short-term Low 1.4 Consider amending the City’s Official Plan policy to maintain a short term supply of residential lands with development approvals to accommodate a 5 year demand, up from the current requirement of accommodating a 3 year demand. Gap 4 City Development Short-term Low 1.5 Add new official plan policy to protect existing rental housing stock from conversion. Gap 4 City Development Short-term Low 1.6 Add new official plan policy which prohibits the demolition of existing rental housing units. Gap 4 City Development Short-term Low 1.7 Consider adding new official plan polices to implement inclusionary zoning in protected major transit station areas following Durham Region’s completion of the “Assessment Report”. Gap 4 City Development Short- to Medium-term Low Attachment #1 to Report #PLN 28-21 - 52 - Housing Strategy Study Draft Action Plan City of Pickering April 29, 2021 Page 2 of 5 Number Draft Action Gap Number Addressed Lead Department Timeframe Cost 1.8 Secondary Units: (a) Review and update the City zoning by-laws and Two-Dwelling Unit By-law to reflect the More Homes, More Choice Act changes to permit secondary units in a detached, semi-detached or row house, as well as in a building or structure ancillary to a detached house, semi-detached or row house. (b) Consider allowing secondary units in rural areas subject to the capacity of well and septic systems. (c) Consider reducing the City’s parking requirement for secondary units located in areas well served by transit. (d) Examine other existing zoning requirements that may present barriers to increasing secondary units within the City. This could potentially be partially addressed through the City’s current Comprehensive Zoning By-law Review initiative. Gaps 2, 4 City Development, Corporate Services (Municipal Law Enforcement) Short-to Medium-term Low 1.9 Consider removing or reducing the minimum requirement for parking spaces and allowing developers to propose alternative parking space options for affordable housing and/or supportive housing. Gap 4 City Development Short-term Low - 53 - Housing Strategy Study Draft Action Plan City of Pickering April 29, 2021 Page 3 of 5 Number Draft Action Gap Number Addressed Lead Department Timeframe Cost 1.10 Consider discouraging “down zoning” high and medium density residential designations to lower density residential designations. Gap 4 City Development Short-term Low 1.11 Add an official plan policy requiring the submission of an Affordability and Accessibility Analysis as part of a complete application for residential development. Gap 4 City Development Short-term Low 2.0 Financial Incentives 2.1 Consider waiving fees or providing a grant equivalent to certain development application fees, development charges, property taxes, parkland dedication requirements, and/or reductions in letters of credit for affordable rental, affordable ownership, and/or supportive housing developments. Gaps 1-3 Finance Department Medium-term Medium -High 2.2 Expedite approvals for projects which provide affordable rental, affordable ownership, supportive housing, and purpose-built rental housing units. Gaps 1-3 City Development, Engineering, Fire Short-term Low 2.3 Consider establishing a corporate policy whereby surplus or underutilized City-owned lands or buildings are first considered for development of affordable rental housing prior to being sold. Gaps 1-3 Corporate Services, Finance Short- to Medium-term Medium - High 2.4 Consider establishing an annual budget item as part of the City’s annual operating budget. Gaps 1-3 Finance Short- to Medium-term Low - 54 - Housing Strategy Study Draft Action Plan City of Pickering April 29, 2021 Page 4 of 5 Number Draft Action Gap Number Addressed Lead Department Timeframe Cost 2.5 Consider establishing a Housing Reserve Fund. Gaps 1-3 Finance Short- to Medium-term Low 2.6 Consider establishing a Vacant Home Property Tax. Gaps 1-3 Finance Short- to Medium-term Low 3.0 Partnerships 3.1 Consider the City acting as a “broker” between developers and operators (of rental accommodation) to facilitate affordable primary rental accommodation. Gaps 2 Economic Development, City Development Short-term Low 3.2 Communicate and work with Durham Region and developers on funding and other incentives available to address the City’s housing needs. Gaps 1-3 City Development Short-term Low 4.0 Education 4.1 Provide guidance to developers, not-for-profits and other proponents of affordable rental, affordable ownership and/or supportive housing, on the planning and building approvals processes. Gaps 1-3 City Development Short-term Low 5.0 Advocacy 5.1 Advocate for the Province to establish minimum number of accessible units or a percentage of accessible units for major residential development. Gaps 1-3 Corporate Communications Short-term Low - 55 - Housing Strategy Study Draft Action Plan City of Pickering April 29, 2021 Page 5 of 5 Number Draft Action Gap Number Addressed Lead Department Timeframe Cost 5.2 Advocate for the school boards to reduce, waive and/or defer their portion of Development Charges for affordable rental housing. Gaps 1, 2 Corporate Communications Short-term Low 6.0 Other Actions 6.1 Ensure there are no barriers to shared living (co-housing, co-living) arrangements in appropriate areas as-of-right. Gaps 1-3 City Development Short-term Low 6.2 Establish a Monitoring Plan that will regularly update and review the baseline data set established in the Research and Gap Analysis Report, March 31, 2021, with the goal of identifying whether or not the goals and objectives of the Housing Strategy are being met, and if any modifications to the Action Plan are necessary to ensure that the goals and objectives of the Housing Strategy are met. Gaps 1-4 City Development Short-term Low 6.3 Encourage developers to consider designing flexible spaces that can accommodate shared living or multi-generational living. Gaps 1, 3 City Development Short-term Low 6.4 Encourage developers to add accessible/universally designed and constructed units to projects. Gaps 1-3 City Development Short-term Low - 56 - Attachment #2 to Report #PLN 28-21 Housing Strategy Study April 29, 2021 Electronic Public Open House 2 Summary of Comments/Questions Item Number Comments/Questions 1. The cost of insuring shared housing (sometimes referred to as “rooming houses”), may impact a home owner. For seniors who may have the space and may welcome the company, the extra costs of these issues could outweigh their desire to assist someone with their housing situation. 2. The City’s 55+ Advisory Committee, has been considering the option of accommodating younger single individuals co-habitating with a senior, thus providing the singleton with affordable housing options in return for some assistance to the senior, such as lawn mowing, snow removal etc. 3. The City should ensure that a Shared Living form of housing is encouraged. Sharing accommodations is the most common way for minimum waged workers to obtain affordable housing. Some municipalities regulate shared living accommodation (“rooming houses”). There needs to be municipal, regional, and provincial initiatives to overcome structural barriers to shared living. 4. How will Pickering resolve issues of multiple cars parked in driveways and on the street that may result from affordable housing such as rental apartments and rooming houses? Does the Planning Committee have a method to deal with a potential lack of upkeep of the area surrounding these units. In Toronto we hear about used drug needles left outside and liquor bottles being left about as well as transients loitering. Has the City developed a plan to deal with these negative issues in the planning process? How will the Planning Department ensure the overall look of Pickering will not be diminished? 5. If low cost housing is a priority, why not include studio apartments or condos that will be more affordable? 6. As a senior I was happy to hear consideration concerning the accessibility of housing. I would like to see more bungalow condos similar to the ones beside the Pickering City Hall. The bungalows there are always in very high demand. Coupled with that, smaller detached bungalows should also be a considered. 7. Pickering seems to focus its energy on creating more high density housing such as condos, apartments and town houses. Why is there no focus on single family homes for young families or bungalows with a garage for seniors. I feel there is too much emphasis on high density and not enough on the younger families and older seniors. - 57 - Attachment #2 to Report #PLN 28-21 Housing Strategy Study April 29, 2021 Electronic Public Open House 2 Summary of Comments/Questions Item Number Comments/Questions 8. Pickering Council entertained the request to build a high condo building at the waterfront at the bottom of Liverpool Road. Why is Pickering not focusing its efforts to create as much parkland as possible along the waterfront for all Pickering residents to enjoy? The waterfront trail should incorporate as much greenspace as possible for residents. Ajax was very forward thinking in doing just that. As a result there are miles of waterfront trail to walk and enjoy. 9. Is Pickering interested in designing a seniors shared living house design? Have you studied the Golden Girls of Port Perry? 10. BILD spoke about the importance of partnerships in addressing the declining affordability in housing in the Greater Toronto Area, including the organization’s support for funding and grants from all levels of government. In particular, they expressed that they are encouraged by the wording in the Draft Action Plan and an approach which includes a suite of incentives that seeks to provide affordable housing units. In addition, BILD expressed an interest in ensuring that any future Inclusionary Zoning policies or requirements are applied in such a way to not unintentionally undermine future housing stock or choice, as well as the City’s overall growth objectives. BILD suggested that a working group be established between the City and BILD. 11. BILD stated that it’s fairly common when the industry is proposing new development that they are faced with community opposition and that community education is necessary to combat the stigma of the word “affordable”. BILD expressed that they believe that the success of implementing affordable housing begins early on with Council, and requires their support and endorsement to be the champions for these policy directions, and ends with residents who need to understand the social implications of opposing these types of initiatives. - 58 - Report to Planning & Development Committee Report Number: PLN 29-21 Date: June 7, 2021 From: Kyle Bentley Director, City Development & CBO Subject: The Municipal Comprehensive Review of the Durham Regional Official Plan: Proposed Policy Directions - File: A-2100-020 Recommendation: 1.That Council endorse the following recommendations regarding Envision Durham’s Proposed Policy Directions in support of a Prosperous Economy (Proposed Directions 1-4): a.That the City Centre, Kingston Road Corridor and Brock Mixed Node Intensification Areas, Employment Lands in Seaton and along Highway 407, and the planned employment hub surrounding the Federal Airport lands be prioritized for adequate servicing to support economic growth and diversification and to accommodate the 2051 growth forecasts; and b.That the planned future Pickering Airport be recognized as a major catalyst for economic development and diversification; 2.That Council endorse the following recommendations regarding Envision Durham’s Proposed Policy Directions in support of Healthy Communities (Proposed Directions 5-28): a.That the Goals for Healthy Communities be expanded to: i.align with the Canadian Institute of Planners’ Healthy Communities Policy Statement to ensure individuals have access to healthy built, social, economic, and natural environments that give them the opportunity to live to their fullest potential, regardless of their race, ethnicity, gender, income, age, abilities, or other circumstances; and ii.align with objectives or outcomes from the Region’s Community Safety and Well- being Plan, and Age-Friendly Durham Strategy; b.That the City supports the inclusion of policies regarding the implementation of a region-wide building retrofit program, and recommends that the Regional Official Plan (ROP) include broader policy direction around additional initiatives and incentives to encourage and enable energy efficient construction and green building design, including net-zero and net-zero ready development; c.That the City supports the inclusion of tree canopy targets for urban areas and rural areas in the ROP, following the identification of the current baseline, as well as the inclusion of policy direction in support of Regional tree planting initiatives along regional roads and on regionally-owned properties where appropriate; - 59 - Report PLN 29-21 June 7, 2021 Subject: The Municipal Comprehensive Review Page 2 of the Durham Regional Official Plan d. That in addition to recognizing and supporting historic downtowns, the Region include robust policies in the ROP related to cultural heritage that conform with, and implement, provincial policy direction and other regional interests related to heritage; e. That with regard to the proposed policy directions related to Housing: i. the City supports the Region undertaking a Regional Housing Assessment Report (Assessment Report) and developing policies that would enable area municipalities to implement Inclusionary Zoning within their respective jurisdictions; ii. the City recommends the establishment of affordable housing targets for Strategic Growth Areas in the ROP be based on the outcome of the Assessment Report, rather than assigning a 35 percent target prior to evaluation; iii. the City supports the policy direction to strengthen the rental to ownership housing conversion policies in the ROP and further recommends that when considering permission for conversion from a rental to ownership property, the Region: • consider increasing to greater than one year, the number of years required to maintain the minimum rental vacancy rate of 3 percent in both the region as a whole and the respective area municipality; and • require a Regional Official Plan Amendment Application if the rental vacancy rate is below 3 percent; iv. the City supports the proposed policy direction to encourage area municipalities to protect existing rental housing from demolition by using tools, such as a demolition control by-law, and recommend this be expanded upon, particularly in locations such as Strategic Growth Areas or areas in proximity to transit, where existing rental housing may be older and therefore more susceptible to demolition and redevelopment; and v. the City recommends policies be included in in the ROP to support “co- ownership housing” and that enable municipalities to address this type of housing in a local and context-specific manner. 3. That Council endorse the following recommendations regarding Envision Durham’s Proposed Policy Directions regarding Supportive Infrastructure (Proposed Directions 29- 33): a. That the City encourages the development of a Regional “Dig Once” policy as it would align with, and support, the City’s policy and interest in broadband deployment; and b. That the City recommends policies be included in the ROP that encourage the Region to work with the provincial government to upgrade the existing infrastructure to support renewable and alternative energy projects; 4. That Council endorse the following recommendations regarding Envision Durham’s Proposed Policy Directions in support of a Vibrant Urban System (Proposed Directions 34-53): - 60 - Report PLN 29-21 June 7, 2021 Subject: The Municipal Comprehensive Review Page 3 of the Durham Regional Official Plan a. That the City supports the direction that Waterfront Places (e.g., Frenchman’s Bay) not be identified as Strategic Growth Areas and recommends that any policies referring to minimum density targets for these areas be removed if this designation is retained in the ROP; b. That the City supports removal of the existing specific policy prohibition on Places of Worship within Employment Areas, and the proposed direction that area municipalities would regulate the location of these uses; c. That the City requests that the Employment Area Conversion submission for the Durham Live lands between Squires Beach Road and Church Street, which has been supported by City Council, be considered through the Land Needs Assessment; d. That the City requests that the Region have regard to Pickering Council Resolutions #140/19 and #173/19 (Attachments #2 and #3 to Report PLN 29-21) requesting, among other things, the inclusion of northeast Pickering in an urban area boundary expansion; and e. That the City recommends the Land Needs Assessment consider a scenario reflecting a future airport and the potential implications it may have in terms of population and employment allocation and growth; 5. That Council endorse the following recommendations regarding Envision Durham’s Proposed Policy Directions in support of a Thriving Rural System (Proposed Directions 54-65): a. That the City recommends the goals and directions with regard to the Thriving Rural System in Durham be expanded to also support the provision of reliable internet services to the rural area; and b. That the City requests that the designation of High Potential Aggregate Resource Areas on lands within the limits of Settlement Areas (e.g., Barclay Estates) be removed; 6. That Council endorse the following recommendations regarding Envision Durham’s Proposed Policy Directions in support of a Protected Greenlands System (Proposed Directions 66-85): a. That the Region consider requesting the Province to make resources available to Indigenous Peoples to facilitate the sharing of Traditional Ecological Knowledge; and b. That the City recommends the Region, through coordinated relationship-building and consultation with Indigenous communities, endeavour to provide guidance to local area municipalities in terms of establishing appropriate engagement processes to facilitate input on land use planning matters; 7. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report; and 8. That a copy of Report PLN 29-21 and Council’s Resolution thereon be forwarded to the Regional Municipality of Durham and Durham Area Municipalities. - 61 - Report PLN 29-21 June 7, 2021 Subject: The Municipal Comprehensive Review Page 4 of the Durham Regional Official Plan Executive Summary: On March 2, 2021, the Regional Municipality of Durham released the report on “Proposed Policy Directions”, as part of Envision Durham, the Municipal Comprehensive Review of the Durham Regional Official Plan (see Report of the Regional Commissioner of Planning and Economic Development 2020-P-7 and Proposed Policy Directions Report, Attachment #4). City staff have reviewed the proposed policy directions and prepared a series of recommendations for the Committee and Council’s consideration and endorsement as the City’s comments. Staff from Economic Development & Strategic Projects, Sustainability, and Engineering Services were consulted in the preparation of these comments. Feedback on the Proposed Policy Directions will guide the development of the draft policies for the new Durham Regional Official Plan. The new plan is expected to be approved by Regional Council in 2022. Financial Implications: The recommendations of this report do not present any financial implications to the City of Pickering. Discussion: 1. Purpose The purpose of this report is to provide an overview of the Proposed Policy Directions for Envision Durham, the Region of Durham’s Municipal Comprehensive Review, and to obtain Council’s endorsement of staff’s comments on the Proposed Policy Directions. 2. Background 2.1 “Envision Durham” – The Municipal Comprehensive Review of the Durham Regional Official Plan The Region of Durham is in the midst of reviewing its Official Plan. An official plan provides a vision for the future orderly development of a municipality through a set of policies and maps. The Planning Act, which is provincial legislation governing land use planning in Ontario, requires that a municipality regularly review and update its Official Plan. Once the Region has completed its Official Plan review, the City will be in a position to review the Pickering Official Plan. The first stage of the Region’s Official Plan Review was titled “Discover”, and commenced with the launch of a public consultation program through an online project hub and public opinion survey. The second stage, titled “Discuss”, focused on the preparation of a series of discussion papers, addressing the following major areas: agriculture and rural systems; climate change and sustainability; growth management; the environment; transportation; and housing. The City provided comments on each of these discussion papers through 2019 and 2020. - 62 - Report PLN 29-21 June 7, 2021 Subject: The Municipal Comprehensive Review Page 5 of the Durham Regional Official Plan The Region is currently in stage three of the Municipal Comprehensive Review process, titled “Direct”, which includes the release of proposed policy directions for review and comments. In fall 2020, the Region ushered in this phase through the release of Proposed Policy Directions for Major Transit Station Areas (MTSAs). The City provided comments on the MTSA Policy Directions through Report PLN 10-21. The release of the Proposed Policy Direction Report, which centres around key strategic directions, is a subsequent step and a continuation of phase three. The proposed policy directions are based on the review of best practices, stakeholder and public feedback from earlier phases. They are also intended to respond to submissions received through Stage 2, a summary of which can be found at: www.durham.ca/EnvisionDurhamSubmissions. The proposed Policy Directions are intended to provide guidance for draft policies to be incorporated into the new Regional Official Plan (ROP). A key component of Envision Durham is the undertaking of a Growth Management Study (GMS) which is being completed in two phases. The first phase, a Land Needs Assessment (LNA), is a comprehensive review and calculation of the Region’s land base, including existing urban areas, to determine how the Growth Plan population and employment forecasts can be accommodated and how much, if any, additional urban land is required. The second phase of the GMS, if required, will focus on determining the most appropriate location(s) for Urban Boundary Expansions. A Growth Opportunities and Challenges Report, prepared by Urban Strategies Inc. and Watson & Associates Ltd., was also brought forward as an attachment to the Proposed Policy Directions Report, and serves as a starting point for the LNA and related technical studies. This report provides essential context; discusses impacts from broader demographic and economic trends, local growth and development trends; and describes other factors that affect growth in the region. The report includes several recommendations that will carry forward into the LNA and help shape the overall outcome of the GMS. The Region also opened up a 90 day window for the submission of urban area boundary expansion requests, which will be considered through phase two of the GMS if the LNA finds that further land is required to be added to the Urban Area in Durham to accommodate growth to the year 2051. Submissions for new and/or amended requests for Settlement Area boundary expansion are requested to have regard for the criteria outlined in the Settlement Area Boundary Expansion section of the Proposed Policy Directions Report, and to include mapping of the subject property and a description of the proposed land use and built form. Submissions are requested by May 31, 2021. Comments on the Proposed Policy Directions are being requested by June 30, 2021. An online survey has also been developed to help facilitate public input, which can be accessed at www.durham.ca/EnvisionDurhamDirections. - 63 - Report PLN 29-21 June 7, 2021 Subject: The Municipal Comprehensive Review Page 6 of the Durham Regional Official Plan 3. The Proposed Policy Directions Based on the new ROP framework endorsed by Durham Regional Council in November 2020 (refer to PLN 10-21), the 105 broader Proposed Policy Directions and over 400 associated detailed policy directions are mainly centered around the following 7 strategic directions: • Prosperous Economy; • Healthy Communities; • Supportive Infrastructure; • Vibrant Urban System; • Thriving Rural System; • Protected Greenlands System; and • Connected Transportation System. Each strategic direction covers a series of policy topics, summarizes comments received, and introduces proposed policy directions for discussion. The Proposed Policy Directions present potential changes to land use planning policies upon which comments are being requested. These proposed directions are not intended to be exhaustive, but rather introduce certain broad directions where further input is being sought before draft detailed policies are introduced through a proposed Regional Official Plan Amendment. Policy reviews and directions generally fall within one of three categories: 1. Matters of provincial conformity which must be updated to satisfy legislative requirements; 2. Housekeeping components related to existing policies in the ROP which may change based on review; and 3. New policies or approaches based on research and feedback which may warrant inclusion in the ROP The Proposed Policy Directions Report can be found as Attachment #4 to this Report, or online at: https://www.durham.ca/en/regional- government/resources/Documents/Council/Reports/2021-Committee-Reports/Planning- and-Economic-Development/2021-P-7.pdf City staff has undertaken a detailed review of the Proposed Directions Report, considering the City’s comments that were provided as part of Phase Two “Discuss” on each of the theme areas. The recommendations of this Report (PLN 29-21) seek Council’s endorsement of staff’s key comments on the proposed policy directions. Staff-to-staff comments will also be provided, addressing minor technical matters and clarification requests regarding certain terms and statements. The following is an overview of the Proposed Policy Directions by theme and key comments from staff in response: 3.1 Prosperous Economy Economic development objectives evolve over time with changes in broader economic trends, regional growth, and in response to changing local priorities and issues. In addition to provincial policies, the Region’s proposed policy directions to support a prosperous economy were informed by the Durham Region Strategic Plan, the Region’s Economic - 64 - Report PLN 29-21 June 7, 2021 Subject: The Municipal Comprehensive Review Page 7 of the Durham Regional Official Plan Development Strategy and Action Plan, and the Region’s Broadband Strategy. Proposed Policy Directions that are intended to support a Prosperous Economy include: • Determining and implementing an appropriate supply of Employment Areas with access to municipal water and sewage services; • Supporting balanced population and employment growth and the diversification of the region’s employment base; • Supporting collaboration with educational institutions and the business community in programs that create and maintain a highly skilled regional labour force; • Supporting the agricultural and agri-food sector, including new opportunities for agri-tourism, on farm diversified uses and the diversification of agricultural operations; • Recognizing the importance of, and encouraging the expansion of leading edge technologies, including high-speed broadband infrastructure; and • Inclusion of policy support for the development of an airport on the Federal Airport Lands in Pickering, establishment of an aviation-based multimodal employment hub surrounding the airport, and the provision of necessary municipal services and transportation infrastructure. The Proposed Policy Directions related to a Prosperous Economy are generally supported by staff. These directions appear to align with Pickering Council direction on the Federal Airport Lands, and support the City’s recently adopted policies (Amendment 31) related to broadband. Further, staff recommend that: • in order to support economic prosperity, the provision of adequate servicing be prioritized for: • Strategic Growth Areas, particularly in Urban Growth Centres such as Pickering’s City Centre, which will facilitate a large number of new jobs in the Region; • Employment Lands, particularly those in Seaton and along Highway 407, to enable investment attraction; and • the Federal Airport lands to realize the vision for this area as a future employment hub; and • the planned future Pickering Airport be recognized as a major catalyst for economic development and diversification. 3.2 Healthy Communities Provincial policy direction supports healthy, livable, and safe communities. The built environment has a direct effect on our health. Proposed policy directions intended to foster healthy communities include: • Introducing a greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction target in the new ROP so as to achieve net-zero as an aspirational objective, and encouraging area municipalities to develop and implement corporate and community-wide GHG emission reduction targets and plans; • Encouraging and supporting climate resilient development, redevelopment and retrofits; - 65 - Report PLN 29-21 June 7, 2021 Subject: The Municipal Comprehensive Review Page 8 of the Durham Regional Official Plan • Including specific policies related to downtowns, recognizing their importance, character, and functions; and • Collaborating with area municipalities on developing age-friendly design guidelines. Staff generally support the proposed policy directions pertaining to Healthy Communities, which align with and also support the City’s Age-Friendly Community Plan and Housing Strategy Study which is currently underway. The following key comments are provided as it relates to Healthy Communities: • the goals in support of Healthy Communities should be broadened and expanded to align with the Canadian Institute of Planners’ Healthy Communities Policy Statement. More specifically, communities should be planned to ensure individuals have access to healthy built, social, economic, and natural environments that give them the opportunity to live to their fullest potential, regardless of their race, ethnicity, gender, income, age, abilities, or other circumstances. Staff also recommend that the goals and objectives for Healthy Communities align with objectives or outcomes from the Region’s Community Safety and Well-being Plan, and Age-Friendly Durham Strategy; • Inclusion of policy support for the implementation of a region-wide building retrofit program is strongly supported, and it is recommended that the ROP also include broader policy direction around additional initiatives and incentives to encourage and enable energy efficient construction and green building design; • Staff, consistent with recommendations provided in PLN 04-20, (which provided comments on the Environment and Greenlands Discussion Paper), continue to support the inclusion of tree canopy targets for urban areas and rural areas in the ROP, following the identification of the current baseline, as well as the inclusion of policy direction in support of Regional tree planting initiatives along regional roads and on regionally-owned properties where appropriate; and • Cultural heritage did not appear to be addressed in a comprehensive way in the Proposed Policy Directions, and has only been referenced in relation to downtowns. Cultural heritage is a fundamental ingredient to fostering complete communities and place-making. Accordingly, staff recommend the Region include robust policies in the ROP related to cultural heritage that conform with and implement provincial policy direction and other regional interests related to heritage. 3.2.1 Housing The ROP supports complete communities through policies that promote housing options to meet the needs of current and future residents. The Housing section of the Healthy Communities chapter outlines proposed policy directions that: • Support a range of housing options including secondary suites, rental housing, microhomes, shared living and special needs housing; • Encourage the production of new affordable housing; • Preserve and prevent the loss of existing rental housing; and - 66 - Report PLN 29-21 June 7, 2021 Subject: The Municipal Comprehensive Review Page 9 of the Durham Regional Official Plan • Consider inclusion of ROP policies that encourage municipalities to enact zoning by-laws, regulate, and licence short-term rentals if and where they feel it is appropriate. The City of Pickering Housing Strategy Study was initiated to establish the City’s role and priorities in facilitating opportunities for developing a diverse range of housing, including affordable, age-friendly, and accessible housing in Pickering over the next 10 years. The Phase 1 Research and Gap Analysis Report identified the overall need for housing options for: low and moderate income earners; rental and ownership units; a range of unit sizes; and accessible units. In particular, as it relates to the primary rental market (units purposely built for the rental market), a need was identified for: additional units of all sizes; protection of units; and additional accessible units. As it relates to the home ownership market, a need was identified for: home ownership housing options for moderate income earners; a range of unit sizes; and accessible units. Staff generally support of the proposed policy directions related to Housing, and provide the following key comments: • Staff support the Region undertaking a Regional Housing Assessment Report (Assessment Report) and developing policies that would enable area municipalities to undertake Inclusionary Zoning within their respective jurisdictions. Implementing Inclusionary Zoning could assist the City in closing the gap identified in the primary rental market; • The Proposed Policy Directions Report indicates that the Region may adopt a 35 percent affordable housing target on the basis of targets other municipalities such as York Region and Clarington have implemented. Staff recommends that the establishment of an affordable housing target for Strategic Growth Areas be based on the outcome of the Assessment Report, rather than setting an affordable housing target of 35 percent for Strategic Growth Areas without the benefit of a detailed evaluation; and • Staff supports the policy direction to strengthen the rental to ownership housing conversion policies in the ROP to help protect existing affordable rental housing; • In support of the protection of existing affordable rental housing: • Staff recommends that when considering permission for conversion from a rental to ownership property, the Region: • Consider increasing to greater than one year, the number of years required to maintain the minimum rental vacancy rate of 3 percent in both the region as a whole and the respective area municipality; and • Require an Official Plan Amendment Application if the rental vacancy rate is below 3 percent; • Staff supports the Region’s policy direction to encourage area municipalities to protect existing rental housing from demolition by using tools, such as a demolition control by-law, and recommend that policy direction be expanded upon, particularly in locations such as - 67 - Report PLN 29-21 June 7, 2021 Subject: The Municipal Comprehensive Review Page 10 of the Durham Regional Official Plan Strategic Growth Areas or areas in proximity to transit where existing rental housing may be older and therefore more susceptible to demolition and redevelopment; and • To support of the provision of affordable ownership housing, staff recommends that the Region include a definition of “co-ownership housing” in the ROP, and include policies that enable municipalities to address this type of housing in a local and context-specific manner. 3.3 Supportive Infrastructure To support a growing region, it is essential to ensure that municipal infrastructure is in place to serve current and future needs and is maintained on a regular basis. Many of the existing policies in the ROP related to infrastructure are anticipated to be carried over into the new ROP. Proposed Policy Directions related to Supportive Infrastructure include: • Planning for infrastructure that is supported by infrastructure master plans and asset management plans to ensure infrastructure is financially viable over its full lifecycle; • Encouraging the co-location of linear infrastructure; • Encouraging stormwater management practices supporting low impact development and sustainable urban design within the public realm; • Supporting new opportunities for energy from waste, source reduction, reuse, and diversion where appropriate, consistent with the Long Term Waste Management Plan guiding principles; investigating the feasibility of a Dig Once policy, which would allow and/or require broadband infrastructure to be installed during road construction and reconstruction and other major development activities; • Recognizing energy conservation and efficiency measures, and renewable and alternative energy systems as critical to reducing greenhouse gas emissions; • Adapting and building resiliency to the impacts of climate change; and • Permitting and promoting alternative energy systems and renewable energy systems in accordance with provincial and federal requirements, while prohibiting large-scale commercial renewable energy facilities in Prime Agricultural Areas and critical environmental areas. Staff are generally in support of the proposed policy directions related to infrastructure, and provide the following key comments: • Through Amendment 31, the City has been a leader in establishing a local “Dig Once” standard and adopting Official Plan policies related to broadband infrastructure. Establishment of a Regional Dig Once Policy is strongly supported and would align with the City’s policy and interests around the provision of a robust information technology network; and, • To enable uptake of renewable and alternative energy projects by development proponents, staff encourages the Region to work in partnership with the Province to ensure existing infrastructure is upgraded to support and enable these renewable and alternative energy projects. - 68 - Report PLN 29-21 June 7, 2021 Subject: The Municipal Comprehensive Review Page 11 of the Durham Regional Official Plan 3.4 Vibrant Urban System The Urban System comprises lands within the Region’s Urban Area Boundary. These areas are designated to accommodate the vast majority of the Region’s forecasted population and employment growth. Currently, the Regional Official Plan (ROP) designates land within the Urban System in one of the following categories: Living Areas; Employment Areas; Urban Growth Centres (including Pickering’s City Centre); Regional Centres; Regional Corridors; and Waterfront Places. In the City of Pickering, existing Urban Areas consist of lands in South Pickering and Seaton. Planning for growth in the urban system differentiates between development within existing built-up areas and newer designated greenfield areas. The ROP currently contains policies directing the majority of growth and intensive development to urban growth centres, regional centres, and regional corridors, in accordance with the previous Provincial Growth Plan policy directions. Through A Place to Grow – Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2020), new intensification targets and new terminology was introduced. Through the Municipal Comprehensive Review and the Growth Management Study, the Region is proposing to update its policy framework by updating minimum intensification targets, and reviewing, designating and delineating Strategic Growth Areas (Urban Growth Centres, Regional Centres and Corridors, and Major Transit Station Areas). Some of the policy directions that are being proposed to foster a vibrant Urban System include: • Reviewing and refining existing Regional Centres against the density targets and planned function as described in ROP policy, in consultation with area municipal staff; • Designating Highway 2 from the Toronto/Durham border easterly to Highway 418 in Clarington as a “Rapid Transit Spine Intensification Corridor”; • Designating Strategic Growth Areas with densities, built form, and a mix of uses that will support Light Rail Transit in the long term; • Adding clarifying policy that Waterfront Places are not to be recognized as Strategic Growth Areas; • Identifying a Regional Structure for the Central Pickering Development Plan area, as well as associated policies with appropriate references to the Central Pickering Development Plan and the Pickering Official Plan where additional detailed policies can be found; • For Employment Areas: • Including policies related to Provincially Significant Employment Zones; • Identifying a Regional interest in the decommissioning and long-term plan for future use of the Pickering Nuclear Generating Station; • Permitting a broader range of intensive commercial uses along Regional Corridors in Employment Areas above what is allowed in the current ROP related to personal service and retail uses within employment areas; • Continuing to advance the Region’s pre-servicing of employment lands project through the inclusion of enabling policies in the ROP; - 69 - Report PLN 29-21 June 7, 2021 Subject: The Municipal Comprehensive Review Page 12 of the Durham Regional Official Plan • Removing the specific policy prohibition on Places of Worship and allowing area municipal official plans and/or zoning by-laws to regulate the location of these uses, subject to meeting criteria including land use compatibility; and • Reporting back to Regional Council on recommended Employment Area Conversions upon completion of review and analysis, and receipt of area municipal positions as a component of the LNA; • Encouraging the redevelopment of brownfield sites and greyfield sites, and prioritizing the redevelopment of brownfield and greyfield sites within Strategic Growth Areas and other intensification areas; and • Considering Settlement Area Boundary Expansion Requests based on criteria, if it is determined through Phase One of the LNA that additional land is required to accommodate the 2051 growth forecast. City staff generally support the proposed policy directions related to the Vibrant Urban System. In particular, staff recommend: • That Waterfront Places (e.g., Frenchman’s Bay) not be identified as Strategic Growth Areas and that any policies referring to minimum density targets for these areas be removed if this designation is retained in the ROP; and • That the existing policy prohibiting Places of Worship within Employment Areas be removed, and that area municipalities be enabled to regulate the location of these uses. This addresses the concern the City previously expressed through comments on the Region’s Growth Management Discussion Paper regarding the challenges faced by places of worship to establish within residential areas, and takes into account the functions and services they offer within the context of building “complete communities”. This change would provide for greater flexibility and opportunity for Places of W orship to locate within the City. 3.4.1 Employment Area Conversion Requests Regional staff will be reporting back to Regional Council on recommended employment area conversions (requests to re-designate an Employment Area to a “non-employment” use or to permit additional uses which would otherwise not be permitted) upon review and analysis of the requests and receipt of area municipal positions, as a component of the Land Needs Assessment. To provide a transparent process for the consideration of Employment Area conversion requests, the Region formalized its evaluation process, criteria, and submission requirements, as described in Report 2020-P-11. Prior to the release of the report, the Region had received a total of 47 Employment Area conversion requests representing approximately 780 hectares of land. Only one of these requests was for lands within the City of Pickering, received from Malone Given Parsons, on behalf of the owners of the Durham Live lands. In May, 2020 Pickering Council resolved to support a request by Malone Given Parsons, on behalf of Pickering Developments Inc. (the owners of the Durham Live lands) to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH) for a Ministerial Zoning Order (MZO) to permit a wider range of uses, including retail and residential uses that would complement the Pickering Casino Resort tourist attraction. The MMAH granted the MZO, which effectively changed the land use permissions on the Durham Live lands east of Squires Beach Road, from prestige - 70 - Report PLN 29-21 June 7, 2021 Subject: The Municipal Comprehensive Review Page 13 of the Durham Regional Official Plan employment uses to also permit retail and limited residential uses. By virtue of supporting the MZO, the Council of Pickering agreed to the conversion of the subject Employment Area lands. Accordingly, staff are recommending that the Employment Conversion Request for the Durham Live lands (approximately 90.5 hectares) between Squires Beach Road and Church Street, be considered through the Land Needs Assessment. 3.4.2 Settlement Area Boundary Expansion Requests The Region has received ongoing requests for settlement area boundary expansion since the initiation of Envision Durham. Prior to the release of the report, the Region had received a total of 38 settlement area boundary expansion requests, representing approximately 2,670 hectares of land. Of those requests, 7 were for lands within the City of Pickering, predominantly for lands within northeast Pickering (see Attachment #1 – Map of Requests for Boundary Expansion – Ajax and Pickering – Excerpt from the Envision Durham Policy Directions Report). In this regard, Pickering Council passed 2 motions, on September 23, 2019 and November 25, 2019 respectively, in relation to the possible future designation of additional urban land in Pickering. The motion passed by Council on September 23, 2019 requested, among other things, that the Region of Durham include in their review, all lands within the City of Pickering meeting the following criteria: • lands not restricted by availability of servicing; • lands that do not comprise a Specialty Crop Area; • lands that are not within a Natural Heritage System; • lands not located in the Moraine Natural Core and Linkage Areas; • lands experiencing growth pressures and/or with locations in the white belt that are appropriate for growth and can achieve a healthy, connected, thriving and complete community; and • lands that have existing or planned infrastructure to support and accommodate growth. Further, the motion passed by Council on November 25, 2019 states that the Council of the Corporation of the City of Pickering supports the Vision and Community Planning Principles for the lands in northeast Pickering (at the time being referred to as Veraine), and reaffirms its request that the Region of Durham include these lands in the settlement area boundary during its current Municipal Comprehensive Review. A copy of these Motions are contained in Attachments #2 and #3 to this Report. Adding an area of this size (approximately 1,650 hectares) would permit a community that would accommodate approximately 60,000 residents, 10,500 population related jobs as well as 33,000 employment related jobs. Five of the seven requests for an urban area boundary expansion in Pickering are for lands in this vicinity. A request has also been made to add lands municipally known as 3580 Audley Road, approximately 6.8 hectares in size, to the Hamlet of Kinsale, to permit the development of a 7 lot plan of subdivision on private services. - 71 - Report PLN 29-21 June 7, 2021 Subject: The Municipal Comprehensive Review Page 14 of the Durham Regional Official Plan With regard to proposed Settlement Area Boundary Expansions, and in accordance with the City’s recommendations put forward in PLN 32-19, (which provided comments on the Region’s Growth Management Discussion Paper), staff are recommending: • that the Region have regard to Pickering Council Resolutions #140/19 and #173/19 requesting, among other things, the inclusion of northeast Pickering in an urban area boundary expansion; and • that the Region’s Land Needs Assessment consider a scenario reflecting a future airport and the potential implications it may have in terms of population and employment allocation and growth. Completion of the Land Needs Assessment will determine if and how much new urban land is required to accommodate the Region’s 2051 growth forecast. Should a determination be made that additional land is required, the Growth Management Study (GMS) will proceed to phase two to determine the most appropriate location(s) for Settlement Area Boundary Expansion in Durham. Due to the ongoing GMS, additional policy directions for the Urban System and finalization of proposed policy directions will be released as part of phase one and, if required, through phase two after the study is completed. Staff are generally supportive of the recommendations outlined in the Growth Opportunities and Challenges Report and will continue to remain engaged in the Region’s GMS. 3.5 Thriving Rural System The current Rural System comprises 84 percent of the region’s land base, and houses approximately 8 percent of Durham’s population (54,000 residents). Most of the rural area is planned for agricultural and open space uses, interspersed with rural settlements. Land use designations that make up the current Rural System include: Prime Agricultural Areas; Rural Settlements (consisting of existing Hamlets, Country Residential Subdivisions, Residential Clusters and 4 hectare lots); and Aggregate Resource Extraction Areas. In Pickering, the rural area comprises: the Rouge National Urban Park; the Duffins-Rouge Agricultural Preserve; and 8 Hamlets, 3 Rural Clusters, and 5 Country Residential Subdivisions, disbursed across the rural area including Prime Agricultural lands and Natural Areas. Proposed policy directions intended to support a thriving Rural System include: • Creation of a Rural Lands Designation consistent with the rural lands classification in Provincial Plans, and will comprise lands with lesser quality soils, areas without environmentally significant features, and permitted non-agricultural uses such as golf courses and cemeteries; • Permitting a full range of agricultural, agriculture-related and on-farm diversified uses in accordance with the provincial Guidelines on Permitted Uses in Ontario’s Prime Agricultural Areas; • Updating the ROP to ensure policies related to the Duffins-Rouge Agricultural Preserve reflect those contained in the Central Pickering Development Plan and the Pickering Official Plan; - 72 - Report PLN 29-21 June 7, 2021 Subject: The Municipal Comprehensive Review Page 15 of the Durham Regional Official Plan • Adding the Rouge National Urban Park as a Special Policy Area and referring to the Park’s Management Plan and for adjacent land uses to have consideration for this plan; • Continuing to prohibit the creation of parcels of land for agricultural uses of less than 40 hectares; and • Requiring the rehabilitation of Aggregate Resource Extraction Areas back to an agricultural condition for sites in Prime Agricultural Areas, and incorporating relevant Greenbelt Plan rehabilitation policies. Further, the Region is currently reviewing the Provincial Agricultural System, which comprises the agricultural land base and agri-food network. The Provincial Agricultural System mapping will be refined through 2021 for inclusion in the draft ROP. Area Municipal staff will be consulted in this review. City staff generally support the proposed policy directions for the Thriving Rural System. Building on these directions, the following key comments are provided: • Access to fast and reliable fiber optic services has not only become a critical ingredient to sustainable farming and the ability of farmers to adapt, diversify and modernize their farming operations, but has proven to be an essential service for rural communities who, through the impacts of COVID-19 measures, have been forced to rely more on Internet services. Accordingly, staff recommend that the Region expand the goals and directions with regard to the Agricultural/Rural System in Durham to support the provision of reliable Internet services to the rural area; and • Through the adoption of Official Plan Amendment 27 to the Pickering Official Plan in 2017, the City included mapping of High Potential Aggregate Resources within the rural settlement of Barclay Estates, at the insistence of the Province, even though the resource had been extracted and the license removed. Staff request that the designation of High Potential Aggregate Resource Areas on lands within the limits of Settlement Areas (e.g., Barclay Estates) be removed. 3.6 Protected Greenlands System The current Greenlands System comprises approximately 40 percent of the region’s land base and weaves through both the Urban and Rural Systems. This system contains areas with the highest concentrations of sensitive and/or significant natural features and functions, agricultural and rural lands. Land use designations that currently comprise the Greenlands System in the ROP include: Major Open Space Areas; Oak Ridges Moraine Areas; Waterfront Areas (along the Lake Ontario Waterfront); Open Space Linkages; and Waterfront Links. In Pickering, the Greenlands System is reflected in the Major Open Space Areas, primarily consisting of: valleylands, and natural heritage and hydrologic features, and areas associated with the various creeks that flow from the Oak Ridges Moraine and the rural lands in north Pickering; the Oak Ridges Moraine lands in the north; an Open Space Linkage north of Finch Avenue, generally between Scarborough-Pickering Townline and Whites Road; and Waterfront Areas along the Lake Ontario shoreline, including a - 73 - Report PLN 29-21 June 7, 2021 Subject: The Municipal Comprehensive Review Page 16 of the Durham Regional Official Plan Waterfront Link which abuts the north perimeter of the Pickering Nuclear Generating Station. The Greenlands System designations in the ROP are being examined and will be updated by the Region to implement provincial direction to establish a regional natural heritage system as well as a new rural lands designation. Proposed Policy Directions in support of a Protected Greenlands System include: • Establishing a systems-based Regional Natural Heritage System which will function as an overlay to the underlying land use designation (the current ROP employs a features-based approach to protect the Natural Heritage System); • Recognizing Indigenous Traditional Ecological Knowledge in understanding sites and ecological features and in assessing cumulative impacts; • Establishing a water resources system that includes ground and surface water features and areas; • Ensuring conservation authorities, area municipalities, and other stakeholders consider climate change and the effects of severe weather events and cross- watershed impacts while preparing and updating watershed plans; • Implementing policies and mapping to conform with Source Protection Plans; • Adding policies to the ROP which encourage ecosystem compensation as a last resort, only where mitigation and avoidance are not possible; and • Requiring new development and redevelopment to incorporate native and drought tolerant vegetation. City staff are generally supportive of the Proposed Policy Directions for a Protected Greenlands System. It should be noted that the City has already revised its Official Plan through Official Plan Amendment (OPA) 36 to bring it into conformity with the Credit Valley, Toronto and Region and Central Lake Conservation Authority Source Protection Plan, and is in the process of establishing and implementing ecosystem compensation policies through proposed OPA 35. Staff provide the following recommendations as it relates to the Protected Greenlands System Proposed Policy Directions: • Staff support the proposed policy directions that Indigenous history and presence be considered in the design of communities and the review of development applications. However, it should be acknowledged that enhanced resources will likely be required by Indigenous Peoples to enable the sharing of Traditional Ecological Knowledge. Accordingly, staff recommend that the Region consider requesting the Province to make resources available to Indigenous Peoples to facilitate the sharing of Traditional Ecological Knowledge; and • The Provincial Policy Statement and Provincial Plans indicates that municipalities and planning authorities shall consult with Indigenous communities on planning matters. Staff recommend that the Region, through coordinated relationship-building and consultation with Indigenous communities, endeavor to provide guidance to local area municipalities in terms of establishing appropriate engagement processes to facilitate input on land use planning matters. - 74 - Report PLN 29-21 June 7, 2021 Subject: The Municipal Comprehensive Review Page 17 of the Durham Regional Official Plan Durham Region is currently developing a Regional Natural Heritage System (NHS), in consultation with the Envision Durham consulting team, Conservation Authorities, and the Area Municipal Working Group. Through this consultation, staff have provided input into the proposed criteria for mapping of significant woodlands and valleylands, as well as the draft NHS mapping. Systems-based ROP mapping will be developed and refined through 2021 for inclusion in the draft ROP. 3.7 Connected Transportation System The Region's Transportation System is designed to facilitate the efficient movement of people and goods. Proposed Policy Directions for a Connected Transportation System include: • Incorporating Transit Oriented Development (TOD) strategies as part of the development approvals process within Strategic Growth Areas connected by Higher Order Transit corridors; • Ensuring that the transportation network is designed and planned to support sustainable and multi-modal transportation options of walking, cycling, the use of transit, and supports mixed-use development; • Providing for transit-supportive urban design and an improved active transportation network, so that 80 percent of residents and workers in the urban area are within 400 metres or a 5-minute walk to the nearest transit stop; • Including the Primary Cycling Network and Regional Trail Network as part of the Regional Transportation System; • Leveraging the Vision Zero Strategic Road Safety Action Plan through the design of facilities to support active transportation, control traffic speeds, and promote safe and attractive environments for pedestrians and cyclists; and, • Ensuring the transportation and road network is designed and planned to support sustainable and multi-modal transportation options of walking, cycling and use of transit. City staff are generally in support of the Proposed Policy Directions for a Connected Transportation System. These directions are aligned with the City’s draft Integrated Transportation Master Plan for which a notice of study completion has been issued. The City has previously provided comments on the Proposed Policy Directions for Major Transit Station Areas through PLN 10-21. These policies are advancing separately and concurrently to the MCR. 3.8 Supporting Sections In addition to the core policy areas, the new ROP will contain supporting components, consisting of: • Introductory contextual information such as the history of the Region, the purpose of the plan, and how to read the plan; • A new component honouring and acknowledging Indigenous populations as well as clarifying that the Mississauga’s of Scugog Island First Nation, as well as lands owned - 75 - Report PLN 29-21 June 7, 2021 Subject: The Municipal Comprehensive Review Page 18 of the Durham Regional Official Plan by the Provincial and Federal Governments are not subject to the policies of the Regional Official Plan; • A glossary and index to help readers navigate the document; • Updated mapping which considers accessibility, including the use of an online mapping portal; • Inclusion of policy direction that allows the Region to release supplemental information and/or guidelines to support implementation of the Plan; • Inclusion of public consultation and engagement policies; and • Inclusion of broader policies related to review and monitoring, which incorporate the potential for establishment/monitoring of broader key performance indicators to ensure that the intent of the Plan is being met. City staff are generally supportive of the proposed policy directions pertaining to supporting sections of the ROP. 4. Summary Overall, staff are generally in support of the proposed policy directions outlined in the Proposed Policy Directions Report and the recommendations contained within the Growth Opportunities and Challenges Report. Envision Durham is anticipated to deliver a new forward-looking official plan that will guide growth and change in Durham in the years ahead – providing the blueprint for Durham to become known as the place to live, learn and thrive by 2051. Following these commenting/submission periods, the proposed policy directions will be reviewed based on feedback received through the consultation process and will form the basis for the Region’s new Official Plan’s draft policies. Planning staff currently serve on the Envision Durham Municipal Working Group and continue to provide staff-to-staff feedback on the various policy matters that are brought forward for discussion as part of the Region’s Municipal Comprehensive Review process. The City will have further opportunity to review and comment on the proposed draft policies prior to approval of the new Regional Official Plan. Despite the continuously changing provincial policy landscape and disruptions caused by COVID-19, the Region has advised that they will be making every effort to meet the Growth Plan requirement deadline of July 1, 2022 for completion of Envision Durham. Attachments: 1. Map of Urban Area Boundary Expansion Requests – Ajax and Pickering - Excerpt from the Envision Durham Policy Directions Report 2. Pickering Council Resolution #140/19 3. Pickering Council Resolution #173/19 4. Report of the Regional Commissioner of Planning and Economic Development 2020-P-7 and Envision Durham Proposed Policy Directions Report, March 2021 - 76 - Report PLN 29-21 June 7, 2021 Subject: The Municipal Comprehensive Review Page 19 of the Durham Regional Official Plan Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Original Signed By Original Signed By Kristy Kilbourne, MCIP, RPP Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner, Policy Chief Planner Original Signed By Original Signed By Déan Jacobs, MCIP, RPP Kyle Bentley, P. Eng. Manager, Policy & Geomatics Director, City Development & CBO KK:DJ:ld Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Original Signed By Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer - 77 - Attachment #1 to Report #PLN 29-21 Town  of Ajax City of Pickering Lake Ridge RoadBrockRoadTaunton Road W WestneyRoad N Taunton Road E SalemRoadNTaunton Road Ninth Concession Road Altona RoadLake Ridge Road NWhites RoadBER-05 BER-13 BER-12 BER-14 BER-16 BER-21 BER-23 031.5 Km Requests for Boundary Expansion – Ajax and Pickering Legend Regional Official Plan, Schedule 'A' composite, 2017 consolidation. This map has been produced from a variety of sources. The Region of Durham does not make any representations concerning the accuracy, likely results, or reliability of the use of the materials. The Region hereby disclaims all representations and warranties. Digital cartography by The Regional Municipality of Durham, Planning and Economic Development Department, 2019. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced without permission. Data Sources and Disclaimer A Prime Agricultural Areas Living Areas Specific Study Area 'A'AAA Major Open Space Areas Employment Areas Urban Area Boundary Municipal BoundaryWaterfront Areas Regional Corridors Regional Centres Lands Subject to BoundaryExpansion Request - 78 - Attachment #2 to Report #PLN 29-21 Council Decision Resolution #140/19 WHEREAS, the City of Pickering is projected to be a driving force for residential and economic growth in Durham Region and the GTA over the next 2 decades; And Whereas, by the year 2031 the estimated population of Pickering will grow to 190,000; And Whereas, the lack of affordable and sustainable housing options have reached a crisis in parts of Canada, and in particular the Greater Toronto area; And Whereas, the City of Pickering recognizes that there is an urgent need to create an age friendly housing strategy that includes reviewing and redefining its urban/living boundaries consistent with current and future growth within the GTA, Durham, and City of Pickering beyond 2031; And Whereas, the City of Pickering considers all serviceable lands with access to water and sewer within its current and potential urban/living boundaries be considered as a living area; And Whereas, the Province of Ontario has recognized the need for more housing choices and more affordability; And Whereas, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing has produced its “More Homes, More Choice: Ontario’s Housing Supply Action Plan”, and has given royal assent to Bill 108 (More Homes, More Choice Act, 2019) to address housing supply, housing variety and affordability; And Whereas, the City of Pickering has commenced a Strategic Plan Review that includes redefining its urban/living boundaries; And Whereas, the Provincial Government amended the Growth Plan to permit some additional options for urban area boundary expansions, and to allow upper and single- tier municipalities to request alternative intensification targets to address, among other matters, greater housing supply, and affordability; And Whereas, proposed amendments to the Provincial Policy Statement will allow consideration of market demands and needs in determining housing options, as a strategy to provide a more diverse range of grade related homes; And Whereas, the Region of Durham is currently undertaking a municipal comprehensive review of its settlement areas, including a land needs assessment as required by the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe; And Whereas, on February 27, 2019, Durham Regional Council commented on Amendment 1 to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe 2017 in support of a minimum density of 50 persons and jobs per gross hectare for new greenfield developments, and a region-wide intensification target of a minimum 45% within the existing built boundary; - 79 - Council Decision Resolution #140/19 And Whereas, the City of Pickering supports the Region’s comments on Amendment 1 to the Growth Plan; Now therefore be it resolved that the Council of the Corporation for the City of Pickering request that the Region of Durham in their review include: 1. All lands within the City of Pickering meet the following criteria: • Lands not restricted by availability of servicing • Lands that do not comprise a Specialty Crop Area • Lands that are not within a Natural Heritage System • Lands not located in the Moraine Natural Core and Linkage Areas • Lands experiencing growth pressures and or with locations in the white belt that are appropriate for growth and can achieve a healthy, connected, thriving and complete community • Lands that have existing or planned infrastructure to support and accommodate growth 2. That the Region of Durham be requested to seek approval of the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing to an alternate intensification rate of 45% for Durham Region that will enable greater flexibility to provide a more diverse range of grade related housing mix; 3. That City staff be directed to report back to Planning & Development Committee in the first quarter of 2020 outlining a process to develop an age friendly housing strategy, including changes to Pickering’s Official Plan and any required secondary plan reviews of those lands in Pickering that meet the stated criteria of recommendation #1; and, 4. That a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Premier of Ontario, Durham Region MPPs, all Durham Regional Municipalities, and the Region of Durham. - 80 - Attachment #3 to Report #PLN 29-21 Council Decision Resolution #173/19 WHEREAS, at the September 23, 2019 Council meeting, the City of Pickering adopted Resolution #140/19 “An Age Friendly Affordable Housing Strategy”; And Whereas, included in this Resolution was a request for Durham Region to include in their Municipal Comprehensive Review all lands within the City of Pickering that meet the following criteria: • lands not restricted by availability of servicing • lands that do not compromise a specialty crop area • lands that are not within a natural heritage system • lands not located in the moraine natural core and linkage areas • lands experiencing growth pressures and/or with locations in the white belt that are appropriate for growth and can achieve a healthy, connected, thriving and complete community • lands that have existing or planned infrastructure to support and accommodate growth; And Whereas, at the Planning and Development Committee meeting of November 4, 2019, the Community of Veraine presentation was made to the City of Pickering, being a new community proposed for northeast Pickering based on thriving, connected and complete community principles that comprise inclusivity and affordability; And Whereas, among other things Veraine provides an opportunity that can address the need for age friendly, affordable housing options for future generations for decades to come; Now therefore be it resolved that the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering: 1. Supports the Vision and Community Planning Principles for the lands in northeast Pickering known as Veraine, and reaffirms its request that the Region of Durham include these lands in the settlement area boundary during its current Municipal Comprehensive Review; 2. That City Staff be directed to report back to Committee in Q1 2020 outlining a process to initiate a secondary plan for the new community of Veraine based on the Community Planning Principles in Appendix 1 attached to this Motion; 3. That City Staff be directed through the CAO’s Office to discuss with the landowners an arrangement for a dedicated team that will work on the Veraine file, without impacting other priorities of the City of Pickering; and, 4. That a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Region of Durham. - 81 - Attachment #4 to Report #PLN 29-21 If this information is required in an accessible format, please contact 1-800-372-1102 ext. 2564 The Regional Municipality of Durham Report To: Planning and Economic Development Committee From: Commissioner of Planning and Economic Development Report: #2021-P-7 Date: March 2, 2021 Subject: Envision Durham – Proposed Policy Directions, File: D12-01 Recommendation: That the Planning and Economic Development Committee recommends: That this report be received for information. Report: 1.Purpose 1.1 The purpose of this report is to advise Committee members that Proposed Policy Directions, contained in Attachment #1, are being released for public and agency comment. These policy directions are a key component of Envision Durham, the Municipal Comprehensive Review (MCR) of the Regional Official Plan (ROP). 1.2 Comments on the Proposed Policy Directions are being requested by June 30, 2021, a 120-day (four month) submission window. 1.3 In addition, submissions for new and/or amended requests for Settlement Area Boundary Expansion are requested by May 31, 2021, a 90-day submission window. - 82 - Report #2021-P-7 Page 2 of 10 2. Previous Reports and Decisions 2.1 Envision Durham is a multi-year project that received authorization to proceed in May 2018, see Report #2018-COW-93. This project has been the subject of several reports to Council. Recent activities have included: a. Developing and reporting upon the Employment Area conversion criteria and submission process (see Reports #2020-P-11 and #2020-INFO-94); b. Commenting on Amendment 1 to A Place to Grow (Growth Plan), which updated population and employment forecasts for Durham to 2051 (see Reports #2020-P-14 and #2020-INFO-83); c. Establishing a new framework, with a streamlined structure and approach to support a new and compelling ROP (see Report #2020-P-24); and d. Examining and preparing proposed policy directions and delineations for existing and future Major Transit Station Areas, to be provided as a standalone amendment (see Report #2020-P-27). 3. Background 3.1 Envision Durham is currently in Stage 3 (“Direct”). The attached Proposed Policy Directions were developed and informed based on best practice reviews, research, public engagement and feedback received during Stages 1 (“Discover”) and 2 (“Discuss”) of the Envision Durham process. They are also intended to respond to submissions received through Stage 2, a summary of which can be found at durham.ca/EnvisionDurhamSubmissions. 3.2 These Proposed Policy Directions present potential changes to land use planning policies, and public input is being requested. The proposed directions are not intended to be exhaustive but introduce certain directions where further input is being sought before draft policies are introduced within a proposed new ROP. 3.3 As a key component of Envision Durham, a Growth Management Study (GMS) is being completed in two phases. The first phase of the GMS focuses on the completion of a Land Needs Assessment (LNA). The LNA is a comprehensive review and calculation of the Region’s land base, including existing urban areas, to determine how the Growth Plan population and employment forecasts can be accommodated and how much, if any, additional urban land is required. The second phase of the GMS, if required, will focus on determining the most appropriate location for Urban Boundary Expansions. - 83 - Report #2021-P-7 Page 3 of 10 3.4 Attachment #2 to this report provides a Growth Opportunities and Challenges Report prepared by the Region’s consultants. This report serves as a starting point for the LNA and related technical studies and provides essential context; discusses impacts from broader demographic and economic trends, local growth and development trends; and describes other factors that affect growth. The Growth Opportunities and Challenges Report includes several recommendations that will carry forward into the LNA and help shape the overall outcome of the GMS. 4.Overview of Proposed Policy Directions 4.1 Based on the framework endorsed by Regional Council in November 2020, the proposed policy directions provide an indication of how the new ROP will be structured around chapters that represent seven balanced, aspirational, outcome-oriented Strategic Directions, reflective of the region’s diverse characteristics: a.Prosperous Economy;b.Healthy Communities;c.Supportive Infrastructure;d.Vibrant Urban System;e.Thriving Rural System;f.Protected Greenlands System; andg.Connected Transportation System. 4.2 Each Strategic Direction describes a series of policy topics, discusses comments where received and introduces proposed policy direction(s), where applicable. 4.3 Global events, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, underscore the importance of planning and preparing for a resilient, prosperous economy at the regional scale. To date, the economic disruption of COVID-19 has been severe, while the longer-term sustained economic impact worldwide, and more specifically within Durham, is largely unknown. 4.4 The impacts of COVID-19, resulting primarily from travel restrictions and economic disruption, are anticipated to have a negative impact on near term labour force growth and keep near-term (i.e. 2020 and 2021) immigration levels across Canada, including in Durham, below recent historical averages. On the other hand, the Oshawa CMA had the highest rate of population growth in 2020, Canada-wide. While the Region has limited control over its ability to influence these macro-economic and policy factors, the Region does have the ability to recognize emerging trends. As a result, staff will continue to closely monitor the impacts of - 84 - Report #2021-P-7 Page 4 of 10 COVID-19 on near-term and long-term population and employment growth across the GGH and Durham. 4.5 To solicit feedback on the Proposed Policy Directions, an online survey was developed to help facilitate input. Each proposed policy direction has been highlighted by report section, with a corresponding “poll” survey at durham.ca/EnvisionDurhamDirections. Specific comments can also be provided directly into the survey for each proposed direction. Prosperous Economy 4.6 Economic development objectives evolve over time with changes in broader economic trends, regional growth, and in response to changing local priorities and issues. Proposed policy directions that are intended to support a prosperous economy include: a.Determining and implementing an appropriate supply of Employment Areaswith access to municipal water and sewage services;b. Supporting balanced population and employment growth and thediversification of the region’s employment base;c.Supporting collaboration with educational institutions and the businesscommunity in programs that create and maintain a highly skilled regionallabour force;d. Supporting the agricultural and agri-food sector, including new opportunitiesfor agri-tourism, on farm diversified uses and the diversification of agriculturaloperations; ande. Recognizing the importance of, and encouraging the expansion of leading-edge technologies, including high-speed broadband infrastructure. Healthy Communities 4.7 The built environment has a direct effect on our health. Establishing and implementing policies that shape the development of healthy communities that address quality of life, health, safety, convenience and well-being of present and future residents is one of the primary functions of an official plan. 4.8 Proposed policy directions intended to foster healthy communities include: a.Introducing a greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction target in the newROP so as to achieve net-zero as an aspirational objective; - 85 - Report #2021-P-7 Page 5 of 10 b. Encouraging and supporting climate resilient development, redevelopment and retrofits; c. Encouraging community hubs in transit-supportive locations where existing cultural and community services and facilities exist, especially within Strategic Growth Areas; d. Collaborating with area municipalities on developing age-friendly design guidelines; e. Completing a Regional Housing Assessment Report to enable the Region’s area municipalities to undertake Inclusionary Zoning within their respective jurisdictions; and f. Establishing a new affordable housing target of at least 35 per cent of new housing within Strategic Growth Areas. Supportive Infrastructure 4.9 Ensuring supportive municipal infrastructure is in place (or will be in place for future needs) and maintained on a regular basis is essential for a growing, economically competitive region. Proposed policy directions intended for supportive infrastructure include: a. Encouraging stormwater management practices supporting low impact development (LID) and sustainable urban design within the public realm; b. Recognizing energy conservation and efficiency measures, and renewable and alternative energy systems as critical to reducing greenhouse gas emissions; c. Adapting and building resiliency to the impacts of climate change; and d. Permitting and promoting alternative energy systems and renewable energy systems in accordance with provincial and federal requirements, while prohibiting large-scale commercial renewable energy facilities in Prime Agricultural Areas and critical environmental areas. Vibrant Urban System 4.10 The Urban System is comprised of lands within the Region’s Urban Area Boundary, designated to accommodate the vast majority of the region’s forecasted population and employment growth. The Urban System is intended to comprise distinct Urban Areas, functioning as healthy and complete communities, and guided by policies that aim to separate incompatible uses, provide for focal points, concentrations of urban activities and essential connections. - 86 - Report #2021-P-7 Page 6 of 10 4.11 Additional policy directions for the Urban System and finalization of those proposed will be released as the various phases of the GMS are completed. 4.12 Some of the proposed policy directions that would foster a vibrant Urban System, as contained with Attachment #1, include: a. Reviewing and refining existing Regional Centres against the density targets and planned function as described in ROP policy, in consultation with area municipal staff; b. Designating and delineating Regional Centres in Beaverton, Cannington, Sunderland, Uxbridge and Port Perry as “Rural Regional Centres” in recognition of their role as unique places and their historic function; c. Designating Highway 2 from the Toronto/Durham border easterly to Highway 418 in Clarington, and Simcoe Street from Gibb Street in downtown Oshawa to Highway 407 as “Rapid Transit Spine Intensification Corridors”, signaling their status as Strategic Growth Areas with densities, built form and a mix of uses that will support Light Rail Transit in the long term; d. Allowing Places of Worship within Employment Areas subject to meeting criteria including land use compatibility; and e. Encouraging the redevelopment of brownfield sites and greyfield sites and prioritize the redevelopment of brownfield and greyfield sites within Strategic Growth Areas and other intensification areas. 4.13 If necessary, settlement area boundary expansions will be considered through the GMS (Phase 2), after the completion of the LNA, that will determine the amount of urban land required to accommodate the 2051 growth forecasts. 4.14 To inform this work, a 90-day submission window for new and/or amended requests for Settlement Area boundary expansions will allow proponents the opportunity to respond to or address the criteria identified within Settlement Area Boundary Expansion section of Attachment #1. 4.15 The final date to submit a Settlement Area boundary expansion request for consideration through Envision Durham will be May 31, 2021. All submissions and supporting information should be made directly via email to EnvisionDurham@durham.ca. Thriving Rural System 4.16 The current Rural System comprises 84 per cent of the region’s land base and houses approximately eight per cent of Durham’s population (54,000 residents). - 87 - Report #2021-P-7 Page 7 of 10 With almost 300,000 acres of Durham in production, agriculture is one of the largest primary goods producing sectors within the Region. Most of the rural area is planned for agricultural and open space uses, interspersed with rural settlements. Proposed policy directions intended to support a thriving Rural System include: a. Permitting a full range of agricultural, agriculture-related and on-farm diversified uses in accordance with the provincial Guidelines on Permitted Uses in Ontario’s Prime Agricultural Areas; b. Continuing to prohibit the creation of parcels of land for agricultural uses of less than 40 hectares; and c. Requiring the rehabilitation of Aggregate Resource Extraction Areas back to an agricultural condition for sites in Prime Agricultural Areas and incorporating relevant Greenbelt Plan rehabilitation policies. 4.17 The Region is currently reviewing the provincial Agricultural System, comprised of the agricultural land base and agri-food network. Systems-based ROP mapping will be developed and refined through 2021 for inclusion in the draft ROP. Protected Greenlands System 4.18 The current Greenlands System comprises approximately 40 per cent of the region’s land base – weaving through both the Urban and Rural Systems. It contains areas with the highest concentrations of sensitive and/or significant natural features and functions, agricultural and rural lands. Examples of proposed policy directions that would support a protected Greenlands System include: a. Recognizing Traditional Ecological Knowledge in understanding sites and ecological features and in assessing cumulative impacts; b. Establishing a water resources system that includes ground and surface water features and areas, the Lake Simcoe watershed boundary and former Lake Iroquois Shoreline; c. Ensuring conservation authorities, area municipalities and other stakeholders consider climate change and the effects of severe weather events and cross-watershed impacts while preparing and updating watershed plans; d. Seeking to reduce stormwater runoff volume and pollutant loadings within Designated Urban Areas in the Lake Simcoe watershed, in accordance with the Lake Simcoe Protection Plan; and e. Requiring new development and redevelopment to incorporate native and drought tolerant vegetation. - 88 - Report #2021-P-7 Page 8 of 10 4.19 The Provincial Policy Statement, 2020, requires the establishment of a Natural Heritage System (NHS) that includes key natural heritage features and areas, and the connections between them. In addition to satisfying provincial conformity requirements, a systems-based approach reflects best practices in natural heritage planning because it recognizes the critical role that linkages between features play in establishing and maintaining ecological integrity. 4.20 Staff are currently developing a Regional NHS, in consultation with the Envision Durham Conservation Authority and Area Municipal Working Groups. Systems-based ROP mapping will be developed and refined through 2021 for inclusion in the draft ROP. Connected Transportation System 4.21 The Region's Transportation System is designed to move people and goods. Proposed policy directions for a connected Transportation System include: a. Incorporating Transit Oriented Development (TOD) strategies as part of the development approvals process within Strategic Growth Areas connected by Higher Order Transit corridors; b. Ensuring that the transportation network is designed and planned to support sustainable and multi-modal transportation options of walking, cycling and the use of transit and supports mixed-use development; c. Providing for transit-supportive urban design and an improved active transportation network, so that 80 per cent of residents and workers in the urban area are within 400 metres or a five-minute walk to the nearest transit stop; d. Including the Primary Cycling Network and Regional Trail Network as part of the Regional Transportation System; e. Leveraging the Vision Zero Strategic Road Safety Action Plan through the design of facilities to support active transportation, control traffic speeds and promote safe and attractive environments for pedestrians and cyclists; f. Establishing a new Schedule showing future right-of-way (ROW) width requirements for all arterial roads under regional and area municipal jurisdiction; and g. Ensuring the transportation and road network is designed and planned to support sustainable and multi-modal transportation options of walking, cycling and use of transit. - 89 - Report #2021-P-7 Page 9 of 10 5. Relationship to Strategic Plan 5.1 This report aligns with/addresses all the strategic goals and priorities in the Durham Region Strategic Plan. 6. Summary 6.1 The Proposed Policy Directions were prepared by Regional planning staff in consultation with Regional staff from the Office of the CAO, Legal, Works, Finance, Health, Durham Region Transit, Social Services – Housing Services, and Economic Development and Tourism. 6.2 Regional staff continue to meet with and receive input from the Envision Durham Conservation Authority and Area Municipal Working Groups. Feedback from these Working Groups helped to inform the proposed policy directions. 6.3 Comments on the Proposed Policy Directions are requested by June 30, 2021, a 120-day submission window. The online survey will be closed to submissions immediately following this date. 6.4 Submissions for new and/or amended requests for Settlement Area boundary expansion are requested by May 31, 2021, a 90-day submission window. Submissions should have regard for the criteria outlined in the Settlement Area Boundary Expansion section of the enclosed report and include mapping of the subject property and a description of the proposed land use and built form. Settlement Area boundary expansion requests should be made directly via email to EnvisionDurham@durham.ca. 6.5 Following these commenting/submission periods, the proposed policy directions will be reviewed based on feedback received through the consultation process and will form the basis for our new Official Plan’s draft policies. 7. Next Steps 7.1 The Proposed Policy Directions will be posted to the project web page at durham.ca/EnvisionDurham for public and agency input. Interested parties are encouraged to provide feedback using the online survey at durham.ca/EnvisionDurhamDirections. The Proposed Policy Directions and survey will be announced by way of: a. News releases and public service announcements; b. Social media platforms, including Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn; and - 90 - Report #2021-P-7 Page 10 of 10 c. Email notifications and report circulation, as detailed below. 7.2 A copy of this report, the Proposed Policy Directions and an invitation to complete the online survey will be forwarded to Durham’s area municipalities, Indigenous communities, conservation authorities, BILD – Durham Chapter, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, the Envision Durham Interested Parties List, as well as to any stakeholders that have already made Settlement Area boundary expansion requests and/or inquiries, for review and comment. 8. Attachments Attachment #1: Proposed Policy Directions Attachment #2: Growth Challenges and Opportunities Report, prepared by Urban Strategies Inc. and Watson & Associates Ltd. for the Region’s Growth Management Study Respectfully submitted, Original signed by Brian Bridgeman, MCIP, RPP Commissioner of Planning and Economic Development Recommended for Presentation to Committee Original signed by Elaine C. Baxter-Trahair Chief Administrative Officer - 91 - DURHAMENVISION Proposed Policy Directions March 2021 Durham Region Planning and Economic Development Department Report - 92 - These Proposed Policy Directions are published for public and agency comment as part of Envision Durham, the Municipal Comprehensive Review of the Regional Official Plan. Report contents and proposed directions do not necessarily represent the position of Regional Council on changes that may be considered to the Regional Official Plan. All information reported and/or collected through this report and related online survey will help inform and be used as part of the Municipal Comprehensive Review. Please provide your comments on these Proposed Policy Directions by June 30, 2021. - 93 - 1 | Envision Durham About Envision Durham Envision Durham, the Municipal Comprehensive Review (MCR) of the Regional Official Plan (ROP), is an opportunity to plan for fundamental change, by replacing the current ROP and establishing a progressive and forward-looking planning vision for the Region to 2051. The Region is undertaking Envision Durham to review: • How and where our cities and towns may grow. • How to use and protect our land and resources. • What housing types and job opportunities are needed for our residents. • How people and goods move within, across and beyond our region. We’re planning for an attractive place to live, work, play, grow and invest – and we’re asking for your help. Why review the Official Plan? The ROP guides decisions on long-term growth, infrastructure investment and development–providing policies to ensure an improved quality of life–to secure the health, safety, convenience and well-being of present and future residents of Durham. Under the Planning Act, there is a legislative requirement to review the current ROP every five years; whereas new official plans must be reviewed within 10 years of coming into effect. Since the approval of the last ROP update (January 2013), the Province of Ontario has completed several significant provincial policy initiatives, including a coordinated review and update of the following provincial plans: • The Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2017, which was replaced by A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe in May 2019, and further amended by Amendment 1 in August 2020. • The Greenbelt Plan, 2017. • The Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, 2017 (ORMCP). • Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 (PPS). The Planning Act requires the Region to complete a provincial plan conformity exercise to amend the ROP to ensure that it: • Conforms with provincial plans or does not conflict with them. • Has regard to matters of provincial interest. • Is consistent with Provincial Policy Statements. Envision Durham constitutes Durham’s provincial plan conformity exercise and its five-year review of the ROP within this broader MCR process, satisfying these legislative requirements. - 94 - Envision Durham | 2 How to get involved Public input is integral to the success of Envision Durham – we want to hear from you! Please use this opportunity to have your say about our future – tell us if we’re headed in the right direction on the key Proposed Policy Directions described throughout this document. Join the conversation by visiting durham.ca/EnvisionDurhamDirections to submit your comments directly online. To receive timely notifications on the Envision Durham process, please visit durham.ca/EnvisionDurham to subscribe for project updates - 95 - 3 | Envision Durham Table of Contents About Envision Durham………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..1 Why review the Official Plan? ........................................................................................................................ 1 Executive summary………………………………….......................................................................………………..…………….8 Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….10 Background ................................................................................................................................................... 10 Stage 1 – Discover ..................................................................................................................................... 10 Stage 2 – Discuss ....................................................................................................................................... 10 Outreach and Engagement: .................................................................................................................. 11 Stage 3 – Direct ......................................................................................................................................... 11 Policy Review Approach………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………13 Format of Report.………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………14 Proposed Policy Directions………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….15 Prosperous Economy .................................................................................................................................... 15 Goals for a Prosperous Economy .............................................................................................................. 16 Economic Development Policies .............................................................................................................. 16 Broadband Infrastructure ......................................................................................................................... 17 Pickering Federal Airport Lands ................................................................................................................ 18 Healthy Communities ................................................................................................................................... 20 Goals for Healthy Communities ................................................................................................................ 21 Sustainability ............................................................................................................................................ 21 Greenhouse Gas Reduction ...................................................................................................................... 22 Climate Resilient Development ................................................................................................................ 25 Air Quality ................................................................................................................................................. 27 Tree Canopy .............................................................................................................................................. 28 Complete Communities ............................................................................................................................ 29 Urban Agriculture ..................................................................................................................................... 31 Public Realm and Urban Design................................................................................................................ 32 Downtowns ............................................................................................................................................... 34 Community Hubs ...................................................................................................................................... 36 Age-Friendly Planning ............................................................................................................................... 37 Community Safety and Well-Being Planning ............................................................................................ 38 - 96 - Envision Durham | 4 Diverse Housing ........................................................................................................................................ 39 Supply of Land for Housing ....................................................................................................................... 40 Housing Mix: ......................................................................................................................................... 40 Housing Options ....................................................................................................................................... 41 Affordable Housing ................................................................................................................................... 43 Affordable Housing Definition: ............................................................................................................. 43 Affordable Housing Targets: ................................................................................................................. 44 Supporting Affordable Housing: ........................................................................................................... 45 Inclusionary Zoning ................................................................................................................................... 47 Secondary Units ........................................................................................................................................ 47 Microhomes .............................................................................................................................................. 49 Shared Living ............................................................................................................................................. 50 Adaptive Re-use ........................................................................................................................................ 51 Condominium Conversion and Demolition Control ................................................................................. 51 Short-term Rentals ................................................................................................................................... 53 Special Needs Housing .............................................................................................................................. 54 Supportive Infrastructure ............................................................................................................................. 56 Goals for Supportive Infrastructure .......................................................................................................... 56 Green Infrastructure ................................................................................................................................. 57 Waste Management ................................................................................................................................. 58 Telecommunications Infrastructure ......................................................................................................... 59 Energy ....................................................................................................................................................... 59 Vibrant Urban System................................................................................................................................... 62 Regional Growth Management Study ...................................................................................................... 64 Regional Population and Employment Forecasts ..................................................................................... 65 Goals for a Vibrant Urban System ............................................................................................................ 66 Delineated Built-Up Areas and Designated Greenfield Areas .................................................................. 68 Identifying and Planning for Strategic Growth Areas ............................................................................... 69 Centres: ................................................................................................................................................. 70 Major Transit Station Areas: ................................................................................................................. 72 Corridors: .............................................................................................................................................. 73 Waterfront Places: ................................................................................................................................ 75 Supporting Strategic Growth Areas: ..................................................................................................... 75 - 97 - 5 | Envision Durham Living Areas ............................................................................................................................................... 79 Central Pickering Development Plan Area ............................................................................................... 79 Updated Targets and Measuring Density ................................................................................................. 80 Planning for Employment ......................................................................................................................... 83 Employment Areas: .............................................................................................................................. 83 Employment Related Policies: .............................................................................................................. 87 Certain Sensitive Land Uses in Employment Areas: ............................................................................. 88 Land Use Compatibility: ........................................................................................................................ 88 “Mixed Use Employment Areas”: ......................................................................................................... 89 Employment Area Conversion: ............................................................................................................. 91 Brownfields and Site Contamination ........................................................................................................ 92 Settlement Area Boundary Expansion ...................................................................................................... 92 Secondary Plan Considerations ................................................................................................................ 95 Thriving Rural System ................................................................................................................................... 97 Goals for a Thriving Rural System ............................................................................................................. 99 Provincial Agricultural System .................................................................................................................. 99 Rural System ........................................................................................................................................... 100 Cemeteries .............................................................................................................................................. 101 Minimum Distance Separation ............................................................................................................... 102 Rural Settlements ................................................................................................................................... 103 Edge Planning ......................................................................................................................................... 103 Specific Policy Areas ............................................................................................................................... 104 Cannabis Cultivation and Processing ...................................................................................................... 105 Rural Lot Creation ................................................................................................................................... 107 Secondary Dwellings for Farm Help: .................................................................................................. 108 On-Farm Diversified Uses: .................................................................................................................. 108 Parcels for Agricultural Uses: .............................................................................................................. 109 Abutting Surplus Farm Dwellings: ...................................................................................................... 109 Non-Abutting Surplus Farm Dwellings: .............................................................................................. 110 Regional Nodes ....................................................................................................................................... 111 Aggregate Resource Extraction Areas .................................................................................................... 111 Protected Greenlands System .................................................................................................................... 114 - 98 - Envision Durham | 6 Goals for a Protected Greenlands System .............................................................................................. 116 Traditional Ecological Knowledge ........................................................................................................... 116 Natural Heritage System ......................................................................................................................... 117 Open Space Linkages and Waterfront Links ........................................................................................... 119 Key Natural Heritage and Key Hydrologic Features ............................................................................... 120 Vegetation Protection Zones .................................................................................................................. 122 Water Resources .................................................................................................................................... 123 Identifying a Water Resources System: .............................................................................................. 123 Watershed Planning: .......................................................................................................................... 124 Lake Simcoe Protection Plan .................................................................................................................. 125 Source Protection ................................................................................................................................... 126 Natural Hazards ...................................................................................................................................... 129 Shoreline Hazards: .............................................................................................................................. 129 Wildland Fire ........................................................................................................................................... 129 Open Space Areas and Greenbelt Urban River Valleys .......................................................................... 130 Oak Ridges Moraine Areas ..................................................................................................................... 132 Waterfront Areas .................................................................................................................................... 132 Tourist Activity/Recreation Nodes ......................................................................................................... 133 Environmental Stewardship ................................................................................................................... 133 Ecosystem Compensation....................................................................................................................... 135 Invasive Species Management ............................................................................................................... 136 Excess Soil Management ........................................................................................................................ 137 Septage ................................................................................................................................................... 139 Environmental Noise .............................................................................................................................. 140 Environmental Assessments ................................................................................................................... 140 Connected Transportation System ............................................................................................................. 142 Goals for a Connected Transportation System ....................................................................................... 143 Transit Oriented Development ............................................................................................................... 144 Transit Oriented Development in MTSAs: .......................................................................................... 147 Transit Oriented Development in SGAs: ............................................................................................. 147 Transit-Supportive Development: ...................................................................................................... 148 Commuter Stations ................................................................................................................................. 148 Active Transportation ............................................................................................................................. 151 - 99 - 7 | Envision Durham General Policies for Active Transportation: ........................................................................................ 152 Active Transportation within a Connected Transportation System: .................................................. 153 Active Transportation within a Vibrant Urban System: ...................................................................... 154 Active Transportation within Healthy Communities: ......................................................................... 154 Active Transportation within Supportive Infrastructure: ................................................................... 154 Active Transportation within a Protected Greenlands System: ......................................................... 154 Transportation Demand Management ................................................................................................... 155 Arterial Right-of-Way Protection ............................................................................................................ 157 Multi-Modal Level of Service .................................................................................................................. 159 Additional Provincial Conformity Considerations .................................................................................. 160 Other Transportation-Related Policy Reviews ....................................................................................... 161 Freight and Goods Movement: ........................................................................................................... 161 Environmental Assessments for Arterial Roads: ................................................................................ 162 Emerging Technologies: ...................................................................................................................... 163 Supporting Sections .................................................................................................................................... 165 Introductory Components ...................................................................................................................... 165 Honouring and acknowledging Indigenous Populations within the region ........................................... 165 Indigenous Territory Acknowledgement: ........................................................................................... 165 Mississaugas of Scugog Island First Nation: ....................................................................................... 166 Supporting Implementation of the Plan ................................................................................................. 166 Public Consultation and Engagement ..................................................................................................... 167 Review and Monitoring .......................................................................................................................... 168 How to provide feedback………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….169 Next steps…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………170 Appendix A: Glossary of Proposed New/Amended Terms…………………………………………………………………………171 Appendix B: Requests for Employment Area Conversion………………………………………………………………………….178 Appendix C: Settlement Area Boundary Expansion – Evaluation Criteria………………………………………………….196 Appendix D: Requests for Boundary Expansion………………………………………………………………………………………..204 - 100 - Envision Durham | 8 Executive summary The Region is entering a period of significant growth and change. By 2051, the Region is forecast to accommodate a population of 1.3 million residents, and 460,000 jobs. This represents nearly a doubling of the Region's 2020 population of approximately 705,000, and a more than doubling of the Region's approximately 210,000 jobs. Envision Durham’s Proposed Policy Directions present potential changes to land use planning policies intended to support this period of change with directions that respond to: • heightening expectations to address climate change by embracing a low- carbon pathway to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, particularly within the transportation and building sectors; • growing demands to improve mobility options by emphasizing increased opportunities for active transportation and transit availability; • focusing intensification within strategic growth areas, including along corridors and the areas surrounding existing and planned GO Stations; • establishing a systems-based approach to promote the continued protection of the natural environment; • planning approaches that further support the region’s Agricultural System, agri- food network, and an increasingly diversifying agricultural sector; and • facilitating the development of high- quality job opportunities by supporting collaboration with educational institutions, the business community, service providers, and governments at all levels. The Proposed Policy Directions are not intended to be exhaustive, but introduce over 250 directions where further input is being sought before draft policies are introduced within a proposed new Regional Official Plan (ROP). This report is structured around the new ROP framework, endorsed by Regional Council in November 2020, that reflects seven balanced, aspirational, outcome-oriented Strategic Directions: • Prosperous Economy; • Healthy Communities; • Supportive Infrastructure; • Vibrant Urban System; • Thriving Rural System; • Protected Greenlands System; and • Connected Transportation System. Each Strategic Direction describes a series of policy topics, discusses comments where received and introduces proposed policy direction(s), where applicable. To solicit feedback on the Proposed Policy Directions, an online survey was developed to help facilitate input. Each proposed policy direction has been highlighted by report section, with a corresponding “poll” survey at durham.ca/EnvisionDurhamDirections. Specific comments can also be provided directly into the survey for each proposed direction. Comments on these Proposed Policy Directions are requested by June 30, 2021. - 101 - 9 | Envision Durham Following this 120-day submission window, the proposed directions will be reviewed based on feedback received through the consultation process and will form the basis for a new forward-looking ROP that will guide growth and change in Durham in the years ahead – providing the blueprint for Durham to become known as the place to live, learn and thrive by 2051. - 102 - Envision Durham | 10 Introduction The purpose of this report is to introduce proposed policy directions for public review and input. Informed by best practice reviews, research, public engagement and feedback received during Stages 1 and 2 of the Envision Durham process, this report responds to submissions received through the Stage 2 Discussion Papers. It also outlines how to provide feedback on the proposed policy directions. Input received on these proposals will inform the development of draft policies for the new Regional Official Plan. Background Envision Durham was authorized by Regional Council to proceed in May 2018 (Report #2018-COW-93). The multi-year project has been taking place in four stages, as follows: • Stage 1 – Discover • Stage 2 – Discuss • Stage 3 – Direct • Stage 4 – Draft Each stage provides an opportunity to share information, solicit input, and to re-engage the public and interested parties. Stage 1 – Discover In February 2019, the first stage (“Discover”) commenced, with a public engagement program launched with an online project hub (durham.ca/EnvisionDurham). A public opinion survey (Report #2019-P-4) was released, posing a series of questions on a variety of planning and development topics across the region. Stage 2 – Discuss Over 2019, the second stage (“Discuss”) was advanced. Six theme-based discussion papers were prepared and released, each of which provided background information and posed separate questions on specific topics: • Agriculture and Rural System – released March 5, 2019 (Report #2019-P-12) • Climate Change and Sustainability – released May 7, 2019 (Report #2019-P- 26) • Growth Management: The Urban System – released June 4, 2019 (Report #2019-P- 31) • Environment and Greenlands System – released September 3, 2019 (Report #2019-P-39) • Transportation System – released October 1, 2019 (Report #2019-P-41) • Housing Policy Planning – released December 3, 2019 (Report #2019-P-47) These Discussion Papers included background information that informed the discussion and analysis within this report. Readers are encouraged to refer to respective Discussion Papers for additional information and policy context when reviewing the proposed policy directions. Also, in 2019, professional consulting services were retained to assist with the Growth Management Study (GMS) component of Envision Durham. - 103 - 11 | Envision Durham Outreach and Engagement: Participation opportunities have occurred across a variety of platforms, including pop- up information kiosks, in-person and virtual meetings and presentations (including to Regional Advisory Committees and the BILD Durham Chapter Liaison group), working group sessions, workbooks, email and social media campaigns and a public opinion survey. Feedback and research on a variety of topics helped inform the development of a new ROP framework and proposed policy directions. In response to the COVID-19 State of Emergency initiated in March 2020, staff have continued to evaluate public and stakeholder feedback, while meeting remotely with the Area Municipal and Conservation Authority Working Groups, various proponents and the GMS consultants. Public comments and questions continue to be received, and project progress continues to be communicated online via the Envision Durham web page and through interested parties email list. Stage 3 – Direct Envision Durham is currently in Stage 3 (“Direct”). Over the course of 2020, the Growth Management Study has continued to progress. In August, 2020 Amendment 1 to A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe came into effect (Report #2020- INFO-83), allowing significant components of the GMS to continue, including: • The comprehensive Land Needs Assessment supported by the required technical and feasibility studies; and • The area municipal allocations of the new regional population employment forecasts, now with a 2051 time-horizon. As of January 2021, a detailed examination of the intensification potential of Strategic Growth Areas is being examined, and employment conversion requests are being evaluated, informed by Council-endorsed criteria and a submission process (Report #2020-P-11). A total of 42 employment conversion requests were received by the September 23, 2020 submission deadline (Report # 2020-INFO-94). Five additional conversion requests were received outside of the Region’s 90-day submission window (also see the Employment Area Conversion section). In November, 2020 Regional Council endorsed the framework for the new ROP that would include a streamlined structure and approach to support a new and compelling ROP (Report #2020-P-24). In December, 2020 Proposed Policy Directions for Major Transit Station Areas (MTSAs) (Report #2020-P-27) was released for public review and comment. The presentation of the Proposed Policy Directions within this report represents a significant milestone in Envision Durham. The Growth Management Study, including the Land Needs Assessment and the advancement of a Major Transit Station Area policies is proceeding concurrently and will - 104 - Envision Durham | 12 be reported on separately as these components are completed. As required by the Growth Plan, the timeframe for completing Envision Durham for submission to the Province remains July 1, 2022. Although continued changes to provincial policies and plans have impacted the ability of all Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH) Regions to complete their MCRs by the prescribed conformity date, as well as disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, all necessary steps are being taken in an effort to meet this deadline. Ultimately, the goal of the Envision Durham exercise is to deliver a new forward-looking official plan that will guide growth and change in Durham in the years ahead – providing the blueprint for Durham to become known as the place to live, learn and thrive by 2051. - 105 - 13 | Envision Durham Policy Review Approach Policy reviews and proposed directions generally fall within one of three categories: • Matters of provincial conformity – proposed policy changes required to satisfy legislative requirements based on new or updated provincial policies and plans (i.e. “Policy areas that must change”). • Housekeeping – components of the current ROP that are still relevant, in principle, but may require an update, clarification, or streamlining and therefore may be carried-forward to a new ROP with refinements (i.e. “Policy areas that should change”). o While the entirety of the ROP is under review, there are instances where there are generally sound policy directions that are aligned and consistent with best practices and are reflected across other regions in the GGH. Such policies are being reviewed as a matter of housekeeping but may not change substantially. • New policies or approaches – generally identified through research, within the Discussion Papers, and/or received through submissions from stakeholders (i.e. “Policy areas that could change”). Online Compendium of Submissions These Proposed Policy Directions are intended to respond to submissions received through Stage 2. Discussion paper submissions and responses have been summarized in an online compendium. To view this compendium, please visit durham.ca/EnvisionDurhamSubmissions. - 106 - Envision Durham | 14 Format of Report Based on a framework that has been endorsed by Regional Council, the new ROP will be structured around chapters that represent seven balanced, aspirational, outcome-oriented Strategic Directions, reflective of the region’s diverse characteristics: Prosperous Economy (pages 15-19) Healthy Communities (pages 20-55) Supportive Infrastructure (pages 56-61) Vibrant Urban System (pages 62-96) Thriving Rural System (pages 97-113) Protected Greenlands System (pages 114-141) Connected Transportation System (pages 142-164) Each Strategic Direction will be supported by long-term goals that will guide a suite of planning objectives and policies. The Proposed Policy Directions provide an indication of the framework for the new ROP. Each Strategic Direction describes a series of policy topics, discusses comments where received, and introduces proposed policy direction(s), where applicable. The Proposed Policy Directions are not intended to be exhaustive but introduce certain directions where further input is being sought before draft policies appear within a proposed new Regional Official Plan. Proposed Policy Directions will be highlighted using shaded call-out boxes and are numbered to allow for cross-referencing. Where commentary and resulting proposed policy direction(s) relates to a discussion question from Stage 2, the connection will be noted in text, identifying the applicable Discussion Paper. Figure 1: Stage 2 theme-based Discussion Papers, released through 2019. Where a proposed policy direction is tied to a potential Key Performance Indicator (KPI) in the new ROP, an “analytics” icon is illustrated. The identification of relevant targets and measures intended to be monitored on a regular basis, based on data availability, will be developed internally by the Region or, to satisfy those mandated by the Province (also see the Review and Monitoring section). - 107 - 15 | Envision Durham Proposed Policy Directions Prosperous Economy Since the first ROP was approved in 1978, the Plan has contained regional goals and objectives for Economic Development. These goals and objectives have evolved over time with changes in broader economic trends, regional growth, as well as in response to changing local priorities and issues. Many of the themes and policies currently found in Section 3 – Economic Development, such as striving to balance population and employment growth, diversifying the regional employment base, and working in partnership with area municipalities, industry, and educational institutions continue to resonate. However, it is important that these goals, objectives and policies remain current, compelling and actionable. The proposed updated objectives and policies were informed by the Durham Region Strategic Plan, the Region’s Economic Development Strategy and Action Plan, the Broadband Strategy, and responds to updated provincial policies, including the PPS and Growth Plan. While focused primarily on the structural components of the Urban System and on how to effectively manage future growth, the Urban System Discussion Paper broadly discussed regional employment and other economic development related topics. A review of Economic Development policies identified the need to strengthen through policy the interrelationship between key infrastructure and development, the importance of supporting and fostering innovation, and the value of developing targeted strategies and action plans, in furthering economic development initiatives in the region. Global events, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, underscore the importance of planning and preparing for a resilient, prosperous economy at the regional scale. To date, the economic disruption of COVID-19 has been severe, while the longer-term sustained economic impact worldwide, and more specifically within Durham, is largely unknown. The impacts of COVID-19, resulting primarily from travel restrictions and economic disruption, are anticipated to have a negative impact on near term labour force growth and keep near-term (i.e. 2020 and 2021) immigration levels across Canada, including in Durham, below recent historical averages. While the Region has limited control over its ability to influence these macro-economic and policy factors, the Region does have the ability to recognize emerging trends. As a result, staff will continue to monitor the impacts of COVID-19 on near-term and long- term population and employment growth across the GGH and Durham Region. For additional commentary on the impacts of COVID-19, please refer to the Durham Growth Management Study consultant’s Growth Opportunities and Challenges Report that accompanies these Proposed Policy Directions. This chapter outlines the proposed policy directions intended to support a prosperous economy. - 108 - Envision Durham | 16 Goals for a Prosperous Economy 1. Proposed Direction: Goals for a Prosperous Economy The following Goal is proposed for the Prosperous Economy section of the ROP: 1. Support the development of a strong, resilient and prosperous economy that maximizes opportunities for business and employment growth (jobs), innovation, and partnerships, to develop the region to its fullest economic potential. Economic Development Policies 2. Proposed Direction: Economic Development Policies The following policy directions are proposed for the Prosperous Economy section of the ROP: 1. Recognize the importance of infrastructure to facilitate economic development, including a policy requiring that Strategic Growth Areas be appropriately serviced with Regional infrastructure to achieve their development and/or intensification potential. 2. Determine and implement an appropriate supply of Employment Areas with access to municipal water and sewage services be provided, with a requirement that the supply and development of such lands be regularly monitored. 3. Recognize the importance of knowledge- based industries and emerging leading- edge technologies, including policies that support the expansion of related infrastructure. 4. Support the ongoing growth of Durham’s energy sector, including the continued safe operation of existing Nuclear Generating Stations, the potential future expansion of the Darlington Nuclear Generating Station, and the ongoing growth of related energy businesses and industries. 5. Support the Region’s transition to a clean energy economy as articulated in the Durham Community Energy Plan. 6. Promote collaboration between the energy sector and post-secondary institutions to attract clean energy industries including supply chain and research and development to Durham Region. 7. Support the establishment and expansion of innovation hubs within the region. 8. Support balanced population and employment growth and the diversification of the region’s employment base, including a policy requirement to monitor on a regular basis the regional job to population ratio, the achievement of population and employment forecasts, and the growth, distribution and composition of the region’s employment base. 9. Identify Strategic Growth Areas as appropriate locations to focus high- density mixed-use development, including major office and major institutional uses. - 109 - 17 | Envision Durham 10. Support collaboration with educational institutions and the business community in programs that create and maintain a highly skilled regional labour force. 11. Support the agricultural and agri-food sector, including the changing nature of agricultural operations and new opportunities such as agri-tourism, on farm diversified uses, and the diversification of agricultural operations. 12. Recognize that it has been a long- standing Regional aspiration to balance population and employment growth to the extent possible, to lower the burden on the residential tax base, reduce pressure on the road system and above all, provide diverse employment opportunities for Regional residents close to home. Therefore, the Region’s planning, economic development, and growth management programs and initiatives will be on the basis of achieving the Provincial Population and Employment Forecasts, while continuing to aspire to achieve a jobs to population ratio of 50 per cent (one job for every two residents) by seeking and supporting employment intensive developments as opportunities arise. 13. Support the expansion of GO Rail service to Bowmanville, the implementation of Rapid Transit, the expansion of the Goods Movement Network, the implementation of the Regional Cycling Plan, and effective use of special intermodal facilities such as the Oshawa Executive Airport and the Port of Oshawa in recognition of the correlation between transportation networks/infrastructure and job creation/economic development. 14. Require the preparation and/or regular updating of a Regional Economic Development Strategy and Action Plan, a Regional Marketing Plan, Agricultural Strategy and a Regional Tourism Development Strategy. Broadband Infrastructure In recognition of the growing shift of economic, social, educational and entertainment activities to online formats dependent on high-speed broadband infrastructure, the Region undertook the preparation of Broadband Strategy which was completed in 2019. The Strategy identified that part of the Region, especially the north, do not have adequate broadband service, and recognizes the importance of broadband infrastructure. The Strategy outlines a series of actions to promote the expansion of broadband networks, particularly to underserved areas. Action 2C directs the consideration of ROP policies that support broadband infrastructure as part of the MCR. The Durham Region Strategic Plan reinforces this action item by prioritizing the enhancement of communication networks to better connect people more effectively. To inform the implementation of the Broadband Strategy and Strategic Plan, the Urban System Discussion Paper asked the following discussion question #17: “What type of Regional Official Plan policies should be provided to support the deployment of broadband infrastructure?”. Responses expressed wide support for broadband policies that acknowledge the importance of - 110 - Envision Durham | 18 broadband as essential infrastructure for economic development, and for policies that support its deployment within both urban and rural communities. There was general agreement that policies should encourage broadband infrastructure as part of new development/construction. 3. Proposed Direction: Broadband Infrastructure 1. Recognize the importance and encourage the expansion of leading-edge technologies, including high-speed broadband infrastructure. 2. Require new development to be designed to enable the implementation of high- speed broadband, where feasible. 3. Support the establishment of a Regional Broadband Network and continue to engage our area municipal partners and service providers. 4. Enable the Region to participate, financially or otherwise, in projects that may include those from Internet Services Providers or as may be identified through a potential Community Improvement Plan that would expand broadband infrastructure to underserved areas. 5. Encourage the provincial and federal governments to continue to provide funding programs that support the expansion of high-speed broadband services to underserved areas and to provide access to their infrastructure to promote co-location opportunities. Pickering Federal Airport Lands In 1972, the federal government acquired land within the municipalities of Markham, Uxbridge and Pickering for the purpose of developing a new major international airport. Following this direction by the federal government, the Region has taken steps to prepare for an eventual airport. These steps include protecting the lands for a future airport in the ROP by designating a land use planning structure of compatible and complimentary uses surrounding and connecting the future airport site, and by planning and constructing infrastructure, including the oversizing of municipal services, to support a future airport. In recent years, there have been several changes in the status of the federal airport lands. Concluding in 2017, the federal government transferred over 50 per cent of the original federal airport lands towards the creation of the Rouge National Urban Park. While the remaining 3,885 hectares continue to be held for an airport and related uses, a definitive decision has not yet been made by the federal government as to whether it will advance the development of an airport on the remaining lands. Since the federal government acquired the lands, the prospect of an airport in Pickering has elicited both support and opposition by various stakeholders and interest groups. Although the Urban System Discussion Paper did not seek input on the development of an airport in Pickering, submissions were received that both sought continued protection and support of the development of an airport through ROP policy, as well as submissions that opposed the development - 111 - 19 | Envision Durham of an airport in favor of continued agricultural use of the lands. Although the decision of whether to proceed with an airport remains outstanding and fully within the jurisdiction of the Federal Government, Regional Council continues to support the development of an airport and related aviation hub in Pickering. These lands provide an opportunity to create an innovative, sustainable hub that protects and integrates the approximately 3,885 hectares of green space and agricultural uses into its site design from the start. This position is reflected in the Durham Region Strategic Plan, recent Council resolutions, and through the reports and studies commissioned by the Region that demonstrate the need and economic benefit of an airport that incorporate the substantial agricultural land assets through innovative sustainability and environmental management approaches. 4. Proposed Direction: Pickering Federal Airport Lands 1. Revise ROP mapping to reflect the current boundaries of the Pickering Federal Airport Lands. 2. Support the development of an airport on the Federal Airport Lands in Pickering and encourage the federal government to make a timely decision to develop an airport on the Lands. 3. Support the development of an aviation based multimodal employment hub surrounding the airport, and that the necessary municipal services and supporting transportation and transit infrastructure be provided by the responsible service providers. - 112 - Envision Durham | 20 Healthy Communities The built environment has a direct effect on our health. The PPS broadly states that healthy, liveable and safe communities are generally sustained by: • encouraging efficient development and land use patterns; • accommodating a range and mix of housing options, including affordable and market-based choice; • providing ample opportunities for employment, institutional uses, recreation, park and open space, and other uses to meet long-term needs; • promoting the integration of land use planning, growth management, intensification, infrastructure planning and transit-supportive development; • improving accessibility for persons with disabilities and older persons by addressing land use barriers which restrict their full participation in society; • promoting development and land use patterns that protect the natural environment and conserve biodiversity; and • preparing for the regional impacts of a changing climate. Establishing and implementing policies that shape the development of healthy communities is one of the primary functions of an official plan. Policies that address quality of life, health, safety, convenience and well-being of present and future residents of the region are contained within the current ROP, most notably in the following sections: • Section 2: Environment • Section 4: Housing • Section 5: Cultural, Health and Community Facilities, and Infrastructure However, there is a continually growing imperative to address climate change and improved performance and resiliency of the built environment, while improving access and availability of jobs, services and infrastructure and the affordability of homes. It is therefore appropriate that greater policy guidance be given for healthy and safe communities under such themes as: • Sustainability, including climate change adaptation/mitigation and climate resilient development; • Complete communities, including accessible design within the public realm and a wide range of housing options; and • Community health and services, including community hubs, age-friendly planning, community safety and well-being planning, and cultural, health and community facilities. The Region is dedicated to making sure that everyone in Durham has the same opportunities to live, work, study and play in a community that welcomes and supports them. This commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion is also reflected in the Durham Region Strategic Plan’s Goal (2.5) to building a healthy, inclusive, age-friendly community where everyone feels a sense of belonging. The Region recognizes that the demographic and socio-economic makeup of the Durham - 113 - 21 | Envision Durham is always evolving, and as a result strives to maintain a detailed understanding of these changes by preparing the Durham Profile following each five year Census period. This chapter provides proposed policy directions intended to foster healthy communities. Goals for Healthy Communities 5.Proposed Direction: Goals for Healthy Communities The following overarching goals are intended to be broad, all-encompassing goals to foster Healthy Communities across the region: 1.Prepare built and natural environments to be low-carbon and climate-resilient. 2.Plan complete communities that improve the quality of life for residents. 3.Enhance community health, safety and well-being by planning for sufficient community services. Sustainability Policies in the PPS, Growth Plan, Greenbelt Plan, ORMCP and Lake Simcoe Protection Plan support the development of complete communities, a prosperous economy, a clean and healthy environment and social equity. Although there are existing policies in the ROP that reflect these broad directions, there is an opportunity to strengthen these policies, particularly under the theme of sustainability. For example, Goal 1 of the Durham Region Strategic Plan is to protect the environment for the future by demonstrating leadership in sustainability and addressing climate change, including the following priorities: •accelerate the adoption of green technologies and clean energy solutions through strategic partnerships and investment; •increase diversion and resource recovery; •protect, preserve and restore the natural environment, including greenspaces, waterways, parks, trails, and farmlands; •demonstrate leadership in sustainability and addressing climate change; and •expand sustainable and active transportation. These priorities are supported by provincial direction requiring the Region to prepare for the impacts of a changing climate. To further emphasize the Region’s commitment to accelerate the transition towards a low- carbon, climate-resilient community, Regional Council declared a climate emergency on January 29, 2020 that acknowledged the role of municipalities to respond through policies, programs, and capital investments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in Durham. The following action items from the declaration are being considered through the development of the new ROP: •reduce overall greenhouse gas emissions to prepare for the Region’s future climate; •review current corporate plans and identify how climate change considerations will be embedded across all elements of Regional business; - 114 - Envision Durham | 22 • recognize environmental sustainability and climate change as a priority in the Regional Strategic Plan and the Regional Official Plan; and • work with senior levels of government to reduce emissions and build resiliency to climate impacts. The new ROP will include policies that that protect the natural environment, establish and grow healthy communities, and support the development of a strong, diverse economy. Policy language will be either augmented or added throughout the Plan to: • identify, protect and enhance a new regional Natural Heritage System and Water Resources System, including key natural heritage features and key hydrologic features and areas and their ecological functions; • increase the rate of intensification to, at a minimum, achieve the requirements of the Growth Plan, and thereby reduce the potential need and rate of greenfield development; • support the rural economy by protecting the agricultural land base and broadening agricultural land use permissions; • optimize the use of existing infrastructure and coordinate new infrastructure development with planning for growth; • promote and facilitate a range of housing types and tenures, including attainable and affordable housing; • prioritize projects and initiatives that would improve accessibility and safety in our communities so that universal access to community services for all ages and abilities is achieved; • strive to conserve and promote significant cultural heritage resources and landscapes; • balance jobs and population and encourage economic diversity; • take action to improve air quality and employ climate change mitigation and adaptation measures; • reduce reliance on the single occupant automobile as the preferred mode of travel while increasing access to more sustainable transportation modes; and • take advantage of opportunities to improve climate resilience in the waste, water, and energy sectors for the benefit of the Region and its residents. Greenhouse Gas Reduction As a leader in climate change, Durham Region is committed to understanding and responding to the impacts of a changing climate. Regional Council established a Sustainability Office and the Durham Region Roundtable on Climate Change (DRRCC) in 2009 under the Office of the CAO, and since that time have released a series of key climate change initiatives: • Durham Community Climate Change Local Action Plan; • Durham Community Climate Adaptation Plan (awarded a Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) Sustainable Communities Award in the Climate Change category for the Adaptation Plan); - 115 - 23 | Envision Durham • Keeping Our Cool: Managing Urban Heat Islands in Durham Region; and • Durham Community Energy Plan. Regional Council has endorsed a series of long-term greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction targets. First introduced in the Community Climate Change Local Action Plan in 2012, and then within the Durham Community Energy Plan in 2019, these targets were as follows: • 5 per cent reduction of GHG emission by 2015; • 20 per cent reduction by 2020; and • 80 per cent reduction by 2050 over the 2007 baseline levels. The current ROP supports incremental reduction of GHG emission and other air pollutants generated by the Region’s own corporate activities and functions (policy 2.3.46). However, it does not include policies that reflect Council-endorsed GHG emission reduction targets, neither as an overall goal, nor as part of the consideration for future development applications as a climate change mitigation, adaptation, and resiliency measure. The Climate Change and Sustainability Discussion Paper posed discussion question #3: “Should the additional GHG reduction policies that are encouraged in the Growth Plan and Greenbelt Plan be incorporated into the Regional Official Plan? How do you think this topic should be addressed?”. Area municipalities and conservation authorities support policies that would address GHG reduction and further the goals and objectives outlined in the Durham Community Climate Local Action Plan and the Durham Community Climate Adaptation Plan, and the “Low Carbon Pathway” illustrated in the Durham Community Energy Plan. Submissions indicate a desire to adopt progressive GHG reduction policies that exceed the requirements of the provincial policies, while also supporting area municipal initiatives. The Durham Region Sustainability Office provided feedback indicating the importance of including Durham’s GHG emission reduction targets in the ROP to support Council direction and its commitment to achieving the Region’s targets, with a mechanism to monitor progress regularly. Since the release of the Climate Change and Sustainability Discussion Paper, the federal government has introduced legislation (Bill C- 12) that would require the setting of national targets for the reduction of GHG emissions to attain net-zero emissions in Canada by 2050. Several responses expressed the desire to exceed provincial requirements, including the current requirements of the Ontario Building Code, and adopt best practices. Feedback also spoke to including GHG reduction initiatives within the ROP such as identifying climate change vulnerabilities through mapping of floods, vulnerable populations, and neighbourhood scale resiliency; developing a Regional budget for infrastructure planning and asset mapping; expanding transit and green energy infrastructure; and creating a formal monitoring/reporting program for GHG targets. Other upper and single tier municipalities within Ontario incorporate GHG reduction - 116 - Envision Durham | 24 targets at varying degrees within their official plans. For example, the Cities of Guelph and Kingston can be seen as best practices by adopting GHG emission reduction targets within their Official Plans. Kingston includes a detailed section on climate change that makes the connection between the climate adaptation and mitigation measures within its official plan as a means to achieve its Council-adopted GHG targets and includes considerations for GHG emission in the development review process. Toronto, York, and Peel Regions include GHG emission reduction as part of key themes, goals, and objectives within their official plans, with associated policies on energy, air quality, the environment, and healthy, sustainable communities. The York Region Official Plan includes policy language that implements and supports the York Region Sustainability Strategy. Some of the area municipal official plans within Durham incorporate policies that support GHG emission reductions as part of their general sustainability and climate change policies. Some have incorporated these policy approaches into additional subject areas including water conservation, energy, building design, air quality, and urban agriculture. The City of Oshawa Official Plan includes policies to monitor GHG emissions of corporate facilities and activities. 6. Proposed Direction: Greenhouse Gas Reduction 1. Encourage a culture of energy and water conservation for new and existing development and promote greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction from all sources, in particular the transportation and building sectors, as a key objective. 2. Include Council-endorsed GHG emission reduction targets in the Official Plan so as to achieve net-zero as an aspirational objective. 3. Support the development of green infrastructure including low impact development and stormwater management systems, planting of native tree species, green roofs and other sustainable design practices. 4. Encourage energy efficient construction and green building design, including net- zero and net-zero ready development. 5. Support the implementation of a region- wide building retrofit program that provides support for home and building owners in making deep energy retrofits through access to finance, utility programs and contractors. 6. Encourage renewable, alternative and district energy systems (also see Energy Conservation section). 7. Identify and address links between climate change, community planning and public health. 8. Promote the uptake of electric, hybrid, or alternative fuel vehicles, through the provision of public charging infrastructure, the delivery of education and awareness initiatives and through leadership in adopting such vehicles in the Regions fleet where appropriate. 9. Implement energy efficiency and distributed renewable energy systems in the design and construction of new - 117 - 25 | Envision Durham Regional facilities and through retrofits of existing facilities to demonstrate local market leadership. 10. Encourage area municipalities to develop GHG reduction targets for their corporate operations that demonstrate municipal sector leadership in the community-wide effort to reach net-zero emissions by 2050 and implement corporate GHG reduction programs. 11. Encourage area municipalities to develop and implement community-wide GHG reduction programs in collaboration with the Region, energy utilities and other key stakeholders. 12. Encourage collaboration between the Region, area municipalities, waste collection providers and waste producers to: a) achieve consistent delivery of waste management services across the region; b) require that all new residential developments, higher density residential buildings and mixed-use buildings incorporate multi-stream waste collection and diversion capabilities; and c) support the migration of existing higher density residential and mixed-use buildings to multi-stream waste collection and diversion. 13. Encourage area municipalities to provide policies, programs and standards to support achievement of these targets and monitor progress. Climate Resilient Development Regional Council has made a commitment to adapting to and mitigating the impacts of a changing climate by building resilient, healthy, and sustainable communities. This commitment is demonstrated through Council’s adoption of GHG emission reduction targets which serve as a key indicator of climate action. One key anchor of this commitment includes the Durham Community Energy Plan. It outlines a “Low Carbon Pathway” which includes specific action items to achieve the Region’s GHG targets. These action items include various land use considerations, including green building and design, net-zero development, and retrofit programming. The current ROP generally supports an energy efficient living environment and promotes energy efficient buildings and infrastructure, including retrofits and energy efficient practices for existing and future developments, and orienting buildings to maximize solar exposure. It also supports the adoption of sustainable practices in area municipal official plans. However, these policies are relatively high level, and do not elaborate specifically on matters of green infrastructure, green building design, net- zero or low carbon development, and retrofits of existing buildings. Area municipalities, conservation authorities, and members of the public have responded to various discussion questions (#2, 5, 6, 8, and 9) from within the Climate Change and Sustainability Discussion Paper, and question #19 of the Environment and Greenlands Discussion Paper with strong support for - 118 - Envision Durham | 26 climate resilient development policies, specifically around three key areas: • low carbon and net-zero development such as solar/cool roofs, alternative energy, and passive design; • green infrastructure including stormwater management, low impact development, tree planting, green roofs, and other green design components within the urban realm; and • retrofits of existing development. Significant feedback indicates support of aligning policies with the Low Carbon Pathway outlined in the Durham Community Energy Plan, which highlights low carbon and net-zero development as a key action item. Submissions also demonstrate a desire to have a region-wide green development standard, and a green infrastructure asset management plan. Additional feedback indicated support for policies that go beyond the requirements of the Ontario Building Code, to consider LEED standards, including factors such as building orientation, window location, increased insulation, and passive design1. There is also support for green infrastructure such as tree planting, and low impact development. Other upper and single tier municipalities, including York, Peel, and Guelph have woven climate resilient development into various sections of their plans, ranging from water 1 Passive design refers to minimizing energy use, particularly from heating and cooling systems, by taking advantage of natural energy (i.e. passive solar gain) where possible. Examples include solar conservation, energy, and urban design. The City of Kingston has incorporated policies within its development review and energy conservation sections. The City of Toronto has incorporated policies into its sections that speak to urban centres, mixed use areas, institutional areas, and the public. Area municipal official plans support climate resilient development in various sections, including general directions, stormwater management, urban design sustainability and climate change, built form, parking (in relation to low impact and permeable parking lots), and energy. 7. Proposed Direction: Climate Resilient Development 1. Establish a Climate Resilient Development subsection as a component of the Healthy Communities chapter that addresses key areas including: a) energy efficiency, including low carbon and net-zero/net-zero ready new development and retrofits of existing buildings and infrastructure; b) water conservation; c) natural environment based climate solutions, as proposed in the Protected Greenlands System chapter; and d) sustainable urban design, including the encouragement of green building design and materials, passive design orientation, air sealing, increased/enhanced insulation, strategic placement of windows and daylighting, as well as designing buildings to take advantage of natural ventilation, where possible. - 119 - 27 | Envision Durham (such as solar orientation) and green infrastructure. 2. Incorporate objectives and policies that encourage and support climate resilient development, redevelopment and retrofits. 3. Request that the Government of Ontario update the Ontario Building Code to require improvements to the standards of residential construction that would improve resilience to the effects of climate change and improved sustainability. 4. Encourage area municipalities to establish guidelines, practices and incentive programs to improve the energy, water and stormwater management performance of new construction from the effects of climate change. 5. Encourage measures to improve energy efficiency in new buildings, including building design that promotes low carbon and net-zero development. 6. Promote building conservation and adaptive re-use, including the recycling of building materials. 7. Encourage measures within new development which provide for water conservation and re-use. 8. Promote and encourage energy and water conservation and efficiency strategies, including demand management, water recycling, green infrastructure and low impact development across all sectors. 9. Encourage area municipalities to include water conservation considerations in the development of local green development practices and sustainability guidelines. These considerations may include establishing water conservation targets for new development. 10. Require the submission of supporting information that addresses green infrastructure, net-zero ready development and proposed building practices; and demonstrate how the proposed development would help support the Region’s Climate Resilient Development and Sustainability objectives, as a requirement for a complete application. 11. Require area municipalities to include policies for developments subject to site plan control to include sustainable design elements including exterior sustainable design, landscaping, permeable paving materials, bicycle parking and street furniture as part of their official plan updates. Air Quality The PPS and Growth Plan requires that municipalities promote land use patterns that minimize impacts to air quality and support energy efficiency through: • compact built form; • active transportation and transit between residential and employment uses; • focus travel intensive land uses close to existing/planned transit; • focus freight intensive land uses to higher order transportation facilities; • transit supportive development and intensification with a mix of uses; - 120 - Envision Durham | 28 • design that maximizes energy efficiency; and • vegetation and green infrastructure. Although no explicit questions on air quality were asked as part of the Climate Change and Sustainability Discussion Paper, submissions received identified “air quality” as an area that could use additional policy support. Current ROP policies focus on creating healthy and sustainable communities by promoting alternative modes of transportation and protecting environmental features. However, there is an opportunity to strengthen the connection between policies in the ROP and how they would help improve air quality. 8. Proposed Direction: Air Quality 1. Include policy language that explicitly references improved air quality as an objective for ROP by: a) promoting and facilitating alternative/active modes of transportation; b) improving the energy efficiency of buildings and modes of travel, including infrastructure that encourages the use of low-carbon vehicles; c) increasing the tree canopy; d) protecting and enhancing the natural environment; and e) promoting intensification and compact built form. 2. Require the submission of an Air Quality Study as part of complete application requirement where air quality is a potential concern between facilities and sensitive land uses. Tree Canopy The PPS requires that municipalities prepare for and minimize the negative impacts to air quality and climate change and that planning authorities should maximize vegetation within settlement areas, where feasible. The Growth Plan includes the requirement to mitigate and adapt to the impacts of a changing climate, improve resilience and reduce GHG emissions, and integrate green infrastructure and appropriate low impact development. The current ROP does not include tree canopy targets, however, it does encourage area municipalities to develop Urban Tree Strategies (ROP policy 2.3.19 (g)), which may or may not include targets. Examples of this approach include Ajax’s Urban Forestry Management Plan, Clarington’s Urban Forest Strategy, and Whitby’s Urban Forest Master Plan. While some area municipalities may not have urban tree strategies, they do incorporate tree preservation and planting into urban design guidelines, and as part of development review and approvals processes. Area municipalities also promote various tree planting initiatives. Discussion question #10 of the Climate Change and Sustainability Discussion Paper asked: “Should a tree canopy target be established? If so, should there be separate targets for urban versus rural areas?”. - 121 - 29 | Envision Durham Although there was no consensus on whether the Region should adopt a tree canopy target, some suggested both urban and rural targets while others noted that it may be more practical to have a natural cover target for the rural area. Some suggested enabling policies to support area municipalities in their tree preservation and planting efforts. It was noted that if a tree canopy target is included, the establishment of a baseline of current tree canopy and forest inventory/management plan would be required. Others suggested that the Region coordinate an Urban Forest Strategy. York Region developed a Forest Management Study (including tiered woodland canopy targets of 25 per cent by 2031, canopy cover of 35 per cent by 2031, and 40 per cent by 2051) that can serve as a reference. 9. Proposed Direction: Tree Canopy 1. Recognize that increasing tree canopy cover has many public health, environmental, social and economic benefits including, but not limited to: a) reducing the urban heat island effect; b) creating and linking wildlife habitats; and c) improving air quality. 2. Include policy language that commits the Region to establishing regional tree canopy target in urban and rural areas as part of a Regional Forest Management Plan or similar study. 3. Continue to encourage area municipalities to develop Urban Tree Strategies that provide direction related to protection, stewardship, monitoring and outreach that would preserve and enhance the urban tree canopy. 4. Provide policies to ensure that tree preservation and/or planting is considered as part of area municipal tree by-laws and the development review and approvals process. 5. Encourage area municipalities to participate in programs and initiatives that contribute to increasing regional tree canopy cover including: a) tree planting programs on private lands; b) land stewardship and restoration programs (e.g. land conservancies/trusts); and c) programs that would enhance tree cover on area municipal road allowances. 6. Introduce tree planting on Regional road allowances and on Regionally owned properties where practical and appropriate. 7. Require that native tree species be used in new tree planting initiatives. Complete Communities The Durham Region Strategic Plan includes a Goal (2.1) to revitalize existing neighbourhoods and build complete communities that are walkable, well- connected, and have a mix of attainable housing. The current ROP identifies a broad goal of creating healthy and complete sustainable communities and has incorporated policy directions within various sections, including: - 122 - Envision Durham | 30 Environment, Economic Development, Housing, Cultural, Health, and Community Facilities, Urban System, and Transportation System. However, there is an opportunity to strengthen the notion of “complete communities” as a theme that would permeate the new ROP. The Urban System Discussion Paper solicited feedback through question #1: “Is the Urban System achieving the Regional Official Plan vision of creating distinct Urban Areas, balancing population and employment growth, and achieving healthy and complete communities?”. In addition, questions #2, 3, 5, 18, 19, and 20 all solicited feedback from area municipalities, agencies, and the public which denoted strong support for enhancing the Region’s complete communities’ policies. Feedback also indicated this goal has only been partially achieved through the current ROP. In general, feedback encouraged the Region to better connect compact, complete communities and its relationship to climate mitigation and adaptation. It was also noted that there is a need to distinguish complete communities within the context of the northern, rural municipalities within Durham. Other upper and single-tier municipalities within the GTHA approach complete communities at varying degrees. For example, the York and Peel Regional Official Plans dedicate entire chapters to the theme of complete communities, while weaving it into various other relevant sections of their plans, including: housing, sustainability, transit, and water and wastewater servicing, employment areas, and energy. The City of Toronto Official Plan incorporates the theme of complete communities within its vision and public realm policies. 10. Proposed Direction: Complete Communities 1. Establish a Complete Communities subsection as a component of the Healthy Communities chapter that includes a revised definition of “complete communities”, and include its various components, including but not limited to: a) a full range of attainable housing options; b) a variety of employment opportunities; c) institutional facilities and amenities, including places of worship, schools and hospitals; d) an appropriate supply of recreational facilities, places, and spaces; e) a readily available supply of healthy, local, and affordable food options; f) easily accessible community hubs; g) universally accessible and age-friendly communities for residents of all ages and abilities; h) a variety of transit supportive, mixed- use Strategic Growth Areas; i) an interconnected system of ecological, urban, and rural systems; j) an enhanced and protected natural environment; k) a view to climate adaptation and mitigation, where greenhouse gas emissions are reduced by: - 123 - 31 | Envision Durham i. implementing a multi-modal transportation system that supports increased transit use and alternative, active modes of travel, thereby reducing vehicle emissions; ii. improving the climate resiliency of new and existing development; iii. improving the energy efficiency of buildings and modes of transportation; iv. implementing local distributed and renewable energy systems; and v. other sustainable development practices. l) An integrated approach to land use planning, growth management, transit- supportive development, intensification, infrastructure planning and the optimization of transit investments; and m) Establishing vibrant places and spaces, including a public realm characterized by compact built form. 2. Require, within area municipal official plan updates and new secondary plans, policies relating to complete communities, that include: a) a range of housing options; b) community hubs within a reasonable walking distance, supporting community needs including retail, community services, facilities and health care; c) live-work opportunities through policies and zoning standards, including permissions for mixed uses; d) high quality urban design, with a public realm that incorporates universally accessible design; e) energy efficiency in new development; f) climate resilient development, including low carbon or net-zero designs, solar, green, and cool roofs, green infrastructure, low impact design and other similar measures; and g) an integrated and easily accessible open space network that includes a variety of recreational facilities, opportunities and public spaces. 3. Rationalize the existing definition of “healthy and complete, sustainable communities” with the provincially defined term “complete communities” for consistency. 4. Embed policies for complete communities including: housing, transportation, urban system, public realm, employment, community hubs and climate resilient development sections of the new ROP. Urban Agriculture While the current ROP supports the notion of food security and an Urban System that provides convenient access to fresh locally grown produce, farmer’s markets and community gardens, additional policies that encourage urban agriculture and enable provincial policies are necessary in the new ROP. The Growth Plan directs municipalities to expand convenient access to urban agriculture, and to include urban agriculture in public open space systems. In addition, the - 124 - Envision Durham | 32 Growth Plan requires that local food and food security must be included official plan policies for the reduction of greenhouse gases. The Greenbelt Plan requires that municipalities support urban agriculture in settlement areas and as part of the agri-food network. In addition, comments received in response to discussion question #4 on “How can the Region support urban agriculture through policy in the ROP?” noted the following: • new policies should be added to support urban agriculture, but it should remain high level and allow for area municipal flexibility; • definitions for “urban agriculture” and “agri-food system” should be added; and • permissions for establishing urban agricultural uses within appropriate land use designations should be included. Currently, Urban Agriculture is referenced in the Directions and Urban Systems sections of the current ROP, as matters of food security and locally grown food, but not in terms of urban agriculture in itself. It is appropriate that the Urban Agriculture policies be updated and broadened in recognition of its benefits, including how its helps mitigate climate change, economically supports the local agricultural community, and helps improve food security. 11. Proposed Direction: Urban Agriculture 1. Add a definition for “urban agriculture” as noted in the Glossary (see Appendix A). 2. Require the inclusion of polices for urban agriculture and community gardens with consideration for scale and compatibility within area municipal official plan updates, or secondary plans as appropriate. Public Realm and Urban Design Regional Council, through its Age-Friendly Strategy and Action Plan for Durham (Age- Friendly Durham), has indicated its commitment to be a healthy community where all residents – regardless of age, ethnicity, race, gender, or ability – feel included, respected, and enjoy a high quality of life. This Strategy has implications on the design of public spaces and the application of universal design principles (also see Age- Friendly Planning section). The current ROP acknowledges that good urban design is a key component of the public realm and is addressed in policies on the Regional Structure, the Urban System, Centres, Corridors, Waterfront Places, Living Areas, Employment Areas, and in Road Network Design. The ROP currently requires area municipalities to include detailed urban design policies in their official plans or secondary plans. There is an opportunity to incorporate additional public realm policies that include age-friendly urban design and sustainability as a component of healthy and complete communities. The City of Oshawa provided comments on the Urban System Discussion Paper with strong support for policies addressing urban design and built form that contribute to a strong public realm. Additionally, area municipalities responded to discussion - 125 - 33 | Envision Durham question #3 on “How can Regional Official Plan Policies support the needs of an aging population?” with strong support for urban design policies that incorporate universal design principles within the built environment that support populations of all ages and abilities. Other upper and single tier municipalities in Ontario incorporate public realm and urban design policies. The Official Plans for the Regions of York and Peel, and the Cities of Toronto and Kingston include general policies that signal the importance of good urban design as contributing to accessible, strong, and vibrant communities – including centres, corridors, employment areas, and residential areas. The Official Plans for York Region and the City of Kingston specifically tie good urban design to broader sustainability principles, by incorporating green infrastructure policies and other elements of the public realm that contribute to climate resiliency. All surveyed upper tier municipal official plans direct area municipalities to include more detailed urban design guidelines or require that good urban design principles be addressed through secondary planning. 12. Proposed Direction: Public Realm and Urban Design 1. Establish a Public Realm and Urban Design subsection as a component of the Healthy Communities chapter with policies that support key areas through the review and approval of development applications, including: a) a high quality public realm where the character, and the built and natural heritage of existing areas is respected; b) support for a variety of placemaking opportunities, with active pedestrian- oriented destinations; c) support for the use of sustainable landscaping and streetscape design approaches, including green infrastructure, while promoting energy- efficient building design (also see Climate Resilient Development section); and d) support compatibility and integration of new buildings with the surrounding built form, incorporating transit oriented development, promoting accessible, age-friendly design, and ensuring a high quality of public spaces including parkland and urban squares. 2. Continue to support current ROP policies 2.3.5 (a, b, c and d) that promote the enhancement of visual amenities in the urban environment; encourage area municipalities to enact by-laws that relate to urban design and the public realm; identify, protect, and upgrade attractive gateways and access points to the Region; and encourage native trees as visual barriers along provincial highways. 3. That where feasible, through the design, development and operation of new Regional facilities, that energy efficient building designs and approaches be implemented, such as water conservation and waste reduction techniques, sustainable landscape, sustainable streetscape and building development practices, parking for hybrid or electric - 126 - Envision Durham | 34 fleet vehicles, active transportation infrastructure, adaptive reuse where feasible, and partnerships to promote a vibrant public realm. 4. Cooperate with area municipalities in the establishment of an age-friendly community design guideline. 5. Require area municipal official plans, secondary plans, and zoning by-laws to have regard for high quality and sustainable urban design, a vibrant public realm, parking management, street design and the public realm and urban design policies, particularly within downtown areas. 6. Add definitions for “public realm” and “universal accessibility design principles” as noted in the Glossary (see Appendix A). Downtowns The current ROP includes policies related to downtowns as part of the Urban System’s policy framework for “Centres”. The Urban System describes a hierarchy of Centres within the Regional Structure, including Urban Growth Centres, Regional Centres, and Local Centres. Not all Centres are similar. Some Centres, like Downtown Whitby or Downtown Port Perry are the historic cores of their community, characterized by an existing fine-grained pattern of streets and blocks, with buildings scaled to the pedestrian and oriented to face a traditional “main street”. Other Centres, like Downtown Ajax or the Pickering City Centre are characterized by larger parcels of land, existing on-site surface parking areas with a larger format retail focus, with a variety of public, recreational and institutional uses. These Centres tend to be better suited to accommodate larger scale redevelopment or intensification opportunities. These downtowns are the heart of their communities. Still other areas such as Taunton/Baldwin in Whitby and Highway 2/Trulls Road in Courtice are also identified as Regional Centres and accommodate retail and services in a plaza format, but would not constitute “downtowns”, do not include extensive leisure or cultural activities, nor do they have extensive opportunities for social gathering. Discussion question #18 within the Urban Systems Discussion Paper asked: “How can Regional Official Plan policies support the achievement of strong, vibrant, and healthy downtowns?”. Area municipalities generally indicated a need for policy support around achieving strong, vibrant, and healthy downtowns that support a high quality and well-connected public realm as a paramount design objective. Additional feedback suggested a desire to integrate the natural environment into urban areas, including a suggestion to go beyond the minimum intensification targets to support further growth within downtowns. There is an opportunity to better reflect the diverse character of Centres by incorporating policies that acknowledge the unique characteristics of existing downtowns. Responsiveness to local historic character is necessary in historic districts; whereas larger emerging downtowns may have more significant urban redevelopment opportunities, but the finer grained urban - 127 - 35 | Envision Durham fabric of local streets, blocks and street facing buildings is yet to materialize. Area municipal official plans include policies for downtowns (separate from commercial or urban growth centres) to varying degrees, depending on their geography (i.e. northern vs. southern municipalities). Other upper and single tier municipal official plans include policies on the characterization of downtowns that serve as best practice examples for the ROP to consider. 13. Proposed Direction: Downtowns 1. Recognize downtowns as key destinations based on their historic/traditional function as centres for culture and commerce, their built form and their cultural/social importance. 2. Include policies to strengthen and enhance the role of downtowns as walkable centres of tourism, recreation, higher density housing, employment, main street shopping and social gathering. 3. Encourage the preservation and enhancement of the local, historical, and/or cultural heritage and character of Durham’s downtowns. 4. Emphasize the importance of protecting the distinct character and heritage of downtowns during redevelopment/intensification through careful consideration for scale and massing, protection of important built elements and other heritage components, visual connections with historic neighbourhoods and the preservation of cultural heritage of buildings and structures. 5. Encourage economic development, tourism and shopping functions by promoting downtowns as key places to locate businesses, restaurants, cafés and other attractions that are well-served by transit, and accessible through a variety of modes of transportation. 6. Include policies for downtowns so they may thrive as attractive locations for employment and residential growth, by: a) balancing intensification and redevelopment with sensitivity to local heritage and character; b) providing accessible and complete communities that meet the needs of local residents; c) incorporating a range of appropriate housing options; d) improving sustainability and climate resiliency; e) support active transportation; and f) supporting their function as focal points for culture, art, entertainment, and assembly. 7. Encourage area municipalities to include policies that support downtowns, including policies that: a) strengthen their role and character within their respective municipalities; b) preserve and enhance historic and cultural resources and functions; c) provides for appropriate development that addresses the built, natural and - 128 - Envision Durham | 36 cultural heritage of the downtown within which it is situated; d) guides development, redevelopment and intensification while protecting and preserving heritage buildings, features and functions; e) support the restoration and where appropriate, the adaptive re-use of heritage buildings; f) provide an appropriate interface or transition between new developments and heritage buildings or heritage conservation districts as may be applicable; and g) provides for development that is compatible with existing communities. Community Hubs Community hubs are places where residents can access a range of services in one place. The Growth Plan recognizes the importance of co-locating services and facilities within community hubs and requires municipalities to concentrate public service facilities around existing facilities as a means to achieving complete communities. Regional Council, through its Age-Friendly Strategy and Action Plan for Durham, has indicated its commitment to be a healthy community where all residents – regardless of age, ethnicity, race, gender, or ability – have access to community services, amenities, and health care. The current ROP identifies the goal of creating healthy and complete communities, and locating cultural, health, and community services near Urban Areas and Hamlets to meet the needs of residents. There is an opportunity to incorporate language around community hubs and their role in facilitating complete and accessible communities. Responses to the Urban Systems Discussion Paper commented on emerging trends and various ways to support the achievement of strong, vibrant, and healthy downtowns (i.e. discussion questions #18 and #20) and suggested the importance of strengthening connectivity between areas by co-locating public services. Other upper and single-tier municipal official plans within the GTHA include policies on the co-location of services, amenities, and transit to meet the needs of residents. There is an opportunity for Durham to identify policies that support community hubs within the ROP. 14. Proposed Direction: Community Hubs 1. Incorporate objectives and directional policies for community hubs that: a) promote the co-location of new cultural, health, and community facilities and public services in community hubs; b) encourage the renovation and adaptation of existing community facilities, provide for co-location opportunities, and support the establishment of new community hubs within Strategic Growth Areas, Hamlets and other locations as appropriate; c) encourage the establishment and development of community hubs in transit-supportive locations where existing cultural and community - 129 - 37 | Envision Durham services and facilities exist, with preference given to Strategic Growth Areas as preferred locations; d) require area municipal official plans to include policies for community hubs; 2. Add a definition for “community hub” as noted in the Glossary (see Appendix A). Age-Friendly Planning In 2017, Regional Council endorsed the Age Friendly Durham Strategy and Action Plan. A primary component of the age-friendly vision for Durham is to ensure that all members of the community feel included, respected, and enjoy a high quality of life. Age-Friendly Durham places an emphasis on active, healthy aging where the needs of Durham residents are met across their lifespan. It includes action items in subject areas that include outdoor spaces and buildings, transportation, housing, and social participation. Although the current ROP does not explicitly speak to the concept of age-friendly development, it does encourage assisted housing for families, seniors, and special needs groups. The Growth Management discussion paper on the Urban System posed discussion question #3 on “How can Regional Official Plan Policies support the needs of an aging population?”. Area municipalities responded to the discussion question with support for policies that would promote opportunities to support an aging population and would allow residents to age in place, primarily through policies on housing, urban design, and transportation. Other feedback from various stakeholders identified the need for development that supports an aging population, including multigenerational housing, garden suites and secondary units. Other upper and single-tier municipalities refer to age-friendly development to various degrees. For example, Official Plans for York Region and the City of Toronto include age- friendly planning as basic policy directions - as part of a framework for planning for an aging and diverse society that ensures accessibility for all ages and abilities. The City of Toronto Official Plan also incorporates these elements within its housing section. The Peel Region Official Plan, on the other hand, includes a full section on age-friendly planning that incorporates strong language for advancing accessible communities. 15. Proposed Direction: Age-Friendly Planning 1. Establish an Age-Friendly subsection as a component of the proposed Healthy Communities section in the ROP that: a) recognizes and supports the needs of Durham’s aging population and provides policies to improve opportunities for residents of all ages and abilities to age actively and in place; b) promotes the integration of age- friendly design considerations in the preparation of plans and policies, and in the design and construction of buildings and communities; c) encourages the use of universally accessible design in the built - 130 - Envision Durham | 38 environment that is flexible to people’s various needs and abilities, and enhances the mobility and independence of all residents; d) requires the area municipalities to implement age friendly provisions within their respective official plans by including policies that provide a full range of housing options, and provides for universally accessible design as part of the development review and approval process; and e) cooperate with area municipalities and other stakeholders to identify and correct gaps in the built environment that would hamper access and mobility of vulnerable populations. 2. Integrate language that supports age- friendly planning and the implementation of the Age-Friendly Durham Strategy and Action Plan within the various sections of the Healthy Communities and Vibrant Urban System chapters. 3. Collaborate with area municipalities to consider developing age-friendly design guidelines. 4. Include a policy in the Healthy Communities chapter that connects affordable housing options as a key component of age-friendly planning, by promoting a broad mix of housing types in proximity to community hubs and Strategic Growth Areas. 5. Encourage area municipalities to develop policies and practices that would increase the supply of affordable and accessible housing types to support the needs of an aging population. 6. Include policies in the Connected Transportation System chapter so that transportation systems are designed to be inclusive of the needs of all ages and abilities, including accessible transit stations, terminals and stops; and that universal access to transit; is ensured through accessibility considerations that are addressed during the design stage. 7. Incorporate age-friendly planning and accessibility within active transportation policies that address: pedestrian access, safe pedestrian and cyclist connections, neighbourhood connectivity, prioritizes active transportation in the design of arterial rights-of-way, reduces barriers to active transportation, and prioritizes improvement to connections in areas of high need. 8. Amend existing policy 4.3.6 such that the Region would not only promote but also seek additional federal and/or provincial programs for the provision of assisted housing for families, seniors, and special needs groups. 9. Add definitions for “active aging”, “age- friendly planning” and “diverse populations” as noted in the Glossary (see Appendix A). Community Safety and Well-Being Planning Across the province, communities are required to develop Community Safety and Well-Being Plans (CSWP). The Police Services Act requires the plan be developed regionally in partnership with Durham Regional Police Service and in collaboration with area - 131 - 39 | Envision Durham municipalities, community partners and the public. Community safety and well-being describes a condition where everyone feels safe, has a sense of belonging, where individuals and families can meet their needs for education, health care, food, housing, income, and social and cultural expression. The Province requires the CSWP to include the following: • local priority risk factors; • identify programs and strategies to address those factors; and • measurable outcomes to ensure that the strategies are effective. CSWPs are intended to formalize the shared responsibility of safe and healthy communities beyond policing. CSWPs require an integrated approach to bring municipalities, Indigenous communities and partners together to bring the right services, to the right people, at the right time. The Region’s CSWP will proactively develop and implement evidence-based strategies and programs to address local priorities, such as risk factors, vulnerable groups, etc. related to crime and complex social issues, on a sustainable basis. Once completed, the CSWP will serve as the Region’s first Human Services Plan, aligning Durham Region with other local Regional models of service delivery. It is appropriate that policies be included within the new ROP that are informed by, and will implement recommendations of, the forthcoming CSWP, where appropriate. Diverse Housing Housing is a basic human need. It is the foundation for healthy and complete communities. Over the last few decades affordability and housing choice have become growing concerns, and many residents are challenged with finding a suitable home in Durham that they can afford. Providing housing options that are appropriate for households of various socioeconomic conditions and for people at different stages in their life cycle and abilities is vital to community-building. Over the last decade, home prices and rents, not just in Durham, but globally, have increased significantly. Increases in wages have not kept pace with increases in housing costs. Although Durham has traditionally been among the more affordable places to live in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA), affordability and attainability are increasing concerns. Upward pressure on housing prices continue to pose a challenge for the Region in achieving its current ROP affordable housing target of 25 per cent. A wider range in the forms of housing are being constructed in Durham, including more medium- and high-density forms of housing, such as townhouses and apartments. Secondary units (such as basement apartments) are also becoming more prominent. Smaller residential units are often less expensive, offsetting higher prices in other segments of the housing market. The Region supports increasing the range and mix of housing opportunities, including affordable and special needs housing. At Home in Durham – the Durham Region - 132 - Envision Durham | 40 Housing Plan (2014-2024), the Durham Region Strategic Plan, Age-Friendly Durham, and Affordable Rental and Seniors’ Housing Task Force recommendations (2017) all support the development of diverse housing options. The ROP supports complete communities through policies that promote housing options to meet the needs of current and future residents. Housing policies should both recognize the importance of providing a full range of housing in terms of size, form, tenure and affordability, and set out a framework to achieve this objective. Using land use planning, development tools and funding, municipalities can target areas of the housing spectrum that are not adequately provided for by the market. This section of the Healthy Communities chapter outlines proposed policy directions that support a diverse supply of housing. The proposed policy directions are intended to achieve the following primary objectives: • support a range of housing options; • encourage the production of new affordable housing; and • preserve and prevent the loss of existing rental housing. Supply of Land for Housing In an effort to address housing affordability, in 2019 the provincial government amended the PPS (policy 1.4.1) to extend the duration of time for which the minimum supply of 2 Ibid. land must be available through a combination of residential intensification and land suitably designated for housing from 10 years to a 15 years’ supply. Municipalities have the discretion to increase the minimum supply of residential land suitably zoned to facilitate residential intensification and redevelopment, and land in draft approved and registered plans from three years to five years. Durham’s supply of future residential units within draft approved plans and intensification sites currently exceeds the minimum three-year requirement and continues to be appropriate to maintain a base requirement for a three-year supply as part of the ROP. The region is forecasted to grow from an estimated population of 704,140 people in 2020 2 to 1,300,000 in 2051.3 The Growth Management Study will establish how much residential land supply will be required to accommodate the Region’s forecasted population growth to 2051. Housing Mix: Some submissions to the Housing Policy Planning Discussion Paper encouraged the Region to ensure that there is a sufficient supply of low density housing and executive homes. Other responses indicated that there is a need for more affordable and special needs housing. The existing housing supply in Durham is predominantly low density (roughly two- 3 Amendment 1 to A Place to Grow came into effect on August 28, 2020. - 133 - 41 | Envision Durham thirds of households were single detached in the 2016 Census) and increasingly expensive. There is also sufficient capacity of vacant properties to support demand for larger, single-detached and estate homes. Research undertaken by the Region in 2018 indicates the potential for approximately 2,245 additional residential dwellings in the Rural Area, the majority of which would be outside of rural settlement areas. These additional dwellings translate to approximately 6,800 additional residents in the Rural Area. Conversely, the demand for affordable and special needs housing is often not met by the housing market and may require policy and/or regulatory tools, or incentives to be built. Figure 2: Existing housing supply in May 2016 (Source: Statistics Canada Census of Population). Market demand is the total quantity demanded across all consumers in a market for all housing types. The Growth Management Study, in particular, the Land Needs Assessment will ultimately determine the supply and mix of housing that is appropriate to satisfy forecasted market demand for housing in Durham through 2051. The LNA is being developed under separate cover. 16. Proposed Direction: Supply of Land for Housing 1. Provide a minimum 15 year supply of land through residential intensification and redevelopment and, if necessary, through urban boundary expansion so that sufficient lands will be designated and available for residential development in accordance with provincial policy. 2. Clarify that the current requirement for a three year supply of residential units through lands suitably zoned to facilitate residential intensification and redevelopment, and land in draft approved and registered plans is a “minimum” as the Region targets a supply range of three to five years. Housing Options There is a need to accommodate an appropriate range and mix of housing, including affordable housing, seniors’ housing, and secondary units. There are several policies which support a diverse mix of housing options throughout the PPS and Growth Plan. Recent changes to the PPS include a new definition for “housing options”. Although the current ROP already includes goals and policies that support a range and mix of housing, it does not have a definition for housing options. To help inform changes to the Region’s housing policies, the Housing Policy Planning - 134 - Envision Durham | 42 Discussion Paper asked two questions to obtain input on “Where are the most appropriate locations to build mid-rise apartments in Durham?” (question #14) and “What ROP policies should be strengthened to support the development of diverse housing options including affordable housing?” (question #18). Public submissions confirmed that ROP policies 4.3.9.b) and 8A.2.2 that direct higher- density housing to Centres and Corridors are still appropriate. The Growth Management Study will assess appropriate locations for mid-rise residential development through the Intensification Strategy. There was general support for policies to encourage a range of housing options, especially for housing needs that are not generally met by the housing market. Comments indicated that ROP policies should be strengthened to a full range and mix of housing, including affordable housing, to accommodate a range of incomes and household size, strategies to permit units in accessory buildings, opportunities for gentle density and missing middle housing. There is a need to identify and support areas of the housing spectrum that are not adequately provided through the private market. For example, there is a need for affordable purpose-built rental and seniors’ housing in Durham. To identify gaps in the housing market, the Region will need to undertake a comprehensive assessment of housing through a review of the existing supply, identifying the needs of current and future residents, and targeting gaps where the demand for specific housing options such as affordable, rental and special needs housing are not being met. A Regional Housing Assessment report and policy guidance within the Regional Official Plan will enable area municipalities to implement inclusionary zoning policies through their own Official Plans and implemented through zoning by- law amendments as opportunities arise. Inclusionary zoning is a land-use planning tool that enables municipalities to require through the passage of a zoning by-law, affordable housing units be included in new residential developments. Ontario Regulation 232/18 enables municipalities to implement inclusionary zoning. Prior to the passage of an inclusionary zoning by-law, an assessment report is required as part of the development of Official Plan policies. The assessment report must include an analysis of demographics, income, housing supply, and housing need and demand; current average market prices and rents; and analysis of the potential impacts of inclusionary zoning on the housing market. On September 3, 2019, the Province of Ontario made changes to the legislation for inclusionary zoning through Bill 108 (More Homes, More Choice Act). The changes limit where municipalities can implement inclusionary zoning to protected major transit station areas (areas surrounding and including an existing or planned higher order transit station that have a detailed implementation framework in accordance with Section 16(15) and 16 (16) of the Planning Act) or areas where a development - 135 - 43 | Envision Durham permit system has been required by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. 17. Proposed Direction: Housing Options 1. Add a definition, based on the PPS, for “housing options” as noted in the Glossary (see Appendix A). 2. Complete a Regional Housing Assessment Report and develop enabling policies that would allow the Region’s area municipalities to undertake Inclusionary Zoning within their respective jurisdictions. 3. Strengthen policies to prevent the loss of rental housing. Affordable Housing Several discussion questions related to affordable housing were asked in the Housing Policy Planning Discussion Paper, and a total of 67 submission responses were received. Comments related to affordable housing included the following: • the Region should maintain the ROP definition for affordable housing to be consistent with other municipalities in the GTHA and the PPS; • affordable housing should be measured using median household income; • regional policies that emphasize intensification, higher densities, secondary units and a broader mix and diversity of residential types would encourage the development of smaller units that could create opportunities for affordable and more attainable home ownership; and • area municipalities should be able to determine the appropriateness and implementation of targets at the local level that support the Region-wide affordable housing target. First, there is a need to reexamine how we define affordable housing, including how we measure, monitor and report on such housing, and determine appropriate targets. Second, there is a need to strengthen policy environment such that less expensive forms of housing are better enabled, while barriers to more affordable forms of housing are identified and removed. Affordable Housing Definition: Housing is generally described as “affordable” when households spend less than 30 per cent of income on housing. Both Statistics Canada’s Census of Population and the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation’s (CMHC) survey of core housing need report on the number of households spending 30 per cent or more of gross income on shelter costs. The PPS defines affordable housing the same way, but also includes market-based thresholds. The PPS defines affordable housing as: a) in the case of ownership housing, the least expensive of: i. housing for which the purchase price results in annual accommodation costs which do not exceed 30 per cent of gross annual household income for - 136 - Envision Durham | 44 low and moderate income households; or ii. housing for which the purchase price is at least 10 per cent below the average purchase price of a resale unit in the regional market area; b) in the case of rental housing, the least expensive of: i. a unit for which the rent does not exceed 30 per cent of gross annual household income for low and moderate income households; or ii. a unit for which the rent is at or below the average market rent of a unit in the regional market area. The current ROP definition matches the PPS. Although some municipalities do not include market-based thresholds, they would only be considered if they were lower than the income-based thresholds. The PPS and current ROP definition therefore have a higher standard for affordable housing. It is worth mentioning that funding for affordable housing projects can target deeper levels of affordability like 80 per cent of average market rent. Discussion questions #1 and #2 from the Housing Policy Planning Discussion Paper asked if the Region should maintain the ROP definition for affordable rental and ownership housing respectively. Public consultation confirmed that the ROP definition should be maintained to be consistent with the PPS and other GTHA municipalities. Low and moderate income households are defined as those in the bottom 60th percentile. Some public responses suggested that the Region use median income (50th percentile) to calculate affordable housing. Using the median income would establish a lower threshold for determining “affordable” housing. It should be noted that most municipalities monitor affordable housing using the 60th percentile, while others including York Region also report on affordable housing using median household income. 18. Proposed Direction: Affordable Housing Definition 1. The current ROP definition for affordable housing is consistent with the PPS and should be maintained. 2. The Region should consider monitoring affordable housing using the 50th percentile in addition to using the 60th percentile. Affordable Housing Targets: The Housing Planning Policy Discussion Paper posed question #4: “Should the Region consider increasing or decreasing its affordable housing targets?”. Responses generally agreed that targeting 25 per cent of all new housing as affordable is still appropriate. Moreover, many municipalities in Durham have their own targets for affordable housing that are based on local needs. Many responses to question #4 stated that it was not a fair comparison to use a regional market area to measure affordability within each of the area municipalities. It is more difficult for municipalities in the south and - 137 - 45 | Envision Durham west of the region to achieve the same standard for affordability. However, the PPS defines the regional market area as typically being represented by the upper-tier municipality (i.e. Durham Region). In some cases, a regional market area can be larger, but the PPS does not contemplate using a smaller area. To assist with the application of provincial policy, it is suggested that the ROP target of 25 per cent affordable housing be applied to the region as a whole. Applying this target to the region as a whole is a similar approach to other upper-tier municipalities such as York Region, which targets a minimum of 25 per cent of new housing units to be affordable “across the region”. Area municipalities may consider the Regional target as a minimum or use a higher target where appropriate. Within areas intended to accommodate intensification, certain municipalities including York and Clarington use a 35 per cent affordable housing target for their intensification areas. This approach is being suggested within Durham’s Strategic Growth Areas to increase affordable housing opportunities in locations well-served by transit. The Housing Policy Planning Discussion Paper posed question #5: “Should Durham consider higher affordable housing targets within specific locations, such as within Strategic Growth Areas that are near key transit corridors?”. Responses were generally 4 Barriers to affordable housing can include: a lack of housing options, by type, size and tenure; the planning approvals process, where zoning by-laws are not up to date or aligned with provincial regulations; a lack of supportive of higher affordable housing targets in these areas. Official Plans for Clarington and York Region have higher targets for affordable housing in certain locations. 19. Proposed Direction: Affordable Housing Targets 1. Maintain a minimum affordable housing target of 25 per cent which would apply to the region as a whole. 2. Establish a new affordable housing target for at least 35 per cent of new housing within Strategic Growth Areas. Supporting Affordable Housing: The ROP should support complete communities with affordable housing choices. Affordable housing can take different forms from secondary units and to multi-residential apartments. Official Plan policies and local zoning by-laws can influence the supply of affordable housing by removing barriers 4 to building less expensive housing. The Housing Planning Policy Discussion Paper asked question #3: “Should the Region take a more active role to increase affordable home ownership options?”. Responses generally agreed that the Region should continue to focus on affordable rental housing; however, incentives for new construction or relief from planning fees; an absence of policies encouraging innovative housing forms and tenure, such microhomes and shared living arrangements, etc. - 138 - Envision Durham | 46 there is also support for increasing home ownership. Some have suggested that affordable ownership housing can be supported through policies that emphasize intensification, higher densities, smaller units and a broad mix of residential types. Many responses also identified financial incentives to increase the supply of affordable housing. Currently, Durham Region provides the following tools which support the development of affordable housing: 1. redevelopment credits under development charge by-laws; 2. exemptions under the Development Charge Act, UOIT Act and Regional DC by- laws; 3. intensification servicing policy; and 4. Regional Revitalization Program (RRP). Municipalities can also establish incentives through Community Improvement Plans (CIPs) under section 28 of the Planning Act. CIPs enable municipalities to provide grants, loans or other incentives for affordable housing projects, such as reductions or deferrals of application fees, and development charge deferrals or reductions. The Region is concurrently undertaking an investigation of a Regional CIP that could be used to support the delivery of affordable housing. Figure 3: Ritson Residence, located in Oshawa, is an example of housing that received funding to build affordable rental units. Not all incentives require direct public funding. Households in need of affordable housing often require less parking, which is expensive to construct and maintain. Although the regulation of residential parking standards is not within the Region’s jurisdiction, the ROP could encourage area municipalities to consider reduced parking standards as one way to help offset some of the cost of developing affordable housing. 20. Proposed Direction: Supporting Affordable Housing 1. Add a new policy to encourage less expensive housing including secondary units, microhomes, purpose-built rental housing and medium and high-density apartments in areas that are well served by local amenities including transit, schools and parks. 2. Encourage reduced parking standards as a way to support the delivery of affordable housing, including purpose- built rental housing. - 139 - 47 | Envision Durham Inclusionary Zoning The Province recently amended the Planning Act to allow lower-tier municipalities to implement inclusionary zoning to create affordable housing. Although inclusionary zoning must be applied through area municipal zoning by-laws, there may be role for the Region to facilitate inclusionary zoning in Durham. The inclusionary zoning regulation (O. Reg. 232/18) allows the use of inclusionary zoning within a protected Major Transit Station Area, Development Permit System (DPS) area, or as ordered by the Minister. The regulation prohibits the use of inclusionary zoning from developments which contain fewer than 10 residential units, although proposals from non-profit housing providers are exempt from this requirement. The regulation also includes minimum transition provisions for an Official Plan amendment and/or a Zoning by-law amendment made prior to the adoption of a municipal inclusionary zoning framework. The Planning Act allows municipalities to use inclusionary zoning to require up to 10 per cent of residential developments in protected MTSAs to be affordable. To help inform changes to the Region’s housing policies, the Housing Policy Planning Discussion Paper asked: “Should the ROP include policies on inclusionary zoning?” (question #8). Submissions generally supported ROP policies that encourage area municipalities to implement inclusionary zoning, as one tool to help increase affordable housing, and allow each area municipality to determine if inclusionary zoning is appropriate within their respective jurisdiction. Many respondents felt there could be a role for the Region to help facilitate and administer inclusionary zoning in Durham. Provincial regulations prescribe how municipalities can implement inclusionary zoning and the first step is to complete an assessment report to understand local housing supply and demand, financial viability, as well as potential impacts which might arise from inclusionary zoning. Work on the Regional Housing Assessment Report was initiated in December 2020 and is expected to be completed in 2021. The assessment report will also serve as the basis for implementing inclusionary zoning within the Region’s area municipalities (where permitted by provincial regulation). 21. Proposed Direction: Inclusionary Zoning 1. As noted in Proposed Direction 17. (2.) above, complete a Regional Housing Assessment Report (currently underway) to address housing supply and demand as well as financial viability. Upon completion of the Regional Housing Assessment Report, establish inclusionary zoning policies in the Regional Official Plan to enable area municipalities to establish inclusionary zoning within their respective jurisdictions within Major Transit Station Areas. Secondary Units Significant updates to the Region’s existing approach and policies related to “secondary units” are necessary to conform to the current provincial policy landscape. While - 140 - Envision Durham | 48 secondary units (referred to in provincial plans as “additional residential units”) are encouraged within the current ROP as a means to increase affordable rental housing and residential intensification, regional initiatives and significant shifts in provincial direction highlight the importance of this form of housing and the need to bring ROP policies into conformity. Both the At Home in Durham and the Affordable and Seniors’ Housing Task Force recommendations support the creation and maintenance of rental housing, specifically acknowledging the need to encourage area municipalities to review and develop enabling policies for secondary units in existing housing and new housing developments. A key step towards achieving this objective is to update ROP policies in accordance with provincial plan directions and Planning Act regulations. To help inform the Region’s conformity exercise, the Housing Policy Planning Discussion Paper asked a discussion question (#7) to better understand “What other barriers should be removed to make it easier to build secondary units, such as basement apartments?”. In addition to parking requirements, which were decidedly a local matter, other considerations highlighted servicing constraints (particularly within rural communities) and the potential impact of secondary unit regulations on temporary use housing, such as “garden suites”. Secondary units are an important tool in contributing to the supply of private sector affordable housing choices and are widely recognized as one of the most affordable forms of rental housing. This housing form contributes to affordability by optimizing the use of the existing housing stock and infrastructure, while also providing an income stream for homeowners, including younger and older homeowners, who may respectively have a greater need for income to help finance and/or remain in their homes. 22. Proposed Direction: Secondary Units 1. Introduce policies for secondary units that would: a) permit the authorization of secondary units in detached, semi-detached and townhouses, where feasible (local standard setting still applies); b) permit secondary units within buildings or structures ancillary to the primary dwelling. This direction applies even if the primary dwelling already contains a secondary unit; and c) encourage reduced parking requirements such as one parking space per secondary unit (including “tandem” parking), except where an area municipal by-law is passed to remove this requirement for one parking space (i.e. in areas well-served by transit, such as MTSAs, Regional Centres and Corridors). 2. Allow for secondary units subject to the availability of appropriate water and sewer servicing. 3. Maintain permissions for “garden suites” as a housing option, provided they are authorized through a temporary use by- law, and are identified as one of the potential forms of secondary units (i.e. - 141 - 49 | Envision Durham building or structure ancillary to a primary dwelling). Microhomes “Microhomes” or “tiny homes”, are an emerging form of smaller, prefabricated dwellings that have risen in popularity due to their cost savings, that are quicker and cheaper to build and maintain than a typical house. Microhomes represent an alternative housing option and have the potential to assist with both affordable home ownership and rental housing supply. The Region recently expedited innovative housing developments that feature modular homes (prefabricated units) and a “microhome pilot” for temporary supportive housing (Report #2020-SS-9), consistent with the goals of At Home in Durham and Council’s commitment to increasing the supply of affordable housing. Figure 4: An example of a 320 sq. ft. microhome pilot built in Oshawa by Durham Non-Profit Housing Corporation. In light of this emerging housing solution, the Housing Planning Policy Discussion Paper posed question #13: “Should the Region encourage the development of tiny homes to enable more affordable housing options? If so, where?”. There was general support for tiny homes as a relatively low-cost housing solution, with an emphasis on the notion that these units are a potential option for housing that is: affordable; accessible; and can act as a temporary solution to assist with homelessness. While the potential benefits were recognized, from a policy perspective, it was acknowledged that barriers to building tiny/microhomes exist given there are currently no consistent practices, zoning by- law provisions, or definition that contemplates size, mobility, etc. Although there are no current barriers to constructing “microhomes” as a single detached dwelling type, to help reduce any perceived barriers, the following proposed policy directions focus on clarifying permissions that already exist to facilitate “microhomes” as a viable built form within the region. 23. Proposed Direction: Microhomes 1. Add a definition for “microhomes” as noted in the Glossary (see Appendix A). 2. Require that microhomes comply with the health and safety requirements of Ontario’s Building Code, municipal zoning and other local by-laws. 3. Clarify that a microhome may be an appropriate form for a temporary garden suite or secondary unit ancillary to the primary dwelling, where permitted. - 142 - Envision Durham | 50 Shared Living Shared living is another potential solution to improving housing affordability. Innovative housing arrangements, including co- ownership and shared equity models, have the potential to create affordable ownership housing and can appeal to first-time homebuyers, seniors wanting to downsize and others. In addition, shared living arrangements provide for a range of health, economic and social benefits. In recognition of the role that innovative living have on affordable housing, the Affordable and Seniors’ Housing Task Force adopted recommendation 2-11 which “Supports the implementation of innovative forms of affordable rental and seniors’ housing, including pocket housing, garden suites, secondary units, as well as innovative forms of tenure, including co-ownership and life-lease housing.” Planning policies and by-laws need to be crafted so they do not create unnecessary barriers to innovative housing arrangements such as shared living. As per Bill 69 (the Golden Girls Act, 2019), planning authorities cannot pass a by-law that has the effect of distinguishing between persons who are related and persons who are unrelated including, for greater certainty, unrelated seniors in respect to occupancy. In light of this approach, the Housing Planning Policy Discussion Paper posed question #17: “Should the Region have a role in helping to facilitate shared living housing?”. While there was general support for the notion of shared living, jurisdictional scans did not identify meaningful upper-tier tools that would help facilitate, or likewise, create barriers to, such arrangements. Current ROP policies do not preclude this form of housing arrangement. Therefore, it is proposed that “innovative housing arrangements” be supported by a new definition for “housing options”. The ROP would introduce policy to monitor new and innovative forms of affordable housing arrangements and encourage area municipalities to enable innovative housing arrangements through area municipal plans, policies and by-laws. 24. Proposed Direction: Shared Living 1. Support the practice of shared living, including various iterations of innovative housing arrangements, by adopting a new definition for “housing options” consistent with the PPS (also see Housing Options section). This new definition should explicitly include a variety of housing arrangements and forms such as, but not limited to shared living, life lease housing, co-ownership housing, co- operative housing, community land trusts and land lease community homes. 2. Monitor and enable new and innovative affordable “housing options” which is inclusive of shared living arrangements, regardless of tenure. 3. Encourage the development of new affordable rental and ownership housing options, including a variety of innovative housing arrangements. - 143 - 51 | Envision Durham Adaptive Re-use Area municipalities are responsible for conserving, protecting and enhancing the built and cultural heritage resources of the municipality, but the Region has a role in supporting best practices including adaptive re-use. A public submission received through the Housing Planning Policy Discussion Paper suggested that consideration be given to adaptive re-use of heritage properties, including residential as well as former commercial and industrial buildings, for the purposes of converting into multi-unit housing developments. The renovation of the Genosha Hotel in downtown Oshawa to mixed-use residential apartments above ground floor commercial uses was cited as a good example of adaptive re-use. This project was made possible in part by the Region’s Revitalization Program (RRP). There are existing provincial policies that support the notion of adaptive re-use, namely as a consideration before developing new public service facilities (PPS) and for building conservation as a means to promote integrated waste management (Growth Plan). The Region already supports and participates through the RRP, financially and otherwise, in the intensification, redevelopment and revitalization of properties and entire areas, which does not preclude adaptive re-use of existing buildings. In addition, the Region encourages the conservation, protection and/or enhancement of built and cultural heritage resources, wherein adaptive re-use would be considered one of the methods for conserving and enhancing such resources. Councils of the area municipalities have jurisdiction over how to utilize the Ontario Heritage Act to implement this policy direction. Nonetheless, there remains an opportunity for the Region to support adaptive re-use as a viable option to minimizing waste while strengthening built and cultural heritage. 25. Proposed Direction: Adaptive Re-use 1. Encourage built and cultural resource conservation through adaptive re-use. 2. Support the adaptive re-use of existing buildings. Condominium Conversion and Demolition Control Condominium ownership has become the dominant ownership model for higher density residential development. At the same time, the construction of new purpose-built rental housing has remained low. The existing rental housing stock is aging and in many cases is in need of repair. There is also increasing demand to convert existing rental buildings to condominium ownership, either as separate owner-occupied units or for purchase by investors as individually owned rental properties. There is also increasing demand toward demolishing existing rental apartment buildings to permit higher density privately- owned condominium buildings. Often, these - 144 - Envision Durham | 52 proposals are in areas that would support residential intensification. When considering new development applications, in accordance with the PPS and Growth Plan, municipalities are required to support a range and mix of housing options. As a part of a balanced housing system, the region requires an appropriate balance between rental and private ownership to provide housing to residents of various socioeconomic needs. Several Regional plans and strategies promote a range and mix of housing options. Affordable rental is identified as the second goal of At Home in Durham, and objective 4.1 of the Housing Plan is to preserve rental stock. Furthermore, Affordable Rental and Seniors’ Housing Task Force recommendation 1.8 is to preserve purpose-built rental though demolition control. Since the preservation of rental housing is a Regional priority, the Housing Policy Planning Discussion Paper asked three questions specifically related to condominium conversion and demolition (#9, 10 and 11): • Should Durham continue to combine certain area municipalities as a part of its required three per cent vacancy rate for rental conversion? • Should Durham consider reviewing its rental conversion policies to consider exceptions under certain circumstances? • Should the ROP encourage municipalities to enact demolition control by-laws to preserve existing rental housing? Responses to the Housing Policy Planning Discussion Paper generally support stronger policies to protect rental housing from condominium conversion. Some responses supported ROP policies to protect rental housing from demolition, although most believe that area municipalities should determine if and where such regulations should apply. ROP policies currently protect rental supply by discouraging condominium conversions when vacancy rates are at or below three per cent. In recent years, the Region has received residential development requests for the following two scenarios: • the conversion of existing rental properties to condominium tenure; and • the construction of new condominium units at the expense of demolishing existing multi-unit rental housing. In accordance with Section 99.1 (1) of the Ontario Municipal Act, 2001, where at least six dwelling units exist, area municipalities may prohibit and regulate the following: • the demolition of residential rental properties; and • the conversion of residential rental properties to a purpose other than the purpose of a residential rental property. Many municipalities in Ontario have official plan policies that discourage conversion of residential rental units to condominium tenure and some single and lower-tier municipalities have demolition control by- laws. Although the current ROP contains policies that discourage condominium - 145 - 53 | Envision Durham conversions, opportunities exist to clarify and strengthen those policies to further protect rental housing. 26. Proposed Direction: Condominium Conversion and Demolition Control 1. Amend ROP policy 4.3.4 for administrative simplicity to ungroup the area municipal rental vacancy thresholds, so that the vacancy rate must be three per cent or higher for one year in both the region as a whole and the respective area municipality, for a conversion from a rental property to a condominium to be permitted. 2. Consider an exemption to current policy 4.3.4 provided that criteria are met to mitigate the loss of older rental housing stock, such as: a) demonstrating that there is a net benefit for housing in Durham that will advance the goals of the Region’s 10- year housing and homelessness plan (At Home in Durham); b) ensuring existing tenants will have the right of first refusal to purchase a replacement unit; c) requiring a suitable tenant relocation plan for any existing residents who may require relocation assistance; and d) a Regional Official Plan Amendment may be required if the rental vacancy rate is below three per cent. 3. Add definitions for “rental housing”, “rental property” and “condominium conversion” as noted in the Glossary (see Appendix A). 4. Consider policies that encourage area municipalities to protect rental housing from demolition. Short-term Rentals In the last decade short-term rentals have emerged as a significant challenge for many municipalities in the GTHA, Ontario and across the world. Although these types of accommodations can help tourism, they can also impact the supply of homes for people to live. Short term rentals detract from a readily available supply of permanent housing units. It is important to preserve rental housing as a vital component of a healthy housing system in Durham. Short-term rentals can provide some additional supply to the housing market for some residents that do not need a private kitchen and living space, but where these units replace existing homes and apartments, they can magnify affordability concerns. The Housing Policy Planning Discussion Paper asked: “Should the ROP include policies regarding the regulation of short-term rental housing?” (question #12). Submissions received generally support ROP policies that encourage area municipalities to regulate short-term rentals, but there is still appears to be a desire to let each area municipality determine if and where such regulations are appropriate. Many respondents also believe that there is a role for the Region to monitor short-term rentals in Durham. Single- and lower-tier municipalities can use regulation and licensing to help prevent the - 146 - Envision Durham | 54 loss of permanent rental housing from conversion to short-term rentals. Many municipalities including Toronto and Oshawa have implemented zoning by-laws that regulate short-term rentals as a way to mitigate the loss of housing. For example, some municipalities regulate short term rentals by allowing them only within an owner’s principal residence, allowing hosts to rent suites or rooms but not an entire house or apartment. Municipalities may choose to consider regulating short-term rentals where rental supply is low and demand for tourist accommodations are high. For example, in Durham’s northern municipalities, there is also a need to enable tourism activities like fishing and hunting, where there are fewer tourist accommodation options. As a result, demand is created to existing rental units to tourists for a short-term stay. This scenario can put additional pressure on an already low supply of rental units for longer-term rentals. To preserve existing rental housing the Region could encourage municipalities in Durham to regulate short-term rentals if there is significant risk to the local rental housing supply that would result in a decline in affordability. The Region should monitor and identify trends associated with short-term rentals to help municipalities identify if there is a need to regulate them. Monitoring could include an annual survey of short-term rental units, monitoring academic research and following best practices from other communities. 27. Proposed Direction: Short-term Rentals 1. Consider ROP policies that encourage area municipalities to enact zoning by- laws, regulate and license short-term rentals if and where they determine it to be appropriate. 2. Support municipalities by undertaking an ongoing monitoring program to measure the number of short-term rentals by type (room or entire home) compared with the broader rental housing market. Special Needs Housing Provincial land use policies encourage housing options that accommodate all types of people and households throughout Ontario, including accessible housing options for seniors and other people with physical and mental health challenges. Accessible housing design entails eliminating mobility barriers like stairs and narrow doorways. It is important to locate accessible and seniors’ housing near services (institutional, community, commercial, etc.), amenities (parks, trails, etc.) and transit, typically found within designated intensification areas. ROP policies could be strengthened to protect and encourage accessible and seniors’ housing within these areas as well. 28. Proposed Direction: Special Needs Housing 1. Encourage and prioritize the development of accessible and supportive housing options for people with special needs in areas that have - 147 - 55 | Envision Durham access to community services, amenities and health care. 2. Require that all major residential development applications within Strategic Growth Areas provide an Affordability and Accessibility Analysis within the Planning Justification Report. For the purposes of this policy, major residential development means the creation of 100 or more residential units, or, the construction of a residential building or buildings with a gross floor area of 10,000 square metres or more. 3. Add a definition for “special needs housing” as noted in the Glossary (see Appendix A). - 148 - Envision Durham | 56 Supportive Infrastructure The planning, financing and provision of adequate municipal services 5 is a principal role of the Region. Ensuring supportive municipal infrastructure is in place (or will be in place for future needs) and maintained on a regular basis is essential for a growing, economically competitive region. The current ROP does an appropriate job of setting the context for policies that apply to addressing infrastructure needs, namely through: • Section 5: Cultural, Health and Community Facilities, and Infrastructure; and • Section 6: Finance. In addition, specific policies throughout the current ROP are intended to ensure water and sewage services, both public and private, are available to support the health and sustainability of settlement areas. The key policies governing the provision of services within specific settlement area designations will largely be carried over, where appropriate, to the new ROP in accordance with the servicing hierarchy set out by the PPS. Under this hierarchy: • municipal sewage services and municipal water services are the preferred form of servicing for settlement areas; 5 Within the context of Supportive Infrastructure delivered by the Region, “municipal services” refers to growth-related infrastructure such as regional roads, • in areas where full municipal sewage and water services are not available, planned or feasible, municipalities may allow the use of private communal sewage services and private communal water services; • where the above noted options are not available, planned or feasible, individual on-site sewage services and individual on- site water services may be used provided site conditions are suitable over the long- term; • partial services shall only be permitted under certain circumstances, including where necessary to address failed individual on-site sewage and water services in an existing development, or within settlement areas to allow for infilling and minor rounding out of existing development provided site conditions are suitable over the long- term. This chapter highlights proposed policy directions for supportive infrastructure. Goals for Supportive Infrastructure Envision Durham provides an opportunity to elevate the importance and emphasize the influence that supportive infrastructure has on region-building. As a result, “Supportive Infrastructure” is a strategic direction within the new ROP, where a new chapter is proposed to address the following themes: • Financial management; water distribution and treatment, and sewage collection and treatment. - 149 - 57 | Envision Durham • Municipal servicing; and • Energy and utilities. 29. Proposed Direction: Goals for Supportive Infrastructure The following overarching goals are intended to reinforce the importance and provision of Supportive Infrastructure across the region: 1. Maintain the long-term financial sustainability of the Region by managing its financial resources in a fiscally responsible and prudent manner. 2. Provide the necessary Regional municipal services to meet current and projected needs for orderly growth in the region in an environmentally and financially sustainable manner. 3. Enable the efficient delivery, location and effective use of energy and utilities. Recent provincial direction has emphasized the need for municipalities to undertake an integrated approach to land use planning, infrastructure investments, and environmental protection. While the Region has always taken a coordinated approach to asset management and to planning and financing infrastructure, there are several new Growth Plan conformity requirements, and emerging best practices pertaining to infrastructure that will be addressed within the new ROP, including: • planning for infrastructure that is supported by infrastructure master plans and asset management plans to ensure infrastructure is financially viable over its full life cycle; • considerations for low impact development and green infrastructure; • encouraging the co-location of linear infrastructure; and • requirements for assessing infrastructure vulnerability and identifying priority actions to increase infrastructure resilience and adapt to climate change. In addition, the following proposed policy directions are intended supplement these anticipated changes and generally reinforce Supportive Infrastructure. Green Infrastructure Broad policy directions for climate resilient development are being proposed through the new Healthy Communities chapter. There remains an opportunity to promote the use of green infrastructure through the delivery of regional services. Feedback from the Durham Sustainability Office, area municipalities and conservation authorities on the Climate Change and Sustainability and Environment and Greenlands Discussion Papers strongly recommended that policies be added into the ROP to support climate resilient development in order to adapt and mitigate to a changing climate, support the Region’s commitment to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and demonstrate leadership in climate mitigation. It was particularly emphasized that integrating green infrastructure and climate mitigation must be introduced at the start of the design process, and that begins with the community’s underlying infrastructure. - 150 - Envision Durham | 58 30. Proposed Direction: Green Infrastructure 1. Establish policies which: a) encourage stormwater management practices through green infrastructure policies supporting low impact development (LID); and b) promote sustainable urban design within the public realm, incorporating principles of green infrastructure where feasible. 2. Require the submission of supporting information that demonstrates how the proposed development would help support the Region’s Climate Resilient Development and Sustainability objectives, as a requirement for a complete application (also see Climate Resilient Development section). 3. Add definitions for “green infrastructure” and “low impact development (LID) stormwater management practices” as noted in the Glossary (see Appendix A). Waste Management The ROP contains waste management policies that direct Regional Council to pursue measures related to the Rethink, Reduce, Reuse, Recycle and Recover waste principles and policies related to the development of landfills in the Region. The waste management section of the new ROP will incorporate changes to provincial policy. The Growth Plan directs municipalities to develop and implement official plan policies to support and plan comprehensively at the regional level for integrated waste management. These policies include enhancing waste reduction, organics management, reuse, recycling and recovery. The Growth Plan also directs municipalities to identify new opportunities for energy from waste. The Region’s current Long-Term Waste Management Plan 2021-2041 focuses on reducing waste generation and maximizing diversion of waste from disposal for the next 20 years. The ROP will help advance these goals by supporting waste diversion, reducing the quantity of waste to be managed and supporting sustainability to address climate change. The current ROP definition of “landfill” closely aligns with the definition of “waste disposal site” found in the Environmental Protection Act and includes all manner of waste disposal sites, not only landfills. To increase clarity, rather than defining landfill sites, the new ROP should more broadly include a definition for “waste disposal site.” Additionally, further clarity is needed to determine which types of waste disposal sites require a regional official plan amendment (ROPA). Existing policy requires a ROPA for a landfill, but not for other types of waste disposal sites, such as waste transfer stations and recycling facilities. It is proposed that where a waste disposal site triggers the requirement for an Environmental Assessment, the Region would require an official plan amendment to ensure that the requisite studies are completed and that adverse effects are avoided or mitigated. - 151 - 59 | Envision Durham 31. Proposed Direction: Waste Management 1. Support new opportunities for energy from waste, source reduction, reuse, diversion and energy from waste where appropriate, consistent with the Long- Term Waste Management Plan guiding principles. 2. Recognize the Region’s Long-Term Waste Management Plan and support for other Regional initiatives and coordination with area municipalities. 3. Add a definition for “waste disposal site” as noted in the Glossary (see Appendix A). 4. Require new waste disposal sites that trigger the requirement for an Environmental Assessment be considered through a Regional Official Plan Amendment. 5. Add a policy that requires studies to ensure the protection of human health and the environment, including studies that address impacts on air emissions, leachate, noise, odour, dust and recommendations that address such impacts as applicable prior to the approval of any new or expanded waste disposal site. Telecommunications Infrastructure In support of the proposed policy directions for Broadband infrastructure within the Prosperous Economy section, some responses to the Urban System Discussion Paper’s discussion question #17: “What type of Regional Official Plan policies should be provided to support the deployment of broadband infrastructure?” also indicated a preference for more detailed policies related to co-location of broadband/telecommunication infrastructure, the establishment of a “dig- once” policy that would provide broadband conduit as part of road construction projects, and policies that allow regional funding for broadband projects through Community Improvement Plans. 32. Proposed Direction: Telecommunications Infrastructure 1. Investigate the feasibility of a Dig Once policy, which would allow and/or require broadband infrastructure to be installed during road construction/reconstruction and other major development activities. 2. Encourage co-location on shared towers and structures, wherever possible. Energy Implementation of energy conservation and efficiency measures and the establishment of renewable and alternative energy systems across the region will help our communities mitigate, adapt and build resilience to the impacts of climate change. While the current ROP supports renewable energy, a new emphasis on climate change and direction from the Durham Region Strategic Plan indicates a need for more comprehensive policies. There is broad support for renewable and alternative energy systems across all provincial planning documents, including the specific identification of district energy. The area municipalities, to varying degrees, also - 152 - Envision Durham | 60 support the development of alternative and renewable energy through their official plan policies. The Climate Change and Sustainability Discussion Paper asked several questions pertaining to energy sources, production and distribution (questions #5 to #7). In summary, responses indicated: • most municipalities support restrictions for large renewable energy facilities on prime agricultural lands, as well as within and/or in proximity to natural heritage systems, vegetation protection zones, and natural hazards; • there is a desire for the Region to consult with area municipalities to develop renewable and alternative energy infrastructure; • land use compatibility is paramount; • district energy is an area that should be supported by the Region; • opportunities should be sought for academic collaborations and support of new innovations, public/private partnerships and demonstration and pilot projects; and • the Region should facilitate connections between area municipalities and energy providers. 33. Proposed Direction: Energy 1. Recognize energy conservation and efficiency measures and renewable and alternative energy systems as critical to reducing greenhouse gas emissions and adapting and building resiliency to the impacts of climate change. 2. Continue to promote efficient land use and development patterns that facilitate sustainable transportation, energy efficient design and low carbon district and renewable energy generation options. 3. Encourage the development of Community Energy Plans as a part of the secondary planning process to help achieve reduced energy demand, support active transportation and transit and utilize renewable and alternative energy options. 4. Add definitions, based on the PPS, for “alternative energy systems”, “renewable energy systems” and “renewable energy source” as noted in the Glossary (see Appendix A). 5. Encourage and support prudent energy conservation and efficiency measures including: a) deep building retrofits (municipal and private) that reduce energy and GHG emissions by 40 per cent or greater; b) energy assessments for new development; c) municipal green development practices and related initiatives, including programs and incentives; d) green infrastructure and passive solar gains; and e) renewable natural gas production through Regional infrastructure. 6. Permit and promote alternative energy systems and renewable energy systems (e.g. wind, solar, biogas, etc.) in accordance with provincial and federal requirements. - 153 - 61 | Envision Durham 7. Prohibit large-scale commercial renewable energy facilities in Prime Agricultural Areas and within natural hazards and key natural heritage features and areas and associated vegetation protection zones. 8. Support innovative ways to develop renewable and alternative energy projects through mechanisms like public- private partnerships or demonstration and pilot projects. 9. Provide direction to the area municipalities to regulate the design and scale of renewable energy systems through their official plans and zoning by- laws with consideration for land use compatibility, including impacts to the natural environment. 10. Encourage the development of district energy systems, especially those based on leveraging Regional infrastructure (e.g. sewer heat recovery) low carbon and renewable energy and provide direction to the area municipalities to promote and facilitate district energy through their official plans and zoning by-laws. 11. Encourage new development and municipally owned facilities to connect to existing and planned district energy networks, whenever feasible. 12. Complete a District Energy Feasibility Study, in consultation with the area municipalities that identifies locations with potential for district energy systems. - 154 - Envision Durham | 62 Vibrant Urban System The current Urban System is comprised of lands within the Urban Area Boundary (Urban Areas) which are designated to accommodate the vast majority of the region’s forecasted population and employment growth. The Urban System is intended to comprise distinct Urban Areas, functioning as healthy and complete communities, and guided by policies that aim to separate incompatible uses, provide for focal points, concentrations of urban activities, and essential connections. The components that currently make up the Urban System are identified on Figure 5, including: • Living Areas: areas used predominantly for housing purposes and population related employment. Living Areas include a diverse range of housing sizes, types and tenure, and also permit additional non- residential uses where such uses are compatible with their surroundings. • Employment Areas: lands set aside for businesses and industries that require separation from sensitive uses, such as residential uses. Employment Areas are characterized by their need to have access to highway, rail, and/or shipping facilities. • Urban Growth Centres: focal points for intensive urban development and the main concentrations of institutional, public services, major office, commercial, recreational, residential, entertainment, and cultural land uses, and also serve as major employment centres (specifically downtown Pickering and downtown Oshawa). • Regional Centres: the main concentrations of urban activity, but at a smaller scale than Urban Growth Centres, providing a fully integrated array of institutional, commercial, major retail, residential, recreational, cultural, entertainment, and major office uses. • Regional Corridors: lands along arterial roads that connect centres and form key connections and provide for the movement of people and goods between Centres. Regional Corridors support public transit through mixed use development at higher densities. • Waterfront Places: focal points along the Lake Ontario waterfront that integrate a range of residential, commercial, and recreational uses with the surrounding Greenlands System. These Urban System components appear in the schedules of the ROP using symbols and designations. To implement the policies of the updated Growth Plan, the designations of the Urban System will be refined and, in some cases, have their detailed boundaries delineated in the ROP. This chapter provides an update on the Growth Management Study, as well as provides initial proposed policy directions related to a vibrant Urban System structure and policy framework, particularly on topics and responses to discussion questions from in the Urban System Discussion Paper. Further policy directions will be released as the various phases of the Growth Management Study are completed. - 155 - 63 | Envision Durham Figure 5: Durham’s Urban System as currently designated in the Regional Official Plan. - 156 - Envision Durham | 64 Regional Growth Management Study The Region is undertaking a Growth Management Study (GMS) as part of Envision Durham. The purpose of the GMS is to assess where and how future population and employment growth should be accommodated within the region and across Durham’s eight area municipalities. To assist with the GMS, the Region retained the consulting services of Urban Strategies Inc. supported by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. The GMS is being undertaken in two phases. Phase One consists of the completion of a Land Needs Assessment (LNA) and related technical studies, which will evaluate the ability of the existing Urban System to accommodate forecasted growth. Phase Two will assess the most appropriate location for any necessary Settlement Area Boundary Expansions. Key outcomes of the GMS will include: • allocating the Regional growth forecast across Durham’s area municipalities to the year 2051; • determining if the Region can achieve the various density and intensification targets contained in the Growth Plan; • determining how much urban land is required for Community Areas and/or Employment Areas, and whether (and how much) Settlement Area Boundary Expansion is required to accommodate forecasted growth; • determining whether certain Employment Areas should be re- designated for non-employment use; • if additional urban land is required, determining the most appropriate location(s) for Settlement Area Boundary Expansion; and • necessary updates to the Urban System and the related policy framework to plan for complete communities that accommodate growth in an efficient, managed, and sustainable fashion that also achieves conformity with provincial policy. Figure 6: Growth Management Study components. - 157 - 65 | Envision Durham All components of Phase One of the GMS are currently underway, with a tentative completion date targeted for mid-2021. Further details can be found in the accompanying Durham Growth Management Study consultant’s Growth Opportunities and Challenges Report, which serves as a starting point for undertaking the LNA and related technical studies by providing essential context, discussing impacts from broader demographic and economic trends, local growth and development trends, and other factors that affect growth. The Growth Opportunities and Challenges Report includes a number of recommendations based on factors that will affect growth which will carry forward into subsequent studies of the LNA and shape the overall outcome of the GMS. 34. Proposed Direction: Regional Growth Management Study 1. Refer to the accompanying Durham Growth Management Study (GMS) consultant’s Growth Opportunities and Challenges Report for further details on the GMS, including essential context and initial recommendations for undertaking the Land Needs Assessment and related technical studies. Regional Population and Employment Forecasts The Growth Plan requires upper-tier and single-tier municipalities to plan for and accommodate the population and 6Amendment 1 to A Place to Grow came into effect on August 28, 2020. employment forecasts that the Province assigns them. At the onset of Envision Durham, the Growth Plan allocated to Durham a 2041 forecast of 1,190,000 people and 430,000 jobs. Recent amendments to the Growth Plan6 have extended the planning horizon to 2051 and increased total forecast for Durham to 1,300,000 people and 460,000 jobs. Included with the amendments is a new provision that allows upper-tier and single- tier municipalities through their MCR process to establish higher forecasts than those provided in the Growth Plan if justified through appropriate technical analysis and studies. Through the Durham Growth Management Study – Growth Opportunities and Challenges Report, the GMS consultant team assessed the 2051 Growth Plan forecast for Durham and determined that a significant increase in growth rates will be required to achieve the forecast (roughly double historic growth rates). The current 2051 Growth Plan forecast is therefore viewed as aspirational and a higher alternative local forecast is not necessary. Along with the long-term forecast, the Growth Plan includes direction on where and how growth should occur. This includes policies that require the vast majority of growth to be directed to Settlement Areas that have a delineated built boundary, have existing or planned municipal water and wastewater systems, and that can support the achievement of complete communities. The Growth Plan also limits growth in rural - 158 - Envision Durham | 66 settlements, areas that do not have existing or planned municipal water and wastewater systems, and locations that are in the Greenbelt Plan area. More specifically, policy 2.2.8.3 (k) limits Settlement Area Boundary Expansion into the Greenbelt Plan Area to a five per cent increase in the geographic size of the current settlement area boundary, up to a maximum of 10 hectares, of which only 50 per cent of the lands can be used for residential development. 35. Proposed Direction: Regional Population and Employment Forecasts 1. Implement the 2051 population and employment forecast contained in the Growth Plan, 2019 as the basis for the Growth Management Study and Land Needs Assessment. Based on work being undertaken through the Land Needs Assessment, higher long-term population and employment forecasts are not being recommended. 2. Provide, through the Land Needs Assessment, a limited amount of growth to Rural Settlements, limited expansion of Settlement Areas located in the Greenbelt Plan Area, and limited growth in areas without municipal water and wastewater systems as required by the Growth Plan. Associated policies will be included in the new ROP. 3. Extend the planning horizon for the ROP, including associated population and employment forecasts, area municipal allocations, and other related targets, to the year 2051. The regional and area municipal population and employment forecasts, households, and rural/urban split, will be provided in five year increments as an appendix to the new ROP. Goals for a Vibrant Urban System The current ROP contains 19 goals for the Urban System and its components, covering a vast array of priorities and desired outcomes, such as balancing population and employment growth, evolving into healthy and complete sustainable communities, and directing growth to appropriate locations. To evaluate the effectiveness and relevance of the existing Urban System goals, and to inform future updates, the Urban System Discussion Paper posed two questions (#1 and #2): “Is the Urban System achieving the Regional Official Plan vision of creating distinct Urban Areas, balancing population and employment growth, and achieving complete communities” and “Are there any additional goals for the Urban System that should be included in the Regional Official Plan?”. Responses indicated that the Urban System goals varied in their ability to create distinct Urban Areas, balance population and employment growth, and achieve complete communities. Responses also suggested the need to further elaborate and emphasize these concepts, including more detailed implementing policies. With respect to additional goals that should be incorporated into the Urban System section of the ROP, one response indicated there should be fewer, yet broader Urban System goals, while others identified the following subject areas as important additions: addressing climate change, - 159 - 67 | Envision Durham providing a full range of housing mix, focusing development/intensification within Strategic Growth Areas, strengthening public realm/urban design policies, focusing on transit and transportation connections, and protecting and integrating the environment with the Urban System. 36. Proposed Direction: Goals for a Vibrant Urban System That the existing goals for the Urban System and its various components be replaced with the following: 1. Establish a vibrant Urban System that supports the development of compact, efficient, and complete communities characterized by a mix of uses, a full range of housing options, transit and active transportation linkages, and pedestrian-oriented built form that is accessible to those of all abilities and ages. 2. Balance employment and population growth by ensuring an adequate supply of Employment Areas, by supporting emerging industries and trends in how and where people choose to work, and by encouraging the intensification of employment generating uses in all designations of the Urban System. 3. Value the diversity of areas and places that comprise the Urban System by protecting and integrating natural and cultural heritage resources, encouraging distinctive place-making through architecture and high-quality urban design, supporting historic downtowns and recognizing the distinct character of Urban Areas in Durham’s northern municipalities. 4. Advance the development of Strategic Growth Areas as focal points for intensification, economic activity, significant employment intensification and employment generating uses, culture, and entertainment, characterized by people-oriented urban built form and transit-oriented development. 5. Manage growth within the Urban System by promoting intensification and development that optimizes infrastructure and public service facilities, implementing practices that support sustainability, climate change mitigation and adaptation, while protecting the components of the Greenlands System. - 160 - Envision Durham | 68 Delineated Built-Up Areas and Designated Greenfield Areas The Province established the Delineated Built Boundary in 2006. Lands included inside the Delineated Built Boundary were considered to be in some stage of urbanization and are referred to as Delineated Built-Up Areas. Lands outside the Delineated Built Boundary but inside the designated Urban Area boundary were identified as Designated Greenfield Areas. Intensification is measured by the rate of residential unit construction occurring within Delineated Built-Up Areas. Any development taking place outside of the Delineated Built Boundary is considered Greenfield development. The Growth Plan promotes growth through intensification throughout the entire Delineated Built-Up Area, as well as through focused intensification within Strategic Growth Areas. The Growth Plan sets out a region-wide intensification target requiring not less than 50 per cent of all new annual residential growth to occur within Delineated Built Up Areas, guided by the development of an intensification strategy. Any additional Settlement Area Boundary Expansion would result in new Designated Greenfield Areas. The Growth Plan provides policy directions for development in Designated Greenfield Areas, which are required to: • support the achievement of complete communities; • support active transportation; and • encourage the integration and sustained viability of transit services by achieving densities and urban forms that are transit supportive. The Growth Plan sets a Designated Greenfield Areas density target of at least 50 people and jobs combined per hectare for Durham. For both the Designated Greenfield Areas density target and the intensification target referenced above, Regional Council may request an alternative target where it is demonstrated that the Growth Plan target(s) cannot be achieved. Figure 7: Illustration of Delineated Built Boundary and Designated Greenfield Areas. - 161 - 69 | Envision Durham Through the Urban System Discussion Paper, several submissions were received providing opinion on appropriate intensification and Designated Greenfield Areas density targets. In some cases, the submission asked the Region to request an alternative (lower) intensification target. In other submissions, comments indicated that the Region should support higher levels of intensification beyond the Growth Plan minimum, and also apply higher density targets for Designated Greenfield Areas. As part of the GMS, technical studies are being undertaken to assess the intensification potential of the Region as well as evaluate trends and densities being achieved during development within Designated Greenfield Areas. These studies will inform appropriate targets for the ROP. Until such studies and the broader LNA is completed, it is premature to recommend or request an alternative target. 37. Proposed Direction: Delineated Built-Up Areas and Designated Greenfield Areas 1. That the generalized Urban Area Boundary currently shown on the various schedules of the ROP be refined and more precisely delineated, based on approved area municipal official plans. 2. Add a schedule to the ROP to more clearly illustrate all of the lands within the boundaries of Delineated Built-up Areas and Designated Greenfield Areas. 3. Promote active transportation and transit supportive development within Designated Greenfield Areas. 4. Encourage community uses and institutional uses to locate within proximity to existing and planned transit. 5. Set the minimum intensification target and the minimum density target for Designated Greenfield Areas contained in the Growth Plan through the pending completion of the Growth Management Study and related technical studies. 6. Encourage developments to consider climate resilience and low impact design (also see Climate Resilient Development section). Identifying and Planning for Strategic Growth Areas The Growth Plan promotes an “intensification first” approach to land use planning and city building by placing an emphasis on optimizing the use of land and infrastructure. While the Growth Plan broadly supports intensification and the creation of compact and complete communities, it prioritizes Strategic Growth Areas (SGAs) as focused areas for mixed-use development at high densities. SGAs are considered key to achieving municipal intensification targets. SGAs are generally described in the Growth Plan as nodes, corridors, and other areas to be the focus for accommodating intensification and higher-density mixed-uses in a compact built form. Areas designated as SGAs signify that they are appropriate locations for focused and dense urban development, supported by municipal infrastructure and transit service. To - 162 - Envision Durham | 70 effectively monitor growth and performance, the Growth Plan requires SGAs to be assigned a minimum density target and their detailed boundaries to be delineated in the ROP. SGAs may be identified by both the Province and the Region. The current Urban System includes areas that meet the definition of an SGA and will therefore require delineation in the ROP. Further, additional policy directions to promote and support the appropriate form of development in these places are required. A review is currently underway of the Region’s existing Urban System components to identify appropriate areas for designation as SGAs. Preliminary observations, outcomes, and proposed directions are discussed in the following sections related to Centres, MTSAs, Corridors, Waterfront Places and proposed directions for supporting SGAs. Centres: Durham’s existing Urban System includes a hierarchy of Centres. Urban Growth Centres are the highest order Centre within the region. There are two Urban Growth Centres located within Durham, currently designated through use of a symbol in the ROP. The Growth Plan designates Durham’s Urban Growth Centres as SGAs and prescribes a minimum density target of 200 people and jobs per hectare, which must be planned to be achieved by 2031. Regional Centres are the next highest order Centre within the ROP, intended to be 7 This figure excludes the Pickering Urban Growth Centre, since the boundaries of the Urban Growth planned and developed as the main concentrations of urban activities, but generally at a smaller scale than Urban Growth Centres. There are 16 Regional Centres 7, including five northern Regional Centres, currently designated in the ROP using a symbol. Regional Centres are important areas within the Urban System framework, often strategically located along key transit and transportation routes. Some Regional Centres consist of larger parcels of land, include traditional shopping centres, and have the ability to accommodate significant redevelopment without the need for land assembly. Other Regional Centres include many of the region’s historic downtowns, where redevelopment may typically consist of more modest intensification or infill projects on smaller parcels of land. The ROP assigns a long term, minimum density target of 75 residential units per gross hectare with a floor space index of 2.5 for the southern Regional Centres, and a long-term minimum density target of 15 residential units per gross hectare for the Beaverton, Cannington, Sunderland, Uxbridge and Port Perry Regional Centres located in north Durham. An assessment of the current state of Regional Centres, as reported in the Urban System Discussion Paper, indicates that most have experienced development which to date is far below their planned long-term density target. In addition, preliminary results from an analysis of intensification potential Centre coincides with the boundaries of the Regional Centre. - 163 - 71 | Envision Durham from a supply side perspective when identifying the availability of underdeveloped lands, suggests certain Regional Centres may not have the ability to meet their long-term density target. Intensification in such Regional Centres may be constrained due to the presence of natural heritage features, the local context and character including historic downtowns and the presence of heritage properties, and the inclusion of extensive stable neighbourhoods which are not anticipated to experience a high rate of redevelopment. The final category in the ROP hierarchy of Centres are Local Centres. ROP policy recognizes three different types of Local Centres of varying scale and function, including Urban Centres, Community Centres, and Neighbourhood Centres. Local Centres are not specifically designated in the ROP and are instead designated in area municipal official plans. As part of the last round of Official Plan conformity review, area municipalities delineated the boundaries of Urban Growth Centres and Regional Centres in their Official Plans. These existing boundaries have been used by the Region for analysis purposes and will form the basis of delineated boundaries in the next ROP. As part of their response to this Directions Report, area municipalities may request minor modifications to the current Urban Growth Centre or Regional Centre boundaries by submitting mapping of the revised boundaries with a supporting rationale. Additionally, Regional staff may identify and recommend minor adjustments and in such cases with consult with area municipal staff. 38. Proposed Direction: Centres 1. Designate and delineate Urban Growth Centres as Strategic Growth Areas and assign an associated minimum density target of 200 people and jobs per hectare to be planned to be achieved by 2031. 2. Review and refine existing Regional Centres against the density targets and planned function as described in ROP policy. Certain Regional Centres shown to be unlikely to achieve their long-term density target or planned function, due to their size and/or composition, will be subject to refinement in consultation with area municipal staff. Refinement may include removal of the Regional Centre designation or the refinement of their detailed boundaries to more appropriately reflect areas intended to achieve the policies and density target for Regional Centres. 3. Designate and delineate Regional Centres, once refined in consultation with area municipalities, in the ROP as Strategic Growth Areas and assign an associated minimum density target. 4. Designate and delineate Regional Centres in Beaverton, Cannington, Sunderland, Uxbridge and Port Perry as “Rural Regional Centres” in recognition of their unique and historic function as clusters for local businesses; shopping and tourist destinations; as concentrations of services and amenities within and serving a primarily rural setting; and, as key locations for accommodating growth in - 164 - Envision Durham | 72 north Durham at a scale that is appropriate for their context. To allow for ongoing monitoring and service delivery, it is proposed that the detailed boundaries of Rural Regional Centres be delineated in the ROP, however, are not proposed to be designated as Strategic Growth Areas as their growth potential is more limited. 5. That the delineated boundaries for Urban Growth Centres, Regional Centres and Rural Regional Centres be based on the current defined boundaries as contained in area municipal official plans. As part of their response to this Directions Report, area municipalities may request modified boundaries by submitting mapping of revised boundaries along with a detailed supporting rationale. Additionally, Regional staff may identify and recommend minor adjustments and, in such cases, will further consult with area municipal staff. Major Transit Station Areas: The concept of Major Transit Station Areas (MTSAs) has existed since the initial Growth Plan (2006) and is reflected in the current ROP in policies for Transportation Hubs and Commuter Stations. The updated Growth Plan elevated the significance of MTSAs by designating them as Strategic Growth Areas and specifying a minimum density target of 150 people and jobs per hectare for MTSAs located along Priority Transit Corridors.8 8 Within Durham Region, the only Priority Transit Corridor is the Lakeshore East GO Transit rail line, up The Urban System Discussion Paper outlined a proposed approach for identifying and planning for the MTSAs located around the four existing and four future GO train stations in Pickering, Ajax, Whitby, Oshawa, and Clarington. Two discussion questions were included in the paper to provide an opportunity for the public and stakeholders to offer input on the proposed approach. The first related discussion question (#11) asked “Is the proposed approach for delineating and assigning density targets to existing and future Major Transit Station Areas appropriate?”. Responses confirmed that the proposed approach to delineating and assigning density targets to MTSAs was sound and supported by the affected municipalities. To solicit input on proposed boundaries for the eight MTSAs, the second related discussion question (#12) asked “Do you have any feedback or input on the proposed draft Major Station Area delineations?”. Responses generally indicated agreement with the proposed delineations. In some cases, there were individual private requests to extend the boundary to include certain properties. There were also a few instances where further clarification was requested on how Employment Areas within MTSA boundaries would be treated, and how environmental features and systems would be considered during the planning of MTSAs. In November 2019, recognizing the opportunity of achieving Transit Oriented Development within Major Transit Station Areas, Regional Council directed staff to to its current termination point at the existing Oshawa GO Train Station. - 165 - 73 | Envision Durham accelerate the MTSA component of Envision Durham. A separate Proposed Policy Directions report, specific to the next steps for MTSAs, has been prepared and was released for review and response in December 2020. 39. Proposed Direction: Major Transit Station Areas 1. Refer to the Major Transit Station Areas Proposed Policy Directions, dated December 1, 2020, which includes a recommendation that the Major Transit Station Areas be designated in the ROP as Strategic Growth Areas, have their detailed boundaries delineated, and be assigned an associated minimum density target. Corridors: Regional Corridors were originally intended to form key connections between Centres and are considered the main arteries of the Region’s urban structure. Regional Corridors are designated as an overlay in the ROP, with the underlying designation and policies remaining applicable. They are intended to be developed as higher density mixed-use areas that support higher order transit services and pedestrian-oriented development. The ROP also includes enabling policies for area municipal official plans to designate Local Corridors and includes high level policy directions and a minimum density target. There are 13 Regional Corridors currently identified in the ROP. Where appropriate and implemented in area municipal official plans, the long-term density target for Regional Corridors is at least 60 residential units per gross hectare with a floor space index of 2.5. Initial observations indicate that Regional Corridors are not equal, with varying degrees of connectivity, existing/planned transit service, and the ability and suitability to accommodate growth and intensification. As part of the Urban System Discussion Paper, two discussion questions were posed seeking input on how to refine and evolve the Regional Corridor designation. The first related discussion question (#8) asked “should the Region delineate only those corridors with significant intensification potential that are also within the Higher Order Transit Network?”. The second related discussion question (#9) asked “Should Regional Corridors that are intended to be priority areas for the highest level of transit service (Highway 2 and Simcoe Street) be delineated in the ROP and assigned an increased minimum density target?”. A wide range of responses to the discussion questions were received. Some comments indicated that the Region should continue to identify all existing Regional Corridors, because transit can always be added and improved. Other comments suggested that the Region should identify and focus on priority corridors that have higher order rapid transit and have the area municipalities designate the other corridors in the area municipal official plans. Further, other respondents indicated a preference for more conceptual and enabling regional policies and boundary delineations, perhaps even a text- based description of the Corridor, which provides flexibility for area municipalities to implement in more detail. - 166 - Envision Durham | 74 Specifically regarding the Highway 2 and Simcoe Street Corridor segments, there was more general agreement that these Regional Corridors should have some primacy in the ROP given their long term planned function as Bus Rapid Transit/Light Rail Transit routes, but there was a variety of comments on how the ROP should delineate and assign densities to these areas. Although Regional staff and the GMS consultant team are still in the process of assessing Regional Corridors, based on their planned function, local character, and growth potential, the following preliminary directions are proposed for review and feedback. 40. Proposed Direction: Corridors 1. Designate the Highway 2 Regional Corridor from the Toronto/Durham border easterly to Highway 418 in Clarington, and the Simcoe Street Regional Corridor from Gibb Street in downtown Oshawa to Highway 407 as a “Rapid Transit Spine Intensification Corridor” signaling its status as a Strategic Growth Area with a long term planned function to develop at higher densities and with built form and a mix of uses that will support Light Rail Transit. Designating the Rapid Transit Spine Intensification Corridor includes consideration of an appropriate density target and delineation approach. 2. That all other Regional Corridors be reviewed and subject to refinement. Through the review, the Regional Corridor overlay would be evaluated against the density target and policies contained in the ROP. The intended outcome of the review would be to remove the Regional Corridor overlay from areas that do not have the ability to achieve the intended function as described in ROP policy and summarized by the following evaluation criteria: a) the connectivity provided by the Regional Corridor to Urban Growth Centres, Regional Centres, Major Transit Station Areas and significant Employment Areas; b) the alignment with existing or planned Higher Order Transit Services; and c) the potential to accommodate long term growth and intensification. 3. As a subsequent step to the refinement of Regional Corridors, that the Regional Corridor policies be revised to provide greater clarity on the geographic application of density targets adjacent to arterial roads and Rapid Transit Spines contained in the ROP. Such revisions would include designating the generalized boundaries of intensification areas along segments of Regional Corridors on an appropriate Schedule and specifying in policy the applicable density target for such intensification areas. This approach is intended to provide greater certainty and direction during the implementation, monitoring and review of development proposals within Regional Corridors. 4. Require area municipalities to delineate the precise boundaries of designated intensification areas along Regional Corridors in their respective Official Plans. - 167 - 75 | Envision Durham Waterfront Places: Waterfront Places are intended to be developed as unique focal points along the Lake Ontario Waterfront, with a mix of uses integrated with the current Greenlands System. There are five Waterfront Places currently designated in the ROP using a symbol. Current ROP policies recognize that each Waterfront Place has a unique context and provides flexibility for implementation by area municipalities. Currently, the ROP provides enabling policies including an overall, long-term density target of at least 60 residential units per gross hectare and a floor space index of 2.0 where determined appropriate in area municipal official plans. Through the Urban System Discussion Paper, input was sought on the future treatment of Waterfront Places in the ROP, including the potential to designate these areas as SGAs. Discussion question #10 asked “should Waterfront Places be specifically designated in the Regional Official Plan?”. Responses indicated a strong preference to retain local flexibility in the implementation and planning of Waterfront Places by area municipalities. Accordingly, most responses recommended that Waterfront Places continue to be designated in the ROP, with a slight majority preferring the continued use of a symbol with high-level enabling policies, as opposed to being specifically delineated as SGAs with prescriptive policy requirements. Some responses noted that the continued designation of Waterfront Places was necessary to identify where development and outdoor recreation opportunities should occur within an otherwise continuous system of shoreline and associated natural features. 41. Proposed Direction: Waterfront Places 1. Continue to recognize Waterfront Places using a symbol with associated enabling policies, allowing for flexibility in implementation by area municipalities. 2. Waterfront Places are not proposed to be designated as Strategic Growth Areas. Supporting Strategic Growth Areas: The existing densities of Urban Growth Centres and Regional Centres as reported in the Urban System Discussion Paper indicated that further development and intensification, often at significant levels, is required to achieve Growth Plan and ROP targets. To inform potential ROP policies that would support development within these and other SGAs, a related discussion question was asked (#15): “Are additional strategies or solutions required to support development in Strategic Growth Areas?”. A theme observed in the responses to discussion question #15 was the need to plan for and provide adequate growth-related municipal services, such as roads, water and sewage infrastructure to support intensification, including pre-servicing. Other comments included continuing to offer financial incentives that support development in SGAs, establishing a Regional Community Improvement Plan, providing flexibility to area municipalities to make minor adjustments to the delineation of Strategic Growth Areas without the requirement for a Regional Official Plan Amendment, and stronger policies that require mixed-use development within SGAs. - 168 - Envision Durham | 76 A comment was also received requesting an update on staff’s response to the following direction from the May 9, 2019 Regional Committee of the Whole: “That as part of the Municipal Comprehensive Review with respect to Intensification, a detailed analysis be provided with respect to water and sewer servicing constraints in Downtowns, major transit station hubs and other key sites for intensification, and that this analysis be provided and reported in the first phase of the review”. The Region’s GMS consultants are undertaking an intensification analysis as part of Phase One of the GMS. The analysis provides an inventory of intensification potential within Urban Growth Centres, Regional Centres, Regional Corridors, Major Transit Station Areas, and Waterfront Places. Area municipal staff have been asked to comment on various drafts of the intensification analysis so that knowledge and expertise of local conditions could be integrated into the analysis. The intensification analysis will be reviewed by the Region’s Works and Finance Departments and Durham Region Transit to inform potential service upgrades to support the projected development in these areas. Further detailed analysis may be required at the time of the next Regional Development Charge Background Study. 42. Proposed Direction: Supporting Strategic Growth Areas That new ROP policies specific to the planning and development of Strategic Growth Areas include the following: 1. Identify designated Strategic Growth Areas and their delineated boundaries within the ROP. 2. Prioritize the provision of municipal services and infrastructure, including water and wastewater services, to Strategic Growth Areas. 3. Identify Strategic Growth Areas as priority locations within the Region for the highest order of intensification, dense urban development and significant employment generating uses such as Major Office. 4. Not allow low density residential uses or low-density land intensive employment uses, including but not limited to car washes, self-storage facilities and land extensive warehousing uses within Strategic Growth Areas. 5. Minimize the use of surface parking and instead encourage underground and/or structured parking in order to maximize development potential and achieve applicable density target and Floor Space Index target. 6. Clarifying that where the boundaries of a Centre, Corridor, Waterfront Place and/or MTSA coincide or overlap, the applicable higher density target requirement would apply. 7. Requiring area municipalities to amend their official plans and zoning by-laws to delineate Strategic Growth Areas and update policies to ensure the minimum density targets contained in the ROP will be achieved. 8. Require area municipal official plans to include policies that identify permitted - 169 - 77 | Envision Durham uses and densities, and provide policy guidance for building heights, siting and design related elements. 9. Require area municipalities to include appropriate policies to enable a transition in heights and densities between new development in Strategic Growth Areas and surrounding areas. 10. Allow area municipalities, in consultation with the Region, to make minor refinements to the delineated boundaries of any Strategic Growth Area without the need for a Regional Official Plan Amendment, except where such boundaries coincide with arterial roads, rail corridors, or clearly defined environmental features. Minor refinements may include the addition of additional parcels adjacent to a Strategic Growth Area Boundaries, or to account for a refinement to environmental features as a result of detailed study. 11. Add a definition for “Strategic Growth Areas” consistent with the Growth Plan, as noted in the Glossary (see Appendix A). 12. Requiring area municipalities to incorporate Official Plan policies/designations for Centres, Corridors, MTSAs and Waterfront Places such that community facilities and amenities, including but not limited to community uses and facilities, schools and parkland, are provided to the satisfaction of the school boards and applicable agencies to support the creation of complete communities. - 170 - Envision Durham | 78 Figure 8: Proposed refinements to the Urban System to designate Strategic Growth Areas. - 171 - 79 | Envision Durham Living Areas The current ROP designates Living Areas as communities predominately for housing purposes, including a diverse range of housing types, sizes, and tenures. ROP policies permit additional uses within Living Areas, such as offices, certain home occupations, convenience stores, limited retailing of goods and services, and certain public and recreational uses. Area municipal official plans are directed to include more detailed policies for communities within Living Areas and may permit additional uses such as major retail uses, Employment Area uses (which are not obnoxious in nature), and others. Within the context of provincial policy and related guidance materials, the Living Areas designation aligns with “Community Areas”. In the Provincial Land Needs Assessment Methodology, Community Areas are described as areas for housing purposes and for population-related jobs (i.e. schools, retail, and service related), most office jobs, and some employment related jobs. 43. Proposed Direction: Living Areas 1. Rename the Living Areas designation to “Community Areas” in the ROP to align with the terminology and intent of these areas as described in provincial guidance documents. 2. Identify Community Areas and Strategic Growth Areas as appropriate locations for the majority of population-related jobs. Central Pickering Development Plan Area The Central Pickering Development Plan (CPDP) is a provincial land use plan for the Seaton Community and Duffins Rouge Agricultural Preserve located in northwest Pickering. The Seaton Community has been planned to accommodate a population of 61,000 residents and 30,500 jobs by 2031, with the long-term intensification goal of 70,000 residents and 35,000 jobs. A requirement of the CPDP is for the Region of Durham and the City of Pickering to amend their Official Plans to conform and implement the policies and schedules of the CPDP. Currently, the ROP identifies lands subject to the CPDP as Specific Policy Area A with associated high-level policies on how development in the Seaton Urban Area will occur, but does not designate an urban structure comprised of Regional land use designations such as Living Areas, Employment Areas, and Major Open Space Areas or Prime Agricultural Areas (for lands within the Duffins Rouge Agricultural Preserve). In recent years, there has been significant progress in the development of Seaton. To assess updates to the ROP as part of Envision Durham that would better integrate the CPDP planning area within the Regional structure, the Urban Systems Discussion Paper asked the following discussion question #16: “Should a Regional structure, consisting of appropriate Regional land use designations, be applied to lands located within the Central Pickering Development Plan Area?”. Responses generally indicated - 172 - Envision Durham | 80 that it was appropriate to apply Regional land use designations, as well as associated policies, to the ROP for the CPDP planning area. 44. Proposed Direction: Central Pickering Development Plan Area 1. Identify a Regional structure for the Central Pickering Development Plan area. Policies would continue to indicate that the area is subject to the provisions of the Central Pickering Development Plan. 2. Add policies specific to the Central Pickering Development Plan Area, including appropriate references to the Central Pickering Development Plan and the City of Pickering Official Plan, where additional detailed policies can be found. Updated Targets and Measuring Density As part of the GMS exercise the current density targets contained in the ROP will need to be evaluated and potentially updated to conform with provincial policy or to reflect planned function and growth potential of the Urban System. Also under consideration are the metrics used in the ROP to express and measure density targets. Currently, the ROP includes density targets expressed as the total number of people and jobs per hectare, the ratio of total floor area to land area (referred to in the ROP as Floor Space Index), and the number of dwelling units per hectare. Figure 9: Methods of measuring density. The Regional Official Plan currently measures density by the total number of residents and jobs per hectare (left image); the ratio of floor area to land area, referred to in the ROP as the Floor Space Index (centre image); and the total number of dwelling units per hectare (right image). - 173 - 81 | Envision Durham There are further variations of how to measure density, including the option to apply either a net density or a gross density. Gross density generally refers to a measurement taken over any given land area, whereas net density refers to a measurement taken only after non- developable areas and/or features have been excluded from the land area calculation. During meetings with area municipal staff, discussions have identified challenges when implementing current ROP targets. Challenges include uncertainty on how to align and apply the gross density targets currently found in the ROP to situations where the area municipal official plans uses net density targets. Area municipal staff have also commented that the Floor Space Index (FSI) targets in the ROP are in some cases unrealistic and challenging to implement, and have provided examples of development proposals where the gross units per hectare density target has been met but FSI target has not, suggesting these two metrics are not aligned. Finally, it has been noted and questioned why some Urban System components are measured by people and jobs per hectare while others are measured using units per gross hectare, and that a more consistent approach is preferred. Through the Urban System Discussion Paper, discussion question #7 asked “How should density (gross or net) be measured in the Regional Official Plan?”. Responses echoed the concerns and challenges raised during meetings with area municipal staff, including a number of submissions requesting that the FSI target be removed. The majority or responses indicated a preference for net densities to be applied in the ROP, although some responses also suggested that a gross density factor continue to be applied, and then allow municipalities to determine how to apply it on a net density basis. Figure 10: Conceptual illustration of net density, which “nets out” certain features or non-developable areas such as highways, railways, flood plains and natural features as part of a density calculation. - 174 - Envision Durham | 82 Through the Urban System Discussion Paper, discussion question #7 asked “How should density (gross or net) be measured in the Regional Official Plan?”. Responses echoed the concerns and challenges raised during meetings with area municipal staff, including a number of submissions requesting that the FSI target be removed. The majority or responses indicated a preference for net densities to be applied in the ROP, although some responses also suggested that a gross density factor continue to be applied, and then allow municipalities to determine how to apply it on a net density basis. The minimum density targets for Local Centres and Local Corridors have not been examined in detail and are not currently monitored by the Region on an ongoing basis. To provide additional flexibility and discretion to area municipalities in achieving area municipal intensification targets, it is proposed that the existing minimum density targets for Local Centres and Local Corridors be removed and replaced with policy language which enables the establishment of appropriate targets in area municipal official plans, provided such density targets do not compete or supplant the function of Regional Centres or Regional Corridors. Regional staff and the GMS consultant team are still in the process of assessing the current ROP density targets as well as appropriate density metrics for inclusion in the ROP. Since no clear preference has yet been identified through the consultation that has taken place to date, preliminary directions on how to measure density in the ROP are proposed for review and feedback. 45. Proposed Direction: Updated Targets and Measuring Density 1. As required by the Growth Plan, the density target for Designated Greenfield Areas will be expressed as a “people and jobs per hectare” target. The following may be netted out during the density calculation of Designated Greenfield Areas: a) natural heritage features and areas, natural heritage systems and floodplains, provided development is prohibited in these areas; b) rights-of-ways for electricity transmission lines, energy transmission lines, freeways as defined by and mapped as part of the Ontario Road Network, and railways. c) designated Employment Areas; and d) cemeteries. 2. As required by the Growth Plan, provide density targets for Urban Growth Centres and MTSAs as a “people and jobs per hectare” target that is measured as gross density (measured across all lands within the relevant boundaries). For consistency, this approach will also be applied to Regional Centres, Regional Corridors and Waterfront Places. 3. Revise the Floor Space Index (FSI) requirements of the ROP, which are currently structured as minimum long- term targets across the broader geography of Centres, Corridors and Waterfront Places. The revised FSI targets will be adjusted to represent a minimum standard of appropriate built form on individual sites within Urban Growth - 175 - 83 | Envision Durham Centres, Regional Centres, Regional Corridors and MTSAs. The objective of this approach is to provide clearer policies with specific and measurable requirements that can be applied during the review of development applications. 4. Provide policies that allow for the inclusion of appropriate density targets for Local Centres and Local Corridors to be part of area municipal official plans. Planning for Employment Employment (job) distribution in Durham is spread across the Urban System in a variety of locations, forms, and functions. Employment may be “population related”, such as commercial, retail, personal service, and institutional (e.g. schools), and may be part of or in proximity to residential areas. Employment uses that are characterized by manufacturing, warehousing, storage, assembly and processing and other uses with unique land needs and/or require separation from residential areas, are directed to designated Employment Areas. Outside of the Urban System, employment is primarily rural in nature, and includes agriculture (farms) and related businesses and services, aggregate extraction operations, uses within Rural Employment Areas, tourism, recreation, as well as others. Across the region, employment may also take place as work from home, or as employment with no-fixed place of work. Employment Areas: Lands designated as Employment Areas are reserved for uses that require access to transportation infrastructure (including goods movement infrastructure), require separation from sensitive lands uses (i.e. residential uses), and/or benefit from locating within proximity to similar employment uses. Employment Areas offer of a range of land parcel sizes, including large sized parcels, which are necessary for land intensive employment uses. Policy directions that speak to the importance protecting and maintaining an adequate supply of Employment Areas are found in the PPS, the Growth Plan, the Durham Region Strategic Plan, as well as the current ROP. The PPS, for example, requires the Region to plan, protect, and preserve Employment Areas for current and future uses. The Growth Plan provides additional and more specific direction, requiring the Region to designate Employment Areas in the ROP and protect them for appropriate employment uses over the long term. To achieve conformity with provincial employment policy updates, the new ROP will: • implement Growth Plan direction for the efficient use and intensification of existing Employment Areas; • establish minimum employment densities and aligning high density employment uses with transit; • refine the current Employment Areas designation to better reflect the actual boundaries of Employment Areas, as opposed to the generalized depictions currently contained in the ROP; and • identify Provincially Significant Employment Zones, which have been - 176 - Envision Durham | 84 identified by the Province as areas for long-term job creation and economic development. To inform other updates to Employment Areas policy, the Urban System Discussion Paper posed a related discussion question (#6): “What Regional policies and approaches could assist in achieving the Regional Official Plan target that 50 per cent of all jobs be in designated Employment Areas?”. One response questioned the appropriateness of maintaining the target that 50 per cent of jobs be provided in Employment Areas, given the shift away from manufacturing in Ontario. Broader themes in the responses included providing financial incentives, reducing development charges, ensuring adequate services and infrastructure (including broadband) are available, intensifying employment areas, establishing minimum employment densities, and limiting Employment Area conversion. 46. Proposed Direction: Employment Areas 1. Continue to require an adequate supply of vacant land with Regional water and sanitary services available within designated Employment Areas to enable the achievement of the Region’s employment forecast. 2. Refine the current generalized Employment Areas designation to reflect more accurate and up to date boundaries based on area municipal official plans and information contained in the Region’s Employment Land Inventory. 3. Apply the Employment Areas designation to the employment lands located within the Seaton/Central Pickering Development Plan area. 4. Extend the Urban Area Boundary to include the Darlington Nuclear Generating Station, in recognition of the scale of development, existing jobs, and the existing provision of full municipal services. 5. Identify a Regional interest in the planning and regulatory process for new nuclear development at the Darlington Nuclear Generating Station as well as the decommissioning and long-term plan for future use of the Pickering Nuclear Generating Station lands. 6. Identify and acknowledge the boundaries of Provincially Significant Employment Zones in the ROP. 7. Include a definition for “Provincially Significant Employment Zones” and a policy that indicates the Province may issue additional supplementary direction for these areas. 8. Delineate the boundaries of Rural Employment Areas. 9. Assess the appropriateness of the current ROP target that 50 per cent of the employment forecast be planned to be accommodated in Employment Areas. 10. Consider including additional policy language for Regional Corridors in Employment Areas that would: a) Continue to encourage office buildings and business parks to be located along Regional Corridors; b) Further to Policy Direction 48. (1.) below, continue to encourage sensitive - 177 - 85 | Envision Durham land uses to locate outside of Employment Areas. Any sensitive land uses within an Employment Area, including hotels, places of worship, and other uses should locate along a Regional Corridor or at the edge of an Employment Area to preserve the broad function of the Employment Area; c) Encourage transit-supportive employment intensive uses to be located along Regional Corridors, while discouraging lower-intensity employment uses; and d) Permit a broader range of intensive commercial uses along Regional Corridors in Employment Areas above what is allowed in the current ROP related to personal service and retail uses within Employment Areas. 11. As part of the GMS, develop a Regional density target for Employment Areas. 12. Enhance ROP policies to promote/encourage the intensification of existing Employment Areas. 13. Monitor the servicing status, supply, and development of Employment Areas. 14. Continue to advance the Region’s pre- servicing of Employment Lands project outside of the Municipal Comprehensive Review. Add policies that enable the Region to undertake studies, strategies, and infrastructure projects to extend Regional services to Employment Areas, should it be determined through regular monitoring that there is not an adequate supply of vacant and serviced lands within Employment Areas. - 178 - Envision Durham | 86 Figure 11: Potential refinements to the Employment Areas designation. - 179 - 87 | Envision Durham Employment Related Policies: Updates to the Growth Plan also include broader employment related policies that apply beyond only designated Employment Areas. These updates include policy that directs major office and appropriate major institutional development to Urban Growth Centres, Major Transit Station Areas, and/or other Strategic Growth Areas with existing or planned frequent transit service. Further, the Growth Plan includes policy to promote compact built form and intensification of retail and service uses. As part of the Urban System Discussion Paper, two discussion questions were posed seeking input on broader employment related policy. Discussion question #4 asked: “Are there specific policies or other measures that are needed to enable the achievement of employment forecasts and/or the Regional Council target of one job for every two persons?”. There were many different responses to the question. In one case, the respondent questioned why and on what basis the ROP continues to identify a target of one job for every two persons. Broader themes in the responses included pre- servicing of employment lands, maintaining an adequate supply of employment areas in strategic locations, supporting innovation hubs, limiting the conversion of Employment Areas, limiting the introduction of sensitive land uses within Employment Areas, the importance of other supportive infrastructure (such as broadband), and providing financial incentives and/or a Regional Community Improvement Plan. The second broader employment related discussion question (#5) asked: “How can Regional Official Plan policies recognize and support the changing pattern of where and how people work?”. Responses included high level policies to support working from home and employment with no fixed place of work, encouraging live-work options, encouraging office/co-working locations in Strategic Growth Areas, supporting necessary technologies to support the change in work (i.e. broadband), stronger policy directions for significant employment in Regional Centres and Corridors, and ensuring transit/transportation connections between residential and employment areas. 47. Proposed Direction: Employment Related Policies 1. Support the development of major office and major institutional development in Strategic Growth Areas, in particular Urban Growth Centres and Major Transit Station Areas, and Regional Corridors with existing or planned frequent transit service. 2. Recognize the importance of knowledge- based industries and emerging leading- edge technologies, including policies that support the expansion of related infrastructure (also see Broadband Infrastructure section). 3. Support existing and emerging business parks by promoting intensification, supporting improved connectivity with transit and active transportation, promoting appropriate amenities, and ensuring the introduction of non- employment uses would be limited and - 180 - Envision Durham | 88 not negatively impact the primary function of the area. 4. Promote compact built form and intensification of jobs provided by retail and service uses throughout the Urban System where appropriate and permitted by the underlying land use designation. 5. Acknowledge and support long term trends for working from home and live- work employment options and the changing nature of employment. 6. Direct retail and office uses to locations with existing or planned active transportation infrastructure so that they are accessible by existing or planned public transit service. Certain Sensitive Land Uses in Employment Areas: As noted earlier, current ROP policy prohibits most sensitive land uses, such as nursing and retirement homes, elementary and secondary schools, and places of worship, from locating within designated Employment Areas. However, more recent provincial plans (i.e. the updated Growth Plan) do not explicitly prohibit places of worship in Employment Areas. At the time of this review, Durham Region is the only upper-tier municipality within the GTHA that explicitly prohibits places of worship within Employment Areas. Over time, a continually diversifying faith base and property market realities have shifted places of worship from traditionally stand-alone institutional buildings to alternative locations including modest units within commercial plazas to units within employment related condominium building spaces to stand-alone buildings within Employment Areas. As a result of this changing landscape and in response to an area municipal request to examine this issue, the Urban System Discussion Paper asked a specific discussion question (#19): “Should places of worship be permitted in Employment Areas?”. Responses varied, with a slight majority of responses preferring the continued prohibition on places of worship within Employment Areas. Responses seeking the flexibility to permit Places of Worship within Employment Areas were often premised on the basis of limiting such permissions to appropriate areas. 48. Proposed Direction: Certain Sensitive Land Uses in Employment Areas 1. Continue to encourage sensitive land uses to locate outside of Employment Areas and explicitly prohibit residential, nursing and retirement homes, and elementary and secondary schools within this designation, while continuing to permit them elsewhere, such as in Community Areas and Strategic Growth Areas. 2. Remove the specific policy prohibition on Places of Worship within Employment Areas and allow area municipal official plans and/or zoning by-laws to regulate the location of these uses, subject to meeting criteria including land use compatibility. Land Use Compatibility: Land use compatibility is premised on the recognition that some land uses and/or facilities are expected or known to cause - 181 - 89 | Envision Durham environmental problems for other uses, and therefore need to be protected and separated from one another. A common application of this principle is to separate and buffer sensitive land uses, such as residential and institutional uses, from uses and facilities that emit noise, odour and/or other emissions, such as industrial, manufacturing, and processing uses. Policies related to land use compatibility are found in the PPS and the Growth Plan. Provincial policy provides direction to ensure major facilities, including energy generation facilities, be separated from sensitive land uses. Provincial Policy also prohibits residential uses and limits other sensitive uses within Employment Areas. There is also a requirement to plan for an appropriate interface between Employment Areas and adjacent non-employment uses in order to maintain land use compatibility. As discussed in the section above, the current ROP includes policies that prohibit most sensitive land uses from locating within Employment Areas. In recent years, land use compatibility concerns have become more prevalent during land use planning exercises and through development applications where sensitive land uses have been introduced near major facilities, industrial uses or commercial areas. Through the Urban Systems Discussion Paper, the Region received submissions related to the separation of incompatible uses, as well as the need to protect and buffer of Employment Areas from other sensitive uses. The current ROP generally implements provincial policy requirements related to land use compatibility by prohibiting most sensitive land uses within Employment Areas. However, additional policy updates to reflect recent changes to provincial policy and to provide direction on study requirements and buffering techniques are required, and to provide guidance where designations abut and conflicts could occur. 49. Proposed Direction: Land Use Compatibility 1. Buffer and separate sensitive uses from incompatible uses and provide policies to identify when and what type of studies are required to demonstrate land use compatibility as part of development applications. 2. Identify on an appropriate Schedule to the ROP the Automatic Action Zone associated with the Pickering Nuclear Generating Station and the Darlington Nuclear Generating Stations. 3. Require area municipal official plans to include policies that restrict sensitive lands uses within the Automatic Action Zone for Nuclear Generating Stations and/or outline how the impacts of these facilities will be considered through the review of development applications within the Automatic Action Zone, including addressing how adequate egress will be maintained in the case of an emergency. “Mixed Use Employment Areas”: At its June 24, 2020 meeting, Regional Council passed a motion “that staff be directed to research and report back to Council on a specific mixed-use land - 182 - Envision Durham | 90 designation”. Discussion by Council members indicated a desire to better understand the interface between residential and employment uses, and if residential uses could be added to certain Employment Areas while still maintaining an employment function and minimum number of jobs in a “mixed-use” format. It was suggested that such an approach would not be considered as a true conversion from Employment Areas to Living Areas but would instead represent a new designation consisting of both residential and employment uses as part of a development, and could serve as a lens for examining conversion requests. Through Envision Durham, the Region has received submissions that seek to introduce residential uses within Employment Areas. These submissions often propose the combination of residential, commercial/retail, and employment generators such as office and other compatible employment uses and are often characterized by their proponents as appropriate mixed-use development. The following is provided within the context of provincial and regional policy. Employment Areas are defined in provincial policy as “Areas designated in an official plan for clusters of business and economic activities including, but not limited to, manufacturing, warehousing, offices, and associated retail and ancillary facilities”. The Growth Plan requires the Region to designate Employment Areas in the ROP and protect them for appropriate employment uses over the long term. Both the PPS and Growth Plan require the prohibition of residential uses within designated Employment Areas, while other sensitive uses that are not ancillary to the primary employment use must also be prohibited or limited. Therefore, any introduction of residential uses into an Employment Area, regardless of the number of residential units proposed or the proposed employment yield constitutes an Employment Area conversion. Under both provincial and regional policy, the addition of residential uses is not permitted within designated Employment Areas. Regional and area municipal official plans policies can impose policy requirements through land use designations that influence the form and function of development, such as requirements for a certain number of jobs or employment floor space to be created as part of a mixed-use area. However, there are no provincial policy safeguards that would mandate that a mix of uses be provided once the conversion has been granted. Although policies may be included within Regional or area municipal official plans, they would remain open to challenge and subsequent removal through future applications and/or appeals. Accordingly, there would be no provincial policy safeguard to prevent the removal any such locally imposed policy requirements. It should be noted that there are current designations within the ROP that provide for higher density mixed use development, including Urban Growth Centres, Regional Centres, Regional Corridors (within an underlying Living Areas designation), Waterfront Places, as well as enabling provisions for local Centres and local Corridors. Employment Area conversion requests will be evaluated consistent with the criteria that - 183 - 91 | Envision Durham were endorsed by Regional Council and will form part of the Land Needs Assessment exercise. Employment Area Conversion: Employment Area conversion generally refers to the re-designation of Employment Area lands to a ‘non-employment’ use, or to permit additional uses which would otherwise not be permitted. In many cases, conversion requests often seek to introduce residential or other prohibited sensitive land uses into designated Employment Areas. Provincial policy allows the consideration of Employment Area conversion as part of a Municipal Comprehensive Review. It also outlines the conditions and criteria that must be met in order to consider a conversion, which includes the following: • there is a need for the conversion; • the lands are not required over the horizon of the Growth Plan for the employment purposes for which they are designated; • the municipality will maintain sufficient employment lands to accommodate forecasted employment growth to the horizon of the Growth Plan; • the proposed uses would not adversely affect the overall viability of the employment area or the achievement of the minimum intensification and density targets in the Growth Plan, as well as the other policies of the Growth Plan; and • there are existing or planned infrastructure and public service facilities to accommodate the proposed uses. To assist in the development of local criteria when considering Employment Area Conversion requests, the Urban System Discussion Paper posed a related discussion question (#14): “Are there other criteria that should be considered when evaluating Employment Area conversions?”. Responses varied, including some comments that the minimum criteria contained in the Growth Plan are sufficient. Most submissions, however, identified additional criteria that should be added as part of the Region’s review, such as criteria to weigh the retention of jobs as part of the conversion, that parcel size, location, and proximity to 400 series highways and other goods movement be evaluated, and that land use compatibility be considered. To provide a transparent process for the consideration of Employment Area conversion requests, the Region formalized its evaluation process, criteria, and submission requirements, as described in Report #2020-P-11. As of February 1, 2021, a total of 47 Employment Area conversion requests representing approximately 780 hectares of land had been submitted to the Region (see Appendix B). 50. Proposed Direction: Employment Area Conversion 1. Report back to Council on recommended Employment Area Conversions upon completion of the review and analysis, and receipt of area municipal positions, as a component of the Land Needs Assessment. - 184 - Envision Durham | 92 Brownfields and Site Contamination Brownfield sites are undeveloped or previously developed properties that may be contaminated. They are usually, but not exclusively, former industrial or commercial properties that may be underutilized, derelict, or vacant. Greyfield sites are in most cases previously developed commercial properties that are now underutilized and/or derelict, but that are generally not contaminated. Comments received through the Urban System Discussion Paper requested that the Region examine and update brownfield and greyfield related ROP policies. The current ROP supports and promotes the rejuvenation and redevelopment of brownfield sites and regeneration areas. However, to ensure that brownfield sites are safe for both humans and the environment, the ROP requires applications for development and redevelopment to be screened for known or suspected contamination. In addition, the ROP requires area municipalities to include policies in their Plans to ensure matters of site contamination are adequately addressed. The ROP’s site contamination policies are implemented through the Region’s Site Contamination Protocol, which is under review at this time. The current Protocol requires development proponents to complete and submit a Site Screening Questionnaire (SSQ) which may lead to additional environmental studies and remediation work to ensure the site is suitable for a sensitive use (i.e. residential). The objective of reviewing the Protocol is to streamline efficiencies and manage Regional risk by ensuring the protection of human health and the environment, while also incorporating any new provincial requirements and/or industry best practices. Policy refinements are required to implement provincial policies that emphasize the re-use of brownfield and greyfield sites, particularly through intensification and redevelopment. The new ROP will reflect the outcome of the review of the Protocol. 51. Proposed Direction: Brownfields and Site Contamination 1. Encourage the redevelopment of brownfield sites and greyfield sites and prioritize the redevelopment of brownfield and greyfield sites within Strategic Growth Areas and other intensification areas. 2. Incorporate terminology and references to the Region’s Site Contamination Protocol (pending the completion of the Region’s review). 3. Require any necessary documentation to implement the Region’s Protocol, including a signed Site Screening Questionnaire (SSQ), as a requirement for a complete application. Settlement Area Boundary Expansion As required by provincial policy, the current ROP only allows Settlement Area Boundary Expansions to occur through a comprehensive review process. The Growth Plan also affirms that Settlement Area Boundary Expansions should occur through an MCR, with some policy exceptions that - 185 - 93 | Envision Durham make it possible for minor adjustments or limited expansions to settlement area boundaries outside of an MCR, subject to certain criteria. Growth Plan policy 2.2.8 outlines an extensive list of requirements that must be met when considering Settlement Area Boundary Expansion. These requirements involve both justifying the need for the expansion by conducting a land budgeting exercise and by also demonstrating that the expansion is technically feasible. The Growth Plan outlines the various elements when assessing the feasibility of a Settlement Area Boundary Expansion, including financing implications for the required servicing and infrastructure, impacts on natural heritage system and features, impacts on the water resource system and features, impacts on prime agricultural areas, limited expansion potential for areas within the Greenbelt Plan Area, as well as others (see Appendix C). Policy 7.3.11 of the current ROP outlines the list of criteria when considering Settlement Area Boundary Expansion. Many of these criteria should be maintained in the ROP, however, changes to the PPS and Growth Plan require that certain criteria be updated to conform with provincial policy. These updates includes increasing the minimum land supply from 10 to 15 years and extending the maximum time horizon from 20 years to 2051. Criteria for Settlement Area Boundary Expansion should also make reference to the Agricultural System and agri- food network, agricultural impact assessment, limited potential within the Greenbelt Plan Area, public service facilities, stormwater management, key hydrologic areas, and Natural Heritage System mapping. To inform the Region’s evaluation of Settlement Boundary Expansion Requests, the Urban System Discussion Paper posed a related discussion question (#13): “Are there any other criteria that should be considered when evaluating Settlement Area Boundary Expansions?”. Overall, the responses indicated that the requirements contained in Growth Plan were sufficient and, in many cases, confirmed the importance of certain provincial requirements such as protecting agricultural land, the availability of existing or planned services, and environmental protection. Comments were also received suggesting the Region consider the contiguity/proximity of proposed expansions to existing Urban Boundaries, prioritizing proposals that minimize the cost to provide infrastructure and public service facilities, and climate change adaptation/mitigation. Appendix C summarizes the extensive list of Settlement Area Boundary Expansion evaluation criteria that are contained in the Growth Plan, Regional Official Plan, as well as additional enhancements/considerations that are recommended and reflected in the proposed policy directions. The Region has received requests for Settlement Area Boundary Expansion on an on-going basis since the initiation of Envision Durham. As of February 1, 2021, a total of 38 Settlement Area Boundary Expansion requests, representing approximately 2,670 hectares of land had been submitted to the Region (see Appendix D). Settlement Area Boundary Expansion submissions received to date includes requests to extend the Urban Area Boundary, as well as requests to expand or “round out” - 186 - Envision Durham | 94 rural settlement boundaries (hamlets) located in the Rural System. In several instances, the request to expand a hamlet boundary relates to previous deferrals to area municipal official plan exercises which considered the “rounding out” of hamlet boundaries. It is noted that the Greenbelt Plan (2017) no longer permits the minor rounding out of hamlet boundaries. Further, the Region has received an interpretation from Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing staff, the planning approval authority for the Regional Official Plan, that the transition rules of the Greenbelt Act, 2005 have not changed in this regard, and as such, further decisions on minor rounding out, regardless of whether the matter is deferred or appealed, would be subject to the Greenbelt Plan (2017), which no longer permits the minor rounding out of hamlets. The completion of the LNA will determine if and how much new urban land is required to accommodate the Region’s 2051 growth forecast. Should a determination be made that additional land is required, the GMS will proceed to Phase Two to determine the most appropriate location for Settlement Area Boundary Expansion. 52. Proposed Direction: Settlement Area Boundary Expansion 1. Consider Settlement Area Boundary Expansions in Phase Two of the Growth Management Study, after the completion of the Land Needs Assessment and if it has been determined additional urban land is required to accommodate the 2051 growth forecast. 2. Recommend the most appropriate location(s) for Settlement Area Boundary Expansion based on the criteria within Appendix C, which includes section 2.2.8 of the Growth Plan and policy 7.3.11 of the ROP, and the following additional criteria: a) that the proposed Settlement Area Boundary Expansion represent a contiguous, orderly, and logical expansion to the existing Settlement Area Boundary; b) that the proposed Settlement Area Boundary Expansion be in proximity to existing or planned transit and active transportation infrastructure; c) that the proposed Settlement Area Boundary Expansion minimize the need to expand or extend public infrastructure; and d) that the proposed Settlement Area Boundary Expansion contribute to context-appropriate population and employment growth that considers balance and distribution across the Region. 3. Establish a 90-day submission window that closes on May 31, 2021 to allow proponents to submit any new requests for Settlement Area Boundary Expansion, or for those with existing requests, allow the opportunity update their requests to respond/address these criteria. 4. Ensure that future urban area boundary expansion criteria within the new ROP be consistent with requirements Growth Plan policy 2.2.8.3. - 187 - 95 | Envision Durham 5. Factor climate change mitigation and adaptation into Settlement Boundary Expansion recommendations, including: a) That any Settlement Area Boundary Expansion be contingent upon the existence/completion of Watershed Plan(s) that incorporates climate change mitigation and adaptation policies, and that Settlement Area Boundary Expansion be required to implement the recommendations of any such Watershed Plan policies. b) That any Settlement Area Boundary Expansion provide protection and improvement of the water resource system and natural heritage system and related features, including features that sequester carbon, and that policies be included requiring more detailed policies and implementation approaches as part of area municipal official plans and Secondary Plans. c) Require Settlement Area Boundary Expansion to achieve a mix of uses at densities and configurations that are supportive of renewable and alternative (low or zero carbon) energy systems and that incorporate measures and policies to support active transportation and transit supportive development. A policy will be included which requires more detailed policies be provided in area municipal official plans and Secondary Plans. 6. In accordance with provincial policy, Settlement Area Boundary Expansion requests and outstanding deferrals that propose the minor rounding out/expansion to hamlet boundaries located within the Greenbelt Plan Area cannot be considered. Secondary Plan Considerations Greenfield development often involves larger tracts of land and proceeds through planning processes that include Secondary Plans and background studies, such as Master Environmental Servicing Plans, watershed plans and/or sub-watershed plans, and other associated studies and plans. PPS policy 1.1.3.7 also allows municipalities to implement phasing policies to ensure that targets are achieved, and infrastructure and public services are provided in a timely manner to meet current and projected needs. Growth Plan policy 2.2.8.c) allows for Settlement Area Boundary Expansions only if the timing and phasing of development within the Designated Greenfield Area will not adversely impact the achievement of minimum intensification and density targets. The current ROP specifies that the Region may only consider amendments to an area municipal official plans to designate a supply of land for development, including expansion to urban area boundaries, provided that the amendment satisfy various criteria including a phasing strategy for the urban area through Secondary Plans in Greenfield Areas and an intensification strategy in Built-Up Areas. Furthermore, development of Greenfield Areas that are greater than approximately 20 hectares shall only proceed within an approved Secondary Plan, and policy 7.3.14.c) requires that Secondary Plans consider sequential and orderly development. The current ROP is in conformity with provincial policy regarding - 188 - Envision Durham | 96 phasing strategies and does not need to be updated substantially in this regard. Other considerations for the preparation of Secondary Plans required by the current ROP include an assessment of how new growth will affect the natural environment including key natural heritage features and/or hydrologic features. Secondary Plans should also assess the need for area municipal services and facilities required to support development. The Growth Plan now requires that Secondary Plans for large-scale development be supported by a stormwater management plan and a subwatershed plan or equivalents. Secondary Plans should also implement the Growth Plan minimum density targets, establish permitted uses, identify densities, heights, and other elements of site design. Policies are required in the new ROP to include a requirement for a stormwater management plan and a subwatershed plan or equivalents to support Secondary Plans. 53. Proposed Direction: Secondary Plan Considerations 1. Require consideration of a stormwater management plan and a subwatershed plan or equivalent to inform and support area municipal Secondary Plan exercises. 2. Require policies that consider low carbon energy systems and other measures as part of Secondary Plans for new communities to demonstrate how they may achieve net-zero/net-zero ready energy performance. - 189 - 97 | Envision Durham Thriving Rural System The current Rural System comprises 84 per cent of the region’s land base and houses approximately eight per cent of Durham’s population (54,000 residents). With almost 300,000 acres of Durham in production, agriculture is one of the largest primary goods producing sectors within the Region. Most of the rural area is planned for agricultural and open space uses, interspersed with rural settlements. The land use designations that make up the current Rural System are: • Prime Agricultural Areas: consists of areas where prime agricultural lands predominate. They also include areas of lesser agricultural significance and additional areas where there is a local concentration of farms which exhibit characteristics of ongoing agriculture. Agricultural areas are used primarily for agriculture and related uses. • Rural Settlements: consists of existing Hamlets, Country Residential Subdivisions, Shoreline Residential Areas, Rural Employment Areas, as well as residential clusters and four hectare lots. • Regional Nodes: are currently identified as Kirby Ski Area (now Mount Brimacombe) and Mosport Park (now Canadian Tire Motorsports Park). The development of these Nodes is intended to complement the goals of the Plan and where applicable, conform provincial policy. New Regional Nodes are not permitted. • Aggregate Resource Extraction Areas: are identified in the current ROP with policies to ensure the orderly and efficient extraction of aggregate resources that minimizes social and environmental impacts. To implement provincial direction, including the addition of a new Provincial Agricultural System, the designations and symbology used to identify the above noted Rural System components (see Figure 12) will be refined and, in some cases, removed. This chapter outlines initial proposed policy directions for a thriving Rural System structure and policy framework. - 190 - Envision Durham | 98 Figure 12: Durham’s Rural System as currently designated in the Regional Official Plan. - 191 - 99 | Envision Durham Goals for a Thriving Rural System The current ROP contains several goals for the Rural System and its various components, which cover a vast array of priorities and desired outcomes, such as protecting and maintaining agricultural land, support for the role of rural settlements, specialized tourism locations and aggregate extraction opportunities. To evaluate the effectiveness and relevance of the existing Rural System goals, and to inform future updates, the Agriculture and Rural System Discussion Paper asked discussion question #1: “Are the current goals and directions for the Agricultural/Rural System still relevant/appropriate?”. Responses indicated the Rural System goals should support the diversification of agriculture uses, the Agricultural System and climate change. Responses also suggested the need to add consideration for environmental stewardship and restoration of land. 54. Proposed Direction: Goals for a Thriving Rural System That the existing goals for the Rural System and its various components be replaced with the following: 1. Establish a thriving Rural System that supports rural businesses including agriculture, aggregate extraction and tourism. 2. Support the health and vitality of existing Rural Settlements which serve the needs of rural residents and area businesses. 3. Support a sustainable, diversified, and productive Agricultural System. 4. Champion the wise-use and management of resources. 5. Encourage land stewardship to enhance natural heritage, protect drinking water and support climate resiliency. Provincial Agricultural System The Region is in the process of incorporating the Provincial Agricultural System. The Agricultural System was mapped and issued by the Province in 2018. It is comprised of a group of inter-connected elements that collectively create a viable, thriving agricultural sector. The System has two primary components: • an agricultural land base comprised of prime agricultural areas, including specialty crop areas, and rural lands that together create a continuous, productive land base for agriculture; and • an agri-food network, which includes infrastructure, services and assets important to the viability of the agri-food sector. The Provincial Agricultural System mapping is being reviewed and refined by the Region through Envision Durham. As part of this work, the Agriculture and Rural Discussion Paper asked question #7: “Are there any additional considerations the Region should have regard for in the refinement of the Agricultural System Mapping?”. Comments received through the Discussion Paper indicated: - 192 - Envision Durham | 100 • support for the refinement process outlined in the Discussion Paper; • the importance of protecting environmental features; • divided feedback on the incorporation of a new Rural Lands designation; • consideration for supporting urban agriculture; • desire for early consultation and involvement in the refinement process; • concern over the expansion of prime lands and resulting reduction of Major Open Space Areas (MOSA) (reduced flexibility of permitted uses); and • site specific refinements. These comments will be taken into consideration as systems-based ROP mapping is developed and refined through 2021 for inclusion in the draft ROP. Rural System A review of the changes to provincial policy and the Prime Agricultural Areas designation in the ROP reveal a variety of changes are warranted to broaden goals and policies that would: • permit a range of types, sizes and intensities of agricultural uses; • recognize normal farm practices; • recognize the agri-food network; • reference provincial guidance where appropriate; • discourage non-agricultural uses in prime agricultural areas; • further address compatibility by requiring Agricultural Impact Assessments (AIAs) where appropriate and necessary; and • updates to reflect flexibility for farmers, including to eliminate the requirement for agricultural products to be sourced from the farm unit upon which a farm stand is situated. Comments received through the Agriculture and Rural System Discussion Paper indicated that area municipalities find it challenging to manage the scale (i.e. size) of some on-farm diversified uses, as well as ensuring these uses remain secondary to the primary agricultural function of the property. Additional challenges arise when related uses generate increased traffic, noise, and other impacts to adjacent agricultural operations and rural residences. Other submissions requested more clarity about the types of uses permitted in the rural area. As a result, proposed policy directions are intended to provide support and direction for how these uses should align with provincial guidelines that provide recommendations for approaches to minimize the impacts of these uses to nearby properties and community infrastructure (e.g. roads and servicing). The new ROP will provide more clarity regarding permitted uses in the Rural System by developing a Rural Lands designation. This designation will be comprised of lands removed from the MOSA designation, consisting of lower quality soils and areas without environmentally significant features. This designation will be consistent with the rural classification used by provincial plans. Permitted uses will include non-agricultural - 193 - 101 | Envision Durham (e.g. cemeteries) and major recreation (e.g. golf courses). 55. Proposed Direction: Rural System 1. Promote and protect a full range of agricultural, agriculture-related and on- farm diversified uses as permitted, based on provincial Guidelines on Permitted Uses in Ontario’s Prime Agricultural Areas. Incorporating the guidelines will provide clarity, increase consistency of its application and confirm support for the wide range of permitted uses in the rural area. Subject to criteria (e.g. servicing), the Region supports the diversity and economic prosperity of the agricultural sector in Durham. This increased policy support will confirm the range of permitted agriculture-related uses, including farm equipment repair shops, produce processing and grain dryer farm operations (if the produce/grain is from the area). This clarification will also be extended to on-farm diversified uses such as agri-tourism (e.g. corn maze), café and value-added uses (e.g. winery, bakery). 2. Ensure agriculture-related uses and on- farm diversified uses are compatible with and will not hinder surrounding agricultural operations. 3. Require the use is appropriate based on available rural services (e.g., do not require the level of road access, water and wastewater servicing, utilities, fire protection and other public services typically found in settlement areas). 4. Ensure that on-farm diversified uses are clearly secondary to the principal agricultural use of the property. 5. As outlined in the Guidelines on Permitted Uses in Ontario’s Prime Agricultural Areas, manage the scale of on-farm diversified uses by ensuring they don’t occupy more than two per cent of the property on which the uses are located, to a maximum of one hectare. 6. Monitor the cumulative impact of on- farm diversified uses throughout the Region. 7. Require that area municipal official plans include detailed policies to limit the scale of on-farm diversified uses and address their compatibility with surrounding uses. 8. Area municipalities are encouraged to support the establishment of agriculture- related and on-farm diversified proposals. To assist with limiting scale, managing land use compatibility and ensuring appropriate servicing availability, these applications shall be considered by amendment to the applicable zoning by- law. 9. Add the following definitions, based on the PPS, for “agricultural uses”, “agriculture-related uses”, “agri-tourism uses”, “on-farm diversified uses” and “agri-food network” as noted in the Glossary (see Appendix A). Cemeteries Cemeteries are recognized as necessary community facilities. The establishment of new cemeteries or expansion of existing ones are subject to local official plan amendment. Within the current ROP, cemeteries are not permitted in Prime Agricultural Areas and may be considered in Major Open Space Areas subject to the development criteria of - 194 - Envision Durham | 102 ROP policies 10A.2.4 and 10A.2.5. Furthermore, small-scale institutional uses are permitted in Countryside lands on the Oak Ridges Moraine. The Region is best served to guide these uses to Major Open Space Areas and then assessing them on a case-by-case basis. However, there is limited available Major Open Space (rural lands) that can accommodate the desired 40 hectares of land desired by cemetery operators. Likewise, it is cost-prohibitive to acquire similar tracts of land within the Urban System. As such, Prime Agricultural Areas are increasingly being considered as being more affordable and providing the size requirements that are sought after by the cemetery operators. While provincial policy does not explicitly prohibit cemeteries within Prime Agricultural Areas, they are relegated to lower priority areas within Prime Agriculture Areas and are subject to applicants demonstrating that alternative locations (outside of Prime Agriculture) are not feasible. The existing prohibition of cemetery uses within Prime Agricultural Areas, and the need for an amendment to the ROP to permit expansions to existing cemeteries in Prime Agricultural Areas are being further investigated through the Agricultural System mapping exercise currently underway. Land constraints across the GTHA and abroad have resulted in solutions to the challenge of interring the dead by using a variety of alternatives, including natural burials, mausolea, columbaria, multiple-use cemeteries, and the reuse of existing burial sites. Comments received through the Agriculture and Rural System Discussion Paper and information gathered through a literature review suggest that cemetery planning requires an approximate 30-year timeframe, and that broader coordination for cemetery planning is required. 56. Proposed Direction: Cemeteries 1. Through the review of applications for new cemeteries or expansions to existing cemeteries, promote the efficient use of cemetery lands which may include columbaria or mausolea and encourage approaches that support site stewardship. 2. Additional proposed policy directions be considered through the exercise to enable the new “Rural Lands” designation (also see Provincial Agricultural System section). Minimum Distance Separation Minimum Distance Separation (MDS) Formulae was developed by the Province to reduce incompatibility concerns stemming from odour impacts from livestock facilities through distance separation. The current ROP requires compliance with MDS for: • municipal facilities in Prime Agricultural Areas; • new land uses and lot creation, and new or expanding livestock facilities in Prime Agricultural Areas; • delineation of Hamlet boundaries; - 195 - 103 | Envision Durham • development of a country residential subdivision; • infill development within Rural Clusters; • the development of non-agricultural uses in Major Open Space Areas; • zoning to permit the continuation, expansion or enlargement of legally existing uses; and • for any proposal for development or site alteration outside of urban areas and/or within 500 metres of a livestock facility. The Agriculture and Rural System Discussion Paper asked discussion question #2: “Are there aspects of Minimum Distance Separation or other considerations that you would like to see addressed in greater detail in the ROP?”. The responses were supportive of the Region maintaining a high-level approach, allowing for flexibility of implementation at the local level. 57. Proposed Direction: Minimum Distance Separation 1. Maintain current high-level approach regarding MDS compliance. 2. Add the following clause any time MDS is referenced: “as amended by the Province from time to time.” Rural Settlements Rural Settlements include Hamlets, Country Residential Subdivisions, Shoreline Residential Areas and Rural Employment Areas that are currently designated on Schedule A of the ROP (see Figure 12). Rural Settlements also include residential clusters and four hectare (10 acre) lots. Comments related to Rural Settlements were received through the Agriculture and Rural System Discussion Paper; however, the ongoing Growth Management Study will inform the Region’s approach to future policy directions related to Rural Settlements. Comments indicated: concern for impacts to agriculture areas if boundaries are expanded; settlement areas should be the most permissive for lot creation; and, some site- specific matters requiring further study and consultation. As noted in the Regional Population and Employment Forecasts section, through the Land Needs Assessment, only a limited amount of growth will be directed to Rural Settlements, the Greenbelt Plan Area, and areas without municipal water and wastewater systems as required by the Growth Plan. Associated policies will be included in the new ROP. The new ROP will include delineated Rural Settlement boundaries as shown in area municipal OPs and through the MCR process, staff intend to resolve Hamlet boundary deferrals in these areas. Edge Planning The interface between urban and rural uses, as well as the existing fragmentation of agricultural land continue to be a concern. Smaller parcels are more likely to be owned by non-farm residents, resulting in more urban people living in the rural area. This encroachment causes land use compatibility concerns such as: trespass (e.g. snowmobiles on cropland); complaints about noise, odour or dust; traffic safety (e.g. tractors sharing the road with cars and bicycles); and, violation of biosecurity protocols (e.g. people coming onto the farm property). - 196 - Envision Durham | 104 The Agriculture and Rural System Discussion Paper asked discussion question #3: “In what ways do you believe the Region should address land use conflicts arising between urban and rural land uses?”. In a similar manner to the Rural Settlement policy directions, the ongoing Growth Management Study will inform the Region’s approach to future policy directions related to edge planning. This approach will ensure any boundary expansions are done with consideration for the impacts to rural land uses. Specific Policy Areas There are currently three Specific Policy Areas that apply to the following unique areas of the region: • Specific Policy Area A – Duffins/Rouge Agricultural Preserve and Seaton (Pickering); • Specific Policy Area B – St. Marys Cement (Clarington); and • Specific Policy Area C – Port Granby (Clarington). The Agriculture and Rural System Discussion Paper asked discussion question #5: “Are there additional areas we should consider identifying as Specific Policy Areas?”. Comments indicated support for keeping these Specific Policy Areas and identified minor changes to reflect updates since the last ROP review that resulted in Regional Official Plan Amendment 114. The current ROP also contains policies instructing area municipalities to incorporate policies for these specific areas into their official plans. Comments were submitted in support of recognizing the Rouge National Urban Park (RNUP) as a Specific Policy Area. The Rouge National Urban Park is administered by Parks Canada under the Rouge National Urban Park Act, 2015. The vision for the park includes linking Lake Ontario with the Oak Ridges Moraine, providing for education and preservation opportunities, supporting agriculture within the park lands and conducting research on ecosystem based subjects. The management plan that governs these federal lands has been implemented since the last ROP review, and the park is in proximity to existing Specific Policy Area A. Given the unique land use and federal jurisdiction of the RNUP, it is appropriate to recognize the Park as a Specific Policy Area. Comments related to the Duffins/Rouge Agricultural Preserve and Seaton (SPA-A) included adding support for the goals of the Duffins/Rouge Agriculture Preserve as articulated in section 5.5 of the Central Pickering Development Plan. In addition, as changes to the Pickering OP have been made since the last update of the ROP, updates to SPA-A will be necessary to reflect these updates. With respect to Port Granby (SPA-C), comments requested the ROP support changes made to the ongoing clean up initiative and the intent to establish a nature reserve on the surplus lands. The Port Granby lands in Clarington are part of the Government of Canada’s Port Hope Initiative Area. The goal of this project is to clean up historic, low level radiation on 95 hectares of the 270 hectare site. A proposed direction has been added to reflect the Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority (GRCA) - 197 - 105 | Envision Durham stewardship plan and the proposed vision for the site. 58. Proposed Direction: Specific Policy Areas 1. Ensure Specific Policy Area A reflects updates to the City of Pickering OP. 2. Add support for the goals of the Duffins/Rouge Agricultural Preserve. 3. Encourage the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission to support the establishment of a nature reserve within Specific Policy Area C. 4. Add the Rouge National Urban Park (RNUP) as a new Specific Policy Area and encourage land uses to be consistent with the Greenbelt Plan, the RNUP Management Plan and for adjacent land uses (outside the park) to have consideration for the RNUP. Cannabis Cultivation and Processing The Cannabis Act came into force in October 2018 and Health Canada is responsible for administering licenses. Under the Cannabis Act, provinces and territories may authorize the distribution and sale of cannabis. On June 14, 2019, additional regulations under the Cannabis Act came into force regarding cannabis edibles, extracts and topicals. Under Health Canada, there are two types of growers permitted: • Licensed: Federal license to cultivate, process and sell cannabis for medical or non-medical purposes (commercial/pharmaceutical); and • Designated: A grower who has been “designated” to produce cannabis for an individual(s) with a medical cannabis prescription. Licensed growers are subject to strict protocols, including security and odour abatement measures. Designated growers are not subject to the same criteria, making them harder to monitor. Area municipalities have noted an increased in the number of cannabis operations as a result of recent legalization in Canada. Although they are regulated federally, there is no specific guidance for cannabis/marijuana in provincial land use policies. In consultation with the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (OMAFRA), cannabis is typically considered a form of agriculture in a similar manner to greenhouse horticulture, mushroom farms, etc. Although cannabis was legalized federally, where and how cannabis should be permitted becomes the responsibility of single or lower tier levels of government. In the absence of federal legislation or provincial policy, municipalities are grappling with how to manage land use conflicts and other complexities associated with this use. These proposed policy directions are considering cannabis strictly from a land use perspective, as cannabis sales are not within the Region’s jurisdiction. Such land uses may be considered as agricultural or agricultural- related uses and permitted as of right within prime agricultural areas, however, they also pose unique challenges related to size and - 198 - Envision Durham | 106 scale of the processing operations, water usage and proximity to residential uses. The Agriculture and Rural Discussion Paper asked question #6: “Is there criteria that should be considered when siting “new” types of agricultural-related and on-farm diversified uses?”. Submissions were mostly related to cannabis and included concerns about: • protecting the rural character from seeing a surplus of industrial style buildings on prime agricultural land; • land use compatibility (e.g. light, odour, traffic and the perception of crime); • capping building size given the extensive scale these operations may require; • servicing needs/water availably (e.g. indoor growing facilities can be very high water users); and • processing - what is agricultural-related and what is large scale industrial/commercial. (The Guidelines on Permitted Uses in Ontario’s Prime Agricultural Areas provide direction for how to differentiate between these two categories.) To further understand this issue from a policy perspective, Regional staff consulted with OMAFRA who confirmed that cannabis cultivation is considered a form of agriculture (growing a crop). OMAFRA does not provide formal recommendations for mitigation but has observed that setback requirements (through implementing zoning by-laws) have been implemented at the single/lower tier municipal level in other areas of the province. Cannabis cultivation and on-site processing should be considered in accordance with provincial plans (e.g. Greenbelt Plan) and the Guidelines on Permitted Uses in Ontario’s Prime Agricultural Areas. These documents guide the appropriate location for this use depending on the unique characteristics of each proposal. It is also appropriate that large-scale cannabis processing facilities, which occupy large buildings and have functional characteristics similar to industrial operations with high water needs, should be located in Employment Areas. In order to regulate the characteristics of these uses within agricultural areas, there are tools available to area municipalities (including zoning by-laws to regulate building heights and setbacks, site plan approval to regulate the character of buildings and the layout of the site, and nuisance by-laws that can regulate lighting, odour and related impacts). Based on staff’s review, there are no proposed policy directions related to cannabis cultivation and processing. However, the Region offers the following guidance: • in the rural area, cannabis is subject to the same criteria as any other agriculture, agriculture-related, or on-farm diversified use; • depending on scale, servicing requirements and land-use compatibility, the appropriate location for the use may be in a rural (Major Open Space Areas) or Employment Areas; - 199 - 107 | Envision Durham • high water uses/effluent generators should be on full municipal services; and • OMAFRA Guidelines on Permitted Uses in Ontario’s Prime Agricultural Areas should be consulted when determining the appropriate location for a proposal. Rural Lot Creation Durham’s rural area supports a complex and dynamic network of agriculture, on-farm diversified, agriculture-related, and non- agricultural uses. Lot creation has a history of being a complex matter in Durham. In order to support the economic viability of the rural area, the Region strives to balance the needs of today’s rural business and property owners, with the long-term goals for the land base. From an agricultural industry perspective, lot creation allows landowners to: • avoid tenant/landlord issues; • expand the farm operation by using the revenue from the sale of a surplus dwelling to purchase land and/or equipment; • allows for business, estate or retirement planning; • provides non-farm housing options in the rural area; and • for non-abutting surplus farm dwellings specifically, the restrictive zoning on the retained lands helps to moderate the cost of agricultural parcels. From a land use planning perspective, the following represents some of the issues with the creation of new lots in the rural area: • creation of vacant (potentially undersized) agricultural parcels, zoned to prohibit the construction of a dwelling in perpetuity; • viability of the retained agricultural lands (especially if undersized) if farming trends change over time; • lack of flexibility for future generations of farmers; • fragmentation of the agricultural land base; • Minimum Distance Separation (MDS) setback requirements may prohibit the expansion or construction of a livestock barn on the retained lands; • potential for land use conflicts through the introduction of non-farm residents into the rural area; and • for non-abutting surplus farm dwellings specifically, uncertainty around the long- term effectiveness of zoning retained parcels to restrict the construction of new residential dwellings. Evidence suggests there is a need for the Region to continue to limit severances in rural areas: • an assessment of existing lot sizes has shown significant fragmentation has already occurred across the Region; and • data has shown a correlation between parcel size and how it is used. As parcel size increases, so does the percentage of parcels still being used for farming. On the other hand, as parcel size decreases, the number of properties being used for farming decreasing. This correlation demonstrates that smaller parcel sizes - 200 - Envision Durham | 108 are likely to be owned by or sold to non- farmers. The Agriculture and Rural System Discussion Paper asked the following question (#8): “Should the ROP be more or less restrictive in terms of lot creation in the Rural Area? What criteria should be considered?”. This topic received a range of responses, from those supporting more restrictive policies, to those who would like to see less restrictive lot creation policies. However, the majority appreciated the complex implications of permitting severances in the rural area and were therefore supportive of more restrictive lot creation policies. Some comments recommended the removal of the Regional Official Plan Amendment requirement for non-abutting scenarios; however, staff have determined this mechanism allows the Region to assess the appropriateness of these applications on a case-by-case basis. Secondary Dwellings for Farm Help: Secondary dwellings in the context of the Rural System refers to housing accommodation for farm help. The PPS definition for an agricultural use includes accommodation for full-time farm labour when the size and nature of the operation requires additional employment. While the PPS permits accommodation for farm help, the OMAFRA’s Guidelines on Permitted Uses outline a best practice of farmers to consider alternatives to building new, separate, permanent dwellings. Alternatives include a second unit within an existing building on the farm; a temporary structure, such as a trailer or other portable dwelling unit, or an existing dwelling on another parcel owned by the operator, whether on a farm, in a nearby settlement area, or on a rural lot. 59. Proposed Direction: Secondary Dwellings for Farm Help 1. Clarify that the severance of secondary dwellings (originally constructed to accommodate farm help), regardless of the date they were established, shall be prohibited. 2. Clarify that secondary dwellings (for farm help) are no longer required to be temporary on the Oak Ridges Moraine. On-Farm Diversified Uses: Based on the PPS definition for an on-farm diversified use, a wide variety of uses may qualify, as long they meet the criteria described in OMAFRA’s Guidelines on Permitted Uses in Ontario’s Prime Agricultural Areas. Such uses include home occupations, home industries, agri-tourism uses, and uses that produce value-added agricultural products. On-farm diversified uses are required to be secondary to the principal agricultural use of the property and limited in area. The Guidelines offer a recommended area calculation, including direction for these uses to be limited to no more than two per cent of the property, to a maximum of one hectare. Severing agriculture-related uses has the potential to further fragment the agricultural land base. Background research, including an assessment of existing farm parcels, has shown a wide range of farm parcel sizes - 201 - 109 | Envision Durham already exists. There is insufficient justification to warrant the creation of more. 60. Proposed Direction: On-Farm Diversified Uses 1. Prohibit severances for agriculture- related uses or on-farm diversified uses. Parcels for Agricultural Uses: An agricultural use includes the growing of crops; raising of livestock; raising of other animals; aquaculture; apiaries; agro-forestry; maple syrup production; and associated on- farm buildings and structures, including livestock facilities, manure storages, value- retaining facilities, and accommodation for full-time farm labour. Due to the level of existing fragmentation in the rural area, large tracts of land should be protected. Research has shown a correlation between the size of the property and the likelihood it will remain owned and operated by a farmer. Smaller parcels are more likely to be purchased by non-farm residents. 61. Proposed Direction: Parcels for Agricultural Uses 1. Continue to prohibit the creation of parcels of land for agricultural uses of less than 40 hectares. 2. Clarify that parcels on the Oak Ridges Moraine are subject to the same 40 hectare minimum severance requirements. Abutting Surplus Farm Dwellings: As noted above, lot creation in prime agricultural areas is discouraged and may only be permitted in limited circumstances. Subject to criteria, the severance of a residence surplus to a farming operation, as a result of farm consolidation, may be considered. In Durham, when the parcels abut (i.e. touch/neighbour) one another, they are referred to as “abutting surplus farm dwelling severances” and considered by the Land Division Committee as an application for a lot line adjustment. The process does not result in the creation of a vacant lot or increase the number of lots. These applications also require an area municipal zoning by-law amendment to prohibit any further severances and/or the establishment of a new/additional residential dwelling. A Regional Official Plan Amendment is not required for these applications. Figure 13 illustrates a common abutting surplus farm dwelling severance application. The applicant owns farm parcel ‘B’, which contains a farm dwelling and is acquiring farm parcel ‘A’, which also contains a farm dwelling. The farmer does not need both dwellings, rendering the second one “surplus” to their needs. - 202 - Envision Durham | 110 Figure 13: Abutting surplus farm dwelling severance. 62. Proposed Direction: Abutting Surplus Farm Dwellings 1. Clarify that in circumstances where a farm operation owns two or more abutting farm parcels and are seeking a severance, they shall be required to merge (no net increase in the number of lots). Non-Abutting Surplus Farm Dwellings: In Durham, when the parcels do not abut (i.e. not touching or neighbouring one another), they are referred to as “non-abutting surplus farm dwelling severances” and considered by an amendment to the ROP. This application results in an increase in the number of total lots in the rural area, and also produces a vacant farm parcel which cannot have a dwelling on it in perpetuity. Some area municipalities require a local official plan amendment for these proposals. A zoning bylaw amendment is also required to prohibit any further severances and the establishment of any new/additional residential dwelling. Figure 14 illustrates a common non-abutting surplus farm dwelling severance application. The applicant owns the “non-abutting” parcels outlined in yellow, many of which already contain dwellings. They are now acquiring the subject parcel (solid yellow), which also contains a dwelling. The farmer does not need this dwelling, rendering it “surplus” to their needs. The resulting parcel no longer contains a dwelling and will be zoned to prohibit one from being constructed in perpetuity. Figure 14: Non-abutting surplus farm dwelling severance. 63. Proposed Direction: Non-Abutting Surplus Farm Dwellings 1. Include the following additional conditions for approval of a non-abutting farm severance: a) the applicant is a bona-fide farmer; - 203 - 111 | Envision Durham b) farm consolidation shall have been completed prior to the time of application; c) the maximum size of the surplus dwelling lot shall be the size required for private servicing, minimizing to the extent possible, the amount of land taken out of agricultural production; d) the shape and dimensions of the surplus farm dwelling lot shall: i.) not impede agricultural operations on the retained land; and ii.) generally not exceed a certain depth (i.e. 122 metres (400 feet)). e) to discourage fragmentation, a cumulative total of one severance is permitted for each lot. All consents granted on or after the approval of the first ROP (1978) are to be included in the calculation of the cumulative total. 2. Investigate the delegation of planning approvals for non-abutting surplus farm dwelling severances to the Commissioner of Planning and Economic Development. 3. Add a definition for “bona-fide farmer” as noted in the Glossary (see Appendix A). Regional Nodes This policy is a historic carryover from Regional Official Plan Amendment (ROPA) 114. Prior to ROPA 114, the ROP contained urban and rural nodes, but through this ROPA 114 process urban nodes were removed, and the “Cullen Gardens” node was removed due to its closure. As a result, only two Regional Nodes remain, both of which are in the rural area. The current ROP continues to identify Regional Nodes at the Kirby Ski Area (now known as Brimacombe) and Mosport Park (now known as Canadian Tire Motorsport Park). The Agriculture and Rural System Discussion Paper asked question #9: “Is there value in continuing to identify Regional nodes in the ROP? If so, what Regional Nodes, (or areas exhibiting these characteristics), should be considered?”. Responses were focused on retaining the policy as written, with minor updates. Through ROPA 114, it was determined that no new nodes would be considered, that certain nodes would be removed (as noted above) and that the two remaining nodes were to be grandfathered. It was determined that urban nodes were not needed, as such uses were permitted in urban areas. Rural nodes were determined to cause concerns due to potential land use compatibility issues, as such it was determined that no new nodes be considered. Current proposed direction is consistent with that approach. 64. Proposed Direction: Regional Nodes 1. Update the names of the existing Regional Nodes. 2. Clarify that existing Nodes will continue to be recognized, but that no new Regional Nodes will be introduced to the ROP. Aggregate Resource Extraction Areas Aggregate resources, such as sand, gravel, bedrock, and clay, are used for road building and construction. Durham contains - 204 - Envision Durham | 112 significant aggregate resources with most aggregate resources concentrated in Uxbridge, Scugog, Brock, and north Clarington, coincident with the Oak Ridges Moraine. Changes to this policy section are being proposed to conform with provincial plans. In addition, there were comments received through the Agriculture and Rural System and Environment and Greenlands System Discussion Papers, primarily related to the levy breakdown and rehabilitation plans. The Aggregate levy is a fee of 20.6 cents per tonne of material extracted which is paid by the aggregate operator to the Ontario Aggregate Resources Corporation, who then distribute the levy accordingly. Of this fee, 15 per cent is allocated to Durham Region as the upper-tier municipality. The fee is governed by Regulation 244/07 of the Aggregate Resources Act. Levies are dictated by the Aggregate Resources Act and fall outside the scope of Envision Durham. The following changes to the PPS were examined as part of this review. Relevant changes related to PPS conformity were incorporated into proposed policy directions: • identifying mineral aggregates, minerals and petroleum through official plan mapping; • conserving mineral aggregate resources; • rehabilitating aggregate extraction sites in agricultural areas; • regulating of the depth of extraction; • promoting accessory aggregate recycling facilities at extraction sites; • encouraging comprehensive rehabilitation planning where there is a concentration of mineral aggregate operations; and • requiring rehabilitation to mitigate negative impacts to the extent possible. In addition to changes to the PPS, the following changes were made to the Growth Plan as it relates to aggregate resources. Relevant changes related to Growth Plan conformity were incorporated into proposed policy directions: • promotion of aggregate recycling and conservation; • aggregate siting policies related to the new Growth Plan Natural Heritage System; • requirement for an Agricultural Impact Assessment; and • new rehabilitation standards. Lastly, the following changes were made to the Greenbelt Plan as it relates to aggregate resources. Relevant changes related to Greenbelt Plan conformity were also incorporated into the following proposed policy directions: • addition of an Agricultural Impact Assessment as a requirement for new applications; and • increased rehabilitation standards, with a focus on agricultural rehabilitation. Additionally, the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry has launched a website Pits and Quarries Online, which is a searchable database of aggregate licenses in the province. The database provides basic site information and a map with the licensed boundaries. Schedule E1 of the current ROP - 205 - 113 | Envision Durham presents the same information for licensed aggregate sites in the region. 65. Proposed Direction: Aggregate Resource Extraction Areas 1. Identify mineral aggregates, minerals and petroleum resources through ROP mapping. 2. Require the conservation and recycling of mineral aggregate resources where feasible. 3. Enhance aggregate resource rehabilitation requirements, including that Agricultural Impact Assessments, to require rehabilitation back to an agricultural condition for sites in Prime Agricultural Areas and incorporating relevant Greenbelt Plan rehabilitation policies. 4. Reference the new Pits and Quarries online resource in addition to identifying licensed aggregate sites within ROP mapping. - 206 - Envision Durham | 114 Protected Greenlands System The ROP establishes a Greenlands System which makes up approximately 40 per cent of the region’s land base, and weaves through both the Urban and Rural Systems. It contains areas with the highest concentrations of sensitive and/or significant natural features and functions, agricultural and rural lands. Policies of the Greenlands System aim to support environmental protection and conservation, major recreational uses, protection of waterfronts, and rural and agricultural uses. The land use designations that make up the Greenlands System in the current ROP are: • Major Open Space Areas: a continuous system of open space lands in the urban and rural areas that contain key natural heritage and hydrologic features, prime agricultural lands as well as lands of lesser agricultural significance. • Oak Ridges Moraine Areas: an area of significant ecological and hydrological significance that provides for clean and abundant water resources, diverse plant and animal habitat, an attractive landscape and prime agricultural areas and aggregate resources. Development on the Oak Ridges Moraine is governed by the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan. • Waterfront Areas: includes the waterfronts of Lake Ontario, Lake Simcoe and Lake Scugog which are intended to be used for outdoor recreation and function to protect significant natural areas. • Tourist Activity/Recreation Nodes: specific nodes along the above noted “Waterfront Areas” that are identified as important to recreation and tourism and are permitted to develop in this regard. • Open Space Linkages: areas that provide for the migration of flora and fauna, as well as pedestrians between components of the Greenlands System. • Waterfront Linkages: are routes adjacent to large facilities that connect the public to the waterfront. To implement provincial direction to establish a regional natural heritage system and agricultural system mapping into the ROP, the Greenlands System designations noted above are being examined and updated. This chapter provides initial proposed policy directions for a protected Greenlands System structure and policy framework. - 207 - 115 | Envision Durham Figure 15: Durham’s existing Greenlands System as designated in the Regional Official Plan. - 208 - Envision Durham | 116 Goals for a Protected Greenlands System The current ROP includes two policy sections that apply to the natural environment: • Section 2: Environment outlines basic directions for the natural, built, and cultural environments in the region; and • Section 10: Greenlands System identifies the structural components and associated policies of the Greenlands System, including specific policies for key natural heritage features and areas. Existing Environment goals focus on preservation, conservation and enhancement of the natural environment, minimizing pollution of air, water and land resources and community planning that preserves cultural heritage resources and enhances public health and safety. Greenlands System goals speak to establishing a Greenlands System, protecting significant habitats, providing for recreational opportunities and protecting the Oak Ridges Moraine and the region’s waterfronts. Merging key components of these two sections into one chapter in the new ROP, reinforces the strategic direction of a “Protected Greenlands System”. This approach is intended to improve navigation of the ROP and highlight the natural environment as a critical component of the regional structure. Question #1 from the Environment and Greenlands Discussion Paper asked, “Are the current goals for the Environment and Greenlands System still relevant/appropriate?”. Responses indicate that the existing goals are still appropriate with suggestions to add themes of restoration, climate change, ecological goods and services, and no net loss. Under the new ROP framework, many of the existing goals will be retained as objectives, and the additional themes identified through feedback will be integrated into subsections of the Protected Greenlands System chapter. The following overarching goals are intended to support a Protected Greenlands System for the region. 66. Proposed Direction: Goals for a Protected Greenlands System That the existing Environment and Greenlands System goals be replaced with the following: 1. Establish a protected Greenlands System that conserves, protects and enhances water and land resources for present and future generations. 2. Protect, restore and enhance an interconnected Natural Heritage System and Water Resources System across the region. Traditional Ecological Knowledge In recent years, Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) has served as a key source of information for understanding the impacts of a changing climate. Research suggests that the recognition of Indigenous, local, and traditional knowledge systems has improved management of ecosystems, natural - 209 - 117 | Envision Durham resources, and biodiversity.9 The notion of incorporating TEK into the land use decisions serves to add an extra social dimension to planning from a socio-ecological perspective, and its recognition by municipalities within policy development processes is growing in prominence.10 TEK is defined as knowledge and values which have been acquired through experience, observation, from the land or from spiritual teachings, and handed down from one generation to another.11 Question #6 of the Environment and Greenlands Discussion Paper asked, “How can the ROP support the consideration of Traditional Ecological Knowledge in land use decisions?”. Responses showed strong support for TEK policies in the ROP related to consultation with Indigenous communities and incorporating Indigenous history and knowledge into the decision-making process for natural heritage planning. Provincial direction does not require the incorporation of policies on TEK but does require coordination with Indigenous communities to ensure meaningful opportunities for engagement in the planning process. The current ROP does not currently address TEK or Indigenous engagement, however proposed policy directions include Indigenous consultation as a key objective (see Public Consultation and Engagement section). In addition to general engagement policies, there is an opportunity to introduce 9 Markkula, I., Turunen, M. T., and Kantola, S. (2019). Traditional and local knowledge in land use planning: insights into the use of the Akwé: Kon Guidelines in Eanodat, Finnish Sápmi. Ecology and Society, Mar 2019, Vol. 24, No. 1. Resilience Alliance. <https://www.jstor.org/stable/26796911> policy language to acknowledge TEK in developing our understanding on the importance of achieving a protected Greenlands System that includes indigenous knowledge. Other jurisdictions have incorporated policy language that ties Indigenous engagement with archaeological resources. Regional staff are developing updated cultural heritage and archaeological resources direction that will be included in the new ROP. 67. Proposed Direction: Traditional Ecological Knowledge 1. Encourage consideration of Indigenous history and presence in the design of communities in the review of development applications. 2. Recognize Traditional Ecological Knowledge as a key input in understanding sites and ecological features and in assessing cumulative impacts through the review of secondary plans and development applications. 3. Add a definition for “Traditional Ecological Knowledge” as noted in the Glossary (see Appendix A). Natural Heritage System The PPS requires the establishment of a natural heritage system (NHS) that includes 10 Ibid. 11 Deh Cho Land Use Planning Committee, Northwest Territories (2003). Traditional Knowledge Policy. <http://reviewboard.ca/upload/ref_library/Dehcho_tk _policy.pdf> - 210 - Envision Durham | 118 key natural heritage features and areas and the connections between them. In addition to satisfying provincial conformity requirements, a systems-based approach reflects best practices in natural heritage planning because it recognizes the critical role that linkages between features play in establishing and maintaining ecological integrity. The current ROP employs a features-based approach to protecting the natural environment. Current ROP policies recognize that connections between features are important, and policy protections are provided at the features level. A Regional NHS is in the process of being studied, that once completed is intended to be included in the new ROP. Most area municipalities in the region have established their own NHS. In some cases, they have adopted conservation authority systems datasets, while others have refined their own system – based on both the conservation authority systems and/or utilizing their own, additional data sources. Recognizing the two-tier municipal system in Durham, discussion question #14 of the Environment and Greenlands Discussion Paper asked, “How should the Region best protect the natural heritage system, features and areas in the ROP (overlay, designation, level of detail)?”. Responses to this question were clear in their support for a systems- based approach, but less definitive about whether this system should be administered as an overlay to another land use designation, or land use designation in itself. The Region is proposing a that the Natural Heritage Systems be included as an “overlay” to the underlying land use designation comprised of the Greenbelt NHS and Natural Core and Natural Linkage Areas of the ORMCP and would apply outside of the urban area boundary. Within the urban area boundary, a combination of conservation authority, area municipal and updated features mapping would be used. This approach meets the requirements of provincial planning direction and continues to maintain strong protections for key natural heritage features and areas across the region while allowing for further refinement at the area municipal level or as detailed studies are conducted for individual sites. Natural heritage features and areas play a significant role in the region’s ability to mitigate, adapt and build resiliency to the impacts of climate change. For example, they act as carbon sinks, improve air quality and reduce the urban heat island effect. Therefore, it is critical to utilize best practices for their protection, enhancement and restoration, including establishing a connected NHS. Protection, enhancement and restoration of the regional NHS will be a fundamental element of the new ROP. The Region’s NHS will not exist in isolation. Rather, it will be a component of a wider provincial system of greenspaces and features. As such, the ROP should consider external connections such as those between the regional NHS and the NHS of adjacent municipalities and the regional NHS at the boundaries of urban and rural areas to ensure that those connections make sense and support the objectives of the ROP. These proposed connections to the NHS will be supported by an edge mapping review. - 211 - 119 | Envision Durham Systems-based ROP mapping will be developed and refined through 2021 that will include the proposed NHS, Agricultural System and Water Resource System, for inclusion in the draft ROP. 68. Proposed Direction: Natural Heritage System 1. Establish a regional NHS overlay as a component of the protected Greenlands System mapping. 2. Add language that permits the NHS to be updated to reflect minor changes, as a result of the newest and best available data, at the date of consolidation without an update to the ROP. 3. That an NHS policy section be added to the ROP that includes: a) objectives to promote a systems-based approach to protecting the natural environment, achieve no net loss and to protect, enhance and restore features and areas and their ecological functions; b) a policy to bring existing identified linkages, including “Open Space Linkages” and “Waterfront Links” and future linkages and enhancement areas identified through watershed plans and/or area municipal assessments into the regional NHS; c) a policy to consider cross-jurisdictional relationships and impacts on the regional NHS and recognize the importance and intent of external connections, such as Urban River Valleys within the Greenbelt Plan; and d) a policy to support the completion of climate vulnerability assessments to identify areas of the regional NHS with the greatest vulnerability to the impacts of climate change and outline suggested enhancements and/or restoration needed to mitigate these impacts. 4. Require area municipalities to develop an NHS and/or refine their existing NHS policies and mapping, including the identification of enhancement areas and linkages as necessary. Open Space Linkages and Waterfront Links The current Schedule A of the ROP identifies two Open Space Linkages: • Pickering – north of Finch Avenue, generally between Pickering Town Townline and Whites Road; and • Whitby/Oshawa – north of Taunton Road, generally between Thickson Road and Oshawa Creek. Schedule A also identifies three Waterfront Links: • Pickering – abutting the north perimeter of the Pickering Nuclear Generating Station; • Oshawa – connecting the Oshawa Creek with Harmony Creek, north of the Port of Oshawa; and • Clarington – abutting the north perimeter of both the Darlington Nuclear Generating Station and St. Mary’s Cement. - 212 - Envision Durham | 120 Open Space Linkage policies are intended to provide connections within the Greenlands System and direct area municipalities to detail linkage locations, features and policies in their official plans. Waterfront Links do not have associated policies in the ROP and have not been adopted by the area municipalities. Instead, area municipalities focus on mapping and policy direction for Waterfront Areas. Discussion question #10 of the Environment and Greenlands Discussion Paper asked, “Should Open Space Linkages and Waterfront Links continue to be identified in the ROP? If so, what additional areas should be identified and how could the policies associated with these areas be enhanced?”. Responses generally showed support for retaining linkages to contribute to wildlife habitat and movement and to connect the NHS. Establishing linkages more broadly as a component of the NHS, noted above, and including supportive policies will strengthen the identification and protections for these connections across the region. Key Natural Heritage and Key Hydrologic Features The current ROP includes policies to protect key natural heritage and hydrologic features by restricting development and site alteration within and adjacent to these features, unless there are no negative impacts to the feature and its ecological function. General updates to these policies 12 Woodland cover is comprised of treed areas, woodlots and forested areas. This is different from tree canopy cover, which is comprised of tree are required to reflect conformity with provincial plans including: • exceptions for habitat of endangered and threatened species; • exceptions for agricultural uses, agricultural-related uses and on-farm diversified uses; • prohibition of stormwater management systems; • Growth Plan exceptions for building/structure expansions and large- scale development; and • changes to terminology and definitions, including Habitat of Endangered and Threatened Species. Regional staff use key natural heritage and key hydrologic features mapping as a screening tool for development applications. An Environment Impact Study (EIS) is required when development or site alteration is proposed within or in proximity to these features. Data gaps and inconsistencies have been identified in the region’s existing features mapping. Updates are currently underway, in consultation with the conservation authorities. The current ROP contains a specific woodlands policy section that identifies a 30 per cent woodland cover 12 target and suggest a woodlands inventory, tree planting and stewardship programs as ways to protect and enhance woodlands in the region. The branches, stems and leaves/needles when looking at the ground from above. - 213 - 121 | Envision Durham region currently has approximately 25.8 per cent woodland coverage. In order to enhance the resilience of ecological features, improve resiliency, mitigate the urban heat island effect and help reduce the region’s climate footprint, it is appropriate that the target be further strengthened by proposing a higher cover target, integrating findings from the Significant Woodlands Study (currently underway) and recognizing regional and local woodlands by-laws. The Significant Woodlands Study will establish criteria for identifying which woodlands in the region are “significant” and therefore subject to specific policy protections and will also update the region’s existing woodlands mapping. This exercise will ensure the region’s woodlands are accurately identified and protected as part of development review. In addition to woodlands, examples from other jurisdictions identify wetlands with separate, specific policies due to their important natural heritage and hydrologic functions and social and economic benefits. Wetlands also act as significant carbon sinks, contributing to climate change mitigation. To acknowledge their critical role as part of the regional NHS, the ROP could include more specific policies related to wetlands. Some municipalities have included a goal of no net loss of wetlands, which the Region should also consider. No net loss is achieved by both protecting wetlands from development and degradation and restoring them through local initiatives and ecosystem compensation. Two questions related to natural heritage features were asked as part of the Environment and Greenlands Discussion Paper: question #11 asked “How can the Region best support the protection and enhancement of significant woodlands in Durham?” and question #12 asked “Should there be targets included in the ROP for other natural heritage and hydrologic features in addition to woodlands?”. Responses to these questions confirmed the significance of woodlands and wetlands to the ecological health of the natural system and highlighted a general desire to see targets established for other features, especially wetlands. 69. Proposed Direction: Key Natural Heritage and Key Hydrologic Features 1. Update the key natural heritage features and key hydrologic features mapping to reflect the most recent data from a variety of sources including, but not limited to the province (i.e. Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry), conservation authorities and area municipalities. These revisions should be accompanied by policy language to permit ongoing updates to this mapping without a Regional Official Plan Amendment. 2. That criteria for identifying significant woodlands and woodlands mapping be included in the ROP. Criteria and mapping are being developed through a Significant Woodlands Study, currently underway. 3. That the existing woodlands cover target be examined based on the findings of the Significant Woodlands Study. - 214 - Envision Durham | 122 4. Encourage area municipalities to develop tree/woodland conservation by-laws for woodlands not covered by the regional by-law (woodlands less than one hectare in size). 5. Continue to encourage area municipalities to develop Urban Tree Strategies and investigate the opportunity to complete a regional Forest Management Plan (also see Healthy Communities - Tree Canopy section). 6. Encourage the use of native species for tree planting initiatives. 7. Recognize the role of protecting and enhancing features as a means to increasing carbon sequestration. 8. That wetland mapping be established in the ROP and that policy language be added that sets a target of no net loss of wetland function and area and that promotes wetland restoration through regional, area municipal, conservation authority and other agency initiatives and ecosystem compensation. Vegetation Protection Zones The land adjacent to natural heritage features supports the ecological functions of that feature and of the NHS. The PPS requires that development and site alteration not be permitted in lands adjacent to natural heritage features and areas unless there are no negative impacts on the feature or its ecological functions. To achieve no negative impact, it is important that the ROP not only protect features, but also identify and protect buffers around them. While the PPS refers to these as “adjacent areas,” the ORMCP, Greenbelt Plan and Lake Simcoe Protection Plan refer to them as vegetation protection zones. Existing policies in the ROP implement provincial direction by generally prohibiting development or site alteration in vegetation protection zones. Minimum vegetation protection zones are established for key natural heritage features within areas governed by the provincial plans (Greenbelt, Oak Ridges Moraine, Lake Simcoe watershed). Outside of these provincial plan areas, many area municipalities have undertaken the analysis to establish minimum vegetation protection zones into their NHS. At the regional level, current practice is to determine the required vegetation protection zone of an ecological feature through the completion and review of an Environmental Impact Study as part of a development application. Discussion question #13 of the Environment and Greenlands Discussion Paper asked, “Should the Region include more detailed policies prescribing minimum vegetation protection zones (where they are not otherwise prescribed by provincial policy)?”. Responses were mixed, with some suggesting the region determine minimums to ensure consistency, while others prefer that area municipalities continue to establish minimums. One suggestion highlighted the potential to require a 30-metre buffer for features along the boundary of the regional NHS, based on the findings of the Carruthers Creek Watershed Plan. 30-metres is suggested because it is consistent with standard vegetation protection zone policies in the Growth Plan, Greenbelt Plan, ORMCP and Lake Simcoe Protection Plan and is also - 215 - 123 | Envision Durham reflected in many area municipal official plans. Determinations will be made through the NHS mapping exercise. 70. Proposed Direction: Vegetation Protection Zones 1. Require that minimum vegetation protection zones be established within area municipal official plans and that such vegetation protection zones be established through appropriate studies such as secondary plans, watershed plans or Environmental Impact Studies. Water Resources Existing policies in the ROP provide a sound policy framework for the region’s key hydrologic features by supporting water conservation measures, discouraging alterations to watercourses and requiring stormwater management, erosion and sediment control plans. These policies and others work together to protect the quality and quantity of water in the region. Key updates to the provincial plans related to water resources include identification of a water resources system (WRS)13 and associated policies for hydrologic areas; new policies to more comprehensively address watershed planning and water conservation; and integrating climate change considerations. In addition to implementing these provincial plan requirements, the ROP will also implement relevant policies from the 13 The water resources system is comprised of ground water features, hydrologic functions, natural heritage features and areas, and surface water features Lake Simcoe Protection Plan and applicable source protection plans. While the Environment and Greenlands discussion paper did not ask a specific question related to water resources, general comments received suggest that the ROP should recognize that the NHS and water resources system are interconnected. Identifying a Water Resources System: Key hydrologic features in the region are mapped together with key natural heritage features. This mapping is reflective of the features-based approach that the ROP currently employs. Updates to the PPS require that municipalities identify the components of the water resources system in policy and mapping. The new ROP will adopt this systems-based approach. Updates to underlying hydrological features mapping will include: • updates to mapping for wetlands, permanent and intermittent springs, lakes and littoral zones and other key hydrologic features; • delineation of significant groundwater recharge areas, highly vulnerable aquifers and significant surface water contribution areas; and • implementation of the Lake Simcoe Protection Plan, and source protection mapping requirements. including shoreline areas, which are necessary for the ecological and hydrological integrity of the watershed. - 216 - Envision Durham | 124 The water resources system, including key hydrologic features and areas at the regional scale, will be developed and refined as a component of the systems-based ROP mapping through 2021 for inclusion in the draft ROP. 71. Proposed Direction: Identifying a Water Resources System 1. That a water resources system be established in the ROP that includes ground and surface water features and areas, the Lake Simcoe watershed boundary and former Lake Iroquois Shoreline. Key hydrologic areas include significant groundwater recharge areas, highly vulnerable aquifers and significant surface water contribution areas. 2. Add policy language that provides for the protection, improvement and restoration of hydrologic functions of key hydrologic areas. 3. Recognize the former Lake Iroquois Shoreline as an area of hydrological significance and include policy language that encourages area municipalities to include policies that seek to protect, enhance and/or restore the shoreline’s key natural heritage and hydrologic features and areas as part of area municipal official plans. Watershed Planning: The goal of watershed planning is to provide a framework that includes goals, objectives, targets and management recommendations to protect, enhance and restore watersheds so that they are healthy and resilient. The current ROP recognizes watershed plans as an effective planning tool in protecting natural resources and supports the preparation, update and implementation of watershed plans. The majority of the region is covered by watershed plans, many of which are in the process of being updated. New direction within the provincial land use plans includes enhanced requirements for municipalities to complete watershed plans, or equivalent studies. These requirements include, for example, ensuring watershed planning is undertaken to support comprehensive, integrated and long-term planning and new requirements to consider climate change impacts at the watershed scale. In 2018, the province released draft watershed planning guidance to support the implementation of this strengthened policy approach. As this guidance has yet to be finalized, the region will continue to monitor its progress and will implement policies as required. 72. Proposed Direction: Watershed Planning 1. Include a map that illustrates watershed plan boundaries and conservation authority boundaries as an Appendix to the new ROP and allow updates to this map without a Regional Official Plan Amendment. 2. Ensure conservation authorities, area municipalities and other stakeholders consider the following, in priority order, while preparing and updating watershed plans: a) climate change and the effects of severe weather events; - 217 - 125 | Envision Durham b) targets and goals of the Great Lakes Protection Act and Strategy; and c) cross jurisdictional and cross-watershed impacts. 3. Require that watershed plans and updates include information and management recommendations that: a) inform water resources identification; b) support the long-term protection, enhancement and/or restoration of water quality and quantity; c) enable informed decisions on locations for future growth; d) provide recommendations that support planning for water, wastewater and stormwater infrastructure; and e) protect the region’s key natural heritage and key hydrologic features, areas and functions. Lake Simcoe Protection Plan The Lake Simcoe watershed contains significant natural, urban and agricultural systems, including portions of the Oak Ridges Moraine and the Greenbelt. It also holds provincially-significant wetlands, woodlands and prime agricultural areas. The Lake Simcoe Protection Plan (LSPP), was released on June 2, 2009, and is a provincial plan that sets policies that are intended to protect the Lake Simcoe watershed. It is a watershed-based plan, established to improve water quality, protect the watershed’s natural heritage resources and manage the effects of climate change and invasive species. The Lake Simcoe Protection Act requires municipalities to bring their official plans into conformity with the LSPP. In 2011, to assist in determining how the ROP should be amended to implement the LSPP, a discussion paper was prepared and endorsed by the Planning and Economic Development Committee (Report #2011-P-76). The findings of the paper confirm that the ROP already contains sound policy to protect the Lake Simcoe watershed. Policies introduced through Amendment 114 to the ROP in 2006, addressing the PPS and Greenbelt Plan, achieved similar policies. However, it also suggests that there are aspects of the LSPP that need to be addressed in the ROP. The following recommendations from the 2011 LSPP Discussion Paper will be implemented in the ROP, with the understanding that further amendments may be required based on the province’s 10-year review of the LSPP (currently underway): 73. Proposed Direction: Lake Simcoe Protection Plan 1. Add the Lake Simcoe Watershed Boundary to relevant ROP maps. 2. Ensure growth management policies, such as future urban area boundary expansion criteria, address the requirements of the Lake Simcoe Protection Plan (LSPP). 3. Restrict the establishment of new municipal sewage treatment plants in the Lake Simcoe watershed to a new plant that is intended to replace an existing plant or a new plant that will provide sewage services to existing development that is on partial services or where - 218 - Envision Durham | 126 existing private sewage systems are failing. 4. Provide policy direction to the area municipalities to include policies within their official plans to reduce stormwater runoff volume and pollutant loadings within Designated Urban Areas in the Lake Simcoe watershed, in accordance with the LSPP. 5. Encourage that any new private sewage system be located more than 100 metres from the Lake Simcoe Shoreline, other lakes or any permanent streams within the Lake Simcoe watershed. If such systems must locate within 100 metres of these areas, they will only be permitted in accordance with the LSPP. 6. Require that an application to establish or expand a major recreational use within the Lake Simcoe watershed be accompanied by a recreational water use plan in accordance with the LSPP and include a definition of recreational water use plan in the ROP. 7. Enhance restrictions to development within vegetation protection zones along the Lake Simcoe shoreline, including: a) adding a 30-metre vegetation protection zone for Shoreline Residential areas along the Lake Simcoe shoreline; and b) adding a 100-metre vegetation protection zone along the Lake Simcoe shoreline for areas outside of Urban Areas and Rural Settlements. 8. Require that for lands within 240-metres of the Lake Simcoe shoreline, an Environmental Impact Study ensures that development or site alteration maintains, enhances or restores functional wildlife movement corridors between key natural heritage features key hydrologic features and the shoreline. 9. Add a new policy that allows for the continuation of existing uses in place prior to June 2, 2009 in the Lake Simcoe watershed. Source Protection In 2006, the province passed the Clean Water Act, legislation designed to help communities protect the sources of their drinking water. The Clean Water Act was in response to the contamination of a municipal well in Walkerton in 2000. Under the Act, Source Protection Areas and Source Protection Regions were established across Ontario based on the watershed boundaries of the province’s 36 Conservation Authorities. Each region has a Source Protection Committee responsible for undertaking a technical assessment of municipal water sources to identify potential vulnerabilities, and for developing a source protection plan. These plans set out specific requirements that regulate activities within identified vulnerable areas to protect the quality and quantity of drinking water. Vulnerable areas are: • Wellhead Protection Areas (WHPA) (denoted as WHPA-A, B, C, D, and E); • Intake Protection Zones (IPZ) (denoted as IPZ 1 and 2); • Significant Groundwater Recharge Areas; and • Highly Vulnerable Aquifers. - 219 - 127 | Envision Durham The current ROP sets out policies for the protection of the quality and quantity of water and identifies wellhead protection areas and areas of high aquifer vulnerability, based on direction from the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan. The ROP does not identify or provide policy direction for vulnerable areas defined in the Clean Water Act that are regulated through source protection plans. Source protection plans require that municipalities implement source protection policies into their official plans at the time of the next official plan review. As such, these proposed directions represent how the ROP must change to conform to the four source protection plans applicable to the region: • the Trent Source Protection Plan; • the Ganaraska Source Protection Plan; • the South Georgian Bay Lake Simcoe Source Protection Plan (SGBLS); and • the Credit Valley, Toronto and Region and Central Lake Ontario (CTC) Source Protection Plan. Some area municipalities have either completed, or are in the process of completing, amendments to their official plans to implement specific source protection policies that apply in their jurisdictions. 74. Proposed Direction: Source Protection 1. Establish mapping for the boundaries of source protection plans and vulnerable areas including Intake Protection Zones (IPZs) and Wellhead Protection Areas (WHPAs). 2. Rename the current Wellhead Protection Areas section of the ROP to Source Protection, with policy language added to identify the requirements of the Clean Water Act, 2006 and the four source protection plans that apply to Durham. 3. Require planning decisions to conform to the policies of the relevant source protection plan for Planning Act Applications submitted on or after the effective date of the applicable source protection plan. 4. Add the following Restricted Land Uses to the current classification of land uses that may be prohibited or restricted in the ROP: a) the application and storage of agricultural source material; b) the application, handing or storage of non-agricultural source material, commercial fertilizer or pesticides; c) the handling or storage of road salt; d) the storage of snow; e) the handling or storage of fuel, dense non-aqueous phase liquid, or an organic solvent; f) the use of land as livestock grazing or pasturing land an outdoor confinement yard or farmyard; g) the establishment, operation or maintenance of a waste disposal site that does not require approval under the Environmental Protection Act or the Ontario Water Resources Act; h) the management of runoff that contains chemicals used in the de-icing of aircraft; and - 220 - Envision Durham | 128 i) an activity that reduces the recharge of an aquifer. 5. Require a Section 59 notice 14 from the Risk Management Official (RMO) for proposals that include restricted land uses. 6. Prohibit high risk land uses, as defined in the current ROP Schedule E – Table E5, within the Beaverton IPZ-1. 7. Protect WHPAs with the highest vulnerability (i.e. a vulnerability score of 10) by ensuring that: a) existing and future uses connect to municipal sanitary sewers, where feasible; b) new development and lot creation, where dependent on private onsite sewage systems, meets the requirements of the Ontario Building Code, provincial and regional standards; c) large septic systems be prohibited unless compliant with the applicable source protection plan; and d) consideration be given to the impact of road salt for development that includes impervious surfaces. Considerations may also include the promotion of innovative techniques and technologies and training in the effects of over- salting for service providers. 14 A Section 59 Notice is a written notice from the RMO that is required prior to approval of any Building Permit, Planning Act or Condominium Act application. 8. Add policies specific to the Credit Valley, Toronto and Region and Central Lake Ontario (CTC) source protection area to: a) require new development to proceed by way of site plan control to ensure that the location of on-site sewage systems and replacement beds for vacant lots within WHPA-A and WHPA- B with a vulnerability score of 10 do not become a significant drinking water threat; b) address parking lot prohibitions within WHPA-A; and c) address salt management plans for new roads and parking lots within WHPA-B with a vulnerability score of 10. 9. Generally prohibit stormwater management facilities within WHPAs with a vulnerability score of 10 and the Beaverton IPZ-1 and require sanitary sewers and related pipes to locate outside of these areas. 10. Prohibit the establishment of sewage storage and treatment facilities, including associated discharge (lagoons) within WHPAs with a vulnerability score of eight to 10 and those activities plus industrial effluent discharges from Beaverton IPZ-1, unless compliant with the applicable source protection plan. 11. Add policies to address water quantity threats within wellhead protection area (quantity 1/quantity 2) that include requirements for settlement area boundary expansions, water balance - 221 - 129 | Envision Durham studies, Permits to Take Water and best management practices for low impact development. 12. Add definitions for “significant groundwater recharge areas”, “highly vulnerable aquifers”, “intake protection zones”, “wellhead protection areas”, “risk management official”, “prescribed drinking water threats”, “designated vulnerable area”, “vulnerability score” and “agricultural source material” as noted in the Glossary (see Appendix A). Natural Hazards Flooding, erosion, slope failures and dynamic beaches have the potential to cause significant harm to public health and safety when people and property locate in areas where these natural processes occur. Provincial policy requires that development generally be directed away from these areas and current ROP policies conform with this direction. Climate change has the capacity to increase the rate and severity of natural hazards, so provincial policies require municipalities to consider these impacts when managing natural hazards. ROP natural hazards policies should be strengthened to fill this gap. In addition, general feedback on the Environment and Greenlands Discussion Paper was received that highlights the need for focused policies on shoreline management and flooding and erosion hazards, land securement initiatives for hazard lands and enhancing environmental protections in these areas to mitigate the impacts of climate change. 75. Proposed Direction: Natural Hazards 1. Include a new Natural and Human-made Hazards policy section in the ROP. 2. Confirm that the Region will work with area municipalities and conservation authorities to develop and implement strategies to address the impacts of climate change on natural hazards. 3. Recognize the importance of protecting, restoring and enhancing the natural environment in the management of natural hazards. 4. Include policies that direct development outside shoreline areas impacted by flooding, erosion and dynamic beach hazards. 5. Encourage the transfer of hazard lands to public agencies. 6. Add definitions for “dynamic beach hazard” and “erosion hazard” as noted in the Glossary (see Appendix A). Shoreline Hazards: 76. Proposed Direction: Shoreline Hazards 1. Include policies to reinforce best practices in shoreline management such as those identified in established shoreline management plans. Wildland Fire Hazardous forest types for wildland fire have been brought into provincial policy as a potential risk to public health and safety. Development must be directed outside of these areas unless the risk is mitigated in - 222 - Envision Durham | 130 accordance with wildland fire assessment and mitigation standards. The Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry has provided broad-level mapping to identify hazardous forest types for wildland fire across the province. They have also developed a Wildland Fire Risk Assessment and Mitigation Reference Manual that outlines assessment and mitigation standards and provides policy guidance for site assessments and potential mapping refinements. Discussion question #15 of the Environment and Greenlands Discussion Paper posed the question, “How should the ROP address the issue of wildland fire?”. Responses included a desire for the ROP to recognize wildland fire as a risk to public health and safety, protect the NHS from development to mitigate this risk and implement local mitigation measures. 77. Proposed Direction: Wildland Fire 1. Include policies to direct development outside of hazardous sites and areas considered unsafe due to hazardous forest types for wildland fire. 2. Require consideration of hazardous forest types for wildland fire in an Environmental Impact Study when development is proposed in or adjacent to areas at risk for wildland fire, as determined by mapping from the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry. Direct area municipalities to refine generalized provincial mapping based on local data, where available, and 15 Lands that are outside of settlement areas and outside of prime agricultural areas. other criteria suggested by provincial guidance materials. 3. Direct area municipalities to include policies to require wildfire risk assessments and mitigation, where applicable within their official plans and zoning by-laws. 4. Add definitions for “hazardous forest types for wildland fire” and “wildland assessment and mitigation standards” as noted in the Glossary (see Appendix A). Open Space Areas and Greenbelt Urban River Valleys The ROP currently includes a Major Open Space Areas (MOSA) designation that is integrated with both the Urban and Rural Systems. The MOSA designation, outside of the urban area boundary, permits agricultural, agricultural-related and on-farm diversified uses and reflects lands containing natural heritage and hydrologic features and rural lands.15 MOSA within urban areas generally consists of areas that make up urban river valleys, connecting the Greenbelt with Lake Ontario and other areas with significant natural features. Much of the MOSA designation outside of urban areas has been identified as prime agricultural or candidate agricultural land in the Provincial Agricultural System mapping (also see Provincial Agricultural System section). As a result, it is anticipated that the amount of land designated as Prime - 223 - 131 | Envision Durham Agricultural Area with be increased in the ROP. Discussion question #8 in the Environment and Greenlands Discussion Paper asked, “Are there additional factors the Region should take into account when re-considering the Major Open Space Areas designations?”. Responses highlighted that land for parks and recreation should be protected and indicated a desire for existing permitted uses to be allowed to continue and a clear policy framework for the Agricultural System and Greenlands System. The 2005 Greenbelt Plan identified external river valley connections. Many of these areas are now designated as Urban River Valleys and subject to policies of the Greenbelt Plan, 2017. This designation applies only to publicly owned lands within the main corridors of river valleys connecting the Greenbelt to Lake Ontario and inland lakes. Permitted uses within these areas continue to be governed by the applicable policies of regional and area municipal official plans, only if those policies are in keeping with the policies of the Greenbelt Plan. The intent of Urban River Valleys policies in the Greenbelt Plan are to promote stewardship, remediation, parks and trails and maintenance and enhancement of ecological features and functions. Existing MOSA policies in the ROP provide direction in much the same way as Urban River Valleys policies in the Greenbelt Plan. In the urban area, the Greenbelt Urban River Valleys designation generally overlaps with the current ROP MOSA designation in the urban area (except for a few areas that will require refinement). Refinement of the Open Space Areas designation and inclusion of Urban River Valleys will be addressed through the establishment of a regional NHS and implementation of the provincial agricultural system. 78. Proposed Direction: Open Space Areas and Greenbelt Urban River Valleys 1. Establish a Regional Natural Heritage System as an “overlay” to the Open Space Areas and Greenbelt Urban River Valley designations, the detailed boundaries or descriptions of which would be detailed through area municipal official plan updates or through more detailed area specific studies, as applicable. 2. Add associated NHS policies into the ROP that will apply to areas with features, particularly along creek valleys (also see Natural Heritage System section). 3. Within the urban area boundary, establish Open Space Areas and include mapping for Greenbelt Urban River Valleys that considers the boundaries of adjacent designations. 4. Include policies to reflect that the predominant use of land within the proposed Open Space Areas designation will be conservation and environmental protection, with major recreational, kennels and landscape industry uses encouraged to locate within Rural Lands. 5. Portions of the proposed Open Space Areas designation that include lands under public ownership will be subject to the Urban River Valleys policies of the Greenbelt Plan. - 224 - Envision Durham | 132 6. Privately owned lands within the Greenbelt Urban River Valleys portion of the proposed Open Space Areas designation will be subject to the policies of the ROP, including NHS policies. Oak Ridges Moraine Areas The Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP) was introduced in 2002 to provide land use and resource management direction for the Oak Ridges Moraine. As part of the coordinated provincial plans review, the ORMCP was updated in 2017. Updates included minimal policy and terminology changes to ensure consistency with the other provincial plans. To achieve conformity, the ROP will reflect new policy directions in the ORMCP by: 3. recognizing the ORM and ORMCP for their role in climate change adaptation and mitigation; 4. adding policies related to best management practices for excess soil; 5. adding policies that facilitate the coordination of infrastructure planning with land use planning. 6. adding policies to prohibit waste disposal sites and soil conditioning sites within the Natural Core Area, Natural Linkage Area, key natural heritage features, key hydrologic features and their vegetation protection zones; and 7. adding policies to support agricultural systems planning by: a) implementing the provincial agricultural system and providing for a range of on-farm diversified uses; b) expanding exemptions for agricultural uses; c) outlining when Agricultural Impact Assessments (AIA) are required; and d) protecting agricultural uses from the impacts of non-agricultural uses. Waterfront Areas Waterfront Areas in Durham include areas along the shorelines of Lake Ontario, Lake Simcoe and Lake Scugog and are meant to be areas for outdoor recreation that also focus on natural heritage protection. Provincial policy requires the protection of waterfront areas for their natural heritage and hydrological value and recreational and tourism opportunities (including trails). The Growth Plan also directs municipalities to develop a public open space system along shoreline areas. Although current ROP policy generally satisfy these directions, it is appropriate that the ROP address policies in the Growth Plan and the Great Lakes Strategy that speak to restoration of habitat and ecological features in coastal areas. Area municipal official plans already have robust policies related to waterfront areas. Most area municipal official plans capture and expand on ROP policies. The wide adoption of policies, significant amount of parks and trails, and development of waterfront master plans in some municipalities illustrates that the Waterfront Areas designation is a priority for both the region and area municipalities and should not be significantly altered. - 225 - 133 | Envision Durham 79. Proposed Direction: Waterfront Areas 1. Ensure that policies providing for the protection, restoration and enhancement of ecological features along the waterfront continues through the review of development applications, Environmental Impact Studies, planning documents, management plans and related initiatives for Waterfront Areas. Tourist Activity/Recreation Nodes Tourist Activity/Recreational Nodes are identified in the ROP with symbols that denote the locations of these uses. However, there is little supportive policy direction, beyond the intention that these places develop as locations for tourism. All but one of these Tourist Activity/Recreational Nodes are within the current Waterfront Areas designation which allows for appropriate development and emphasizes these areas as intended for recreational uses. Discussion question #9 of the Environment and Greenlands Discussion Paper asked, “Do you feel that a separate Tourist Activity/Recreational Node designation is necessary in the ROP? If so, do you feel the policies should be enhanced or revised?”. Responses to this question were mixed. Some were supportive of retaining and even expanding the designation, while others questioned the need to identify Tourist Activity/Recreational Nodes. 16 Bennett, Whitty, Finkbeiner et al., 2018. As discussed earlier, proposed directions for the Prosperous Economy section of the ROP continue to emphasize the importance of tourism. It is suggested that for simplicity, it is not necessary that a separate Tourist Activity/Recreational Node overlay or designation be included in the ROP as the Waterfront Areas designation would provide the necessary policy permissions for such uses to continue or expand. Such locations could continue to develop as sites for tourism consistent with the intent of the Waterfront Areas as meant for outdoor recreation, supported through Economic Development policies of the new ROP, and more specific policy direction at the area municipal level. 80. Proposed Direction: Tourist Activity/Recreation Nodes 1. That Tourist Activity/Recreational Nodes continue to be supported through Regional and area municipal economic development and tourism initiatives, as well as within Waterfront Area policies where applicable, without the need to explicitly identify each location within the new ROP. Environmental Stewardship Environmental stewardship refers to the actions taken by individuals and groups to protect, care for and responsibly use the environment to support environmental or social outcomes.16 Over 80 per cent of the region is located within the Greenbelt, which includes various - 226 - Envision Durham | 134 natural and hydrological features and agricultural areas. There is value in acknowledging the ecological goods and services that these areas provide and the role that environmental stewardship plays in protecting, enhancing and restoring these areas. The current ROP includes encouraging policies on stewardship as a key direction and includes policies on ecological integrity that support the protection and enhancement of the natural environment across various sections. Special attention is paid to the ecological integrity of the Oak Ridges Moraine. There is an opportunity to enhance these policies to ensure conformity with provincial planning direction by demonstrating the connection between environmental stewardship and ecological integrity, aligning with best practices, and acknowledging the economic and cultural benefits of the ecological resources and features within the region. Discussion question #7 of the Environment and Greenlands System Discussion Paper asked “How can the ROP best support environmental stewardship efforts in Durham? It further asked if there are other examples of best practices?”. Responses to this question and general responses to the Climate Change and Sustainability Discussion Paper indicate strong support for ROP policies that encourage and promote environmental stewardship programming. This support can include the incentivization of stewardship activities across various areas including urban forestry and tree planting, habitat protection, invasive species management, farmland restoration and wetland restoration, among others. The principle of good stewardship, in partnership with area municipalities, conservation authorities and other agencies and residents supports a current key ROP objective to protect, enhance and restore the region’s natural environment for the ecological goods and services that it provides. Proposed policy directions strengthen this approach. 81. Proposed Direction: Environmental Stewardship 1. Establish Environmental Stewardship objectives that: a) seek to protect, enhance and restore the ecological integrity of the Greenlands System and its natural heritage features and functions; b) acknowledge the ecological goods and services provided by the natural environment foster healthy and complete communities, improve quality of life, and support tourism in the region; and c) recognize that the agricultural land base contributes to food production, and that the provision, protection and enhancement of agricultural resources contributes to the provision of ecological goods and services. 2. Support working with area municipalities and conservation authorities through education, stewardship initiatives and promotion on the value of ecological goods and services that result from natural heritage conservation. 3. Encourage partnerships with area municipalities, conservation authorities, - 227 - 135 | Envision Durham the province and other agencies to promote environmental stewardship. 4. Encourage the Region to seek funding sources to support the securement of natural areas in accordance with a set of land securement objectives. 5. Encourage area municipal official plans to include environmental stewardship policies. 6. Support ecosystem compensation (see Ecosystem Compensation section). 7. Manage the establishment and spread of invasive species (also see Invasive Species Management section). 8. Support increasing public awareness, stewardship and maintenance on the value of the ecological integrity of water resources, in partnership with area municipalities, conservation authorities and other organizations. 9. Encourage the stewardship of natural features as part of trail building and maintenance. 10. Add definitions for “ecological integrity” and “ecological goods and services” as noted in the Glossary (see Appendix A). Ecosystem Compensation There may be some cases where the removal of natural features is best addressed through ecosystem compensation, where the approach is to replace natural features and ecological functions lost.17 17 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA). Guideline for Determining Ecosystem Compensation. 2018. The current ROP does not directly address the principle of ecosystem compensation outside of aggregate resource extraction areas. Some area municipalities have incorporated comprehensive policies on the preservation, replacement and compensation for natural features. Similarly, some conservation authorities have prepared detailed guidelines to administer the implementation of ecosystem compensation. Discussion question #5 of the Environment and Greenlands Discussion Paper asked, “Should policies regarding ecosystem compensation and valuation be included in the ROP through Envision Durham? If so, are there examples of best practices?”. Responses voiced strong support for the establishment of policies that address ecosystem compensation, with a specific emphasis on preservation as the first step with removal/replacement only if necessary. Financial compensation has been identified as a last resort, and only if other approaches have been exhausted. Feedback also suggested that the EIS should remain the primary vehicle for implementing ecosystem compensation. 82. Proposed Direction: Ecosystem Compensation 1. Add a policy that allows ecosystem compensation only as a last resort, when mitigation and avoidance are not possible. - 228 - Envision Durham | 136 2. Add a policy that confirms that the Environmental Impact Study (EIS) is the vehicle to address the potential to protect, enhance or restore environmental features and functions, and only where such restoration is not feasible as determined by an EIS and as deemed appropriate by the region, the applicable area municipality, conservation authority and other approval agencies, allow for the compensation of such features and functions that includes financial mechanisms. 3. Require replacement with non-invasive, native species of vegetation or compensation where unavoidable, for all healthy vegetation to be removed as part of new development. 4. Add a definition for “ecosystem compensation” as noted in the Glossary (see Appendix A). Invasive Species Management Invasive species pose a significant threat to the ecological health of the natural system in various ways: • aquatic invasive plants impact recreational activities, displace native vegetation, slow down water flow, and alter oxygen levels; • invasive fish and invertebrates compete with native species for food, alter food webs, destroy habitat and prey on native fish eggs and larvae; 18 Ontario’s Invading Species Awareness Program. • forest pests degrade the quality of wood, destroy wildlife habitat and recreational/cultural value; and • terrestrial plants grow quickly and crowd out native species.18 Common examples of invasive species in the region include phragmites, dog straggling vine and emerald ash borer. Through collaborative efforts, the province, Region, conservation authorities and area municipalities are working to address the management of these and other invasive species. Provincial plans acknowledge the importance of protecting land, biodiversity, natural features and resources for the long-term quality of life, economic prosperity, environmental health and ecological integrity of the province. A component of this is the inclusion of natural self-sustaining vegetation within vegetation protection zones, Natural Core and Natural Linkage Areas of the Oak Ridges Moraine and conservation areas. The Invasive Species Act and the Ontario Invasive Species Strategic Plan identify invasive species and highlight the need for a coordinated approach to mitigate existing invasive species and prevent the introduction and spread of new populations. The Invasive Species Strategic Plan provides specific actions and tactics to help prevent new invasive species from arriving and surviving in the province, detect and respond rapidly to the presence of new invaders, and effectively manage the spread of existing invasive species to reduce their harmful impacts on - 229 - 137 | Envision Durham the environment. It also identifies the inclusion of policies in official plans as a key tactic for prevention and mitigation of invasive species. Discussion question #2 of the Environment and Greenlands Discussion Paper asked, “How can the ROP be revised to further help address the issue of invasive species?”. Responses to this question unanimously suggest that goals and policies should be included in the ROP to support invasive species management and the use of native species. 83. Proposed Direction: Invasive Species Management 1. Establish an Invasive Species Management subsection as a component of the Protected Greenlands System chapter with objectives that: a) highlight that invasive species management is a key consideration in the protection of our natural environment; b) indicate that the management of invasive species represents an important consideration in climate change mitigation and adaptation strategies; and c) acknowledge that collaborative effort is required amongst the region, area municipalities, conservation authorities, provincial agencies and other organizations in carrying out invasive species management. 2. Require invasive species management plans and the provision of appropriate vegetation protection zones, revegetated with natural, self-sustaining vegetation for all proposed developments adjacent to key natural heritage features. 3. Require new development and redevelopment to incorporate native and drought tolerant vegetation. 4. Require that native plantings be provided on Regionally owned land and rights-of- way, as opportunities arise. 5. Support the establishment of a region- wide Invasive Species Management Plan, in partnership with area municipalities and conservation authorities. 6. Require area municipalities to include policies to manage non-native invasive species and discourage the planting of these species in new developments within area municipal official plans. 7. Encourage ongoing monitoring and reporting of initiatives for managing invasive species being undertaken by area municipalities and conservation authorities. 8. Add definitions for “invasive species” and “natural self-sustaining vegetation” as noted in the Glossary (see Appendix A). Excess Soil Management As part of long-term planning for growth and development within the GGH, the Province introduced policy directions that require municipalities to support on-site and local reuse of excess soil, while also protecting human health and the environment. Ontario Regulation 406/19: On-Site and Excess Soil Management established rules for when excess soil is not a waste and outlines soil quality standards for beneficial reuse. This - 230 - Envision Durham | 138 regulation has a staggered implementation date, beginning January 2021. To support the regulation, the Province has also developed associated best management practices for excess soil management through an Excess Soil Management Policy Framework guidance document. Excess soil is a multi-faceted issue with implications for the Urban System, Agricultural System, Transportation System and Greenlands System. It is most often referenced in relation to the potential environmental impacts of fill processing and placement. For this reason, it is being considered within the Protected Greenlands System chapter of the ROP. Beyond conformity with provincial planning direction, responses to question #3 of the Environment and Greenlands Discussion Paper, “How can the Region best effectively support local implementation of excess soil policies?” indicate a desire for the region to provide more direction for area municipalities on excess soil management, develop consistent standards or guidelines with locational criteria, and consider regional operations as generators of fill. 84. Proposed Direction: Excess Soil Management 1. That an Excess Soil Management section be established in the ROP that would: a) Encourage on-site and local reuse of excess soil and encourage soil conservation through the use of low impact development and planting new and protecting existing trees and vegetation. b) Encourage soil processing facilities to locate close to soil reuse sites, areas where proposed development is concentrated and along higher order roads subject to the approval of the applicable municipality. c) Require that excess soil placement at receiving sites be required to demonstrate that the activity will not have a negative impact on existing land uses, the natural environment, surrounding land uses and cultural heritage resources through measures such as screening, appropriate buffers and setbacks, and containment management. d) Require the submission of a Soil Management Plan as a complete application requirement for new development. e) Promoting consideration of best management practices for excess soil in Regional operations. f) Support the establishment of excess soil management guidelines that would outline requirements of a soil management plan and identify locational criteria for receiving sites. g) Provide direction to the area municipalities to: i.) include policies within their official plans that reflect best management practices for excess soil management provided by the province; ii.) determine appropriate locations for excess soil storage and processing - 231 - 139 | Envision Durham sites through their official plans and zoning by-laws; and iii.) require site plan approval for all new or expanding soil storage or processing sites. 2. Encourage area municipalities to update their fill and site alteration by-laws so that they apply to conservation authority regulated areas in accordance with the Municipal Act. 3. Add a definition for “excess soil” as noted in the Glossary (see Appendix A). Septage When septic tanks are pumped out, the raw, untreated waste material (“septage”) is taken away by truck for disposal. Disposal sometimes occurs by way of mechanical spreading on rural sites. The spreading of septage is a use that is permitted by provincial policy, subject to provincial approval. The Province regulates these operations through the Environmental Compliance Approval (ECA) application review process. Since the Region is not the approval authority for ECAs, it may provide comment on the application, but does not have the authority to either “approve” or “refuse” such applications. 19 Sewage biosolids are created when municipal wastewater treatment facilities separate municipal wastewater (water from sewage systems, road drains, etc.) into liquid (clean water that can be discharged to a nearby stream or river) and the leftover solids. Solids go through an additional treatment process to reduce the presence of potentially harmful micro-organisms and potential causes of odour. The final treated Under the Environmental Protection Act, septage is considered a waste. As noted earlier, the definition of “landfill” in the ROP does not specifically address the spreading of septage. Raw, untreated septage spreading poses the potential for impacts on groundwater, surface water runoff as well as odour impacts. However, bio-solids19, which may also be applied in agricultural operations, differs from septage, as biosolids have been processed in municipal wastewater treatment plants. Discussion question #4 of the Environment and Greenlands Discussion Paper asked, “Should the Region include policies in the ROP restricting or limiting the land application of septage?”. Comments received ranged from a desire to prohibit these sites entirely to suggested restrictions related to key hydrological areas. Additional responses noted that prohibitions may conflict with provincial policy. Proposed directions related to “waste management” suggest aligning the waste management definition in the Environmental Protection Act with the current “landfill” definition in the ROP. Given that septage spreading meets the definition of a waste disposal site it would not be subject to a materials are sewage biosolids. Sewage biosolids that do not exceed the regulatory limits for contaminants, pathogens and odour can be applied to farmland as a non-agricultural source material (OMAFRA. Sewage Biosolids – Managing Urban Nutrients Responsibly for Crop Production. <http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/nm/nasm/info /brochure.htm>). - 232 - Envision Durham | 140 ROPA, but rather regulated by the Province via an ECA. Environmental Noise Environmental noise is known as an accumulation of noise pollution that occurs outdoors and is frequently described as “unwanted sound”. Common sources of noise pollution include transportation noise generated by freeways, arterial roads, airplane traffic and railways; heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) equipment on top of commercial, industrial and institutional buildings; and loading bays. To protect people and the environment from adverse noise pollution, the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP) created the Environmental Noise for Stationary and Transportation Sources – Approval and Planning document (Publication NPC-300). Municipalities use these guidelines to evaluate new development proposals to ensure that the use will not create adverse noise pollution to the surrounding uses, and that the proposed use will not be impacted by the existing noise sources in the area. The current ROP contains environmental noise policies that require development to consider noise impacts and prepare vehicular noise studies if within 300 metres of an arterial road. These policies also encourage non-traditional noise attenuation measures such as innovative designs, berms and orientation of higher density developments. Other municipalities outline additional criteria for when a noise study or acoustical audit is required. While feedback on environmental noise policies was not specifically solicited as part of the Environment and Greenlands Discussion Paper, general comments received suggest that the Region consider green infrastructure as an alternative noise attenuation measure and expand the criteria used to determine if a noise study is required. As Durham continues to grow, there are many ways that noise can affect development proposals. As a result, the approach the Region uses to request a noise study should also continue to evolve. 85. Proposed Direction: Environmental Noise 1. Encourage green infrastructure and passive noise attenuation measures in place of acoustical fencing and other traditional noise attenuation measures, where feasible and appropriate. 2. Expand the criteria for when a noise study is required as part of a complete application including when noise sensitive development is proposed near a: a) Rapid Transit Spine; b) railway line, including existing or planned commuter rail; c) freeway; and d) mineral aggregate operation. Environmental Assessments An Environmental Assessment (EA) is a decision-making process used by both the government and private sector to analyze the - 233 - 141 | Envision Durham potential effects of certain activities on the human and natural environment. In Ontario, this process is legislated by the Environmental Assessment Act and its regulations. The purpose of this Act is to provide for the protection, conservation and wise management of Ontario’s environment. It is intended to minimize or avoid adverse environmental effects before they occur and incorporate environmental factors into decision-making. The Environmental Assessment Act applies to enterprises, activities, proposals, plans and programs by provincial ministries, municipalities and public bodies covered by the Act, such as conservation authorities, and Metrolinx, as well as private sector projects, where applicable. The current ROP contains comprehensive policies to ensure EAs are completed for energy, transportation and other infrastructure projects. To achieve conformity with updates to the provincial plans, the new ROP will: • add policy language to clarify that development and site alteration are prohibited within key natural heritage features and key hydrologic features and adjacent lands, unless an EIS shows no negative impacts or if authorized through an EA; • encourage a coordinated response between the region and area municipalities to renewable energy proposals under the Environmental Assessment Act; and • add policy language to clarify when EAs are required including: o Within the Greenlands System, for infrastructure required to service the community; and o For all transportation infrastructure and utilities permitted in the Oak Ridges Moraine and Greenbelt. - 234 - Envision Durham | 142 Connected Transportation System In the current ROP, the Transportation System is structured around several designations applicable to roads, transit and goods movement in Schedule C (Transportation System maps) and Schedule E – Table E7 (Arterial Road Criteria). These designations are supported by various policies in the Transportation System chapter that describe Road Network and Design; Transportation Demand Management, Transit Priority Network, Regional Cycling Plan, Goods Movement, Mitigating Community and Environmental Impacts and considerations for area municipal official plans. The current ROP designates four types of roads, namely: • Existing and future Freeways; • Type A Arterials; • Type B Arterials; and • Type C Arterials. This functional hierarchy is focused on the movement of higher vehicular traffic volumes at the top end over longer distances (Freeways), while the arterials also carry through movements of vehicles, but become increasingly focused on land access and increasing levels of community trips along with having lower volumes. It also recognizes the role of collectors and local roads designated in area municipal official plans, as part of the overall road network. The Arterial Road Criteria, which comprise almost all Regional roads as well as major roads under area municipal jurisdiction, contain design and functional specifications for each arterial class. The classification system for arterial roads is clear, concise and consistent with accepted Transportation Association of Canada and Institute of Transportation Engineers best practices, based on a road classification review that was completed as part of the Region’s Arterial Corridor Guidelines (2007). In December 2017, the Durham Transportation Master Plan (TMP), was completed. The Durham TMP is a strategic planning study that defines the policies, programs and infrastructure modifications needed to manage anticipated transportation demand to the year 2031 and beyond. The Durham TMP supports the growth forecasted in the ROP through a multi-modal approach, including walking, cycling, public transit, autos and goods movement. There are recommended actions in the Durham TMP for the Region to implement, and some of these pertain to the ROP. A few actions recommended by the Durham TMP pertained to recommended additions, changes and deletions to the road, transit and goods movement networks designated in the ROP in Schedule C – Transportation System, and associated policy updates. In July 2018, Amendment #171 to the ROP came into effect, which implemented a number of these key network recommendations from the Durham TMP. Other actions from the Durham TMP that had implications on ROP policies, such as those related to land use designations and development review requirements, are now being addressed through Envision Durham. - 235 - 143 | Envision Durham This chapter provides initial proposed policy directions for a connected Transportation System structure and policy framework. Goals for a Connected Transportation System The current ROP contains four broad goals for the Transportation System. These goals are intended to work together to ensure the Region’s system: • provides an integrated, safe, efficient and reliable experience for all users and modes; • offers a variety of mobility choices; • supports retention of existing businesses and attracting new investment and economic activity; and • supports sustainable transportation initiatives. Provincial plans contain a policy framework that seeks to better integrate transportation planning with land use planning. To achieve this, investment in transit infrastructure is identified as a priority to create opportunities for intensification of existing urban areas in key nodes that benefit from higher levels of existing and planned transit service. Provincial plans also speak to creating a multi-modal transportation system that increases the share of trips made by transit and active transportation across the GGH. Optimizing the use of existing infrastructure and maximizes the benefits of investments in future infrastructure where necessary is also supported in these plans. The Transportation System Discussion Paper asked several questions that echoed several recommended Actions from the Durham TMP, and were consistent with provincial plan policies, towards updating the goals for the Region’s Transportation System. Key questions that helped inform updated Regional goals for transportation included topics such as: • planning considerations for transit- supportive development; • planning for all road users, as part of a complete streets approach; • protection of arterial road right-of-way needs from a multi-modal perspective; • expanding the importance of trip- reduction and non-auto modes through Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures; • addressing freight and goods movement; and • supporting emerging technologies that are changing the way residents are making daily trips. Responses to the questions indicated that there was general support for emphasizing the role of transit in land use planning, creating higher priority for transit and active transportation modes, support for new transit and active transportation infrastructure, and clearer policies to implement transit-supportive development including focusing their application in key areas where Transit Oriented Development (TOD) should occur. - 236 - Envision Durham | 144 86. Proposed Direction: Goals for a Connected Transportation System That the existing goals for the Transportation System be replaced with the following: 1. Provide a connected Transportation System that is integrated, safe, efficient, reliable and fiscally sustainable to meet existing and future needs of the region’s residents and businesses. 2. Strategically invest in the Transportation System by providing a variety of low carbon mobility choices for residents of all ages and abilities. 3. Design and construct transportation infrastructure to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the Transportation System and avoid, minimize or mitigate negative impacts on the natural environment. 4. Facilitate the movement of people and goods through a complete streets approach to accommodate all modes of transportation and strengthen the inter- dependency between transportation and land use. There are other questions and themes in the Transportation System Discussion Paper, as well as other discussion papers, that touched on planning considerations towards a Connected Transportation System. These include the need for protecting the natural environment, including policies related to EA processes for transportation infrastructure, addressing and mitigating climate change impacts, being age-friendly, long-term protection of corridors for roads, transit and active transportation facilities, supporting economic development and growth opportunities, including intensification, and updating planning policies related to ports and airports. These serve to frame the overall goals for the Transportation System, creating a potential framework for developing objectives to help articulate the goals and direct specific policies that will be developed in the new ROP. Transit Oriented Development The development of Transit Oriented Development (TOD) policies in Major Transit Station Areas (MTSAs) surrounding the existing and planned GO Stations on the GO Lakeshore East rail line and extension to Bowmanville has been presented under separate cover. The MTSA Proposed Policy Directions were presented to the Planning and Economic Development Committee in December 2020 and presented policy proposals for review and comment. The policy for TOD in MTSAs will address provincial conformity (PPS and Growth Plan) requirements. In addition, the 2041 Metrolinx Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) identifies the importance of “first mile/last mile” solutions to enhance and prioritize pedestrian access to and from MTSAs. It also recommends strengthening policies to support transit connections to frequent rapid transit networks, and highlighting specific areas for intensification and development to promote TOD through increased density and mixed uses. To effectively respond to Metrolinx investments in Durham on the GO Lakeshore East rail line and future extension to Bowmanville, and the Metrolinx Transit - 237 - 145 | Envision Durham Oriented Communities strategy,20 Regional Council established a Rapid Transit and TOD Office (Report #2019-COW-26). The Office is promoting and helping to implement future developments including high density, compact communities in proximity to the existing and planned GO stations on the GO Lakeshore East line and includes an integrated mix of uses such as office, residential, retail and community uses that support transit ridership. The Office also serves to promote transit infrastructure on the Highway 2 and Simcoe Street Rapid Transit Spines, such as the Durham- Scarborough Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and the Simcoe Street Transit Priority Pilot Study. Outside of MTSAs TOD policies are applicable to the other SGAs, located along routes where planned Higher Order Transit services are designated in the ROP.21 The SGAs consist of Urban Growth Centres, Regional Centres and Regional Corridors (see Figure 16). These existing designations in the ROP, including density requirements and where delineated boundaries should be applied, are being reviewed as part of the Growth Management Study, as described in the Vibrant Urban System chapter. 20 Metrolinx’s Transit Oriented Communities strategy uses the opportunity to leverage the Province’s investment in transit infrastructure for new and existing transit stations, and work with third parties to reduce the costs to taxpayers. It seeks to increase transit ridership and reduce traffic congestion, increase housing supply and jobs with access to transit, catalyze complete communities based on good planning principles, and create positive value capture for the Province to maximize transit investment while reducing taxpayer burden. In order to ensure the Region achieves its objectives and is consistent with provincial direction of TOD policy, policies at the provincial, regional and local levels have been reviewed related to transit-supportive development. Transit-supportive and TOD are similar concepts, but there is a distinction in terms of how the terminology is typically applied, including for the purposes of this policy review. Areas where a broader suite of transit-supportive design and planning measures for compact, mixed use development are applied and tailored to the level of existing or planned Higher Order Transit service is considered TOD. General transit-supportive policies to improve “first mile/last mile” access to transit can be applied throughout the urban area. Proposed policy directions for transit- supportive development have been informed by key recommendations in the Durham TMP, which directed staff to develop a TOD guidelines document and checklist, and a corresponding strategy with enabling policies in the ROP (Actions #3, #4 and #5). They seek to put the actions in the TMP into practice at a regional planning level. 21 Higher Order Transit corridors in the Regional Official Plan, for the purposes of this review, are the combination of Rapid Transit Spine, High Frequency Transit Network and, of course, Commuter Rail designations. In the case of Commuter Rail, MTSAs are identified at the existing and future GO Stations along the GO Lakeshore East line. It is designated as a Priority Transit Corridor for the existing portion, and the extension is designated as a Committed GO Transit Rail Extension. - 238 - Envision Durham | 146 The current ROP does identify support for TOD for some areas. Specifically, current policy 11.3.18 indicates that higher density and mixed use should be applied to areas adjacent to Transportation Hubs, Commuter Stations and Transit Spines. The current ROP also promotes the provision of facilities and amenities which support non-auto modes of transportation. These include bus shelters, active transportation facilities. It also promotes good urban design considerations such as the siting and orientation of buildings that are street facing to reduce walking distances to transit services, while supporting limitations on surface parking and encouraging the redevelopment of existing surface parking areas. While the MTSA Proposed Policy Directions will update TOD- related measures around the existing and planned stations along the GO Lakeshore East rail line and its extension, it is appropriate that this approach apply to other SGAs as well. The inclusion of TOD policies in the new ROP will enable the Region to strengthen the relationship between transportation and land use by achieving its density targets for SGAs while supporting use of Higher Order Transit. TOD policies help ensure that the design principles outlined below are applied consistently within the Regional Centres and Regional Corridor SGA designations served by the planned Higher Order Transit network. Figure 16: MTSAs and Other SGAs in the Context of the Higher Order Transit Network. - 239 - 147 | Envision Durham Proposed directions for transit-supportive policies are divided into three general categories: TOD that supports MTSAs, TOD that supports the other SGAs along Higher Order Transit, and transit-supportive policies that are applied to the remaining designated urban area. Transit Oriented Development in MTSAs: For TOD that supports MTSAs, the proposed policy direction is as follows: 87. Proposed Direction: Transit Oriented Development in MTSAs 1. Refer to the Major Transit Station Areas Proposed Policy Directions, dated December 1, 2020. Transit Oriented Development in SGAs: For TOD that supports SGAs that are not MTSAs (i.e. Urban Growth Centres, Regional Centres and Regional Corridors), the proposed policy directions are as follows: 88. Proposed Direction: Transit Oriented Development in SGAs 1. Incorporate TOD strategies in the development approvals process by creating and applying a TOD guideline and checklist to be used for reviewing development applications in areas within SGAs connected by Higher Order Transit corridors. 2. Ensure that the transportation network is designed and planned to support sustainable and multi-modal transportation options of walking, cycling and the use of transit and supports mixed-use development. 3. Design arterial roads in SGAs, through a complete streets approach, to help control traffic speeds while promoting safe, attractive environments for active transportation. 4. Include policies to ensure that in Regional Centres, measures on arterial roads such as reduced geometric design standards, enhanced streetscaping, maintaining and encouraging on-street parking in historic downtowns and on Type C Arterials, more frequent intersections and controlled pedestrian crossings are encouraged, and will be updated through refinements to the Arterial Road Criteria (currently in Schedule E, Table E7). 5. Encourage measures to create enhanced streetscaping, separate pedestrian and cycling facilities, and more frequent controlled pedestrian crossings in Regional Corridors corresponding to Rapid Transit Spines (sections of Highway 2 and Simcoe Street). 6. Include provisions for alternative development standards to support TOD, including reduced minimum parking requirements and the establishment of maximum parking requirements for both privately initiated development applications and area municipal zoning by-laws, be encouraged in SGAs and tailored to the level of transit service proposed. 7. Collaborate with area municipalities to guide the implementation of TOD, recognizing the contribution of area municipal official plans and secondary - 240 - Envision Durham | 148 plans in developing these types of policies in SGAs. Transit-Supportive Development: For the urban area in general, the following are proposed directions to make development more transit-supportive: 89. Proposed Direction: Transit-Supportive Development 1. Recognize and update existing transit- supportive policies in the ROP, such as policies 11.3.19 and 11.3.20 that address development adjacent to Higher Order Transit routes outside of MTSAs and SGAs. 2. Enhance transit-supportive policies in the ROP applying to the overall Urban System (Section 8) to reflect provincial policy updates (PPS, Growth Plan) and best practices. 3. Provide for transit-supportive urban design and an improved active transportation network, wherein 80 per cent of residents and workers in the urban area are within a reasonable walking distance to the nearest transit stop (400 metres, representing a five- minute walk). Commuter Stations The current Commuter Station and Transportation Hub designations, and the addition of a Transit Hub designation, were reviewed for the following reasons: • Action #13 in the Durham TMP entails identifying transit station and terminal needs, including needs for upgrades to existing facilities and physical footprint and operational parameters for future facilities, as early as possible in the planning process to enable protection of land and permit long-term financial planning; and • Discussion question #6 in the Transportation System Discussion Paper was intended to solicit feedback on Action #13 in the Durham TMP: “Do you support a new Transit Hub designation and policies as part of the ROP?”. Through the policy review, it was determined that the introduction of a new Transit Hub designation could not be done in isolation and would need to be integrated with a review of the Commuter Station and Transportation Hub designations. In the current ROP’s Transit Priority Network map (currently Schedule C, Map C2), Commuter Stations and Transportation Hubs are designated on the Commuter Rail line corresponding to the existing GO Lakeshore East rail service and its future extension to Bowmanville. In the Growth Plan, the existing GO Lakeshore East line is designated as a Priority Transit Corridor, and the future extension to Bowmanville is designated as a Committed GO Transit Rail Extension. MTSAs are being delineated around existing and future GO Stations on the GO Lakeshore East line to Bowmanville through the Growth Management Study component of Envision Durham. The original Durham TMP (2005) differentiated Transportation Hubs from Commuter Stations, with the intention that - 241 - 149 | Envision Durham the Transportation Hubs would have greater importance as travel destinations, transfer points for different transit services (e.g., GO Bus and Durham Region Transit), than Commuter Stations. These recommendations from the TMP were integrated into the ROP through Regional Official Plan Amendment 114 in 2008. In the context of the GO Lakeshore East rail line and planning for MTSAs, all Commuter Stations function in a similar manner. The Pickering, Central Oshawa and Bowmanville GO stations are designated as Transportation Hubs rather than Commuter Stations in the current ROP. Further, there is a Transportation Hub designated at the future Highway 407/Simcoe Street Transitway station. It is the only Commuter Station or Transportation Hub designation that does not correspond to an existing or future GO Station. Besides the Highway 407/Simcoe Street location, the other Transportation Hubs do not differ significantly from the other GO Stations designated as Commuter Stations on the GO Lakeshore East line, based on the Transportation Hub description in the ROP (policy 11.3.18 f)). This policy describes Transportation Hubs as being places that are “major travel destinations and facilitate transfers between different modes of travel or between transit services.” In essence, this is what any Commuter Station (GO Station) does or is planned to do. Policy 11.3.18 does not include a specific description for Commuter Station, but it is referenced in the Commuter Rail description as “transfer points to other transit services and transportation modes.” There are other important transit terminals or station locations, both existing and planned outside of GO Stations such as the existing Ontario Tech/Durham College North Campus Terminal, Oshawa Centre Terminal or future Baldwin Street Park and Ride, that are not recognized in the current ROP. These locations are identified in area municipal official plans or by Durham Region Transit (DRT) service plans and reflected in the current Durham TMP. The Durham TMP also identifies existing and future commuter lots, some of which correspond to DRT transit terminal or station locations or the planned 407 Transitway stations while others do not. The appropriateness of designating Transit Hubs on the Transit Priority Network map for some or all these facilities was part of this review from a ROP perspective. The 407 Transitway is a planned rapid transit facility that will parallel the 407 Express Toll Route (ETR) and Highway 407 (south side) from Burlington to Highway 35/115. It also includes Highway 412 between Highway 407 and Dundas Street (west side), and Highway 418 between Highway 407 and Regional Highway 2 (west side). The right-of-way needs for the 407 Transitway facility and commuter station locations, as part of the overall highway right-of-way, were identified by the Ministry of Transportation, Ontario (MTO) through the 407 East Individual EA and Preliminary Design Study to protect for its future implementation. These lands include the future BRT facility on its own right-of-way parallel to the highway, commuter stations and maintenance facilities. MTO has completed EA studies for the 407 Transitway, including the Kennedy Road to Brock Road section along 407 ETR in Pickering (2016). - 242 - Envision Durham | 150 Recognizing that the 407 Transitway is a long- term plan, the proposed transitway stations as commuter lots and transit terminals are being implemented on an interim basis. Examples include the Brock Road Park and Ride lot in Pickering, the Halls Road Park and Ride lot (north of Dundas Street) and the Baldwin Street Park and Ride lot (under construction) in Whitby. In this regard, the Durham TMP and current ROP (through the Freeway Transit designation on Schedule C, Map C3 and existing ROP policy 11.3.18 (g)) encourage the early implementation of the 407 Transitway commuter lots. These commuter lots support increased transit use and carpooling to facilitate long-distance inter-municipal and inter-regional transit trips, in advance of the 407 Transitway being constructed as a rapid transit facility. The designation of transit stations and terminals in area municipal official plans is not consistent in terms of terminology or the intended type of facility described. While GO Stations are identified in map schedules and policy through a variety of terms, the approach to other types of stations or terminals (either GO and/or DRT) is quite varied and is often done through policy language rather than through a symbol or land use designation. Area municipal feedback received through the Transportation System Discussion Paper was somewhat supportive of a new Transit Hub designation but requested clarity on its definition and flexibility in terms of implementation from an area municipal perspective. One municipality felt it was not necessary for the ROP to designate them at all. Public comments spoke to encouraging park and ride lots on Highway 407 in general, which have a Transit Hub function as well as promote carpooling. While a new Transit Hub designation on the Transit Priority Network schedule has been considered, such a designation is not considered necessary in the new ROP for the following reasons: • many of the future transit stations and terminals located outside of GO stations, included in the Durham TMP and DRT’s service plans, are largely identified at existing or planned 407 Transitway stations; • the location of commuter lots coinciding with the future 407 Transitway is already recognized in policy 11.3.18 g); and • identifying other future transit station or terminal sites is subject to change, through updates in DRT service planning, and a specific designation in the Transit Priority Network may hamper flexibility in siting locations. Outside of GO Stations and commuter lots, these facilities tend to be on privately-owned lands. 90. Proposed Direction: Commuter Stations 1. Maintain the current Commuter Station designation at the existing and future GO Stations on all designated existing and future Commuter Rail facilities on the Transit Priority Network (currently Schedule C, Map C3). 2. Amend the Transportation Hub designations to existing and future Commuter Stations on the Transit Priority Network, except for the Highway - 243 - 151 | Envision Durham 407/Simcoe Street location, which should be deleted. 3. Explicitly refer to the Commuter Station designation within the Transit Priority Network components of the new ROP. 4. Add a specific policy and/or map symbol to identify that the future Grandview GO Station, located west of Grandview Street and south of Bloor Street in Oshawa, is not part of the GO Lakeshore East Extension to Bowmanville but is designated for land protection purposes only. 5. Ensure the location of future transit terminals and stations in the Durham TMP and DRT service plans be integrated or protected for through the development application review process. 6. Add policies related to active transportation and the primacy of transit access to existing transit stations in SGAs outside of the arterial road right-of-way (e.g. Ontario Tech/Durham College north Oshawa campus). Active Transportation The PPS, Growth Plan, Metrolinx’s 2041 RTP and the Durham TMP highlight the importance of active transportation in achieving healthy and complete communities that support quality of life and help municipalities maximize their investments in infrastructure. Policies in the Growth Plan require that transportation systems in the GGH offer a balance of transportation choices to reduce reliance on single-occupant vehicle use and prioritize active transportation, transit, and goods movement over single-occupant vehicles. They also require that active transportation networks be both comprehensive and integrated, and that municipalities implement Transportation Demand Management (TDM) policies to increase the modal share of active transportation and transit. Further, the Growth Plan recognizes that active transportation is a key component in achieving complete streets. The current ROP addresses active transportation in general, and cycling specifically, in several policies contained in the Urban System and Transportation System sections. However, the active transportation term, instead of “walking and cycling” could be applied more often. Further, policies related to active transportation, walking or cycling should be applied more broadly given the greater importance of complete streets, the Regional Cycling Plan Update including the Regional Trail Network, multi-modal approaches and “first mile/last mile” transit access to stops and stations. In 2017, the Region approved the Age- Friendly Durham Strategy and Action Plan, which guides how decision-making for areas of Regional responsibility reflects and responds to the needs and lived experiences of older adults (those age 55 and older). One of the objectives of Age Friendly Durham is to improve the safety and connectivity of outdoor spaces to support active transportation and ongoing access by older adults. In 2019, the Durham Vision Zero Strategic Road Safety Action Plan was launched by the Region. Durham Vision Zero aims to create safer roads for drivers, pedestrians and cyclists by ultimately eliminating fatal and - 244 - Envision Durham | 152 injury collisions, with a goal of a 10 per cent reduction within five years (2019-2023). The plan coordinates the expertise of a diverse set of stakeholders in engineering, enforcement and education to save lives and reduce injuries caused by motor vehicles. Emphasis areas for improving road safety identified by Durham Vision Zero include cyclists and pedestrians, and a series of actions called countermeasures are recommended to address road safety for these vulnerable road users. By making the road environment safer for active transportation, Durham Vision Zero encourages non-auto travel and the provision of additional infrastructure to support it. The official plans of some area municipalities address active transportation quite robustly, including policies that articulate how active transportation can help achieve environmental objectives related to climate change; the integration of active transportation with new development and with other transportation networks, including cross-jurisdictional connections; the development of transportation facilities that are barrier-free and that accommodate users of all ages and abilities; safety through design and TDM programs that reduce single- occupant vehicle travel, including employer programs and programs for schools. A jurisdictional scan of other upper- or single- tier municipalities in Ontario revealed that most of their official plans address active transportation quite comprehensively. Policies in these plans include the age- friendly design of transportation systems, active transportation as it relates to sustainability, detailing urban design measures to support the comfort and safety of cyclists and pedestrians, providing direction and encouragement to area municipalities, and TDM measures that include active transportation. Several of these official plans also include a map schedule designating an active transportation network or cycling network, with further details referenced in a TMP, cycling and/or active transportation plan. Feedback received on the Transportation System Discussion Paper was in response to the question raised as to “How should the Regional Official Plan recognize or plan for enhanced trail connections as key active transportation linkages within hydro corridors and Waterfront Areas?” (question #8). Responses from the area municipalities, agencies and the public indicated support for an integrated active transportation network that provides strong connectivity to key destinations; better connections between cycling and transit; cycling/active transportation programming and education; TDM measures; and the use of a complete streets approach to arterial road design. General Policies for Active Transportation: 91. Proposed Direction: General Policies for Active Transportation 1. Add a new a map schedule of the Region’s Primary Cycling Network and Regional Trail Network to the Transportation System maps (currently Schedule C). 2. Enhance current Schedule E – Table E7 to provide a more detailed description of cycling facilities, and to reflect new design standards flowing from the - 245 - 153 | Envision Durham Regional Cycling Plan Update and towards a Complete Streets approach. 3. Add a definition, based on the PPS and Growth Plan, for “active transportation” as noted in the Glossary (see Appendix A). In addition to the general policy directions, proposed directions for policies in the Connected Transportation System chapter are noted below. Active Transportation within a Connected Transportation System: 92. Proposed Direction: Active Transportation within a Connected Transportation System 1. Include the Primary Cycling Network and Regional Trail Network as part of the Regional Transportation System. 2. Prioritize investments that advance active transportation, transit, goods movement and overall safety over those that primarily benefit single-occupant vehicle travel. 3. Recognize and support the Region’s role to ensure the safe, year-round operation of cycling and transit facilities through design, signage, enforcement and maintenance. 4. Include policy language to ensure that the Transportation System is inclusive and serves the needs of people of all ages and abilities by ensuring pedestrian access to transit stations, terminals and stops; promoting neighbourhood walkability; and, addressing accessibility requirements during the design stage. 5. That in support of the Region’s Age- Friendly Strategy and Action Plan, and tied to the Vibrant Urban System policy review, an accessible and safe urban environment ensures safe, universally accessible, direct and convenient pedestrian access for various land uses and community amenities; reduces barriers and gaps to active transportation; and focuses improvements in areas of high need such as SGAs and locations where there are high volumes of active transportation, particularly for seniors and elementary and secondary school students. 6. Leverage the Vision Zero Strategic Road Safety Action Plan in the design of facilities to support active transportation, including measures to control traffic speeds while promoting safe and attractive environments for pedestrians and cyclists. 7. Promote the integration of different modes of transportation through cycling and transit-supportive facilities such as bike racks and storage at transit stations/stops. 8. Support commuters by including end of trip active transportation facilities such as showers and change rooms for commercial and industrial developments. 9. Encourage area municipalities to enhance pedestrian and cycling environments by providing informational signage and wayfinding systems to support exploration and travel; extending active transportation facilities into new development areas as early as possible; and, ensuring that active transportation - 246 - Envision Durham | 154 facilities, including bicycle parking, are integrated with each other. 10. Ensure the Primary Cycling Network reflects a proactive planning and funding approach being proposed as part of the Regional Cycling Plan Update. 11. Include a policy for the Regional Cycling Plan to require that it be regularly updated. 12. Support the Region’s intent to explore and leverage opportunities from the provincial and the federal governments, as well as from other funding sources, for active transportation and TDM measures and programs. 13. Pedestrian and cycling policies are also currently referenced in other sections of the ROP. The following proposed directions pertain to enhancing those policies that will become part of the Urban System, Healthy Communities and Supportive Infrastructure chapters. Active Transportation within a Vibrant Urban System: 93. Proposed Direction: Active Transportation within a Vibrant Urban System 1. Include references to the active transportation network in creating people-oriented places. 2. Include language that the preparation of area municipal plans also considers active transportation, as the current policy (8.3.10) is silent on this aspect. 3. That the planning of new SGAs includes cycling connectivity along with pedestrian-oriented environments and transit friendly facilities, consistent with policies identified in the Connected Transportation System section. Active Transportation within Healthy Communities: 94. Proposed Direction: Active Transportation within Healthy Communities 1. Include language that the connection between reducing single-occupant vehicle use, through TDM and increasing the use of active transportation, supports climate change mitigation. Active Transportation within Supportive Infrastructure: 95. Proposed Direction: Active Transportation within Supportive Infrastructure 1. Encourage active transportation facilities on utility corridors, Major Open Space Areas and Waterfront Areas to benefit both use of public lands and to complement recreational uses within or adjacent to these areas. Active Transportation within a Protected Greenlands System: 96. Proposed Direction: Active Transportation within a Protected Greenlands System 1. Recognize and promote the tourism value of the Regional Trail Network and the Primary Cycling Network. - 247 - 155 | Envision Durham Transportation Demand Management Transportation Demand Management (TDM) is the application of strategies and policies that increase the efficiency of the transportation system by influencing travel behaviour. TDM is achieved by encouraging people to utilize sustainable travel options such as active transportation and transit, or by providing flexible work arrangements that allow people to work from home or commute at different times. Existing TDM policies within the ROP focus on programs that encourage employers to implement single-occupant vehicle trip reduction strategies such as dedicated carpool parking and end-of-trip cycling facilities for cyclists. The Transportation System Discussion Paper noted that there may be more opportunities to provide stronger support for Regional action and advocacy on TDM, along with creating more travel choices for more residents using the transportation system. The Discussion Paper highlighted initiatives mentioned in the Durham TMP, including Smart Commute, Active and Sustainable School Travel, TDM development guidelines and the commuter lot program. Discussion question #11 from the Discussion Paper asked the following: “Are other aspects of Transportation Demand Management beyond employer and school trips, and review of development applications, that should be addressed in greater detail in the Regional Official Plan?”. The Durham TMP recommended that the Region develop TDM development guidelines and a checklist for reviewing new development (Action #1). The recommendation is to encourage active transportation, transit use and auto trip reduction for new development approvals. Encouraging TDM measures through a development review guideline and checklist is noted to help achieve the mode share targets for specific land use categories in the Region, focused in the urban areas but particularly in Urban Growth Centres and along Rapid Transit Corridors (i.e. Regional Centres and Corridors along sections of Highway 2 and Simcoe Street). The PPS and Growth Plan both support the use of TDM policies in order to maximize the efficiency of existing transportation infrastructure by reducing trip distance and time and by increasing the modal share of active transportation and transit. Metrolinx’s Regional Transportation Plan recommends that official plans include a TDM strategy as part of planning applications for any major commercial, employment or institutional development. Other provincial plans such as MTO’s #CycleON and Transit-Supportive Guidelines recognize the important role that TDM strategies plan in influencing people’s travel choices. Most area municipal official plans in Durham contain policies that promote TDM- supportive features such as bike storage facilities in new development. Others include policies that support TDM programming such as Smart Commute or active and sustainable school travel programs. TDM supportive measures for development review are also referenced in certain official plans. In particular, the Town of Ajax has a TDM management plan including a development guideline. - 248 - Envision Durham | 156 To support carpooling as a TDM measure, the Region has established a Small Urban and Rural Commuter Lot Program, as part of Smart Commute Durham. Through the program, commuter parking spots have been designated and signed within area municipal facilities (e.g., arenas, community centres) along with existing carpool lots, primarily serving the Region’s northern municipalities and parts of Clarington. This program, along with carpooling in general, should continue to be supported and promoted including through ROP policy. Feedback on the Discussion Paper received from area municipalities and other stakeholders included: • support for prioritizing active transportation users in the planning process; • desire for expanding public transit as an active transportation partner by continuing support for “first/last mile” across the Durham Region Transit (DRT) high volume network with secure active transportation parking along routes at key pick up points, which is relevant to TDM in that it supports initiatives such as Smart Commute and TDM guidelines which would increase the provision of end-of-trip facilities for active transportation; • support for a TDM development guideline and making the inclusion of TDM strategies in some types of development and at major destinations mandatory; • support for specific types of TDM measures, such as carpool parking lots and secure bike storage facilities; • support for education, training and wayfinding as other important TDM tools that can help promote the use of active transportation and transit; • interest in including examples of TDM measures that could be incorporated into new development; • support for a policy that encourages area municipalities to update their parking and zoning by-laws to support and facilitate TDM measures; • an interest in potential partnerships between transit providers and the private sector and/or municipalities to offer incentives for taking transit; and • support for more or enhanced carpooling initiatives and TDM-supportive technologies such as broadband and Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS). Given the above review, it is appropriate to go beyond the approach to TDM in Durham’s current ROP, which emphasizes TDM programming. Addressing TDM through the built environment and development review process, along with TDM programming, is even more important. Ensuring that new development is designed to encourage and support the use of transit and active transportation, and the promotion of auto trip reduction through remote working, active school travel, broadband and other technologies, should also be added to the current TDM measures as part of a new ROP. 97. Proposed Direction: Transportation Demand Management 1. Add a definition, based on the PPS, for “Transportation Demand Management” - 249 - 157 | Envision Durham (TDM) as noted in the Glossary (see Appendix A). 2. Add policy language supporting TDM to help reduce the impacts of climate change and support broadband and other technologies to reduce the number of work trips. Reducing transportation demand not only improves the efficiency of existing transportation infrastructure, it also reduces energy and resource consumption and emissions. 3. Enable the creation of a TDM Development Guideline, which will include a checklist, through policy. This document will be created in parallel with the Envision Durham consultation process and will identify the types of TDM measures that should be implemented as part of the development review process, depending on the nature of the proposed development in terms of location and land use. 4. Clarify the TDM programming offered by the Region. 5. Formalize the Region’s role in planning and promoting commuter lots, including advocacy for the Province to implement new facilities. 6. Require certain types of development (such as a large commercial, mixed use, industrial or multi-storey condominium buildings) reviewed by the Region to submit a TDM Plan as part of, or along with, a Transportation Impact Study (TIS), as a requirement for a complete application. 7. Encourage the area municipalities to promote urban design that supports the use of active transportation and transit in the development review process. 8. Encourage the area municipalities to implement parking and zoning by-laws to facilitate the implementation of TDM measures. 9. Support the application of TDM measures in exchange for reduced parking standards in appropriate locations. 10. Investigate, in partnership with area municipalities and Metrolinx, the need for a regional parking strategy to support TDM and TOD in SGAs. Arterial Right-of-Way Protection To assist in the preparation and review of development applications under the Planning Act and Municipal Class EA studies, and to establish greater certainty in identifying ultimate right-of-way needs on Regional and area municipal arterial roads, it is appropriate that an arterial right of way protection policy be established. The PPS identifies that transportation systems should be planned and protect for current and projected needs. Development should not be permitted that could preclude, negatively affect or be incompatible with the long-term purpose of the corridor. Further, the PPS allows the planning for infrastructure and public service facilities beyond a 20-year time horizon. The Growth Plan echoes the PPS and speaks to the optimization of infrastructure along transit and transportation corridors, to support the achievement of complete communities through a more compact built - 250 - Envision Durham | 158 form. It also emphasizes a coordinated approach between land use and transportation planning, and between upper- and lower-tier municipalities in planning and protecting for transportation needs. The possibility of a new map schedule and associated policy updates for the ROP were proposed through the following recommendations: • to implement Action #49 of the Durham Transportation Master Plan (TMP), which recommended a new map schedule to specify ultimate regional road right-of- way widths that can be acquired under the Planning Act through development applications; and • to address question #9 raised in the Transportation System Discussion Paper, which asked if providing clearer future right-of-way requirements for specific sections of arterial roads would be beneficial for development application review or Class EA studies. On the Transportation System Discussion Paper, feedback received from the Works Department, area municipalities, agencies and the public were generally positive on providing clearer ROW requirements on arterial roads designated in the ROP. Comments received included the use of more specific right-of-way needs as being beneficial in development review and accommodation of transit, active transportation, and stormwater management facilities within the corridor. Further, clarity of future right-of-way needs by section of arterial road would allow for a more refined application of needs in response to known heritage buildings or districts, built form, environmental or other constraints, and would be more context-sensitive than “blanket” maximums being applied depending on the number of lanes planned. The current ROP identifies ranges of right-of- way widths to protect for in the review of development applications, depending on the functional designation of the arterial road (i.e. Type A, Type B and Type C) and planned number of lanes. Policy 11.3.4 enables the taking road widenings as part of the development review process along arterial roads. Interpretation of the ROP along with these studies is not always clear, particularly in the preparation of development applications by developers and their consultants. Further, the area municipalities do not have a consistent approach in identifying exceptions to arterial ROW from what is in the ROP and their respective OPs. Having a right-of-way map schedule would provide a clear source of information to identify where exceptions exist and can be applied in development application review as well as other studies (e.g. Class EAs for road widenings or reconstruction). There are several upper and single-tier municipalities, such as York, Halton, Niagara and Greater Sudbury, that designate right-of-way needs on arterial roads by section. However, Durham would extend this concept to arterial roads under area municipal jurisdiction as well, to reflect their OP policies and capital plans. The identification of ultimate right-of-way needs for arterial roads will support the implementation of a complete streets approach in the region. Right-of-way - 251 - 159 | Envision Durham protection benefits all road users, including the accommodation of active transportation and transit facilities. Specifying ultimate right-of-way needs also creates the opportunity for streetscaping and landscaping to support healthy communities. It also can provide the necessary space to mitigate climate change impacts in terms of embankments, stormwater management and accommodating adaptive culverts and bridges. 98. Proposed Direction: Arterial Right-of- Way Protection 1. Create a new Schedule showing future right-of-way width requirements for all arterial roads under regional and area municipal jurisdiction. The map would show specific sections by planned ROW width that can be applied in the preparation and review of development applications and as a starting point for future Class EA studies looking at road reconstruction, widening or extensions and transit projects. 2. Create an accompanying table as an appendix to the ROP describing the road sections identified in the map schedule, and corresponding right-of-way width requirements. 3. Outline the types of facilities that can be protected for when taking road widenings through the development review process. Multi-Modal Level of Service Through the preparation of Transportation Impact Studies that are filed in support of new developments or road expansion projects, an evaluation of the Level of Service (LOS) is used to forecast the quality of the road environment, focused on auto drivers. A Multi-modal Level of Service (MMLOS) expands the scope of these studies to include an evaluation of the forecasted road environment for other road users such as transit riders, cyclists and pedestrians. The PPS notes the importance of providing efficient, cost-effective, reliable multi-modal transportation system that is integrated with adjacent systems and those of other jurisdictions and is appropriate to address projected needs to support the movement of goods and people. A MMLOS approach is a means to achieve a more multi-modal transportation system in the planning for new development and road expansion projects. The Durham TMP notes the importance of MMLOS and identifies different approaches to quantify it based on practices in other jurisdictions, such as the City of Ottawa or York Region. It identifies additional considerations to lane configurations and signal timing for cars to better support all road users. For example, sidewalk width, adjacent traffic volumes, on-street parking and active transportation facilities are assessed as part of the overall roadway environment. The Durham TMP also notes that is important to outline specific thresholds or expectations for MMLOS depending on the road corridor or land use context. For example, Higher Order Transit corridors may call for a higher ranking for transit than lower density urban or rural corridors. - 252 - Envision Durham | 160 Action #52 in the TMP recommends developing a formal framework and using Multi-modal Level of Service (MMLOS) approaches to assess road designs and allocate right-of-way and promote the use of this concept for transportation impact studies submitted as part of development applications. Echoing this action, the Transportation System Discussion Paper asked, in question #7: “How can Regional Official Plan policies support planning for all road users when assessing new developments and reconstructing or building new roads?”. Feedback from the area municipalities, other agencies and the public was quite positive on introducing a more balanced, multi-modal approach. 99. Proposed Direction: Multi-Modal Level of Service 1. Add a definition for “Multi-modal Level of Service” (MMLOS) as noted in the Glossary (see Appendix A). 2. Ensure, whenever feasible, the provision of facilities to encourage multi-modal transportation options will be included when constructing or reconstructing Regional transportation facilities to ensure the comfort and safety of all road users. 3. Ensure the transportation and road network is designed and planned to support sustainable and multi-modal transportation options of walking, cycling and use of transit. 4. Encourage the area municipalities to integrate multi-modal transportation options into new development, new roads and rehabilitation projects to support the safe, comfortable and efficient movement of all modes of transportation. Additional Provincial Conformity Considerations There are several additional policy directions for the Connected Transportation System, beyond the conformity items previously identified through the TOD (particularly as it relates to MTSAs), TDM and Active Transportation sections, that correspond to conforming with the PPS and/or the Growth Plan. The Growth Plan identifies that as part of the planning and management of the transportation system in the GGH, a complete streets approach “will be adopted”. Through the above policy reviews, the theme of complete streets is expressed in several policy directions, as it supports the use of non-auto modes of travel and influences the design (and right-of-way needs) for arterial roads. Not only does a complete streets approach appear as part of one of the proposed goals for the Connected Transportation System section, it warrants its own policy and definition in the new ROP. A complete streets approach is also important not only for provincial conformity, but the complete streets approach is proposed to be referenced in the context of other policy language as the approach permeates other aspects of transportation planning. - 253 - 161 | Envision Durham The delineation and related proposed policy directions support the development of MTSAs as high density, mixed use areas, stems from Growth Plan conformity requirements. The MTSAs are required where the major transit stations (GO Station) are along a Priority Transit Corridor as designated in Schedule 5: Moving People – Transit. Within Durham, the only Priority Transit Corridor is the Lakeshore East GO Transit rail line, up to its current termination point at the existing Oshawa GO Train Station. Further, the Region is also delineating MTSAs along the Committed GO Transit Rail Extension designation, corresponding to the extension of the line to Bowmanville. 100. Proposed Direction: Additional Provincial Conformity Considerations 1. Add a definition for “complete streets” as noted in the Glossary (see Appendix A). 2. Ensure that, through policy, a complete streets approach be integrated, to ensure the needs and safety of all road users are considered and appropriately accommodated. 3. Add the Priority Transit Corridor and Committed GO Transit Rail Extension designations to the Transit Priority Network schedule, as an overlay to the Commuter Rail designation (currently Schedule C, Map C3). Other Transportation-Related Policy Reviews There are several transportation-related topics where work is still ongoing, and proposed policy directions for the new ROP are forthcoming. These topics are being addressed through separate, ongoing but complementary consultation processes that will continue in 2021. Freight and Goods Movement: A separate, but concurrent “Goods Movement in Durham Review” is being undertaken by the Transportation Planning section, which will help inform the Envision Durham review of the ROP. The purpose of this Review is to support several Actions identified in the Durham TMP related to goods movement, including creating standards for access and loading for different land use types, the initiation of a Durham freight forum, a goods movement communication strategy and enhancing data collection related to goods movement. The review will assist the Region on furthering its role supporting goods movement from a transportation and economic perspective, and help inform what policies the Region should update and add to the new ROP. The Transportation System Discussion Paper covered three key initiatives related to goods movement: the Port of Oshawa and St. Marys Dock, Pickering Federal Airport Lands and Traffic Management Guidelines for Hamlets. These will be considered in terms of policy directions as part of the Goods Movement in Durham Review. The Durham TMP also updated the Region’s Strategic Goods Movement Network, which is a tool for the Region to promote preferred haul routes for truck traffic and prioritize road investments to meet freight-supportive road design standards. It also identifies the network planned to accommodate full-load - 254 - Envision Durham | 162 commercial vehicles on a year-round basis. It was updated into the ROP through Amendment #171 in 2018 (currently in Schedule C, Map C4). The Strategic Goods Movement Network will be carried forward into the new ROP, while supporting policies will recognize its intention to fit into a complete streets approach. Environmental Assessments for Arterial Roads: The Transportation System Discussion Paper posed question #10: “Is it appropriate that the Regional Official Plan address an integrated Class Environmental Assessment and Planning Act process in new growth areas to optimize the alignment and design of arterial roads?”. The question was raised with the secondary plan development and approval process in mind. Secondary plans often include new or extended arterial (and collector roads) and widenings to existing roads as well. In response to the question, feedback from the area municipalities and conservation authorities was generally positive on providing greater clarity in the OP on ensuring compliance on the Class EA process for arterial roads, particularly when they are tied to new developments. The Municipal Engineers Association’s (MEAs) Class EA process for roads has specified that arterial and collector roads beyond a certain cost threshold should be subject to the Class EA process, rather than simply be approved through the Planning Act process and proceed to detailed design and construction. However, prior to amendments in 2007, the Class EA process considered arterial and collector roads regardless of cost pre-approved if part of a Planning Act process such as a secondary plan. Even after 2007, the Class EA process was not always consistently applied in the preparation of secondary plans. A secondary plan of draft plan of subdivision, if approved under the Planning Act process only, may not identify the most suitable alignment from an environmental or engineering perspective. It also can “piecemeal” the planning of a road corridor leaving sections outside of the developable area, such as a watercourse crossing, up to others (often the area municipality) to deal with later. As part of the COVID-19 Economic Recovery Act, 2020, changes to streamline the provincial EA Act, and Class EAs such as the MEA Class EA process, were proposed. Changes to the Class EA process do provide some clarity as to how arterial roads should be considered in the context of secondary plans and other Planning Act approvals. Generally, the revised language allows for the planning of arterial roads under the Planning Act process, such as a secondary plan, as long as alternative alignments have been considered and evaluated subject to specific criteria. Otherwise, a Class EA process is required. These proposed changes mean that more up-front planning as part of the Planning Act process is required, mirroring the EA process, is required to avoid an integrated Planning Act/Class EA process or a separate Class EA process in advance of Planning Act approvals. Pending approval of the changes proposed under the MEA Class EA process, support for the planning and design of arterial roads through the secondary plan process can be articulated through ROP policy. - 255 - 163 | Envision Durham The Connected Transportation System section of the new ROP will consider a policy to encourage initiating Class EA studies in advance of, or integrated with, the Planning Act for secondary plans or significant areas of intensification for arterial roads as the best approach. However, the policy will also support the more streamlined approach proposed by MEA, where feasible, for the evaluation and assessment of arterial road alignment alternatives as part of the secondary plan process (i.e. avoiding the need for a separate Class EA study), as long as it in keeping with Class EA requirements and does not lead to a piecemeal approach. Emerging Technologies: The Transportation System Discussion Paper raised emerging technologies and their current and evolving impact on travel. Emerging technologies on the transportation system are numerous, including ridesharing services such as Uber or Lyft, bike and car sharing services, how people access travel information, Electric Vehicles, Automated Vehicles, and Connected Vehicles. Discussion question #13 asked: “What are the potential implications of emerging technologies on the Regional Transportation System?”. Responses to this question received from area municipalities and the public were quite varied but spoke to the advantages and disadvantages of these technologies in terms of their impact on travel demand, transit ridership and congestion. The Region has embarked on the myDurham Intelligent Communities Plan, a component of which is a Smart Mobility Strategy. The plan is intended to transform the Region from the concept of “smart cities” or “smart regions”, which focused strictly on data and technology to improve efficiency and service delivery, to connected Intelligent Communities. It means that residents, businesses and partners will collaborate and innovate with the Region in terms of data- driven decision making. The concept of “smart cities” has evolved over the past decade. While it used to focus strictly on data and technology, municipal leaders have learned that being smart is more than that. According to the Intelligent Communities Forum of Canada, intelligent communities are more than technology and infrastructure – they are focused on solving problems that matter, not just the ones that technology can address. The Region of Durham is transitioning from being a Smart Region – one that collects and uses data and technology to improve efficiency and service delivery – to a collection of connected Intelligent Communities. We will still use data and technology to improve service delivery, but it will be informed by our residents, businesses and partners. Durham’s Intelligent Communities Plan will improve economic competitiveness, engage citizens and increase connectivity to support smarter, healthier, more equitable and sustainable communities. As work on the myDurham Intelligent Communities Plan evolves, a Smart Mobility Strategy will help inform the Region’s role in managing emerging technologies that use the transportation network, which may have implications for the ROP. These technologies and approaches, which include Connected and Automated Vehicles, use of ridesharing services, increasing access to real time online traffic and construction information - 256 - Envision Durham | 164 (including the Region’s Traffic Watch tool) and Mobility as a Service online applications for access to ridesharing, carsharing, transit and other services. In addition, the use of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), which are advanced and emerging technologies to help manage the transportation system such as the Region’s traffic signal network, will help to make road and transit networks more efficient. The ROP will encourage ongoing Regional initiatives related to ITS. - 257 - 165 | Envision Durham Supporting Sections Introductory Components The new ROP will not only be based on an entirely new framework, it will also build on the strengths of the existing ROP by bolstering those components that remain relevant, while establishing new policies and approaches for a compelling, user-friendly Plan. The introductory components of the new ROP will set the stage, establish the context and assist readers to navigate the: • Historical context of the Region, and how this shapes our future forward (Prologue); • Purpose of a Regional Official Plan; • Preparation of the Plan; • How to read the Plan; and • Framework of the Plan, outlining a strong regional vision that is supported by broad strategic directions, ambitious goals, pragmatic objectives and action-based policies. This section highlights proposed introductory components that are both historical and context-setting for the region. Honouring and acknowledging Indigenous Populations within the region Following the 2015 release of the Federal Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) final report, land acknowledgements have emerged as one of the responses to the TRC “Calls to Action.” The intent of a land acknowledgement statement is to recognize the First Nations Peoples on whose traditional territories we live and work, show respect, acknowledge their rights, pay homage to their traditions, and to continue to pay tribute to their contributions to our nations and our respective communities. It is intended that a specific statement of recognition and respect be included as a foundation for continuing the journey to building healthy, reciprocal relationships with Indigenous peoples. The following proposed directions also encourage meaningful engagement with Indigenous communities (see also Traditional Ecological Knowledge, and Public Consultation and Engagement). Indigenous Territory Acknowledgement: Regional Council believes that traditional territory acknowledgements are a respectful and fitting way to recognize that this region spans a portion of the territories covered by the Williams Treaties, and that all eight area municipalities of Durham are home to Indigenous Peoples. As a result, the Council Procedural By-law was amended to provide for the reading of a traditional territory acknowledgement at the beginning of every Council meeting. As Regional Council’s core planning document, guiding decision-making on current and long-term land use matters, giving recognition to the original caretakers of these lands is fitting within the ROP. - 258 - Envision Durham | 166 101. Proposed Direction: Indigenous Territory Acknowledgement 1. That Regional Council’s current land acknowledgement wording be adopted, and amended from time-to-time as appropriate, for the context of the ROP. This acknowledgement should be stated within the introductory section of the ROP. Mississaugas of Scugog Island First Nation: While the Mississaugas of Scugog Island First Nation lands are not subject to the provisions of the ROP (or provincial plans), it is appropriate that the ROP explicitly recognize and clarify that these lands are separate and distinct, and not governed by these land use planning policies. The Conservation Authorities’ joint submission on the Environment and Greenlands Discussion Paper suggested that consideration be given to including a Treaty map in the ROP. However, a preferred approach that focuses on the Mississaugas of Scugog Island First Nation lands, while conveying that these lands are a distinct neighbouring jurisdiction, is to identify these specific lands consistently within ROP Schedules. 102. Proposed Direction: Mississaugas of Scugog Island First Nation 1. Clarify that the ROP affects all lands within the boundary of the Regional Municipality of Durham, save and except for the lands within the boundary of the Mississaugas of Scugog Island First Nation, as well as lands that are owned by the provincial and/or federal government. 2. Proposed text should be further supported by mapping revisions that identify the Mississaugas of Scugog Island First Nations lands on all applicable ROP Schedules. Supporting Implementation of the Plan In addition to the new ROP’s introductory section and the seven Strategic Directions’ themed chapters, there are key supporting sections which serve to assist document users with matters of implementation and interpretation, including the: • Glossary – formerly referred to as “Definitions” (current Sub-Section 15A), wherein terms and concepts will be updated for clarity, consistency and provincial conformity, where applicable and as detailed throughout this report. • Index – a new tool that will be introduced through the new ROP to aid readers in wayfinding specific policy areas and cross- references, particularly within hardcopies of the new ROP. This feature is intended to help improve ease-of-use and service delivery. • Maps – formerly referred to as “Schedules” (specifically Schedules A to D). While the overall intent of the Plan’s mapping remains largely intact – that is to illustrate the regional structure, differentiate land use designations, - 259 - 167 | Envision Durham identify key systems, networks and boundaries, etc. – significant updates are anticipated to reflect matters of provincial conformity, including detailed delineations of Strategic Growth Areas, the addition of a new Agricultural System and Regional Natural Heritage System, as well as other revisions detailed throughout this report. In addition, there are major upgrades proposed for the delivery of these maps, including the use of an online mapping portal, intended to improve internal staff use across divisions, as well as provide ease-of-use for the general public. New mapping will be presented comprehensively as part of the draft ROP. A new section on “Implementing the Plan” (currently Section 14) will continue to offer guidance for the actions and decisions of all governments, individuals, businesses and stakeholders involved in interpreting and implementing the land use planning policies of the ROP. While staff work towards updating policies integral to implementing the new ROP, the following exemplify new and updated proposed policy directions, respectively. 103. Proposed Direction: Supporting Implementation of the Plan 1. Add a statement that allows the Region to release subsequent information and/or guidelines to support the implementation of the Plan. Public Consultation and Engagement Effective public consultation and engagement is critical to good land use planning and overall decision-making. While formal requirements and procedures are mandatory for Planning Act applications, the Region may go beyond the minimum requirements and expand on when and how enhanced opportunities for input, including both traditional and innovative engagement methods, are applied to other exercises, such as the development of studies, strategies and action plans. Updated provincial plans now explicitly encourage planning authorities, such as the Region, to build constructive, cooperative relationships through meaningful engagement with Indigenous communities to facilitate knowledge-sharing in land use planning processes and inform decision- making. 104. Proposed Direction: Public Consultation and Engagement 1. Foster an open, accessible and collaborative planning process by encouraging ongoing consultation and engagement with the public, stakeholders, and agencies, including a renewed emphasis on meaningful engagement with Indigenous communities. 2. Wherever possible, efforts should be made to promote broad community awareness of planning issues and provide enhanced opportunities for input through both traditional (i.e. in-person) and innovative methods, which may include - 260 - Envision Durham | 168 electronic media or other emerging technologies. Review and Monitoring Reviewing and monitoring the ROP and its components is a critical function of long- range planning. These activities help: • measure the effectiveness of some or all of the policies; • identify emerging trends for additional review and research; and • monitor the implementation of the plan. Overall, the purpose of reviewing and monitoring policies is to assess the Region’s progress towards achieving the strategic directions of the plan. With respect to comprehensive reviews, the Planning Act contains explicit requirements related to reviewing and updating official plans. These requirements were amended through Bill 73, The Smart Growth for Our Communities Act, 2015, wherein the Province extended the review timeframe for new official plans from a five-year cycle to ten years, and at five-year intervals thereafter. As a result of the “repeal and replace” approach of the Envision Durham exercise, the Planning Act would not require another statutory review until 10 years after the new ROP comes into effect (i.e. by 2032). While formal plan reviews are more closely regulated by provincial legislation, monitoring and reporting on implementation is more broadly completed as a matter of good planning practice. The current ROP policies for “Review and Monitoring” are generally adequate and were not subject to extensive stakeholder feedback or formal provincial conformity requirements. Nonetheless, current policies were subject to review to ensure they are up to date, incorporate appropriate indictors, represent measures that can yield meaningful results, and are flexible enough to allow for the addition of new key performance indicators, as deemed appropriate, over time. 105. Proposed Direction: Review and Monitoring 1. Introduce a new implementation objective for “Review and Monitoring” to ensure regular review, monitoring and performance measurement is used to identify emerging trends and guide the successful implementation of this Plan. 2. Clarify that the review timeframe for new official plans is now 10 years, which returns to five-year intervals thereafter. All or parts of the ROP may be reviewed at any time at the request of Regional Council. 3. Expand current monitoring policies from growth management objectives, many of which have been revised through the updated Growth Plan, to incorporate the potential for broader key performance indicators. - 261 - 169 | Envision Durham How to provide feedback To solicit feedback on the Proposed Policy Directions, an online survey has been developed to help facilitate input. Each proposed direction has been highlighted, by report section, with a corresponding “poll” survey at durham.ca/EnvisionDurhamDirections. Using a Likert Scale, ranging from Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree, survey respondents are asked to provide input on of each of the proposed policy directions. In addition, specific comments can be inputted directly into the document for each proposed direction. A Likert Scale is a type of rating scale used to measure attitudes or opinions. With this scale, respondents are asked to rate items on a level of agreement or importance. While use of the online survey is preferred, written responses will still be accepted via email sent to EnvisionDurham@durham.ca or sent to the attention of: Envision Durham, c/o The Regional Municipality of Durham, Planning and Economic Development Department, 605 Rossland Road East, PO Box 623, Whitby, Ontario, L1N 6A3. Paper copies and accessible formats are available upon request by contacting EnvisionDurham@durham.ca. Comments on the Proposed Policy Directions are requested by June 30, 2021 (a 120-day submission window). The online survey will be closed to submissions immediately following this date. In addition, submissions for new and/or amended requests for Settlement Area Boundary Expansion are requested by May 31, 2021 (a 90-day submission window). Submissions should have regard for the criteria outlined in the Settlement Area Boundary Expansion section of this report, and include mapping of the subject property and a description of the proposed land use and built form. Settlement Area Boundary Expansion requests should be made directly via email to EnvisionDurham@durham.ca. The Proposed Policy Directions and related engagement instructions will be posted to the project web page at durham.ca/EnvisionDurham for comment. Interested parties are encouraged to subscribe for project updates and email notifications through this web page. The release of this Proposed Policy Directions report and the opportunity to provide input will be announced by way of: • news release and public service announcement; • social media platforms, including Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn; • email notifications directly to the Envision Durham interested parties list; • materials published online; and circulation of Proposed Policy Directions to the project working groups, including Area Municipalities and Conservation Authorities, relevant Regional Advisory Committees (including DAAC, DEAC, DATC and DRRCC), BILD – Durham Chapter, and the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. - 262 - Envision Durham | 170 Next steps The Proposed Policy Directions were developed and informed based on best practice reviews, research, public engagement and feedback received during Stages 1 and 2 of the Envision Durham process. These proposed directions provide an overview of proposed changes to existing and new, emerging land use planning policies for consideration with a new Regional Official Plan and are intended to gather opinions and to help shape future policy. Your feedback on these proposed policy directions are important to us. The Regional Planning Division appreciates your interest and encourages your participation throughout the Envision Durham process. To submit your comments, please visit durham.ca/EnvisionDurhamDirections. Comments on this Proposed Policy Directions report are requested by June 30, 2021 (a 120-day submission window), while Settlement Area Boundary Expansion requests are requested by May 31, 2021 (a 90-day submission window). Following the 120-day period, the proposed policy directions will be reviewed based on feedback received through the consultation process and will form the basis for draft policies. Interested parties will also have opportunities to provide feedback on proposed policies in a draft Regional Official Plan. Concurrent work is also being completed through the Growth Management Study (i.e. Land Needs Assessment), as well as advancing a standalone Major Transit Station Area Regional Official Plan Amendment. To stay up-to-date on Envision Durham, please visit durham.ca/EnvisionDurham and subscribe to receive email updates. - 263 - 171 | Envision Durham Appendix A: Glossary of Proposed New/Amended Terms Active aging: meaning the process of optimizing opportunities for health, participation, and security in order to enhance quality of life as people age. Active transportation: meaning human- powered travel, including but not limited to, walking, cycling, inline skating and travel with the use of mobility aids, including motorized wheelchairs and other power-assisted devices moving at a comparable speed. Age-friendly planning: meaning growth and development of the physical environment that recognizes the distinct needs of diverse populations; and supports healthy and active aging of residents of all ages and abilities through supportive policies, services, and infrastructure. Agricultural uses: meaning the growing of crops, including nursery, biomass, and horticultural crops; raising of livestock; raising of other animals for food, fur or fibre, including poultry and fish; aquaculture; apiaries; agro-forestry; maple syrup production; and associated on-farm buildings and structures, including, but not limited to livestock facilities, manure storages, value- retaining facilities, and accommodation for full-time farm labour when the size and nature of the operation requires additional employment. Agricultural source material (ASM): meaning treated or untreated material that is capable of being applied to land as a nutrient, but does not include compost that meets the Compost Guidelines, or a commercial fertilizer. Some examples of ASM are manure produced by farm animals, runoff from farm- animal yards and manure storages, and milking center wash water. Agriculture-related uses: meaning those farm related commercial and farm-related industrial uses that are directly related to farm operations in the area, support agriculture, benefit from being in close proximity to farm operations, and provide direct products and/or services to farm operations as a primary activity. Agri-food network: meaning, within the agricultural system, a network that includes elements important to the viability of the agri-food sector such as regional infrastructure and transportation networks; on-farm buildings and infrastructure; agricultural services, farm markets, distributors, and primary processing; and vibrant, agriculture-supportive communities. Agri-tourism uses: meaning those farm- related tourism uses, including limited accommodation such as a bed and breakfast, that promote the enjoyment, education or activities related to the farm operation. Alternative energy systems: meaning a system that uses sources of energy or energy conversion processes to produce power, heat and/or cooling that significantly reduces the amount of harmful emissions to the environment (air, earth and water) when compared to conventional energy systems. Automatic Action Zone: meaning a pre- designated area immediately surrounding a - 264 - Envision Durham | 172 reactor facility where pre-planned protective actions would be implemented by default on the basis of reactor facility conditions with the aim of preventing or reducing the occurrence of severe deterministic effects (Canadian Standards Association N1600, General requirements for nuclear emergency management programs). Bona-fide farmer: meaning someone who derives their primary source of income from farming and can demonstrate their activities are consistent with the definition of agricultural uses. Community hub: meaning a central location where residents may access a range of services in one place. Community hubs can include: social, health, retail, cultural, educational, recreational, and other services and resources that support the daily needs of the community’s residents. Complete streets: meaning streets planned to balance the needs of all road users, including pedestrian, cyclists, transit-users and motorists. Condominium conversion: meaning the conversion of a rental property to ownership tenure through a plan of condominium. Designated vulnerable areas: meaning wellhead protection areas, intake protection zones, significant groundwater recharge areas and areas of high aquifer vulnerability. Diverse populations: meaning distinct groups within the population that require different levels of services and needs which may include and are not limited to: older adults, children, youth, diverse ethnic populations, Indigenous Populations, and recent immigrants. Dynamic beach hazard: meaning areas of inherently unstable accumulations of shoreline sediments along the Great Lakes – St. Lawrence River System and large inland lakes, as identified by provincial standards, as amended from time to time. The dynamic beach hazard limit consists of the flooding hazard limit plus a dynamic beach allowance. Ecological goods and services: meaning the benefits which accrue to all living organisms resulting from the ecological functions of healthy ecosystems. Ecological goods and services include clean air, fresh water, biodiversity, nutrient cycling, water management, soil retention, genetic resources, food production, and climate regulation which contribute to meeting health, social, cultural, and economic needs. The products and processes of ecological goods and services are complex and occur over long periods of time. Ecological integrity: which includes hydrological integrity, means the condition of ecosystems in which: i. the structure, composition and function of the ecosystems are unimpaired by the stresses from human activity; ii. natural ecological processes are intact and self-sustaining; and iii. the ecosystems evolve naturally. Ecosystem compensation: meaning to remediate, replace, or financially compensate to offset the loss of natural heritage features - 265 - 173 | Envision Durham and negative impacts to biodiversity, as a result of development. Erosion hazard: meaning the loss of land, due to human or natural processes, that poses a threat to life and property. The erosion hazard limit is determined using considerations that include the 100 year erosion rate, an allowance for slope stability, and an erosion/erosion access allowance. Excess soil: meaning soil, or soil mixed with rock, that has been excavated as part of a project and removed from the project area for the project. Green infrastructure: meaning natural and human-made elements that provide ecological and hydrological functions and processes. Green infrastructure may include components such as natural heritage features and systems, parkland, stormwater management systems, trees, natural channels, permeable surfaces, and green roofs. Hazardous forest types for wildland fire: meaning forest types assessed as being associated with the risk of high to extreme wildland fire using assessment tools provided by the province. Highly vulnerable aquifers: meaning an aquifer that is particularly susceptible to contamination because of its location near the ground’s surface or where the types of materials in the ground around it are highly permeable. Housing options: meaning a range of housing types such as, but not limited to single- detached, semi-detached, rowhouses, townhouses, stacked townhouses, multiplexes, secondary units, microhomes or tiny homes, mid-rise and high-rise multi- residential buildings. The term can also refer to a variety of housing arrangements and forms such as, but not limited to rental and ownership housing, affordable housing, accessible housing, housing for people with special needs, seniors’ housing, community housing, supportive housing, transitional housing, shared living, co-ownership housing, co-operative housing, community land trusts, life lease housing, land lease community homes, and housing related to employment, institutional or educational uses. Infrastructure: meaning physical structures (facilities and corridors) that form the foundation for development. Infrastructure includes: sewage and water systems, septage treatment systems, stormwater management systems, waste management systems, electricity generation facilities, electricity transmission and distribution systems, communications/telecommunications, transit and transportation corridors and facilities, oil and gas pipelines and associated facilities. Intake protection zones: meaning the area on the water and land immediately surrounding a municipal water intake in a lake, river or stream that may be vulnerable to significant threats. The delineation of intake protection zones is based on the amount of time it takes for water to reach the intake, as outlined below: i. Intake Protection Zone 1: The one kilometre circle around the drinking water intake; - 266 - Envision Durham | 174 ii. Intake Protection Zone 2: The area within a 2-hour time travel to the drinking water intake; and iii. Intake Protection Zone 3: The area that may contribute contaminants to an intake during an extreme event and is based on modeling contaminants released during the extreme event. Invasive Species: meaning plants, animals and micro-organisms that spread when introduced outside of their natural distribution and cause serious and often irreversible damage to ecosystems, the economy, and society. Low impact development (LID) stormwater management practices: meaning an approach to stormwater management that seeks to manage rain and other precipitation as close as possible to where it falls in order to mitigate the impacts of increased runoff and stormwater pollution. It comprises a set of site design strategies and distributed, small-scale structural practices to mimic the natural hydrology to the greatest extent possible through infiltration, evapotranspiration, harvesting, filtration and detention of stormwater. Low impact development can include: bio-swales, permeable pavement, rain gardens, green roofs, and exfiltration systems. Microhomes: also referred to as tiny homes, meaning a small, self-contained dwelling unit intended for year-round use, which cannot move and is not designed to be moved under its own power. Multi-modal level of service (MMLOS): meaning to measure the speed, convenience, comfort and security of transportation facilities experienced by users of all modes (including pedestrians, cyclists, transit riders and goods movement), in addition to automobiles, in evaluating problems and potential solutions. Natural self-sustaining vegetation: meaning vegetation dominated by native plant species that can grow and persist without direct human management, protection, or tending. On-farm diversified uses: meaning uses that are secondary to the principal agricultural use of the property and are limited in area. On-farm diversified uses include, but are not limited to, home occupations, home industries, agritourism uses, and uses that produce value added agricultural products. Ground-mounted solar facilities are permitted in prime agricultural areas, including specialty crop areas, only as on- farm diversified uses. Prescribed drinking water threats: meaning activities prescribed to be drinking water threats as outlined below: i. The establishment, operation, or maintenance of a waste disposal site within the meaning of Part V of the Environmental Protection Act; ii. The establishment, operation or maintenance of a system that collects, stores, transmits or disposes of sewage; iii. The application of agricultural source material to land; iv. The storage of agricultural source material; - 267 - 175 | Envision Durham v. The management of agricultural source material; vi. The application of non-agricultural source material to land; vii. The handling and storage of non- agricultural source material; viii. The application of commercial fertilizer to land; ix. The handling and storage of commercial fertilizer; x. The application of pesticide to land; xi. The handling and storage of pesticide; xii. The application of road salt; xiii. The handling and storage of road salt; xiv. The storage of snow; xv. The handling and storage of fuel; xvi. The handling and storage of dense non-aqueous phase liquid; xvii. The handling and storage of an organic solvent; xviii. The management of runoff that contains chemicals used in de-icing of aircraft; xix. An activity that takes water from an aquifer or surface water body without returning the water taken to the same aquifer or surface water body; xx. An activity that reduces the recharge of an aquifer; and xxi. The use of land as livestock grazing or pasturing land, an outdoor confinement area, or a farm yard. Public realm: meaning publicly accessible external space between private buildings including such areas as parking lots, streets, sidewalks, squares, lanes, parks, and the municipal boulevard. Renewable energy source: meaning an energy source that is renewed by natural processes and includes wind, water, biomass, biogas, biofuel, solar energy, geothermal energy and tidal forces. Renewable energy systems: meaning a system that generates electricity, heat and/or cooling from a renewable energy source. Rental housing: meaning a building or related group of buildings containing one or more rented residential units, including vacant units that have been used for rented residential purposes. Rental property: meaning land where rental housing is located. Risk management official: meaning the official appointed under Part IV of the Clean Water Act, 2006. The Risk Management Official is responsible for making decisions about risk management plans and risk assessments and must meet the prescribed criteria in the regulations under the Clean Water Act, 2006. Significant groundwater recharge areas: meaning an area within which it is desirable to regulate or monitor drinking water threats that may affect the recharge of an aquifer. Detailed mapping of significant groundwater recharge areas is found in source protection plans and their associated assessment reports. Special needs housing: meaning housing used by people with specific needs beyond economic needs, including mobility requirements or support functions required for daily living. Special needs housing may - 268 - Envision Durham | 176 include long-term care homes, seniors’ housing, accessible housing, community housing, transitional housing and supportive housing for persons with disabilities such as physical, sensory or mental health disabilities. Strategic growth areas: meaning within the Urban Area, centers, nodes, corridors and other areas that have been identified at the Regional scale to be the focus for accommodating intensification and higher- density mixed uses in a compact urban built form. Strategic Growth Areas include Urban Growth Centres, Major Transit Station Areas, Regional Centres, and Rapid Transit Intensification Spines (where applicable). Lands within these areas may include major opportunities for infill and/or redevelopment, brownfield sites and/or greyfield, or opportunities for the expansion or conversion of existing buildings. Traditional ecological knowledge: meaning Indigenous knowledge and values which have been acquired through experience, observation, from the land or from spiritual teachings through direct contact with the environment, and handed down from one generation to another. It includes the relationships between plants, animals, natural phenomena, landscapes, and timing of events. Transportation demand management (TDM): meaning a set of strategies that result in more efficient use of the transportation system by influencing travel behaviour by mode, time of day, frequency, trip length, regulation, route, or cost. Universal accessibility design principles: meaning products, services, and environments that can be used by people of all ages and abilities, to the greatest extent possible without the need for adaptation or specialized design. Seven principles for consideration include: equitable design, flexibility in use, simple and intuitive use, perceptible information, tolerance for error, low physical effort, and size and space for approach and use. Urban agriculture: meaning the practice of growing, processing and distribution of food within urban centres in accordance with local policies, by-laws and regulations. Vulnerability score: meaning the scoring of a designated vulnerable area that reflects its vulnerability to contamination. The detailed delineation of vulnerability scoring is found in source protection plans and their associated assessment reports. Waste disposal site: meaning, i. any land upon, into, in or through which, or building or structure in which, waste is deposited, disposed of, handled, stored, transferred, treated or processed; and ii. any operation carried out or machinery or equipment used in connection with the depositing, disposal, handling, storage, transfer, treatment or processing referred to in clause (i.). Wellhead protection areas: meaning the area around a municipal drinking water well that may be vulnerable to threats in accordance with the following: - 269 - 177 | Envision Durham i. For water quality threats, the size and delineation of the wellhead protection areas are determined by how quickly water travels underground to the well, measured in years, as outlined below: a. Wellhead Protection Area – A: The area within a 100-metre radius of the wellhead; b. Wellhead Protection Area – B: The area subject to a 2-year travel period to the well; c. Wellhead Protection Area – C: The area subject to a 5-year travel period to the well; d. Wellhead Protection Area – D: The area subject to a 25-year travel period to the well; and e. Wellhead Protection Area – E: The area where a well is influenced by surface water. ii. For water quantity threats, the delineation of the wellhead protection area is based on a tiered water budget analysis that determined locations where there was a moderate or significant threat to water quantity. These are classified as: a. Wellhead Protection Area – Quantity 1: The area where activities that take water without returning it to the same aquifer may be a threat; and b. Wellhead Protection Area – Quantity 2: The area where activities that reduce recharge may be a threat. Wildland assessment and mitigation standards: meaning the combination of risk assessment tools and environmentally appropriate mitigation measures identified by the province to be incorporated into the design, construction and/or modification of buildings, structures, properties and/or communities to reduce the risk to public safety, infrastructure and property from wildland fire. - 270 - Envision Durham | 178 Appendix B: Requests for Employment Area Conversion Current Requests for Employment Area Conversion as of February 1, 2021. Conversion Request-ID Municipality Site Location (Address, if available) Land Area (Hectares)* Description of Employment Conversion Request (as described by proponent) CNR-01 Brock Multiple lots on the east of Sideroad 18/Laidlaw Street, south of the Beaver River Wetland Trail, Cannington 3.02 To re-designate from Employment Area to permit residential uses (35 single detached dwellings). CNR-02 Whitby 1151 Dundas Street West 2.91 or 4.10 To re-designate one of the two identified areas on the site from Employment Area to permit either a mixed-use development of high- density residential uses (873 units) and ground floor non-residential uses (parcel option A) or a high-density residential development of 1,230 units (parcel option B). It has since been confirmed that parcel option A is the proponents preferred option. CNR-03 Ajax 275 Westney Road South 1.8 To re-designate from Employment Area to permit a mixed-use development of high density residential (1000 units) and commercial uses (805 sq. m) within the proposed Ajax Major Transit Station Area boundary. - 271 - 179 | Envision Durham Conversion Request-ID Municipality Site Location (Address, if available) Land Area (Hectares)* Description of Employment Conversion Request (as described by proponent) CNR-04 Ajax 1901 Harwood Avenue North 1.04 To re-designate from Employment Area to permit a mixed-use development of residential (400 units) and employment uses (1,858 sq. m.). The southern edge of the property is proposed to remain as Employment Area. CNR-05 Oshawa 305 Columbus Road West 25.3 To re-designate from Employment Area to permit residential uses. Request includes lands outside of proponent’s ownership. Proposal would enable the development of 750 to 1,062 units on the lands owned by the proponent. CNR-06 Whitby Lands north of Victoria Street & west of Montecorte Street (Part of Lot 30, Con. 1 and Lot 31, Con. 1) 18.0 To re-designate from Employment Area to permit a mixed-use development of residential (4,900 units) and at-grade retail and service uses. - 272 - Envision Durham | 180 Conversion Request-ID Municipality Site Location (Address, if available) Land Area (Hectares)* Description of Employment Conversion Request (as described by proponent) CNR-07 Ajax Northeast and Southeast corners of Salem Road & Kerrison Drive (Part of Lot 6, Concession 2) 11.8 To re-designate from Employment Area to Regional Centre to permit a mixed-use development of high-density residential (2,873 units, of 171 assisted and 470 seniors housing units) and non-residential uses including office, gym, hotel, medical, retail, community, convention, movie theatre (43,175 sq. m). The eastern portion of the site is proposed to remain as Employment Area. CNR-08 *note: a submission form was not received for this request Whitby 1730 Dundas Street West 2.21 To re-designate a portion of the subject lands fronting Dundas Street West from Employment Areas to Living Areas to permit a mixed-use development including a seniors’ building. CNR-09 Ajax South side of Bayly Street East, east of Shoal Point Road (Part of Lot 4, Range 3) 1.71 To re-designate from Employment Area to permit residential uses (85 townhouse dwellings). - 273 - 181 | Envision Durham Conversion Request-ID Municipality Site Location (Address, if available) Land Area (Hectares)* Description of Employment Conversion Request (as described by proponent) CNR-10 Pickering 1802 and 1902 Bayly Street and 2028 Former Kellino Street (referred to as “Durham Live Lands”) 90.5 To re-designate a portion of the lands from Employment Area to add residential (up to 1,650 units inclusive of a component of affordable housing units) and retail uses (up to 32,500 sq. m.) Note: A Minister’s Zoning Order has since been issued for these lands granting residential land use permission. CNR-11 Clarington 1766 Baseline Rd, (Courtice) 11.08 **overlaps with CNR-41 To re-designate from Employment Area to permit mixed-use residential (1,097 units) and non-residential uses include office, commercial and retail (37,660 sq. m.) CNR-12 Whitby 1275 Dundas Street West 5.51 To re-designate the subject lands from Employment Area to permit mixed-use residential (200 units) and office/commercial development (90,000 sq. m.) CNR-13 Brock 276 Cameron Street East, (Cannington) 13.62 To re-designate the subject lands from Employment Area to Living Area to permit residential uses. - 274 - Envision Durham | 182 Conversion Request-ID Municipality Site Location (Address, if available) Land Area (Hectares)* Description of Employment Conversion Request (as described by proponent) CNR-14 Ajax 1,3,5 & 7 Rossland Road East and 901 Harwood Ave. North 3.9 To re-designate the subject lands from Employment Area to Living Area to permit residential development (Phase 1 approximately 275 to 300 units with further intensification potential over the long term). CNR-15 Ajax 1401 Harwood Avenue North 6.1 To re-designate from Employment Area to Living Area to permit the development of townhouses and a retirement/long term care facility. Note: A Minister’s Zoning Order (438/20) has been issued permitting the retirement and long-term care component of the request. CNR-16 Brock 950 Concession Road 5 (Part of Lot 15, Concession 4) 31.68 To re-designate from Employment Area to Living Area to permit residential development (approximately 200 units) CNR-17 Scugog 1520, 1540 and 1580 Reach Street 31.0 To re-designate a portion of the property from Employment Area to Living Area to permit a mixed-use development. CNR-18 Oshawa 204 to 230 Cordova Road and 742 and 744 Oxford Street 0.64 **overlaps with CNR-45 To re-designate from Employment Area to Living Area to permit residential development. - 275 - 183 | Envision Durham Conversion Request-ID Municipality Site Location (Address, if available) Land Area (Hectares)* Description of Employment Conversion Request (as described by proponent) CNR-19 Ajax 250 Rossland Road East 6.95 To re-designate from Employment Area to permit a mixed-use development of high- density residential (1,090 units) and non- residential uses, including office and retail (24,343 sq. m.). CNR-20 Ajax 650 Beck Crescent 0.69 To re-designate from Employment Area to permit a mixed-use development of high density residential (200 units) and office (5,420 sq. m.). CNR-21 Ajax 493 Bayly Street West 0.9 To be included in the boundary of the Ajax Major Transit Station Area and to permit a mixed-use development of high density residential (1,100 units) and non-residential uses, including service, commercial, office and retail (1,858 sq. m.) - 276 - Envision Durham | 184 Conversion Request-ID Municipality Site Location (Address, if available) Land Area (Hectares)* Description of Employment Conversion Request (as described by proponent) CNR-22 Ajax 190 Westney Road South 0.6 To be included in the boundary of the Ajax Major Transit Station Area and to permit a mixed-use development of high density residential (1,100 units) and non-residential uses, including service, commercial, office, retail, and supermarket (2,787 sq. m.). Note: the subject site is already within the Ajax GO Station Mixed Use Area as per the Town of Ajax Official Plan and the submission is requesting higher residential densities be permitted. CNR-23 Brock Beaver Avenue, Beaverton (Part of Lots 11 and 12, Concession 5, Thorah) 7.6 To re-designate from Employment Area to permit residential development (103 single detached and semi-detached dwellings and 120 apartment units) in the southern portion of the existing Employment Area. CNR-24 Whitby and Oshawa North and south sides of Stellar Drive, west of Thornton Road South 34.0 To be included in the boundary of the Thornton’s Corner Major Transit Station Area and allow for associated mixed-use permissions. - 277 - 185 | Envision Durham Conversion Request-ID Municipality Site Location (Address, if available) Land Area (Hectares)* Description of Employment Conversion Request (as described by proponent) CNR-25 Whitby North and south sides of Stellar Drive, immediately east of the Durham College Whitby campus 12.5 To be included in the boundary of the Thornton’s Corner Major Transit Station Area and allow for associated mixed-use permissions. CNR-26 Clarington 1305 Trulls Road (East of Trulls Road, north of the CP Rail line) 26.69 **overlaps with CNR-41 To be included in the boundary of the Courtice Major Transit Station Area and allow for associated mixed-use permissions. CNR-27 Clarington 1246 Prestonvale Road 3.24 **overlaps with CNR-40 To re-designate a portion of the site from Employment Area to allow for residential uses as per the Southwest Courtice Secondary Plan, including approximately 100 low density units on the applicant’s property. CNR-28 Ajax 221 Church Street South (Annandale Golf Course) 25.4 To re-designate from Employment Area to introduce additional employment, retail and residential uses on the developable portion of the subject lands. CNR-29 Whitby East side of Anderson Street, directly north of Highway 407. 3.22 To re-designate from Employment Area to permit a mixed-use development including residential (305 retirement residential units) and commercial, office, and daycare uses (5,841 sq. m.). - 278 - Envision Durham | 186 Conversion Request-ID Municipality Site Location (Address, if available) Land Area (Hectares)* Description of Employment Conversion Request (as described by proponent) CNR-30 Clarington 1593 Bloor Street and 1614 Trulls Road 45.0 To re-designate from Employment Area to permit residential uses (ranging from low to medium density) to be further determined through an extension to the Southeast Courtice Secondary Plan. CNR-31 Ajax 493 and 509 Bayly Street East, and surrounding lands 2.0 To re-designate the subject property to Living Area with the Regional Corridor Overlay. The submission also encourages the Region to consider the conversion of the surrounding lands on the south side of Bayly Street between Shoal Point Road to Audley Road. CNR-32 Brock North side of Concession Road 5, approximately 500 m east of Osborne Road, in the Village of Beaverton 4.34 To re-designate from Employment Area to permit residential uses (46 single detached and 47 townhouse units). CNR-33 Ajax 1541 Harwood Avenue North 1.1 To re-designate from Employment Area to Living Area to permit residential uses (up to 77 medium density units). CNR-34 Ajax 479 Bayly street east (East of Shoal Point Road) 2.3 To re-designate from Employment Area to Living Area and permit residential (up to 99 townhouse units) / mixed uses. - 279 - 187 | Envision Durham Conversion Request-ID Municipality Site Location (Address, if available) Land Area (Hectares)* Description of Employment Conversion Request (as described by proponent) CNR-35 Ajax 500 Salem Road North 1.67 To re-designate from Employment Area to permit residential uses (120 retirement units) CNR-36 Whitby 1629, 1635, 1650, 1741, 1751 and 1761 Victoria Street East (Thickson Ridge) 16.93 To maintain/expand existing retail permissions and introduce residential uses that includes an initial proposal of approximately 500 units and seeking additional permissions for high density mixed use residential for the balance of the site. CNR-37 Clarington Lands on the west side of Courtice Road, directly north of the proposed Courtice GO Train station (Part of Lots 29 and 30, Concession 1, Darlington) 46.31 **overlaps with CNR-41 To re-designate the lands to permit residential, mixed residential/employment uses, major retail and commercial/ employment uses within the proposed Courtice MTSA boundary. CNR-38 Clarington 1218 Trulls Road 23.8 To re-designate from Employment Area to permit residential, mixed residential/employment uses, major retail and commercial/employment uses west of the proposed Courtice MTSA boundary. - 280 - Envision Durham | 188 Conversion Request-ID Municipality Site Location (Address, if available) Land Area (Hectares)* Description of Employment Conversion Request (as described by proponent) CNR-39 Oshawa 2380 Ritson Road and 2867 Bridle Road 10.33 To re-designate from Employment Area to permit mixed residential (up to 630 units) and non-residential uses including commercial, retail, and employment uses (23,000 sq. m.). CNR-40 Clarington Lands west of Robinson Creek, south of the future extension of Fenning Drive, north of Highway 401 (Southwest Courtice Secondary Plan) 36.91 **overlaps with CNR-27 To re-designate from Employment Area to: permit low density and medium density residential uses of approximately 1,200 units. recognize other existing uses such as a cemetery expansion, parkland, green space, stormwater management facilities preserve the opportunity of a future Highway 401 interchange currently slated within both the Clarington and Regional Official Plans. CNR-41 Clarington Courtice Major Transit Station Area 189.72 **overlaps with CNR-11, CNR-26 and CNR-37 To convert the entirety of the MTSA lands to a high-density mixed-use development. Request includes lands that are outside the Urban Area Boundary, located on the east side of Courtice Road. A related Settlement Area Boundary expansion request has also been submitted to the Region for these lands. - 281 - 189 | Envision Durham Conversion Request-ID Municipality Site Location (Address, if available) Land Area (Hectares)* Description of Employment Conversion Request (as described by proponent) CNR-42 Clarington 1447 Prestonvale Road 8.8 To re-designate from Employment Area to permit single detached residential dwellings in proximity to the existing residences to the west of the property. CNR-43 Brock Lands on the south side of Main Street, approximately 600 metres west of Highway 12 (Part of Lot 12, Concession 5, Thorah) 15.98 To re-designate from Employment Areas to permit residential development (single family dwellings). CNR-44 *note: a submission form was not received for this request Clarington Lands on the north side of the CNR rail line, west of Trulls Road (Part of Lot 32, Concession 1, Darlington) 17.43 **overlaps with CNR-30 To re-designate from Employment Areas to permit residential uses. - 282 - Envision Durham | 190 Conversion Request-ID Municipality Site Location (Address, if available) Land Area (Hectares)* Description of Employment Conversion Request (as described by proponent) CNR-45 Oshawa 204, 210, 214, 218, 226, 230, 240 and 248 Cordova Road, 700, 742 and 744 Oxford Street, and 178-228 Valencia Road including 0 Valencia Road and the City-owned Oxford Street road allowance north of Valencia Road. 3.37 **overlaps with CNR-18 To re-designate lands from Employment Areas to Living Areas to permit a Regeneration Area in the Oshawa Official Plan. CNR-46 Oshawa North of Highway 407 East between Thornton Road North and Simcoe Street North. 30.56 ** overlaps with CNR-05 To re-designate lands from Employment Areas to Major Open Space Areas to reflect the intended purpose of the lands as Species at Risk habitat compensation. CNR-47 Oshawa North of Highway 401 between the CP rail line and the Oshawa-Whitby boundary. 49.36 ** overlaps with CNR-24 To re-designate for mixed-use development (i.e. both residential and non-residential uses). * Land area as indicated in the conversion request Submission Form as provided by the proponent. Staff have estimated the land area where it was not provided or appeared to be incorrect. ** Conversion requests with this notation indicates that more than one Submission was made for the corresponding land. - 283 - Township of Brock Regional Rd 15 Highway 12RegionalRd 23 Highway 48 Regional Rd 12 Simcoe StreetCNR-01 CNR-13 CNR-16 CNR-23CNR-32 CNR-43 02.51.25 Km Requests for Employment Area Conversion –Township of Brock Legend Cannington Regional Official Plan, Schedule 'A' composite, 2017 consolidation. This map has been produced from a variety of sources. The Region of Durham does not make any representations concerning the accuracy, likely results, or reliability of the use of the materials. The Region hereby disclaims all representations and warranties. Digital cartography by The Regional Municipality of Durham, Planning and Economic Development Department, 2019. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced without permission. Requests received by the Region of Durham as of September 24, 2020. Data Sources and Disclaimer Prime Agricultural Areas Living Areas Major Open Space Areas Employment Areas Urban Area Boundary Municipal BoundaryWaterfront Areas Regional Corridors Regional Centres Lands Subject to EmploymentConversion Request Beaverton Lake Simcoe - 284 - Township of Scugog Simcoe StreetScugog Street Regional Rd 1 9Highway 7 & 12R e a c h S t r e e t Island RoadRegional Rd 21 Highw ay 7 a Shirley Road Regional Highway 47 CNR-17 02.51.25 Km Requests for Employment Area Conversion –Township of Scugog Legend Port Perry Regional Official Plan, Schedule 'A' composite, 2017 consolidation. This map has been produced from a variety of sources. The Region of Durham does not make any representations concerning the accuracy, likely results, or reliability of the use of the materials. The Region hereby disclaims all representations and warranties. Digital cartography by The Regional Municipality of Durham, Planning and Economic Development Department, 2019. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced without permission. Requests received by the Region of Durham as of September 24, 2020. Data Sources and Disclaimer Prime Agricultural Areas Living Areas Major Open Space Areas Employment Areas Urban Area Boundary Municipal BoundaryWaterfront Areas Regional Corridors Regional Centres Lands Subject to EmploymentConversion Request Lake ScugogOak Ridge Moraine Areas - 285 - Town  of Ajax City of Pickering Brock RoadHighway 401 Liverpool RoadSalemRoad S W e s tne y Road S Taunton Road W Finch Avenue Bayly Street W Kingst o n R o a d Kingston Road W Bayly Street Taunton Road E Salem Road NBayly Street EWestney Road NKingston Road E Taunton Road CNR-03 CNR-07 CNR-09 CNR-10 CNR-14 CNR-04 CNR-15 CNR-22 CNR-21 CNR-20 CNR-19 CNR-28 CNR-31 CNR-35 CNR-34 CNR-33 01.50.75 Km Requests for Employment Area Conversion – Ajax and Pickering Legend Lake Ontario Regional Official Plan, Schedule 'A' composite, 2017 consolidation. This map has been produced from a variety of sources. The Region of Durham does not make any representations concerning the accuracy, likely results, or reliability of the use of the materials. The Region hereby disclaims all representations and warranties. Digital cartography by The Regional Municipality of Durham, Planning and Economic Development Department, 2019. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced without permission. Requests received by the Region of Durham as of September 24, 2020. Data Sources and Disclaimer A Prime Agricultural Areas Living Areas Specific Study Area 'A'AAA Major Open Space Areas Employment Areas Urban Area Boundary Municipal BoundaryWaterfront Areas Regional Corridors Pickering Nuclear Generating Station Regional Centres Lands Subject to EmploymentConversion Request - 286 - Town  of Whitby City of Oshawa Highway412Stevenson RoadSThickson Road SHighw a y 407 Ritson Road SWilson Road SLake RidgeRoadBloor Street E Winchester Road E Si mcoeSt ree t NThickson Road NWinchester Road W Rossland Road W Adelaide Avenue EBaldwinStreetS Olive Avenue Adelaide Avenue W Ritson Road NWilson Road NRossland Road E Harmony Road NGibb Street Taunton Road E Cochrane StreetHighway 401 Thornton Road NBrock Street NTaunton Road W FarewellStreetConsumers Drive Victoria Street ELake Ridge Road NCNR-02 CNR-08 CNR-05 CNR-06 CNR-12 CNR-18 CNR-24 CNR-25 CNR-29 CNR-36 CNR-39 CNR-45 CNR-46 CNR-47 02.51.25 Km Requests for Employment Area Conversion – Oshawa and Whitby Lands Subject to EmploymentConversion Request Legend Oshawa Airport Regional Official Plan, Schedule 'A' composite, 2017 consolidation. This map has been produced from a variety of sources. The Region of Durham does not make any representations concerning the accuracy, likely results, or reliability of the use of the materials. The Region hereby disclaims all representations and warranties. Digital cartography by The Regional Municipality of Durham, Planning and Economic Development Department, 2019. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced without permission. Requests received by the Region of Durham as of September 24, 2020. Data Sources and Disclaimer Prime Agricultural Areas Living Areas Deferral Areas Major Open Space Areas Employment Areas Urban Area Boundary Municipal Boundary Waterfront Areas Regional Corridors Lake Ontario Special Study Areas Regional Centres - 287 - Municipality of Clarington Courtice RoadHighway 4 1 8 Bloor Street Highway 401 CNR-11 CNR-26 CNR-27 CNR-30 CNR-38 CNR-42 CNR-41 CNR-40 CNR-37 CNR-44 00.650.33 Km Requests for Employment Area Conversion – Courtice Lands Subject to EmploymentConversion Request Legend Regional Official Plan, Schedule 'A' composite, 2017 consolidation. This map has been produced from a variety of sources. The Region of Durham does not make any representations concerning the accuracy, likely results, or reliability of the use of the materials. The Region hereby disclaims all representations and warranties. Digital cartography by The Regional Municipality of Durham, Planning and Economic Development Department, 2019. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced without permission. Requests received by the Region of Durham as of September 24, 2020. Data Sources and Disclaimer Prime Agricultural Areas Living Areas Major Open Space Areas Employment Areas Urban Area Boundary Municipal BoundaryWaterfront Areas Regional Corridors Lake Ontario Regional Centres - 288 - Envision Durham | 196 Appendix C: Settlement Area Boundary Expansion – Evaluation Criteria Criterion/ Requirement Growth Plan, 2019 Durham Regional Official Plan Enhancements/Additional Considerations Demonstration of Need for the Expansion 2.2.8.2: A settlement area boundary expansion may only occur through a municipal comprehensive review where it is demonstrated that: a) based on the minimum intensification and density targets in this Plan and a lands needs assessment undertaken in accordance with policy 2.2.1.5, sufficient opportunities accommodate forecasted growth to the horizon of this plan are not available through intensification and in the designated greenfield areas: i) within the upper- or single tier municipality, and ii) within the applicable lower-tier municipality; b) the proposed expansion will make available sufficient lands not exceeding the horizon of this Plan, based on the analysis provided in 7.3.11 Expansions to the Urban Area boundaries beyond those shown on Schedule ‘A’ – Regional Structure shall only occur through a comprehensive review of this Plan having regard for the following: e) the population and employment forecasts established by the Plan; f) the growth management objectives of Policy 7.3.9; (refers to minimum intensification target, minimum designated greenfield area density target, and target employment growth for employment areas); g) the ability to provide for a minimum 10-year housing and employment land needs Region- wide, with logical and sequential development patterns. Where an area municipality has no opportunities for Urban Area Boundary expansion, this policy shall not be construed to provide Evaluation will implement the requirements of the Growth Plan, 2019, where the Regional Official Plan reflects targets from the Growth Plan, 2006 and are therefore out of date and require updates (forecast, horizon, density and intensification targets, unit supply) - 289 - 197 | Envision Durham Criterion/ Requirement Growth Plan, 2019 Durham Regional Official Plan Enhancements/Additional Considerations policy 2.2.8.2 a), while minimizing land consumption, and c) the timing of the proposed expansion and the phasing of development within the designated greenfield area will not adversely affect the achievement of the minimum intensification and density targets in the Plan, as well as the other policies of this Plan. justification for Employment Area designation conversions to satisfy residential unit demand on an area municipal basis; n) the ability of the existing designated Urban Area land base to accommodate the growth forecasts of Policy 7.3.3 in accordance with relevant density and intensification targets of this Plan; o) the expansion makes available sufficient lands for a time horizon not exceeding 20 years; Determining most appropriate locations for expansion based on Feasibility 2.2.8.3: Where the need for a settlement area boundary expansion has been justified in accordance with policy 2.2.8.2, the feasibility of the proposed expansion will be determined based on the comprehensive application of all of the policies of this Plan, including the following: 7.3.11: Expansions to the Urban Area boundaries beyond those shown on Schedule ‘A’ – Regional Structure shall only occur through a comprehensive review of this Plan having regard for the following: Feasibility – infrastructure and public service facilities 2.2.8.3 a) there is sufficient capacity in existing or planned infrastructure and public service facilities; 7.3.11 c) existing or committed infrastructure; Proximity to existing or planned transit and active transportation infrastructure. - 290 - Envision Durham | 198 Criterion/ Requirement Growth Plan, 2019 Durham Regional Official Plan Enhancements/Additional Considerations Feasibility – infrastructure and public service facilities 2.2.8.3 b) the infrastructure and public service facilities needed would be financially viable over the full life cycle of these assets; 7.3.11 d) financial capability of the Region; The need to expand or extend public infrastructure is minimized. Feasibility – water, wastewater, and stormwater. 2.2.8.3 c) the proposed expansion would be informed by applicable water and wastewater master plans or equivalent and stormwater master plans or equivalent, as appropriate; 7.3.11 j) the ability to service the area with full municipal water and sewerage services. Feasibility – watershed conditions, water resource system 2.2.8.3 d) the proposed expansion, including the associated water, wastewater and stormwater servicing, would be planned and demonstrated to avoid, or if avoidance is not possible, minimize and mitigate any potential negative impacts on watershed conditions and the water resources system, including the quality and quantity of water. Feasibility – key hydrologic areas and Natural Heritage System for the Growth Plan, other environmental areas/features 2.2.8.3 e) key hydrological areas and the Natural Heritage System for the Growth Plan should be avoided where possible; 7.3.11 b) impact on the natural environment in accordance with the relevant policies of Section 2; - 291 - 199 | Envision Durham Criterion/ Requirement Growth Plan, 2019 Durham Regional Official Plan Enhancements/Additional Considerations Feasibility – Prime Agricultural Areas 2.2.8.3. f) prime agricultural areas should be avoided where possible. To support the Agricultural System, alternative locations across upper- or single-tier municipality will be evaluated, prioritized and determined based on avoiding, minimizing and mitigating the impact on the Agricultural System and in accordance with the following: i) expansion into specialty crop areas is prohibited; ii) reasonable alternatives that avoid prime agricultural areas are evaluated; and iii) where prime agricultural areas cannot be avoided, lower priority agricultural lands are used; 7.3.11 h) where possible, avoid prime agricultural areas, and as an alternative consider lower priority lands in prime agricultural areas. Where it is not possible to avoid prime agricultural lands, the location of urban boundaries will make use of natural or man-made features such as road allowances, valley lands and other natural features to mitigate potential conflicts between urban and agricultural uses; Feasibility – Impacts on Agricultural uses 2.2.8.3 g) the settlement area to be expanded is in compliance with the minimum distance separation formulae; Feasibility – Impacts on Agricultural uses 2.2.8.3 h) any adverse impacts on the agri-food network, including agricultural operations, from - 292 - Envision Durham | 200 Criterion/ Requirement Growth Plan, 2019 Durham Regional Official Plan Enhancements/Additional Considerations expanding settlement areas would be avoided, or if avoidance is not possible, minimized and mitigated as determined through an agricultural impact assessment; Feasibility – Resources and Public Health and Safety 2.2.8.3 i) the policies of Section 2 (Wise Use and Management of Resources) and 3 (Protecting Public Health and Safety of the PPS are applied; 7.3.11 i) the aggregate resource capability of the area; Feasibility – Other provincial plans and source protection plans 2.2.8.3 j) the proposed expansion would meet any applicable requirements of the Greenbelt, Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation, Niagara Escarpment, and Lake Simcoe Protection Plans and any applicable source protection plan; Feasibility – Greenbelt Plan limitations 2.2.8.3 k) within the Protected Countryside in the Greenbelt Area: i. the settlement area to be expanded is identified in the Greenbelt Plan as a Town/Village; ii. the proposed expansion would be modest in size, representing no more than a 5 per cent increase in the 7.3.11 k) for Urban Areas located within the Protected Countryside of the Greenbelt Plan Area, subsequent to the 10-year Greenbelt Plan review, the environmental assessment in support of expanded sewage and water services must be completed or approved prior to amending the Urban Area boundary, and the - 293 - 201 | Envision Durham Criterion/ Requirement Growth Plan, 2019 Durham Regional Official Plan Enhancements/Additional Considerations geographic size of the settlement area based on the settlement area boundary delineated in the applicable official plan as of July 1, 2017, up to a maximum size of 10 hectares, and residential development would not be permitted on more than 50 per cent of the lands that would be added to the settlement area; iii. the proposed expansion would support the achievement of complete communities or the local agricultural economy; iv. the proposed uses cannot be reasonably accommodated within the existing settlement area boundary; v. the proposed expansion would be serviced by existing municipal water and wastewater systems without impacting future intensification opportunities in the existing settlement area; and, vi. expansion into the Natural Heritage System that has been identified in the Greenbelt Plan is prohibited. expansion must not extend into the Greenbelt Natural Heritage System, and the expansion is subject to the relevant provisions of the Greenbelt Plan. 7.3.11 l) Urban Areas outside the Greenbelt Plan Area are not permitted to expand into the Greenbelt Plan Area; - 294 - Envision Durham | 202 Criterion/ Requirement Growth Plan, 2019 Durham Regional Official Plan Enhancements/Additional Considerations 7.3.11 a) The Regional Structure established by this Plan The Settlement Area Boundary Expansion represent a contiguous, orderly, and logical expansion to the existing Settlement Area Boundary. 7.3.11 p) where a comprehensive review of this Plan includes consideration of lands for Urban Area expansion within the City of Pickering east of the Pickering Airport lands, outside of the Greenbelt Plan, the following additional matters will be assessed and evaluated at that time: i. the amount and rate of development that has occurred in the Seaton Community; and ii. the preparation and completion of a watershed plan update for the East Duffin and Carruthers Creek watersheds. The Settlement Area Boundary Expansion - 295 - 203 | Envision Durham Criterion/ Requirement Growth Plan, 2019 Durham Regional Official Plan Enhancements/Additional Considerations contributes to context appropriate population and employment growth that considers balance and distribution across the Region. - 296 - Envision Durham | 204 Appendix D: Requests for Boundary Expansion Current Requests for Settlement Area Boundary Expansion as of February 1, 2021. Conversion Request-ID Municipality Site Location (Address, if available) Land Area (Hectares)* Description of Settlement Area Boundary Expansion Request (as described by proponent) BER-1 Whitby Part of Lots 25, 26, 27 and 28, Concession V 4.2 Include the lands in the vicinity of the Brooklin Secondary Plan Area that are outside of the Greenbelt Plan within the Urban Boundary. BER-2 Clarington Lands east of Courtice Road to the future Highway 418 171.2 Include the lands in the Urban Boundary as Employment Areas. BER-3 Clarington 521 and 531 Rundle Road 10.7 Include the lands in the Urban Boundary as Employment Areas in order to permit industrial uses, including a motor vehicle wrecking yard and prestige industrial uses. BER-4 Clarington Lot 29, Concession 4, Orono 2.8 Include the balance of the property in the Urban Boundary. BER-5 Pickering North Part of Lot 6, Concession 6 8.5 **overlaps with BER-13 Include the lands in the Urban Boundary as originally envisioned during the Region’s previous Municipal Comprehensive Review. - 297 - 205 | Envision Durham Conversion Request-ID Municipality Site Location (Address, if available) Land Area (Hectares)* Description of Settlement Area Boundary Expansion Request (as described by proponent) BER-6 Scugog Lands bound by the existing Port Perry Urban Boundary, Hwy 7A, King Street and the Hamlet of Manchester 95 Include the lands in the Urban Boundary to permit a new community comprised of residential, mixed use, community uses and natural heritage features to accommodate approximately 4,800 residents and 200 population-related jobs. BER-7 Clarington 0 Courtice Road (east side of Courtice Road, north side of the existing rail corridor) 35.5 **overlaps with BER-2 Include the lands in the Urban Boundary as part of the Courtice Major Transit Station Area to permit a mixed-used, transit- oriented, development proposal. BER-8 Uxbridge 7370 Centre Road, Uxbridge 39.7 (Already within the Uxbridge Urban Area) Remove the lands from Special Study Area 6 designation in the ROP, increase the urban population for the Uxbridge Urban Area to 20,000, and permit private communal services on lands within the Urban Area to allow development to occur on the Phase 2 Uxbridge lands. The development of the subject property would accommodate 566 units. BER-9 Scugog Part of Lots 21 and 22, Concession 8, Port Perry 19.8 Resolve outstanding deferral D5-1 to the Scugog Official Plan which deferred the approval of the inclusion of the subject lands within the Port Perry Urban Boundary. - 298 - Envision Durham | 206 Conversion Request-ID Municipality Site Location (Address, if available) Land Area (Hectares)* Description of Settlement Area Boundary Expansion Request (as described by proponent) BER-10 Whitby and Oshawa 550 Columbus Road East, Whitby & 654 Columbus Road West, Oshawa 93.8 Include the lands in the Urban Boundary as Living Areas. BER-11 Scugog 14611 Old Scugog Road, Blackstock 27.48 Resolve deferral D2-1 to the Scugog Official Plan by rounding out the boundaries of the Hamlet of Blackstock to include a portion of the subject property within the Hamlet boundaries. BER-12 Pickering All lands within the City of Pickering that meet a certain set of criteria Specific lands were not identified, and therefore are not currently mapped Pickering Council request that Durham consider all lands meeting a certain set of criteria within the City of Pickering for inclusion within the Urban Boundary. BER-13 Pickering Lands known as North East Pickering, generally bound by Highway 7, Concession Road 8, Westney Road and Lake Ridge Road 1,650 **overlaps with BER-05, 14, 16 and 23 Include the lands in the Urban Boundary with appropriate designations to permit a community that would accommodate approximately 60,000 residents and 10,500 population related jobs, as well as 33,000 employment related jobs. BER-14 Pickering 3060 Highway 7 40.2 **overlaps with BER-13 Expression of interest to include the lands in the Urban Boundary. Further details to be provided. - 299 - 207 | Envision Durham Conversion Request-ID Municipality Site Location (Address, if available) Land Area (Hectares)* Description of Settlement Area Boundary Expansion Request (as described by proponent) BER-15 Oshawa 2630 Harmony Road 0.8 Include the lands in the Urban Boundary to permit up to 100 stacked Townhouses. BER-16 Pickering 4015 and 4025 Salem Road 4.1 **overlaps with BER-13 Include the lands in the Urban Boundary and designate as Regional Centre as considered by the Region during the previous Municipal Comprehensive Review. BER-17 Whitby 555 Winchester Road West 8.42 Include the lands, which are outside of the Greenbelt Plan boundary, within the Urban Boundary. BER-18 Oshawa 201 Columbus Road East 26.3 Expression of interest to include the lands in the Urban Boundary. Further details to be provided. BER-19 Clarington Lands on the east side of George Burley Street, south of Highway 2, Newtonville 3.19 Include the subject lands within the boundary of the Hamlet of Newtonville. BER-20 Clarington 1037 and 1067 Arthur Street, Newcastle 5.6 Include the lands within the Urban Boundary as Living Areas to develop 40 townhouse dwellings. - 300 - Envision Durham | 208 Conversion Request-ID Municipality Site Location (Address, if available) Land Area (Hectares)* Description of Settlement Area Boundary Expansion Request (as described by proponent) BER-21 Pickering 3580 Audley Road, Hamlet of Kinsale 6.8 Include the remainder of the subject lands within the boundary of the Hamlet of Kinsale to allow the development of a 7 lot plan of subdivision on private services. BER-22 Clarington 1835 Bloor Street and 1775 Bloor Street 50.6 **overlaps with BER-02 Expression of interest to include the lands within the Urban Boundary. BER-23 Pickering Part of Lots 9, 10 and 11, Concession 5 77.42 **overlaps with BER-13 Include the subject lands that are outside of the Greenbelt Plan within the Urban Boundary as Living Areas. BER-24 Clarington Part of Lots 5, 6, and 7, Concession 2 (Bowmanville) 113.5 Include the subject lands within the Urban Boundary as Living Areas. BER-25 Oshawa 2676 Harmony Road North 5.6 Include the subject lands within the Urban Boundary. BER-26 Oshawa Part of Lots 4 and 5, Concession 5 43.3 Include the balance of the subject lands within the Urban Boundary. - 301 - 209 | Envision Durham Conversion Request-ID Municipality Site Location (Address, if available) Land Area (Hectares)* Description of Settlement Area Boundary Expansion Request (as described by proponent) BER-27 Brock Lands south of Brock Concession Road 7, west of Highway 12 (Sunderland) 14.0 Include the subject lands within the Urban Boundary as Living Areas BER-28 Clarington 2258 Highway #2 (Bowmanville) 12.5 Include the subject lands within the Urban Boundary. BER-29 Clarington 1546 Cobbledick Road, Newcastle 72.0 Request the Region to review the Special Study Area 2 designation of the ROP, including updated land use permissions. BER-30 Scugog Deferral Area D2-2 to the Scugog Official Plan 70.7 Request that Deferrals to the Scugog Official Plan Hamlet of Caesarea be resolved through the ROP review. BER-31 Scugog Deferral Areas D2-1 and D5-1 to the Scugog Official Plan 47.28 **overlaps with BER-11 & BER-09 Request that Deferrals to the Scugog Official Plan for the Port Perry Urban Area and the Hamlet of Blackstock be resolved through the ROP review. BER-32 Whitby Olpi Hills Court, Hamlet of Ashburn 3.8 Expression of interest to include the subject lands within the boundary of the Hamlet of Ashburn. - 302 - Envision Durham | 210 Conversion Request-ID Municipality Site Location (Address, if available) Land Area (Hectares)* Description of Settlement Area Boundary Expansion Request (as described by proponent) BER-33 Brock Lands on the south side of Thorah Concession Road 5 (RR-15), west of Highway 12. 128.3 Expression of interest to include the subject lands within the Urban Boundary as Employment Areas. BER-34 Clarington 72 Ormiston Street and Part of Lot 17, Concession 5 near the Hamlet of Hampton. 14.3 Request that the Deferrals to the Clarington Official Plan be resolved to include the subject lands within the Hamlet of Hampton, and to also include adjacent lands to the west within the Hamlet boundary, to permit the development of a 13 Lot Plan of Subdivision. BER-35 Clarington 2825 Hancock Road, Courtice 1.4 Include the subject lands within the Urban Boundary. BER-36 Clarington 2298 Highway 2, Bowmanville 3.9 Include the subject lands within the Urban Boundary. BER-37 Brock C21605 Sideroad 18A, north west of Cannington. 47.7 Include the subject lands within the Urban Boundary. BER-38 Brock C2130 Concession 13, north east of Cannington. 40.5 Include the subject lands within the Urban Boundary. - 303 - 211 | Envision Durham * Land area as indicated in the conversion request Submission Form as provided by the proponent. Staff have estimated the land area where it was not provided or appeared to be incorrect. ** Requests with this notation indicates that more than one Submission was made for the corresponding land. - 304 - Township of Brock Regional Rd 1Regional Rd 15 Highway 12RegionalRd 23 Highway 7 Simcoe StreetHighway 48 Highway7&12Lake Ridge RoadRegional Rd 12 Regional Rd 10 BER-33 BER-27 BER-38BER-37 031.5 Km Requests for Boundary Expansion – Township of Brock Legend Cannington Regional Official Plan, Schedule 'A' composite, 2017 consolidation. This map has been produced from a variety of sources. The Region of Durham does not make any representations concerning the accuracy, likely results, or reliability of the use of the materials. The Region hereby disclaims all representations and warranties. Digital cartography by The Regional Municipality of Durham, Planning and Economic Development Department, 2019. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced without permission. Data Sources and Disclaimer Prime Agricultural Areas Living Areas Major Open Space Areas Employment Areas Urban Area Boundary Municipal BoundaryWaterfront Areas Regional Corridors Regional Centres Lands Subject to BoundaryExpansion Request Beaverton Lake Simcoe Sunderland - 305 - Township of Scugog Township of Uxbridge Toronto Street SMain Street NReach Stre e tLake RidgeRoadRegional Highway 47 Regional Rd 1BER-08 010.5 Km Requests for Boundary Expansion – Township of Uxbridge Legend Regional Official Plan, Schedule 'A' composite, 2017 consolidation. This map has been produced from a variety of sources. The Region of Durham does not make any representations concerning the accuracy, likely results, or reliability of the use of the materials. The Region hereby disclaims all representations and warranties. Digital cartography by The Regional Municipality of Durham, Planning and Economic Development Department, 2019. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced without permission. Data Sources and Disclaimer Prime Agricultural Areas Living Areas Major Open Space Areas Employment Areas Urban Area Boundary Municipal BoundaryWaterfront Areas Regional Corridors Regional Centres Lands Subject to BoundaryExpansion Request Oak Ridge Moraine Areas - 306 - Township of Scugog Scugog Street SimcoeStreetRegional Rd 19Highway 7 & 12High way 7aRegionalRd57Reach Street Island RoadRegional Rd 21 Shirley Road Regional Highway 47 BER-09 BER-06 BER-11 BER-31 BER-30 031.5 Km Requests for Boundary Expansion – Township of Scugog Legend Port Perry Regional Official Plan, Schedule 'A' composite, 2017 consolidation. This map has been produced from a variety of sources. The Region of Durham does not make any representations concerning the accuracy, likely results, or reliability of the use of the materials. The Region hereby disclaims all representations and warranties. Digital cartography by The Regional Municipality of Durham, Planning and Economic Development Department, 2019. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced without permission. Data Sources and Disclaimer Prime Agricultural Areas Living Areas Major Open Space Areas Employment Areas Urban Area Boundary Municipal BoundaryWaterfront Areas Regional Corridors Regional Centres Lands Subject to BoundaryExpansion RequestLake ScugogOak Ridge Moraine Areas - 307 - Town  of Ajax City of Pickering Lake Ridge RoadBrockRoadTaunton Road W WestneyRoad N Taunton Road E SalemRoadNTaunton Road Ninth Concession Road Altona RoadLake Ridge Road NWhites RoadBER-05 BER-13 BER-12 BER-14 BER-16 BER-21 BER-23 031.5 Km Requests for Boundary Expansion – Ajax and Pickering Legend Regional Official Plan, Schedule 'A' composite, 2017 consolidation. This map has been produced from a variety of sources. The Region of Durham does not make any representations concerning the accuracy, likely results, or reliability of the use of the materials. The Region hereby disclaims all representations and warranties. Digital cartography by The Regional Municipality of Durham, Planning and Economic Development Department, 2019. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced without permission. Data Sources and Disclaimer A Prime Agricultural Areas Living Areas Specific Study Area 'A'AAA Major Open Space Areas Employment Areas Urban Area Boundary Municipal BoundaryWaterfront Areas Regional Corridors Regional Centres Lands Subject to BoundaryExpansion Request - 308 - Town  of Whitby City of Oshawa Simcoe Street NThickson Road NBaldwinStreetSWinchester Road  W Rossland Road WThornton Road NHighway  407 Raglan Road W Winchester Road E Rossland Road E Harmony Road NTaunton Road E Ritson Road NBrock Street NManning Road Wilson Road NTownline Road NTaunton Road WHighway 412Baldwin Street NMyrtle Road W BER-32 BER-10 BER-15BER-17 BER-18 BER-25 BER-26 BER-01 031.5 Km Requests for Boundary Expansion– Oshawa and Whitby Lands Subject to BoundaryExpansion Request Legend Oshawa Airport Regional Official Plan, Schedule 'A' composite, 2017 consolidation. This map has been produced from a variety of sources. The Region of Durham does not make any representations concerning the accuracy, likely results, or reliability of the use of the materials. The Region hereby disclaims all representations and warranties. Digital cartography by The Regional Municipality of Durham, Planning and Economic Development Department, 2019. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced without permission. Data Sources and Disclaimer Prime Agricultural Areas Living Areas Deferral Areas Major Open Space Areas Employment Areas Urban Area Boundary Municipal Boundary Waterfront Areas Regional Corridors Special Study Areas Regional Centres - 309 - Municipality of Clarington Highway35&115Highway 407 Highway 401 RegionalRd18Courtice RoadHighway418Taunton Road High way 115Liberty Street NMain StreetRegional Highway 2 Ganaraska RoadBowmanvilleAvenueRegional Rd 3 Regional Rd 20 Darlington-Clarke Townline RoadBER-03 BER-04 BER-02 BER-07 BER-24 BER-22 BER-20 BER-19 BER-28 BER-29 BER-34 BER-35 BER-36 042 Km Requests for Boundary Expansion – Municipality of Clarington Lands Subject to BoundaryExpansion Request Legend Regional Official Plan, Schedule 'A' composite, 2017 consolidation. This map has been produced from a variety of sources. The Region of Durham does not make any representations concerning the accuracy, likely results, or reliability of the use of the materials. The Region hereby disclaims all representations and warranties. Digital cartography by The Regional Municipality of Durham, Planning and Economic Development Department, 2019. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced without permission. Data Sources and Disclaimer Prime Agricultural Areas Living Areas Major Open Space Areas Employment Areas Urban Area Boundary Municipal BoundaryWaterfront Areas Regional Corridors Lake Ontario Regional Centres Oak Ridge Moraine Areas Darlington Nuclear Generating Station - 310 - The Regional Municipality of Durham605 Rossland Road East, Whitby, Ontario L1N 6A3905-668-7711 or 1-800-372-1102www.durham.ca- 311 - Attachment #2 - 312 - Table of Contents Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................1 1.Introduction: Setting the Context ........................................................................................5 2.Approach to the Land Needs Assessment ............................................................................6 3.Broad Factor’s Influencing Long-Term Growth in Durham ...................................................7 3.1 Durham Region’s Current Growth Performance Relative to the Greater Toronto Hamilton Area..7 3.2 Growth Outlook for Durham Region within the Context of the Greater Golden Horseshoe .......... 9 3.3 Structural Changes in the Macro-Economy Anticipated to Impact Economic Growth and the Future of Work in the Greater Golden Horseshoe ............................................................................ 14 Influence of E-Commerce on Retail and Goods Movement Sector ................................................................. 16 Technological Disruption – Economic Disruptor or Generator of Future Labour Force Demand? ................... 17 What Factors are Influencing the Future of Work in Durham Region? ........................................................... 18 3.4 Planning for the New Economy in Durham Region ...................................................................... 20 3.5 Net Migration as a Key Source of Population Growth.................................................................. 22 Understanding the Key Components of Population Growth .......................................................................... 22 Historical Net Migration Trends Across the GTHA, 2010 to 2019 ................................................................... 23 Historical Net Migration Trends in Durham ................................................................................................... 23 Near-Term Impacts of COVID-19 on Regional Population and Employment Growth ...................................... 24 3.6 Summary of Observations ........................................................................................................... 27 4.Managing Growth in Durham Region: Opportunities and Challenges ...............................28 4.1 Long-Term Growth Outlook ......................................................................................................... 28 4.2 Managing Strong Population Growth .......................................................................................... 29 4.3 Linking Housing Choice and Economic Development ................................................................... 30 4.4 Planning for Existing and Future Generations ............................................................................. 35 Planning for Millennials and Generation Z .................................................................................................... 35 Continuing to Plan for Older Generations ..................................................................................................... 36 Promoting Investment Readiness and Competitiveness ................................................................................ 37 4.5 Planning for Employment Areas .................................................................................................. 38 4.6 Promoting the Rural Economy ..................................................................................................... 40 4.7 Aligning Growth with Significant Infrastructure Investment ....................................................... 41 4.8 Measuring Performance Against Broader Growth Management Objectives............................... 42 5.Conclusions ........................................................................................................................43 6.Next Steps ..........................................................................................................................44 - 313 - 1 Executive Summary By 2051, Durham Region is forecast to accommodate a total population of 1,300,000 people and 460,000 jobs. This represents an increase of approximately 634,000 people and 223,200 jobs over the 35-year period since the last census in 2016 and the forecast horizon year of 20511. This Growth Opportunities and Challenges Report provides an overview of the opportunities and anticipated challenges to achieving forecasted growth over the next three decades in Durham Region. It establishes the foundation for undertaking the Land Needs Assessment by providing essential context, discussing impacts from broader demographic and economic trends, local growth and development trends, and other factors that would affect growth. By assessing these topics and themes, observations and recommendations are provided to help guide and direct Durham’s long-term forecasted population and employment growth. Each section of the Report provides observations and recommendations. These recommendations, based on factors that will affect growth, will carry forward into subsequent studies of the Lands Needs Assessment (LNA) and shape the overall outcome of the Durham Growth Management Study (GMS). Below is a summary of the Report’s observations and recommendations organized by Report section: Summary of Durham Region Population and Employment Growth Trends •Recommendation: Through the Employment Strategy and regional economicdevelopment initiatives, consider approaches and marketing efforts to furtheremphasize growing knowledge-based sectors across the broader GreaterGolden Horseshoe (GGH) economy in an effort to raise the economic profile ofDurham Region. The Toronto-Waterloo Innovation Corridor is an internationallyrecognized technology innovation supercluster extending from Waterloo Regionto the Toronto Region, including Durham. The international presence of thisinnovation corridor provides a key opportunity for Durham Region to leverage itsgrowing local economy in the technology sector. •Recommendation: Through the Housing Strategy, prioritize growth in MajorTransit Station Areas (MTSAs) and other Strategic Growth Areas (SGA) whichleverage public transit investments that provide connectivity and access togrowing employment markets. 1 In accordance with Statistics Canada 2016 Census data and A Place to Grow, Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, Schedule 3. Office Consolidation, 2020. Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 - 314 - 2 Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 Planning for the New Economy in Durham Region •Recommendation: Through the Region’s Employment Strategy, understand thestructural changes taking place in the broader economy and implications toplanning for employment growth and associated Employment Area land needs to2051. Further consider approaches that enable more proactive and adaptableresponses to economic change and disruption. Capitalize on opportunitiesassociated with technological and economic disruptors (where possible) throughgrowth strategies and related Regional Official Plan (ROP) policies that act as aframework to guide adaption and resiliency to rapid change. •Recommendation: Building on the results of the Region’s Employment Strategy,Economic Development initiatives should leverage Durham’s distinct economicand competitive strengths with the context of the broader GGH economy (e.g.cost competitive development environment, established manufacturing andenergy sectors, as well as other growing knowledge-based sectors). •Recommendation: Support the Region’s growing economy by encouragingpopulation and employment growth to areas that promotes a range of housingtypes and tenures, enhanced mobility, walkable and vibrant mixed-useenvironments and amenity rich Employment Areas. In particular, through theIntensification Analysis and Employment Strategy, promote growth inEmployment Areas and SGAs which include Urban Growth Centres (UGCs) andMTSAs. Net Migration as a Key Source of Population Growth •Recommendation: Continue to monitor the impacts of COVID-19 on near-termand long-term population and employment growth across the GGH and DurhamRegion. Durham’s reliance on inter-provincial and intra-provincial net migrationsuggests the Region may be less impacted by a prolonged softening ofinternational immigration relative to some other Greater Toronto Hamilton Area(GTHA) municipalities. Recent 2020 residential building permit activity furthersupports this hypothesis. Long-Term Growth Outlook •Recommendation: The Growth Plan, 2019 population and employment forecastfor Durham Region is aspirational and will require a significant increase in theregional growth rate if it is to be achieved. It is recommended that the 2051forecast contained in the Growth Plan, 2019 be the basis for the Durham GMSand LNA. A higher long-term population and employment growth alternative isnot recommended. - 315 - 3 Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 Managing Strong Population Growth •Recommendation: Be proactive in anticipating and responding to change, byreporting on and regularly monitoring how evolving real estate market trends,consumer behavior and technological disruption is anticipated to influencedevelopment patterns, land use planning and infrastructure investment prioritiesacross the Region. It is recommended that the Region incorporate results andoutcomes of the GMS in its annual monitoring of growth trends. Particular focusshould be given to the influence of evolving real estate market trends anddisruptive forces on housing demand by location, tenure and structure type, aswell as employment growth and non-residential building space requirements bysector. Linking Housing Choice and Economic Development •Recommendation: Through the Housing Strategy and Employment Strategy,reflect that the accommodation of skilled labour and the attraction of newbusinesses are inextricably linked and positively reinforce one another. As anoutcome of the GMS, provide recommendations on how to attract andaccommodate new skilled working residents to the Region within a broad rangeof housing options by type, location, tenure and affordability. •Recommendation: Through the Durham GMS and MCR, prioritize growth andfurther infrastructure investment within SGAs and other priority intensificationareas that align with current and planned servicing and transit/transportationnetworks. •Recommendation: Through the Durham GMS and MCR, consider appropriatepolicies that prioritize and promote office and mixed-use development withinSGAs, including MTSAs and UGCs, as well in other appropriate areas of theRegion. This includes ensuring that planning policies and regulations aresupportive of intensification initiatives and the economic objectives of the Region.Where gaps exist between planning policy objectives and market demandregarding mixed-use and office development, the Region should also exploreutilizing financial tools/incentives to facilitate development where fiscallysustainable. - 316 - 4 Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 and new generations by increasing the market choice of housing available within Durham Region by housing structure type. •Recommendation: Through the Durham GMS and MCR, consider policies,programs and initiatives that support a broad range of new housing options for allages and income groups. This should include rental apartments, condominiumsand entry-level townhome products (e.g. back-to-back townhomes and stacked-townhomes and apartments) for younger adults as well as a range of housingproducts, including seniors’ housing, to accommodate older adults. Planning for Employment Areas and Mixed-Use Development •Recommendation: Through the Employment Strategy, assess the currentcomposition of Employment Areas, including size, distribution and servicingstatus, and determine future employment land need. •Recommendation: Through the Durham GMS and MCR, ensure that Durhamcontinues to offer a competitive array of land within Employment Areas, bydesignating an appropriate quantum of land and including Regional ROP policiesto regularly monitor and maintain a sufficient supply of shovel-ready vacant landsacross a diverse range of parcel sizes and locations within Employment Areas(equivalent to a minimum five-years of forecast Regional demand). •Recommendation: Through the Employment Strategy, consider the importanceof place-making for Employment Areas, including implementing appropriatepolicies. Promoting the Rural Economy •Recommendation: Through the Employment Strategy, reflect the maintenanceand growth of a strong rural economy in Durham Region. •Recommendation: Through the MCR, continue to emphasize through ROPpolicies the importance of growth in the rural economy, including the agriculture,resources, and, agri-tourism sectors. Maintain a policy framework identifyingwhich lands are part of the rural system and may be appropriate for agriculture,agri-tourism, and aggregate extraction, as well as other rural uses.These policydirections should also build on strengthening the already present tourism industryin Durham’s rural economy, by promoting opportunities for farmers to operateagri-tourism uses on agricultural lands. Planning for Existing and Future Generations •Recommendation: Through the Housing Strategy, reflect the continued need toaccommodate and plan for older generations while also attracting younger adults - 317 - 5 Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 Aligning Growth with Significant Infrastructure Investment •Recommendation: Through the GMS and MCR, incorporate an integratedapproach to land-use planning, servicing, and financial management within thebroader context of Regional growth management. Prioritize growth in areas thatmake efficient use of existing and planned regional infrastructure. •Recommendation: Growth strategies and related ROP policies should include adegree of flexibility in order to be more adaptative, and resilient to rapid changesin technology and continued structural shifts in the regional economy. Broader Growth Management Objectives •Recommendation: Durham Region should continue to plan growth in a mannerthat builds on the guiding principles of the Growth Plan 2019 and recognizes theimportance of enhanced livability, mobility and economic opportunity in the regionto successfully achieve sustainable growth. 1.0 Introduction: Setting the C ontext In 2019, the Region launched Envision Durham, the Municipal Comprehensive Review (MCR) of the Regional Official Plan (ROP). The objectives of the MCR are to assess the following: •How and where the cities and towns in Durham Region may grow; •How to use and protect Durham’s land and resources; •What housing types and job opportunities are needed for residents; and, •How people and goods will move across Durham Region and beyond. The Durham Growth Management Study (GMS) is a key component of Envision Durham, providing the technical analysis and studies to determine where and how forecasted population and employment growth will be accommodated in the region by 2051. Phase 1 of the GMS focuses on preparing a Land Needs Assessment (LNA) which will determine the Region’s urban area land need in order to accommodate forecasted growth. It builds on the background research and preliminary observations in the Envision Durham Discussion Papers, which addressed the following topics: Agriculture and Rural System; Climate Change and Sustainability; Growth Management, including discussion of the Urban System and LNA; Environment and Greenlands System; Transportation System; and Housing Policy Planning. The purpose of this report is to provide a high-level summary of growth opportunities and challenges for Durham Region. It sets the planning context by providing an assessment of recent growth in Durham and the broader Greater Toronto Hamilton Area (GTHA), provides an evaluation of broader economic and demographic trends that - 318 - 6 Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 will affect growth in Durham, and includes an assessment of the population and employment forecasts to 2051 provided by the Province in Amendment 1 to the Growth Plan, 2019. Expanding upon the Discussion Papers, further background analysis has been conducted to inform the opportunities and challenges to accommodating growth. This information provides a foundation point to undertake the LNA and related studies. 2.0 Approach to the Land Needs Assessment The LNA will assess how Durham’s Urban Structure will accommodate the various density and intensification targets contained in the Growth Plan, 2019. A key outcome of the LNA is determining how much, if any, additional, urban land is required, by way of settlement boundary expansion, to accommodate the forecasted growth. Amendment 1 to the Growth Plan implemented the “reference” population and employment forecasts which was proposed by the Province as one of three potential growth scenarios. The Growth Plan, as amended, forecasts that Durham Region will grow to a 2051 population of 1,300,000 and 460,000 jobs. The LNA, now underway, includes the following key streams of analysis: Growth Forecasts to 2051, including population, housing, and employment allocations for the Region and by Area Municipality, using the Growth Plan, 2019 Forecast for Durham. Results in: Region-wide Growth Analysis and inputs into the Housing Strategy Intensification Analysis, identifying a recommend intensification target for Durham by evaluating the growth potential in Strategic Growth Areas (SGA) including: Urban Growth Centres, MTSAs, Regional Centres, Regional Corridors and Waterfront Places as well as general intensification thorough-out the built-up area. Results in: Housing Strategy Employment Strategy including an overall sectoral analysis of employment growth, employment land supply including intensification areas, Employment Area Conversion Analysis and identification of employment land need to accommodate job growth to 2051. Results in: Employment Strategy Designated Greenfield Analysis, including assessment of current greenfield densities, greenfield land supply, and the Community Area Land Needs Analysis. Results in: Community Area Land Needs Analysis Land Needs Assessment overview, providing a distillation of all the inputs to determine if and how much additional land is required, through Settlement Area - 319 - 7 Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 Boundary Expansion, to accommodate forecast population and job growth to 2051. Results in: Final Land Needs Assessment Recommendations Report With all streams of work running concurrently, the LNA is expected to be completed in, mid-2021. For each stream, the detailed analysis will be reported through Technical Briefing Papers and a Final LNA Recommendation Report. 3.0 Broad Factors Influencing Long-Term Growth in Durham A broad range of factors related to macro-economics as well as federal and provincial policy (e.g. global economic growth outlook, foreign exchange rates, federal immigration policy, federal trade policy and provincial planning policy) will continue to have a strong influence on the Region’s relative performance with respect to population and employment growth. Travel restrictions and economic disruption due to COVID-19 are also anticipated to have a negative impact on near term labour force growth and keep near-term (i.e. 2020 and 2021) immigration levels across Canada, including in Durham, below recent historical averages. Growth in Durham will also continue to be strongly influenced by the structural changes that are occurring within the macro economy. Similar to broader Provincial trends, Durham Region’s economy has transitioned away from goods production and towards service delivery. Ultimately, this will continue to influence Regional planning, economic development, and marketing initiatives which will be increasingly geared towards a knowledge-driven and service-based economy. Although there is limited ability to influence or control macro-economic trends or policy decisions by senior levels of government, the Region does have the ability to recognize emerging trends and position itself in a positive manner. This requires the Region to continue marketing itself as a hub for innovation, equipped with the human capital that is required to encourage on-going small and medium-sized business development, entrepreneurship, and local investment retention. 3.1 Durham Region’s Current Growth Performance Relative to the Greater Toronto Hamilton Area Since Durham is part of the GTHA, it is helpful to understand how Durham has been growing in relation to its neighbouring regions. Figures 1 and 2 summarize how each of the upper-tier and single-tier municipalities across the GTHA are tracking to their respective 2021 OP population forecasts. Collectively, these municipalities are tracking at 99% of their 2021 respective Official Plan population forecasts. Comparatively, Durham Region is tracking at only 88% of its ROP population forecast, which lags behind every other upper-tier and single-tier in the GTHA. - 320 - 8 Figure 1 GTHA Upper/Single-Tier, Population Tracking to Official Plan Forecast, 20212 Recent employment growth levels achieved relative to Official Plan employment forecasts for upper-tier and single-tier GTHA municipalities indicate most municipalities have fallen short with respect to their near-term employment forecasts. Durham Region is tracking well below its 2021 ROP target of 310,000 jobs with an estimated employment base of 237,500 in 20213, and similarly lags behind all other upper-tier and single-tier municipalities in the GTHA. 2 Watson’s 2021 population forecast is 715,400 assuming a May reference point. The 2021 number is based largely on building permit activity from 2016 to 2020. 3 2019 Employment and Industry Report, Durham Region, February 2020. Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 106%102%99%97%96%92%88% 70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100% 105% 110% Peel Toronto G.T.H.A.Hamilton Halton York DurhamPercentage of 2021 GrowthForecast AchievedUpper/Single-Tier Municipality Source: 2021 population from Greater Golden Horseshoe Growth Forecasts to 2051 Technical Report, June 2020, except for Durham Region derived by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. Population targets for Hamilton and Toronto from the G.G.H. Growth Forecasts to 2041 Technical Report, November 2012. Remaining population targets derived from respective Official Plans. - 321 - 9 Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 Figure 2 GTHA Upper/Single-Tier, Employment Tracking to Official Plan Forecast, 2021 While recent growth trends have Durham Region showing a slower pace of growth than the remainder of the GTHA, infrastructure investment is expected to enable higher levels of growth in the coming decades. A number of existing and planned infrastructure investments in the region (i.e. Hwy. 407 extension, high-order transit including the extension of GO rail service to Bowmanville, the potential for the Pickering Airport, and continued growth in local post-secondary institutions) are anticipated to drive population and employment growth rates higher in Durham over the next several decades, relative to historical trends. While these infrastructure investments are critical enablers of economic growth and investment, it is important to recognize that they are not the only factors which will influence long-term population and employment growth trends across Durham Region. 3.2 Growth Outlook for Durham Region within the Context of the Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH) Future population and employment growth within Durham are strongly correlated with the growth outlook and competitiveness of the GGH regional economy, illustrated in Map 1. Currently, the GGH is the fourth largest and one of the fastest growing larger City/Regions in North America. Employment opportunities are the primary driver of net migration to the GTHA as a whole as well as to Durham. Net migration, particularly international net migration, has been the key contributor to population growth across the GTHA, including Durham Region, over the past two decades. 103% 92%90% 85%85%82% 77% 70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100% 105% Toronto G.T.H.A.Peel Hamilton Halton York DurhamPercentage of 2021 Growth Forecast AchievedUpper/Single-Tier Municipality Source: 2021 employment from Greater Golden Horseshoe Growth Forecasts to 2051 Technical Report, June 2020, except for Durham Region derived by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. Employment targets for Hamilton and Toronto from the G.G.H. Growth Forecasts to 2041 Technical Report, November 2012. Remaining employment targets derived from respective Official Plans. - 322 - 10 Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 Map 1 Durham Region within the Context of the Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH) The Growth Plan, 2019 long-term outlook for the GGH is positive, characterized by strong population growth fueled by economic expansion that is increasingly concentrated in large urban centres. As summarized in Figure 3, the population of the GGH is forecast to increase from 9.5 million in 2016 to 14.9 million in 2051.4 This represents a population increase of 5.3 million people (152,000 annually), or 1.3% annually between 2016 and 2051. With respect to the region’s economic potential, the GGH employment base is forecast to increase from 4.6 million in 2016 to 7 million in 2051 (refer to Figure 4). This represents an employment increase of 2.4 million jobs (69,000 annually), or 1.2% annually between 2016 and 2051. 4 As previously mentioned, proposed Amendment 1 to the Growth Plan extends the Schedule 3 forecast to 2051. - 323 - 11 Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 Figure 3 Historical and Forecast Population Growth for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH), 2001 to 2051 Figure 4 Historical and Forecast Employment Growth for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH), 2001 to 2051 The GGH represents the economic powerhouse of Ontario and is the centre of a large portion of the economic activity in Canada. The GGH is economically diverse with most of the top 20 traded industry clusters throughout North America having a strong presence in this region. Within the GGH, the GTHA industrial and office commercial real estate markets are significant, having the third and sixth largest inventories, respectively, in North America.5 With a robust economy and diverse mix of export-based employment sectors, the GGH is highly attractive on an international level to new businesses and investors. The GGH also has a strong appeal given the area’s regional infrastructure (i.e. Toronto Pearson International Airport, other regional airports, provincial highways, inter-modal facilities), access to labour force, post-secondary institutions, and proximity to the US border. In turn, this continues to support steady population and housing growth within this region, largely driven by international net migration. 5 Source: Derived from Cushman & Wakefield Toronto Industrial Market Beat and US Industrial Market Beat Snapshot, Q3 2017, and Cushman & Wakefield Toronto Office Market Beat and US Office Market Beat Snapshot, Q3 2017 by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. Area 2001 2016 2051 Total Population Growth Annual Population Growth Annual Population Growth Rate Total Population Growth Annual Population Growth Annual Population Growth Rate G.T.H.A.5,808,000 7,183,000 11,170,000 1,375,000 92,000 1.4% 3,987,000 114,000 1.3% G.G.H. Outer Ring 2,046,000 2,355,000 3,700,000 309,000 21,000 0.9% 1,345,000 38,000 1.3% Total G.G.H 7,854,000 9,538,000 14,870,000 1,684,000 112,000 1.3% 5,332,000 152,000 1.3% Note: Population includes the net Census undercount. 2001 to 2016 2016 to 2051 Source: 2001 to 2016 derived from Statistics Canada Census. 2016 to 2051 from A Place to Growth: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2020). Figure by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2020. Population Area 2001 2016 2051 Total Employment Growth Annual Employment Growth Annual Employment Growth Rate Total Employment Growth Annual Employment Growth Annual Employment Growth Rate G.T.H.A.2,938,000 3,564,000 5,360,000 626,000 42,000 1.3% 1,796,000 51,000 1.2% G.G.H. Outer Ring 890,000 1,034,000 1,650,000 144,000 10,000 1.0% 616,000 18,000 1.3% Total G.G.H 3,828,000 4,598,000 7,010,000 770,000 51,000 1.2% 2,412,000 69,000 1.2% 2016 to 2051 Source: 2001 to 2016 derived from Statistics Canada Census. 2016 to 2051 from A Place to Growth: Growth Plan for the Grteater Golden Horseshoe (2020). Figure by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2020. Employment 2001 to 2016 - 324 - 12 Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 The diverse and highly competitive GGH economy has fueled a steady level of employment growth over the past decade in most major sectors of the economy. Employment growth has been particularly strong related to knowledge-based and creative-class service sectors, including professional, scientific, and technical services, financial services, information and cultural industries, education services, health care and social services, as well as real estate. Within the service sector, economic growth has been notably robust for small to medium-scale knowledge-based businesses that are focused on innovation, entrepreneurship, and technology. The strength of the broader regional GGH economy presents a tremendous opportunity for the Durham Region economy and its residents within commuting distance to this growing regional employment market. As displayed in Figure 5, 51% of Durham Region residents work within Durham Region, while 49% of Durham Region residents commute to employment markets outside the Region for work. Comparatively, Durham Region has a relatively low live/work6 ratio relative to the other upper-tier and single-tier municipalities in the GTHA, behind the City of Toronto, the City of Hamilton and Peel Region. The live/work employment ratio is a key metric that the Durham Region Official Plan aims to increase over time by providing greater opportunities for its residents to work throughout the Region across a growing and diversifying local economy. Opportunities to both leverage Durham growth within the GGH employment market while at the same time increasing employment opportunities within the Region will be key to enabling growth within Durham Region. 6 Within this context, live/work refers to living and working within the same upper-tier or single-tier municipality. Strength of the GGH growing employment market presents a tremendous opportunity for Durham’s economic growth. Durham Region has a relatively low live/work ratio compared to other upper-tier and single-tier municipalities within the GTHA. - 325 - 13 Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 Figure 5 Percentage of Labour Force that Live and Work in the Same Upper-Tier/Single-Tier Municipality (Including Work at Home) The City of Toronto represents the largest employment market outside Durham, to which Durham Region residents commute. As of 2016, approximately 68% of all out-commuters from Durham Region are employed within the City of Toronto, while a large part of the remainder commute to York Region and Peel Region. According to the Growth Plan, 2019, the primary commuter-shed for Durham Region (which is comprised of the City of Toronto, York Region and Peel Region) is expected to grow by close to 1 million jobs between 2016 to 2051. Regional employment opportunities within commuting distance represent a large part of what makes Durham Region a desirable location to live and drives a significant portion of the Durham housing market. Durham Region’s recent focus on advancing existing and planned MTSAs and the expansion of GO Rail service to Bowmanville capitalizes on growing employment markets within commuter distance by leveraging investments in public transit and expanding access to employment opportunities. Recommendation: Through the Employment Strategy and regional economic development initiatives, consider approaches and marketing efforts to further emphasize growing knowledge-based sectors across the broader Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH) economy in effort to raise the economic profile of Durham Region. The Toronto-Waterloo Innovation Corridor is an internationally recognized technology innovation supercluster extending from Waterloo Region to the Toronto Region, including Durham. The international presence of this innovation corridor provides a key 65%55%52%44%42%40% 7% 6%5%7%9%9% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% Toronto Hamilton Peel Durham York HaltonShare of Employed Labour Force Upper/Single-Tier MunicipalityLive/Work Work at HomeNote: Live/Work is based on usual place of work employment.Source: Derived from Statistics Canada 2016 Census data, by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2020. 72% 49%51%51%57%61% - 326 - 14 Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 opportunity for Durham Region to leverage its growing local economy in the technology sector. Recommendation: Through the Housing Strategy, prioritize growth in Major Transit Station Areas (MTSAs) and other Strategic Growth Areas (SGA) which leverage public transit investments that provide connectivity and access to growing employment markets. 3.3 Structural Changes in the Macro-Economy Anticipated to Impact Economic Growth and the Future of Work in the Greater Golden Horseshoe Notwithstanding the long-term economic growth opportunities, recent employment growth in Employment Areas across the GGH (including Durham Region) has not been as robust as forecasted in most upper-tier/single tier OPs. This is largely due to structural changes in the macro-economy in recent decades. These structural changes have been largely driven by increased outsourcing of domestically manufactured goods to emerging global markets combined with increased automation of manufacturing processes. Between 2003 and 2010, these challenges were further exacerbated in the manufacturing sector across the GGH and more broadly across Ontario and Canada due to a high Canadian dollar relative to the US dollar. Since 2010, the manufacturing sector across Ontario including the GGH has shown signs of a steady recovery in terms of economic output, measured through gross domestic product (GDP); however, this recovery was slow to materialize. Since 2010, Manufacturing job losses have generally stabilized across Ontario (refer to Figure 6). In Durham Region, this stabilization trend in the manufacturing sector has been supported by the reopening of the General Motors (GM) truck plant in Durham announced in 2020. While the manufacturing sector remains vitally important to the provincial and regional economy with respect to jobs and economic output, this sector is not anticipated to be a principal driver of long-term job growth across the GGH, including Durham Region (refer to Figure 6). - 327 - 15 Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 Figure 6 Manufacturing Labour Force Employment and GDP in Ontario, 2001 to 2020 YTD. Co mpounding this trend of slower manufacturing employment across the GGH is the increasing share of land-extensive uses that have been accommodated in Employment Areas at low employment densities, driven by strong regional demand in the transportation and warehousing sector. This trend has been particularly relevant for west/north GTHA municipalities, which offer an ample supply of designated greenfield lands with access to regional transportation infrastructure (e.g. 400-series highways, the Toronto Pearson International Airport, inter-modal facilities), and is also occurring in Durham. Continued structural changes in the global economy and technological disruption will continue to influence the future nature of work and require municipalities to be responsive and adaptive to changing industry needs. Key highlights related to the evolving structural changes and impacts to the Durham Region economy are provided below, including the recent impacts of COVID-19 on consumer behavior, influence of e-commerce, technology and disruptors and the changing nature of work, as well as the near to medium-term outlook for non-residential space needs. The Technical Briefs supporting the Durham GMS will further address the impacts of COVID-19 on both population, housing and employment growth in more detail. 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 80,000 90,000 100,000 110,000 600 700 800 900 1,000 1,100 1,200 Manufacturing G.D.P. (Millions)Labour Force Employment in Manufacturing (000s)Year Labour Force - AnnualLabour Force - Monthly (3-Month Moving Average)G.D.P. - Annual (Chained 2012 Dollars) Source:Annual labour force data from Statistics Canada Labour Force Survey, Table 282-0125, and monthly data from Table 14-10-0091-01.Annual G.D.P. data from Statistics Canada Table 36-10-0402-01, by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2020. - 328 - 16 Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 Influence of E-Commerce on Retail and Goods Movement Sector •Changes in Consumer Behaviour through E-Commerce o Retail e-commerce sales have risen steadily across Canada, with theproportion of online sales rising from 2.4% in 2016 to a high of 11.4% percentin April 2020.7 Further, the digital impact of retail sales is even greater withmobile purchasing platforms (e.g. UberEats, Skip the Dishes) that supportretail sales of local retailers. o The rise of e-commerce has reduced the demand for retail square footage, inparticular retail space for the sale of goods-based retailers.8 This trend willcontinue as consumer behaviours which have shifted over the course of thepandemic become entrenched. o While e-commerce has been capturing market share from goods-basedretailers, growth in specific service-based retailers continues as they providesocial experiences and other services that cannot be purchased remotely. •E-Commerce is a Driving Force Behind the Region’s Growing Goods Movement Sector o Increased outsourcing of manufacturing production to emerging global marketscontinues to drive the need for new consolidated, land-extensive warehousingfacilities to store and manage the distribution of goods produced locally as wellas goods imported from abroad. o This continues to drive demand for increasingly larger, more land-extensivewarehousing facilities, generally in greenfield Employment Areas. Across NorthAmerica, the Goods Movement industry is continuously evolving at a rapid pace.As previously mentioned, e-commerce and technological improvementsrepresent the biggest drivers of change in the Goods Movement industry, drivenby the rapid growth of mobile technology. o Just-in-time manufacturing will continue to be the industry norm, placingincreasing emphasis on more frequent and smaller deliveries by truck transport,typically during the last mile.9 As the e-commerce market continues to expand, 7 Adapted from Retail Insider article, Retail E-Commerce Explodes in Canada Amid COVID-19 Pandemic, prepared by Mario Toneguzzi, July 29, 2020 8 Goods-based retailer refers to retail facilities that sell goods to be used or consumed at home, including food-oriented retail (supermarkets and convenience stores), beer, wine and liquor stores, pharmacies and personal care stores, home improvement stores and stores selling general merchandise, apparel and furniture. 9 The last mile is commonly referred to in the logistics sector as the last leg of the transportation process from the distribution centre or fulfillment hub to the final destination (i.e. the retailer or consumer). - 329 - 17 Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 this component of the supply chain is becoming increasingly important to businesses as it has a direct influence on the customer experience. In addition to the need to provide timely, accurate service delivery, it is also critical for industry to ensure cost efficiency given that 30% to over 50% of total parcel delivery cost is associated with this leg of the supply chain.10,11 Technological Disruption – Economic Disruptor or Generator of Future Labour Force Demand? •The Use of Technology in Commercial Services o Digital and mobile technologies are making it easier to access goods andservices on-demand which has led to alternative platforms to purchase productsand services. Among these platforms are those that support the sharingeconomy which provide opportunities for individuals to earn an income byleveraging under-utilized assets. These platforms are providing customers withan alternative to traditional buying/selling platforms, including those in hospitality(e.g. hotels and taxis) and in office leasing (office sharing). It is anticipated thatfurther advancements in the sharing economy may have an increasingly negativeimpact on the need for non-residential building space and continued growth inprecarious employment. Other alternative purchasing platforms are providingincome-earning opportunities for individuals to perform services that are typicallynot outsourced by households (e.g. assembling furniture, small householdrepairs, picking up food at fast-food restaurants, meal preparation, grocery pick-up and delivery). •Automation and Rise of Artificial Intelligence o According to the Brookfield Institute for Innovation + Entrepreneurship, over thenext 10 to 20 years, 42% of the Canadian labour force is at high risk of beingaffected by automation, either through significant task restructuring orelimination. Jobs that are anticipated to be most highly impacted by automationare primarily within occupations that are administrative, routine, or orientedtowards sales and service. o The net impacts to global GDP resulting from artificial intelligence (AI) areanticipated to contribute up to $15.7 trillion to the global economy by 2030, morethan the current output of China and India combined. 12 10 Breaking Down the “Last-Mile Delivery”: Challenges and Solutions. October 12, 2016. 11 Parcel Delivery. The Future of the Last Mile. McKinsey & Company. September 2016. 12 Sizing the Prize. What’s the real value of AI for your business and how can you capitalize? PWC. 2017. - 330 - 18 o Over the next decade, AI will generate massive disruption as both establishedbusinesses and new entrants drive innovation and develop new businessmodels. While the long-term net economic impacts of automation and/or AIappear to be positive, global competition from both established and emergingmarkets looking to capitalize on potential opportunities related to this technologywill be increasingly fierce.13 What Factors are Influencing the Future of Work in Durham Region? •Opportunities Related to Remote Work and Learning are Anticipated to Continue Across Durham Region o Over the 2001 to 2016 period, the percentage of the Durham Region’s labourforce defined as having a usual place of work declined, offset by a gradualincrease in the share of work at home employment and a steady increase in theshare of off-site employment or employees with no fixed place of work(NFPOW).14 o Within the Durham Region, the rising share of labour related to NFPOW hasbeen primarily driven by steady growth in the transportation and constructionsectors which are typically characterized as having a higher percentage of off-site employees. o Looking forward, continued advances in technology and telecommunications(e.g. 5G technology) is anticipated to further enable remote work patterns andultimately increase the relative share of off-site employees over the long term.As outlined in Connecting our Communities, a Broadband Strategy for DurhamRegion, the Region and Area Municipalities can play a role in influencing andpromoting the expansion and implementation of necessary technologies andinfrastructure to enable and capitalize on these trends. o Over the coming decades, work from home and NFPOW employment in Durhamis expected to steadily increase as a result of these trends. Demographics andsocio-economics also play a role in the future demand for off-site and work athome employment within an increasingly knowledge- and technology-driveneconomy. o Working with public and private sector partners, Durham Region hasconsiderable control to provide sufficient housing supply opportunities across abroad range of residents by age and income. Continued efforts to increase 13 Ibid. 14 Statistics Canada defines NFPOW employees as “persons who do not go to the same workplace location at the beginning of each shift.” Such persons include landscape contractors, travelling salespersons, independent truck drivers, etc. Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 - 331 - 19 Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 market choice of ownership and rental housing can act to improve the Region’s competitive position by providing increased live/work opportunities. •The Rise of the Gig Economy o It is anticipated that many working residents in Durham Region, particularlyyounger adults as well as older adults (i.e. Baby Boomers) approachingretirement or semi-retirement will utilize technology to supplement their income inmore flexible ways in contrast to traditional work patterns. o Technological innovation and improved broadband regional telecommunicationshave been, and will continue to be, key drivers of economic expansion inknowledge-based sectors as well as the steady rise of the gig economy.15 •How COVID-19 is Accelerating Economic Disruption? o In addition to its broader impacts on the economy, COVID-19 has acceleratedchanges in work and commerce as a result of technological disruptions that werealready in play prior to the pandemic. o Enterprises will increasingly need to rethink the way they conduct business andoffer services and products with an increased emphasis on remote work enabledby technologies such as virtual private networks (VPNs), virtual meetings, cloudtechnology and other remote work collaboration tools, and may be at risk ofclosure if they do not adapt these measures. These trends are anticipated tohave a direct influence on commercial and industrial real estate needs over boththe near and longer terms. o As the percentage of employees working from home and off-site continues tosteadily rise, it may reduce the relative need for future non-residential spaceneeds. The trend towards increased remote work and learning, combined withthe impacts of e-commerce are anticipated to place downward pressure over thelong-term on retail, institutional and office space needs. These trends will befurther explored through Region’s MCR as part of the Employment Strategy. 15 The gig economy is characterized by flexible, temporary, or freelance jobs, often involving connecting with clients or customers through an online platform. - 332 - 20 Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 3.4 Planning for the New Economy in Durham Region Based on many of the trends and disruptors discussed in the previous section, there is a general recognition that a “new economy” which is more driven and dependent on technology and innovation has emerged. Looking forward, there will be increased competition for business development and investment in the “new economy”. Durham Region is located in proximity to several highly populated and growing upper-tier and single-tier municipalities with which it competes directly for business attraction and investment. Each of these municipalities generally offer unique regional attributes that appeal to prospective international and local firms as well as new residents. To remain competitive, Durham Region will need to continue to distinguish itself as a hub for innovation and technology while encouraging ongoing entrepreneurship, small business development, and investment retention. With three highly respected post-secondary institutions, including Ontario Tech University, Durham College, and Trent University, as well as an array of business support organizations, Durham Region is well -positioned and located within an internationally recognized technology innovation supercluster, known as the Toronto-Waterloo Innovation Corridor. The Toronto-Waterloo Innovation Corridor has strong economic and employment growth potential based on its established presence as the largest technology cluster in Canada, critical mass of post-secondary institutions and incubators, access to skilled labour, and a high quality of life. The Toronto-Waterloo Innovation Corridor is the second largest and second fastest growing market in North America related to technology talent, including over 200,000 tech workers and 15,000+ tech companies. The Toronto-Waterloo Innovation Corridor provides a key opportunity for Durham Region to leverage its growing local economy in the technology sector. Further, Durham has particular strengths in the aerospace automation, automotive, and plastics, rubber and chemicals sectors. Durham Region’s greatest competitive advantages in the advanced manufacturing sector are related to the energy and environmental sectors, as these sectors are forecast to be growth drivers in the future. Durham Region will need to continue to make efforts to distinguish itself as a hub for innovation and technology while encouraging ongoing entrepreneurship, small business development and investment retention. - 333 - 21 Durham Region is also home to Ontario’s most well-developed energy cluster. Collectively, this cluster comprises a number of diverse industries centred around manufacturing, engineering, research and technology as well as utilities and power generation. It is noted that Ontario Power Generation (OPG) is currently planning a new corporate campus location within the Clarington Energy Park.16 This project, which is expected to be completed by 2024, will bring over 2,000 direct jobs to Clarington.17 Considerable long-term opportunities exist for Durham Region related to utilities and power generation as well as renewable energy. Currently anchored by two nuclear power stations, the Region is home to a rich array of energy players which produce and distribute power, develop new and renewable energy technologies, alternative fuels, manufacturing components and systems, and provide service support to industry. Durham Region has a unique collection of existing industries, infrastructure, skilled labour, technology research and development, education and training facilities which will allow the Region to lead the Province in future growth within sectors related to energy, manufacturing and technology. Added to this, the Region is well equipped to accommodate new development and investment opportunities throughout its established and developing industrial/business parks. Durham Region’s research-intensive institutions play a pivotal role in ensuring research and manufacturing-based companies in Durham Region are at the forefront of technological innovation. Building on its strong institutional, private-sector and community foundations, Durham Region has been active in increasing its readiness towards an ever-evolving knowledge-based economy through on-going leadership and investment. These efforts will continue to be important in driving youth in-migration (both permanent and non-permanent residents), talent attraction and retention, global investment and regional employment opportunities ultimately geared towards an increasingly skilled labour market. 16 The Clarington Energy Park is located immediately south of Highway 401 and north of the CN rail corridor, between Courtice Road and Solina Road. 17 OPG Moving Headquarters to Clarington, Ontario. Ontario Power Generation. June 10, 2019. Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 Durham Region has a unique collection of existing industries, infrastructure, skilled labour, technology research and development, education and training facilities which will allow the Region to lead the Province in future growth within sectors related to energy, manufacturing and technology. - 334 - 22 The northern municipalities of Durham Region and related economic structure are distinct from the southern lakeshore municipalities. Northern Durham is primarily rural in nature, with urban settlement areas that are nestled within a primarily agricultural and natural environment. Key economic sectors in the northern communities have traditionally been agricultural, resource related, and tourism. However, the northern municipalities also include high concentrations of the “creative class” economy. The presence of artists, actors, performers, writers and designers contributes a strong sense of cultural development and creates a “quality of place” that attracts new residents to the communities within northern Durham.18 The economic base of northern Durham is also highly oriented towards small businesses and home-based occupations. These existing strengths emphasize the need for Durham’s GMS to focus efforts on expanding the economic sector strengths in northern Durham in particular in areas geared towards agri-business, tourism, arts and culture, as well as small businesses and entrepreneurism. Recommendation: Through the Region’s Employment Strategy, understand the structural changes taking place in the broader economy and implications to planning for employment growth and associated Employment Area land needs to 2051. Further consider approaches that enable more proactive and adaptable responses to economic change and disruption. Capitalize on opportunities associated with technological and economic disruptors (where possible) through growth strategies and related ROP policies that act as a framework to guide adaption and resiliency to rapid change. Recommendation: Building on the results of the Region’s Employment Strategy, leverage Durham’s distinct economic and competitive strengths with the context of the broader GGH economy (e.g. cost competitive development environment, established manufacturing and energy sectors and growing knowledge-based sectors). Recommendation: Support the Region’s growing economy by encouraging population and employment growth to areas that promotes a range of housing types and tenures, enhanced mobility, walkable and vibrant mixed-use environments and amenity rich Employment Areas. In particular, through the Intensification Analysis and Employment Strategy, promote growth in Employment Areas and SGAs which include Urban Growth Centres (UGCs) and MTSAs. 3.5 Net Migration as a Key Source of Population Growth Understanding the Key Components of Population Growth There are two primary components of population growth: natural increase (i.e. births less deaths) and net migration. As previously mentioned, population growth across the GTHA over the past two decades has been primarily driven by net migration as opposed to natural increase. This trend is consistent with other regions of the Province and Canada as a whole. Over the next several decades, population growth 18 Northern Durham by the Numbers. Analysis and Commentary. A Competitive Analysis of North Durham for the Rural Economic Development Strategic Plan 2012. Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 - 335 - 23 Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 across the GTHA, including Durham Region, is anticipated to be driven almost solely from net migration with a decreasing share of growth by natural increase. Historical Net Migration Trends Across the GTHA, 2010 to 2019 Over the past decade, international net-migration has represented a larger percentage of total net migration across the GTHA, including to Durham Region. This is due to the gradual decline in absolute net-migration levels from other Canadian provinces (inter-provincial net migration) and from other regions within Ontario (intra-provincial net migration). Between 2010 and 2015 all forms of net-migration levels across the GTHA steadily declined in absolute terms; followed by a sharp rebound between 2015 and 2019. Historical Net Migration Trends in Durham The recent rebound in net migration to Durham Region has been driven by recent federal immigration policies combined with the macro-economic recovery experienced across Durham Region following the 2008/2009 financial crisis. However, local factors including housing affordability and a growing local economy have contributed to Durham’s recent net-migration rebound. Two key factors which are believed to have strongly contributed to the Region’s local rebound in net migration are the supply of ownership housing opportunities offered at competitive prices, as well as the Region’s growing local economy. - 336 - 24 Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 Figure 7 Durham Region, Historical Population Growth by Component, 1991 to 2019 Near-Term Impacts of COVID-19 on Regional Population and Employment Growth To date, the downward impacts of COVID-19 on global economic output have been severe. Economic sectors such as travel and tourism, accommodation and food, manufacturing, energy, and financial have been hit particularly hard. Canada’s GDP declined by approximately 39% in the second quarter of 2020 (April to June), even when economic activities improved in May and June as containment measures gradually loosened beginning in May 2020.19 Restrictions have increased again into Q1 2021 resulting is prolonged economic impacts on downtown and tourism industries. The required modifications to social behavior (i.e. physical distancing) and increased work from home requirements resulting from government-induced containment measures have resulted in significant economic disruption. This has had a profound impact on consumer demand and consumption patterns. Furthermore, escalating tensions and challenges related to international trade have also begun to raise questions regarding the potential vulnerabilities of globalization and the structure of current global supply chains. Currently, the level of sustained economic impact related to this “exogenous shock” to the world and the Canadian economy is largely unknown. Notwithstanding 19 Reuters Business News, August 28, 2020. 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 1991-19921992-19931993-19941994-19951995-19961996-19971997-19981998-19991999-20002000-20012001-20022002-20032003-20042004-20052005-20062006-20072007-20082008-20092009-20102010-20112011-20122012-20132013-20142014-20152015-20162016-20172017-20182018-2019International Share of Net MigrationPopulation ChangePeriodNatural Increase Net Migration International Migration Share of Total Net Migration Source: Derived from Statistics Canada Annual Demographics Statistics/Estimates Components of Population Growth byWatson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2020. Net Migration vs Natural Increase 1991-2019: 67% / 33% - 337 - 25 Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 this uncertainty, it is generally clear that the longer COVID-19 persists on an international scale, the greater the severity of the current global recession. Despite the longer-term consequences of COVID-19 to some industries, firms, and individuals, the long-term economic outlook for the GGH remains positive and the region will continue to be attractive to newcomers. While the housing market across the GTHA got off to a slow start in early 2020 due to COVID-19, pent-up demand and historically low mortgage rates have accelerated housing demand across the Toronto region during the summer months of 2020. According to the Toronto Real Estate Board (TREB), the year-over-year average price growth across the GTA has increased by approximately 17%, while housing sales are also up by close to 30%, compared to July 2019. Active listings also shrank by approximately 16% compared to July 2019. Notwithstanding the recent positive real estate trends identified for the GGH as a whole, including Durham Region, there are a number of reasons to remain cautious with respect to the broader demand for housing across the GGH over the near-term (i.e. next one to three years) primarily due to reduced levels of immigration. This is because even after the COVID-19 crisis begins to lift, many economists warn that sustained higher unemployment rates during the recovery period may reduce the incentive for immigrants coming into Canada.20 Figure 8 summarizes admissions of permanent residents to Canada and Ontario by quarter since 2015. Looking forward over the remainder of 2020 and part of 2021, immigration levels to Canada and Ontario are anticipated to remain low as a result of travel restrictions due to COVID-19. This suggests that near-term immigration levels in Durham Region (i.e. 2020 and 2021) will also remain below recent historical averages. 20 Stalling immigration may add to Canada’s COVID-19 economic woes. Fergal Smith, Steve Scherer. Reuters. May 27, 2020. - 338 - 26 Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 Figure 8 Quarterly Admission of Permanent Residents in Ontario Versus the Rest of Canada, 2015 to 2020 Thi s near -term scenario has the potential to reduce population growth levels and soften the housing market in areas of Ontario where population growth is most heavily dependent on immigration. For the GGH, the City of Toronto, Peel Region and York Region would potentially be the most heavily impacted by such a trend. The remaining “905” Area of the GTHA, including Durham Region, which is more influenced by inter-provincial and intra-provincial net migration as a source of housing demand may potentially be less impacted. Within Durham Region, year -to-date residential building permit activity has been notably stronger in eastern and northern Durham Region. COVID-19 has the potential to reduce population growth levels and soften the housing market in areas of Ontario where population growth is most heavily dependent on immigration. For Durham Region, 2020 year-to-date residential building permit activity has been slightly stronger relative to recent annual averages, particularly in eastern and northern Durham Region. - 339 - 27 Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 Recommendation: Continue to monitor the impacts of COVID-19 on near-term and long-term population and employment growth across the GGH and Durham Region. Durham’s reliance on inter-provincial and intra-provincial net migration suggests the Region may be less impacted by a prolonged softening of international immigration relative to other GTHA municipalities. 3.6 Summary of Observations A broad range of factors related to macro-economics as well as federal and provincial policy (e.g. global economic growth outlook, foreign exchange rates, federal immigration policy, federal trade policy and provincial planning policy) will continue to have a strong influence on the Region’s relative performance with respect to recent population and employment growth. Travel restrictions and economic disruption due to COVID-19 are also anticipated to negatively impact near term labour force growth and keep near-term (i.e. 2020 and 2021) immigration levels across Canada, including Durham Region, below recent historical averages. It is important to recognize that the Region of Durham has limited control in its ability to influence these above-mentioned macro -economic and policy factors, but does have the ability to recognize emerging trends. Durham Region also faces opportunities and challenges resulting from the structural changes that are occurring within the macro economy. Similar to the Province as a whole, Durham Region’s economy has transitioned away from goods production and towards service delivery. Ultimately, this will continue to influence regional planning, economic development, and marketing initiatives which will be increasingly geared to the knowledge-driven economy. When considering the Region’s long-term economic outlook and regional competitive position, Durham Region does have considerable control and ability to position itself in a positive manner. This requires the Region to continue marketing itself as a hub for innovation, equipped with the human capital (population growth) that is required to encourage on-going small to medium-sized business development, entrepreneurship, and local investment retention. Planning for Durham’s offering in housing choice, transit investment, quality of life and diversity in scale and character of communities (large cities, towns and waterfront and Greenbelt environments) are also important in increased competitiveness. - 340 - 28 Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 4.0 Managing Growth in Durham Region: Opportunities and Challenges 4.1 Long-Term Growth Outlook As set out in Schedule 3 of the 2019 Growth Plan, Durham Region’s population and employment base is forecast to reach 1,300,000 and 460,000 respectively, by 2051. This represents an increase of approximately 634,000 persons and 223,200 employees, or an annual population and employment growth rate of both 1.9%, over the next 35 years. As previously discussed, a broad range of factors are anticipated to drive higher population rates over the next several decades in Durham. Notwithstanding the tremendous economic growth potential that exists within Durham, the Growth Plan, 2019 population and employment forecast for Durham Region is aspirational. Forecast annual population and employment growth is anticipated to be approximately double historical growth rates. Comparatively, by 2046 the Growth Plan population growth forecast for Durham Region is approximately 280,000 persons higher than the most recent population forecast (Summer 2020) prepared by the Ontario Ministry of Finance (MOF). Notwithstanding the tremendous economic growth potential that exists within Durham, the Growth Plan, 2019 population and employment forecast for Durham Region is aspirational. - 341 - 29 Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 Figure 9 Durham Region Population Forecast Comparison (Growth Plan vs. Ontario Ministry of Finance) Recommendation: The Growth Plan, 2019 population and employment forecast for Durham Region is aspirational and will require a significant increase in the regional growth rate if it is to be achieved. It is recommended that the 2051 forecast contained in the Growth Plan, 2019 be the basis for the Durham GMS and LNA. A higher long-term population and employment growth alternative is not recommended. 4.2 Managing Strong Population Growth Looking forward, the continued rapid urbanization of existing and planned greenfield areas across Durham, combined with targeted intensification within the Region’s built-up urban areas, including focused growth within SGAs, is anticipated to present a number of growth management opportunities and challenges for the Region and its area municipalities. As previously mentioned, the increasing pace of technological change and advancement related to e-commerce, transportation technology (i.e. high-order transit, autonomous vehicles/trucking) and robotics/artificial intelligence will continue to influence urban development patterns, infrastructure planning and economic growth trends in established and emerging economic sectors. A key objective for Durham Region will be to plan to accommodate growth and change in a manner that advances the Region’s livability in a sustainable manner. Recommendation: Be proactive in anticipating and responding to change, by reporting on and regularly monitoring how evolving real estate market trends, consumer behavior and technological disruption is anticipated to influence development patterns, land use planning and infrastructure investment priorities across the Region. It is recommended 527,623 584,304 626,607 713,300 755,000 795,600 835,400 874,400 913,200 665,834 715,000 804,000 902,000 997,000 1,090,000 1,193,000 1,300,000 300,000 500,000 700,000 900,000 1,100,000 1,300,000 1,500,000 2001 2006 2011 2016 2021 2026 2031 2036 2041 2046 2051Total Population (Including Undercount)YearHistoricalGGH Growth Forecasts to 2051 Technical Report (2020)M.O.F. Summer 2020 Durham Region Population Forecast (2020) Source: Historical data (2001 to 2016) from Statistics Canada Census.Forecast by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2020. Note: Population includes the net Census undercout. Numbers have been rounded. - 342 - 30 Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 that the Region incorporate results and outcomes of the GMS in its regular monitoring of growth trends. Particular focus should be given to the influence of evolving real estate market trends and disruptive forces on housing demand by location, tenure and structure type, as well as employment growth and non-residential building space requirements by sector. 4.3 Linking Housing Choice and Economic Development In accordance with the 2016 Census, Durham Region had a total of 227,900 occupied residential dwelling units. Historically, low-density housing has comprised the majority of total dwellings units in the Region. In 2016, 72% of housing was low-density dwellings (single and semi-detached) compared to 14% for medium- (townhouses, rowhouses) and 13% for high-density (condominium and rental apartments) units. The share of low-density dwellings in the Region has been declining over the past 15 years with an increasing percentage of new dwellings comprised of medium- and high-density housing forms. Durham Region has a strong tradition of home ownership with approximately 81% (approximately 185,000 units) of housing units defined as owner occupied.21 Durham Region’s owner-occupied households are largely comprised of freehold ground-oriented housing units, including detached dwellings and townhouses. Within the context of the broader regional market area, average housing prices for new detached units in Durham Region (average of $920,000 in 2019) are among the lowest when compared with the other GTHA municipalities. As further described in Figure 10 below, new housing prices are substantially higher in other GTA municipalities, averaging in the City of Toronto $1.9 million, York Region $1.7 million, Halton Region $1.6 million, and Peel Region $1.3 million. Durham Region offers greater market choice of new detached homes at various price points compared to most other upper-tier/single-tier municipalities examined within the broader regional market area. However, the surrounding municipalities in the GGH Outer Ring also generate competition for Durham with respect to low-density housing demand, which are not included in Figure 10. 21 2016 Statistics Canada Census. Durham Region offers greater market choice of new detached homes at various price points compared to other upper-tier/single-tier municipalities examined within the broader regional market area. - 343 - 31 Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 Figure 10 Absorbed Single Detached Units by Price Range, GTA Upper/Single-Tier Municipalities, 2018 Over the past two decades, Durham Region has also experienced strong growth related to both medium-density (townhomes, apartments in duplexes) and high-density (apartments) development. Between 2016 and 2021, it is anticipated that approximately 6,200 med ium-density and 6,500 high-density housing units will be added to Durham’s housing base, representing approximately 60% of total estimated housing growth over this period. During the previous five-year period (2011 to 2016) medium and high-density housing development represented just 40% of total housing growth. Since 2011, a notable share of residential development activity has been accommodated within the built-up area (BUA) reinforcing that there is a growing market for higher density residential intensification. Since 2011, the Region’s share of residential development activity within the BUA has remained steady, from 49% in 2011 to 2013 to 50% in 2017 to 2019. The Durham Region ROP, reflecting the 2006 Growth Plan, currently targets 40% of housing growth within the BUA (i.e. intensification) from 2006 to 2031. This equals a total of approximately 65,000 units to be accommodated within the BUA over this period. The Region appears to be on track to exceed the overall intensification target of 40% for all housing development accommodated over the 2006 to 2031 period, having achieved 46% intensification over the 2011 to 2019 period. It is important to note, however, that over the 2011 to 2019 period, Durham Region accommodated a notable amount of ground-oriented housing within the BUA through the buildout of plans of subdivision that were captured in the BUA as of 2006. As opportunities to accommodate ground-oriented housing within the BUA continue to diminish, there will - 344 - 32 Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 be an increasing reliance on redevelopment and infill for high-density development, as well as gentle intensification in stable residential neighbourhoods, in order to achieve the forecasted rate of residential intensification. From a land supply perspective, significant residential intensification opportunities exist within Durham Region’s SGAs including Urban Growth Centres, Regional Centres, MTSAs and Regional Corridors. These areas offer opportunities to accommodate a range of medium and high-density housing that is aligned with transit infrastructure and amenity rich environments. However, not all Strategic Growth Areas have the same potential for accommodating growth. The intensification analysis will provide recommendations on which SGAs can best accommodate growth and complete communities, aligned with infrastructure and servicing. Durham Region is served by a well-established GO rail commuter system with 4 existing and 4 future stations around which MTSAs will be centred. Provincial policy directs that development and/or redevelopment in MTSAs locations along Priority Transit Corridors is required to meet a minimum density target of 150 jobs and persons per ha. It is recognized that Durham Region’s Employment Areas within MTSA are anticipated to undergo transformative change over the long-term. Efforts which encourage transformative change in MTSAs should be supported where appropriate. Durham’s MTSAs represents a significant opportunity to accommodate future employment growth in a more diversified capacity. The Region’s MTSAs and other Strategic Growth Areas offer strong market attributes to accommodate a large portion of the Region’s office and mixed-use development opportunities over the long-term. - 345 - 33 Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 Figure 11 Durham Region Share of Building Permits within Built Boundary by Housing Density (New Units Only), 2011-2019 As the Region’s population grows, providing affordable and appropriate housing for residents across all life stages will be an ongoing challenge. Between 2021 and 2051, approximately 219,600 new households are forecast across the Region, largely within existing and future urban areas. As Durham continues to mature, new housing development activity is anticipated to densify, with a greater share of new housing development occurring through more compact medium - and high-density housing forms. To accommodate future residents in Durham, there is also a need to develop new and innovative approaches to housing development that are pedestrian-oriented and transit-supportive. This includes options which provide greater opportunities for mixed -use development planned within intensification nodes and corridors, including secondary units live/work units and a range of affordable housing opportunities. To maintain well-balanced and healthy communities and ensure long-term sustainability, it is vital that Durham Region continue to offer a wide range of housing options to a broad range of income groups and life stages. This includes provision for rental and affordable housing. The availability of housing is a key factor in attracting and retaining people and businesses to a community. To support an emerging knowledge-based environment, the ability to attract, cultivate, and retain talented workers is increasingly important and dependant on a diverse house stock. 90%97%97%95% 53% 19% 41%39%31%22%17%24% 49% 38% 50%46% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% 2011-2013 2014-2016 2017-2019 2011-2019Share of BUilding Permit Acitivity (%)Period High Density Medium Density Low Density Total Source: Building permit data provided by Durham Region. Derived by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2020.Note: Secondary suites are captured as high density units. - 346 - 34 Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 Addressing the interconnection between the Region’s competitive economic position and its longer-term housing needs by market segment is critical in realizing the Region’s future forecast population and employment growth potential as well as the Region’s ultimate goals related to prosperity, opportunity, and livability.22 This approach recognizes that the accommodation of skilled labour and the attraction of new businesses are inextricably linked and positively reinforce one another. To ensure that economic growth is not constrained by future labour shortages, effort will be required by Durham Region and its area municipalities to continue to explore ways to attract and accommodate new skilled working residents to the Region across a diverse range of employment opportunities, including through a broad choice of housing options. Attraction efforts must also be linked to housing accommodation (both ownership and rental), infrastructure, municipal services, and amenities, as well as quality of life attributes that appeal to the younger mobile population, while not detracting from the Region’s attractiveness to older population segments. Recommendation: Through the Housing Strategy and Employment Strategy, reflect that the accommodation of skilled labour and the attraction of new businesses are inextricably linked and positively reinforce one another. As an outcome of the GMS, provide recommendations on how to attract and accommodate new skilled working residents to the Region within a broad range of housing options by type, location, tenure and affordability. Recommendation: Through the Durham GMS and MCR, prioritize growth and further infrastructure investment within SGAs and other priority intensification areas that align with current and planned servicing and transit/transportation networks. Recommendation: Through the Durham GMS and MCR, consider appropriate policies that prioritize and promote office and mixed-use development within SGAs, including MTSAs and UGCs, as well in other appropriate areas of the Region. This includes ensuring that planning policies and regulations are supportive of intensification initiatives and the economic objectives of the Region. Where gaps exist between planning policy objectives and market demand regarding mixed-use and office development, the Region should also explore utilizing financial tools/incentives to facilitate development where fiscally sustainable. 22 Durham Region Strategic Plan. 2020-2024. Region of Durham. Economic attraction efforts must be linked to housing accommodation (both ownership and rental), infrastructure, municipal services, and amenities, as well as quality of life attributes that appeal to the younger mobile population, while not detracting from the Region’s attractiveness to older population segments. - 347 - 35 4.4 Planning for Existing and Future Generations Planning for Millennials and Generation Z The average age of the population base in Durham Region is getting older, due to the large concentration of Baby Boomers 23 within the Region. The aging of the Regional population base further reinforces the need to attract younger age groups to the Region, particularly those characterized as Millennials and Generation Z as well as any subsequent generations.24 Millennials are typically defined as the segment of the population which reached adulthood during the 2000s. While there is no standard age group associated with the Millennial generation, persons born between 1980 and 1992 (currently 27 to 39 years of age) best fit the definition of this age group. Millennials represent a large cohort in Canada, rivaling the Baby Boomer generation in terms of size and impacts on the real estate market and labour force base. As of 2016, Millennials comprise approximately 17% of the Region of Durham population. 25 Based on recent survey data, 62% of Millennials prefer to live in mixed-use environments that urban centres offer which includes proximity to amenities and employment.26 Millennials also tend to have a higher preference to live in more compact environments which offer a short distance to work and place a higher preference for walkability and access to public transit.27 Generation Z, the cohort which directly follows the Millennial Generation is now entering the real estate and labour market. Demographers and researchers typically use 23 Baby Boomers are generally defined as those born between 1946 and 1964. 24 Millennials are generally defined as those born between 1980 and 1992. For the purposes of this study, we have assumed that those born between 1993 and 2005 comprise Generation Z. 25 Statistics Canada, 2016 Census. 26 Millennials – Breaking the Myths, Nielsen, 2014 27 Emerging Trends in Real Estate, Canadian Edition, PwC and ULI, 2014. Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 The average age of the population base in Durham Region is getting older, due to the large concentration of Baby Boomers within the Region. The aging of the Regional population base further reinforces the need to attract younger age groups to the Region, particularly those characterized as Millennials and Generation Z as well as other future generations. - 348 - 36 the mid-1990s to mid-2000s as starting birth years to describe the Generation Z cohort. As of 2016, the Generation Z population comprises approximately 14% of the Region of Durham population base.28 Over the next several decades, Generation Z is anticipated to place increased demand on medium and high-density ownership and rental housing. Millennials and Generation Z will have an impact on the nature of future employment growth, which will be increasingly driven by the knowledge-based economy. From a planning and economic development perspective, both Millennials and Generation Z will continue to serve as a catalyst for both growth and change related to future office, retail, institutional and industrial developments across Durham. The extent to which Durham can capitalize on potential demand from these demographic groups is subject to a number of economic and socio-economic variables (e.g. relative housing costs/affordability, local and regional employment opportunities, fuel costs, lifestyle preferences, local amenities, community services and perceived quality of life). Continuing to Plan for Older Generations As of 2016 Baby Boomers comprise 24% of the Region’s population base. As of 2020, this age group is between 56 and 74 years of age.29 As the Region’s Baby Boom population continues to age, the percentage of seniors, particularly older seniors (i.e. seniors 75 years of age and older) is anticipated to steadily increase over the 2016 to 2051 forecast period. From 2001 to 2016, the Region’s 75+ population grew at an annual rate of 4.1%.30 Over the 2016 and 2051 period, the annual population growth rate for the 75+ age group is forecasted to remain strong at 3.7%. This demographic trend is anticipated to be largely driven by the aging of the Region’s existing population, as opposed to net-migration of older residents into the Region.31 Not only is the Baby Boom age group large in terms of its population share in Durham Region, it is also diverse with respect to age, income, health, mobility, and lifestyle/life stage. When planning for the needs of older adults, it is important to consider these diverse physical and socio-economic characteristics relative to younger age groups. On average, seniors, particularly those in the 75+ age group, have less mobility, less disposable income, and typically require increased health care compared to younger seniors (65-74 age group) and other segments of the younger working-age population. Typically, these characteristics associated with the 75+ age group drive the demand for relatively higher density housing forms (e.g. apartments and seniors’ homes) that are in proximity to urban amenities (e.g. hospitals/health care facilities, amenities, and other community services geared towards older seniors). Overwhelmingly, existing literature and commentary regarding the housing needs of older Canadians suggests that a large percentage of seniors will “age in place”; that 28 Statistics Canada, 2016 Census. 29 Statistics Canada, 2016 Census. 30 Ibid. 31 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. 2020. Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 - 349 - 37 Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 is, to continue to live in their current home and/or community for as long as possible even if their health changes.32 While there is strong rationale to support “aging in place” as a general concept, it is important to address the current characteristics of the Regional housing stock occupied by older adults (i.e. house size, built-form, location and amenities) against the socio-economic characteristics of older residents in the Region of Durham (i.e. household income, housing affordability, mobility, health, etc.) The overarching message around “aging in place” is that seniors require choice as well as access to services and amenities regarding their living arrangements.33 This could include creating new housing through infill or intensification in established areas which can facilitate “aging in place” by providing housing options which allow seniors to remain in their communities when responding to life changes.34 Recommendation: Through the Housing Strategy, reflect the continued need to accommodate and plan for older generations while also attracting younger adults and new generations by increasing the market choice of housing available within Durham Region by housing structure type. Recommendation: Through the Durham GMS and MCR, consider policies, programs and initiatives that support a broad range of new housing options for all ages and income groups. This should include rental apartments, condominiums and entry-level townhome products (e.g. back-to-back townhomes and stacked-townhomes and apartments) for younger adults as well as a range of housing products, including seniors’ housing, to accommodate older adults. Promoting Investment Readiness and Competitiveness Notwithstanding the long-term economic growth potential that exist across the GGH, and more specifically Durham Region, domestic and international competition for business development and investment is increasing in today’s “new economy.” As previously mentioned, Durham Region faces a number of challenges regarding its competitive position on a global and national scale, in which it has limited control. At the more regional level, Durham Region faces stiff regional competition with its neighbouring municipalities for business attraction and investment. In 2019, the Region of Durham completed a Competitiveness Study, which provided a comprehensive assessment of current industrial and office market conditions and trends, market readiness and competitiveness, and relative competitiveness in key target industry sectors to its key competitors within the broader regional market area. The results of this study indicate that Durham ranks as one of the more competitive upper/single-tier municipalities in the GGH with respect to investment in the five industry sectors profiled – agri-business, health industries, digital media, EN3 and advanced manufacturing. Its competitive advantages are well suited for increased investment in 32 Canadian Housing Observer 2011. CMCH. 2011. 33 The Meaning of “Aging in Place” to Older People. The Gerontologist, Vol. 52, No. 3, 2012. 34 Housing for Older Canadians: The Definitive Guide to the Over-55 Market. CMCH. Canada. 2012. Pg. 18. - 350 - 38 the agricultural/agri-food sector (food processing), digital media sector, and the EN3 industry. Its competitive disadvantages do limit its investment opportunities in health industries and advanced manufacturing when compared to other GTHA municipalities that tend to have larger established clusters and supply chains in these sectors. Durham competes directly for business attraction and investment with other communities within the regional market area and beyond. This is particularly true for “export-based” industrial sectors which are typically accommodated within Employment Areas.35 A major factor influencing the future competitiveness of the Region’s economic base is the structure and quality of its Employment Areas. Employment Areas typically include a broad range of light, medium and heavy industrial lands, business parks and rural industrial lands. Employment Areas accommodate primarily export-based employment sectors, including a wide range of industrial uses (e.g. manufacturing, distribution/logistics, transportation services), as well as specific commercial e.g. office, service, ancillary/accessory retail) which are generally secondary and support the industrial/business function. In order for the Region of Durham to continue to be competitive and attractive to a broad range of industrial and commercial sectors, the Region will need to ensure that it offers a sufficient supply and market choice of municipally serviced lands in Employment Areas. Most notably, this should include a diverse supply of sites in terms of location and size (e.g. ranging from 1 hectare to up to 25+ hectares) with good transportation access and proximity to major highway interchanges as well as other local/regional transportation infrastructure. In September 2020, Regional Council approved Durrham’s Emloyment Land Servicing Strategy. The Region is working to accelerate employment land development by prioritizing sewer and water planning and capital works projects for employment areas. Annual reports will be prepared to update Council on progress of the recommended work elements, including new recommendations for next steps as detailed design and development proceeds for the projects identified, and report on the outcomes of Regional investment and supporting efforts to encourage economic development in designated employment areas. 4.5 Planning for Employment Areas Lands designated as Employment Areas in the Durham Region Official Plan are intended to be used for clusters of business and economic activities, including, but not limited to, manufacturing, warehousing, offices and associated retail and ancillary facilities.36 As previously mentioned, structural changes in the broader economy are altering the nature of economic activities in Employment Areas and impacting the built 35 Export-based employment sectors represent industries that produce goods and services to markets primarily outside Durham Region’s retail trade area. 36 A Place to Grow. Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe Office Consolidation 2020. Pg. 70. Provincial Policy Statement, 2020. Pg. 43. Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 - 351 - 39 Final Draft: Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 11th, 2021 form and composition of these lands. Recently, market demand and real estate development in Employment Areas has been driven by growth in the knowledge-based or “creative class” economies, including employment sectors such as advanced manufacturing, professional, scientific and technical services, cleantech, biotech, digital entertainment, robotics, information and culture, health care and education. The nature of traditional industrial processes is also rapidly shifting, becoming more capital/technology intensive and automated, often with lower labour requirements. Driven by an increasing emphasis on innovation and technology these evolving and emerging export-based sectors have siting, space and built-form requirements that are significantly different from traditional industrial sectors which have occupied Employment Areas across Durham Region in the past. This may include requirements related to telecommunications infrastructure, transit access, energy efficiency, building and urban design standards, eco-industrial design principles and labour force access. Site configuration and integration of uses is also evolving particularly in prestige Employment Areas which often integrate operations combining office, research and development, warehousing and logistics, and on-site manufacturing in a “campus-style” setting. With the recent structural changes in the regional economy, there has been a shift in how Employment Areas are planned and developed. “Place-making” is increasingly recognized as an important planning component in creating diverse and vibrant communities, which in turn can help attract local population and job growth providing that other necessary infrastructure requirements are met.37 For Employment Areas, this is particularly relevant for light industrial and office commercial environments which integrate ancillary retail uses and other supportive amenities, with public open space and other civic infrastructure. Recognizing that structural changes in the global economy will continue to be accelerated by technological advancements and innovation, municipalities must be increasingly responsive and adaptive to changing industry needs and disruptive forces. Looking forward over the next several decades, Durham Region’s land-use planning and economic development policies must monitor, anticipate and reflect the evolving needs of businesses across a diverse range industry sectors and sizes. These policies must also offer a degree of flexibility and nimbleness that allows for relatively rapid responses to unforeseen changes, which can be a critical competitive advantage relative to competitive markets. Recommendation: Through the Employment Strategy, assess the current composition of Employment Areas, including size, distribution and servicing status, and determine future employment land need. 37 Place-making is a process of creating unique, quality locations, places or spaces that possess a strong sense of place. With respect to places of work, the concept of placemaking is often encompasses the attraction knowledge-based workers and businesses with an emphasis on collaboration, connection, and innovation. - 352 - 40 Recommendation: Through the Durham GMS and MCR, ensure that Durham continues to offer a competitive array of land within Employment Areas, by designating an appropriate quantum of land and including ROP policies to regularly monitor and maintain a sufficient supply of shovel-ready vacant lands across a diverse range parcel sizes and locations within Employment Areas (equivalent to a minimum five-years of forecast Regional demand).38 Recommendation: Through the Employment Strategy, consider the importance of place-making for Employment Areas, including implementing appropriate policies. 4.6 Promoting the Rural Economy The majority of Durham’s regional land base is rural (84%), which supports a significant and productive agricultural, tourism, resource and growing creative sector. In 2019, the population of the rural area was 54,000 largely located in the northern two thirds of Durham Region. These rural areas are comprised of small communities, protected landscapes, resource assets, and agricultural lands. Some of the traditional key economic sectors in rural areas include: agricultural inputs and services, environmental services, hospitality and tourism, aggregate extraction, and paper and packaging. Emerging sectors which may be concentrated in rural areas include food processing and manufacturing, livestock processing, and transportation and logistics. Agricultural activities are significant to the Durham Region economy. Further development and investment in the agri-business and food processing industry provides an opportunity to deepen agricultural activity and increase productivity by providing value-added products and services. Rural areas also provide opportunities for strengthening Durham’s tourism economy through agri-tourism, which includes on-farm uses which can include such uses as wineries and breweries. Other rural tourism opportunities include recreation and outdoor facilities such as golf courses, parks, conservation areas, and major trail systems. Specialty retail in rural communities like Uxbridge and Port Perry, and accommodations concentrated in rural areas such as inns, B&Bs and campgrounds, also contribute to the tourism economy. Durham offers a balance between urban and rural communities, with urban development concentrated in the southern portion of the Region along the Lake Ontario shoreline. Given the rural context and built-form of Durham’s northern Urban Areas, there is less opportunity for medium and high-density development. However, population and employment growth is anticipated to occur, at a context appropriate scale. The agri-food sector in Durham varies by geographic area, and economic trends must be considered by local municipality. Innovative solutions are required to prevent urban development from negatively impacting agriculture in the south and to spread prosperity to the north. 38 “Shovel ready” lands reflect designated and zoned developable vacant employment lands that have necessary municipal servicing (i.e. water/sewer (where applicable) to the property line and would be available for development by an end user immediately or within 6 months. Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 - 353 - 41 Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 The key challenges which need to be taken into consideration for the future growth of Durham’s rural and tourism economy include: •Loss of vital land and the increasing price of farmland being driven by thepurchase of large holdings for non-farm residential dwellings; •Trends in locating farm processing plants further away from urban areas asurban development begins to expand to the north; •Addressing Surplus farm dwellings; •Challenges in transporting goods to market due to Durham’s location on the eastside of the GGH, with an increased distance to international airports and the USBorder; •A lack of access to highspeed broadband poses a significant challenge forbusinesses in rural areas; •Conflict between urban and agricultural trucks on shared roads; and, •The relationship between agri-tourism supporting job growth in rural areas. Providing farmers with the opportunity to open on-farm agri-tourism and/or culinary tourism experiences is a strong potential tourism opportunity for Durham’s rural areas. Maintaining a policy framework for which lands may be utilized for agriculture, agri-tourism, and other aspects of the rural economy such as extracting resources and aggregates, will serve to guide long-term population and employment growth to Durham’s rural areas. As previously mentioned, the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in a growing dependence on digital communication and staying connected via video conferencing and social media. Growth in online activity and reliance on digital communication may be utilized as an opportunity to invest in the expansion of high-speed internet and reliable broadband connectivity to Durham’s rural areas in order to assist farmers and local businessowners. An improvement in the speed and reliability of broadband may also provide farmers and residents living in rural areas with a greater sense of connectivity to the urban areas of Durham on a digital platform. Recommendation: Through the Employment Strategy, reflect the maintenance and growth of a strong rural economy in Durham Region. Recommendation: Through the MCR, continue to emphasize through ROP policies the importance of growth in the rural economy, including the agriculture, resources, and, agri-tourism sectors. Maintain a policy framework identifying which lands are part of the rural system and may be appropriate for agriculture, agri-tourism, and aggregate extraction, as well as other uses. These policy directions should also build on strengthening the already present tourism industry in Durham’s rural economy, by promoting opportunities for farmers to operate agri-tourism uses on agricultural lands. 4.7 Aligning Growth with Significant Infrastructure Investment Durham Region is responsible for planning and maintaining major infrastructure systems, including water and wastewater, transit, and regional roads. Regional infrastructure provision serves existing residents and businesses and must be - 354 - 42 Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 expanded and upgraded over time in order to enable new population and employment growth in accordance with the Durham ROP. To accommodate the Region’s long-term population and employment forecasts, significant investments in water, wastewater, and transit infrastructure will be required across the Region in both greenfield and intensification areas. Given the level of infrastructure investment required to accommodate anticipated long-term residential and non-residential development, Durham Region will need to ensure that the prioritization and staging of capital is well aligned with anticipated real estate market trends, the anticipated level of demand, regional structure, and policy goals. It is recognized that if major capital projects are not well-aligned with market demand, the Region will be at increased financial risk. This potential for risk could increase with a prolonged economic downturn and/or slow economic recovery resulting from COVID-19. As experienced through the economic downturn of 2008/2009, this would result in reduced revenue associated with slower growth and lower revenues required to pay for growth-related capital. In turn, delays to major infrastructure investment would potentially reduce the Region’s competitive position relative to the broader regional market area by further limiting new opportunities for new business development and housing choice. To minimize these financial risks, there is a need to align near-term development priorities with locations that offer development capacity within existing infrastructure. Recommendation: Through the GMS and MCR, incorporate an integrated approach to land-use planning, servicing, and financial management within the broader context of Regional growth management. Prioritize growth in areas that make efficient use of existing and planned regional infrastructure. Recommendation: Growth strategies and related ROP policies should be crafted in a manner that is less prescriptive and more outcome focused in order to be more adaptative, and resilient to rapid changes in technology and continued structural shifts in the regional economy. This is of particular importance when planning for Employment Areas within MTSAs. 4.8 Measuring Performance Against Broader Growth Management Objectives While achieving a strong long-term population and employment growth rate is an important indicator of overall performance for Durham Region, it is also necessary to weigh this quantitative measure against other broader community building goals related to housing, neighbourhood design, transportation, environment, health, social engagement, financial sustainability, and opportunity. Achieving these goals requires a long-term vision with respect to the management of the Region’s urban and rural communities, places of work, rural lands, and protected countryside. Recommendation: Durham Region should continue to plan growth in a manner that builds on the guiding principles of the Growth Plan 2019 and recognizes the importance of enhanced livability, mobility and economic opportunity in the region to successfully achieve sustainable growth. - 355 - 43 Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 5.0 Conclusions A broad range of factors related to macro-economics as well as federal and provincial policy will continue to have a strong influence on the Region’s performance with respect to population and employment growth. Travel restrictions due to COVID-19 are also anticipated to keep near-term (i.e. 2020 and 2021) immigration levels across Canada, including Durham Region, below recent historical averages. While it is important to understand the implications of these macro-economic factors and policy trends, it is also important to recognize that the Region has limited control to influence many of these inputs when planning for its future growth. In contrast, Durham Region does have considerable control to influence its competitive position by focusing on the interconnection between local job creation, housing choice, and liveability. This is becoming increasingly relevant during the current pandemic and will be particularly pertinent in the post-pandemic period, as continued structural changes in the economy and technological disruption increasingly enable work from home employment opportunities and remote learning. A key objective of both the Provincial Growth Plan and the Durham Region Official Plan is to build healthy and complete communities in a manner that enhances livability and economic prosperity, while protecting what is important to residents and local businesses. These long-term objectives emphasize the importance of measuring performance against quantitative metrics such as population and employment growth, as well as broader city-building objectives related to housing choice, mobility, environment, health, equity and fin ancial sustainability. With these broad Regional building objectives in mind, “place-making” is increasingly recognized as an important planning component in creating diverse and vibrant communities with emphasis on quality of life, which in turn can help attract local population and job growth. Looking forward, the key opportunity - but also challenge - for Durham Region will be to plan for accommodating growth in a manner which preserves the Region’s livability and is sustainable from a triple-bottom line perspective. To do so, the Region must be proactive in anticipating and responding to change by continually monitoring and measuring how evolving real estate market trends, consumer behavior, and technological disruption is anticipated to influence development patterns and infrastructure investment priorities across the Region. “Place-making” is increasingly recognized as an important planning component in creating diverse and vibrant communities while increasing the competitiveness and ability of the Region to attract and accommodate growth. - 356 - 44 Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 15th, 2021 Given the level of infrastructure investment required to accommodate anticipated long-term residential and non-residential development across Durham Region, the Region will need to ensure that the prioritization and staging of Regional infrastructure investment is well-aligned with identified planning priorities, which are informed by anticipated real estate market trends. It is recognized that if major capital projects are not well-aligned wi th identified planning priorities, the Region will be at risk from a resiliency and financial perspective. This potential risk could increase with a prolonged economic downturn and/or slow economic recovery resulting from COVID-19, reduced revenue associated with slower growth, and lower revenues required to pay for growth-related capital. In turn, delays to major infrastructure investment would reduce the Region’s competitive position relative to the broader Regional market area by limiting new business development and housing choice. In reviewing and considering the overall regional structure, it will be important to identify the areas which have the greatest potential to accommodate growth along with their potential for place making (in existing and new planned communities) and, enhanced mobility and infrastructure investment. This includes a review of Urban Growth Centres, MTSAs, Regional Centres, and Regional Corridors to identify and plan in an integrated way for development and infrastructure requirements in Strategic Growth Areas. Finally, through a balanced approach that incorporates economic and real estate market demand factors against broad Provincial and Regional planning interests, the Region will be best equipped to identify where investment priorities are highest. The Region will also need to identify where financial incentives and planning tools are potentially needed to stimulate residential and non-residential development activity, especially where market forces alone are not delivering a desired outcome. 6.0 Next Steps The Growth Opportunities and Challenges Report should be regarded as a summary of initial analysis to set the stage for the Growth Management Study’s Technical Briefing Papers and supporting documentation to the Final Land Needs Assessment Recommendation Report. The content and recommendations provided in this report may also inform the Envision Durham process and emerging policy directions. The next steps for the Durham Growth Management Study are as follows: Complete the following LNA related analysis: •Region-wide Growth Analysis and Forecast to 2051 •Intensification Analysis •Employment Land Analysis, including Employment Conversion Analysis •Designated Greenfield Density Analysis - 357 - 45 Final Draft: Growth Opportunities and Challenges – January 11th, 2021 •Land Needs Assessment These concurrent streams of analysis will be summarized and reported in the following Technical Briefs, anticipated to be completed between January and March 2021: •Region-wide Growth Analysis •Housing Strategy •Employment Strategy •Community Land Needs Assessment The Durham Growth Management Study outcomes will be synthesized in a Final Land Needs Assessment and Recommendations Report, expected to be completed in mid-2021. - 358 - Report to Planning & Development Committee Report Number: PLN 31-21 Date: June 7, 2021 From: Kyle Bentley Director, City Development & CBO Subject: Northeast Pickering Area Request for Proposals Particulars for Preparation of a Community Plan for Northeast Pickering Funding Agreement for Consulting Assistance Funding Agreement for a Senior Project Manager - File: D-1100-099 Recommendation: 1. That Council approve the draft “Appendix D – Request for Proposals Particulars Northeast Pickering Community Plan”, which identifies the deliverables, including scope of work, project management, consultation and engagement, and timetable, for the consulting assignment for the preparation of an overall community plan for the Northeast Pickering Area for the consideration of Council, generally as set out in Appendix I to Report PLN 31-21; 2. That Council approve the funding agreement between the North East Pickering Landowners Group Inc. and the City of Pickering, for the hiring of a planning consulting team to prepare a Community Plan for the Northeast Pickering Area, generally as set out in Appendix II to Report PLN 31-21; 3. That Council approve the funding agreement between the North East Pickering Landowners Group Inc. and the City of Pickering, for the hiring of a Senior Project Manager (contract) dedicated to managing the preparation of the overall community plan for the Northeast Pickering Area, generally as set out in Appendix III to Report PLN 31-21; 4. That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the funding agreements subject to any minor refinements acceptable to the Chief Administrative Officer, the Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor and the Director, Finance & Treasurer; 5. That staff be authorized to issue Request for Proposals for the overall Northeast Pickering Community Plan, subject to any minor refinements to the project particulars acceptable to the Director, City Development & CBO and the Director, Economic Development & Strategic Projects, following the execution of the funding agreements and the hiring of the contract Senior Project Manager; 6. That staff report back to Council on the recommended planning consulting team; and 7. That Council authorize the appropriate City officials to undertake the necessary actions required to implement the above recommendations. - 359 - Report PLN 31-21 June 7, 2021 Subject: Northeast Pickering Area Page 2 Executive Summary: Council Resolutions #173/19 and #347-348/20 directed staff to outline a process to initiate a secondary plan for a new proposed community in Northeast Pickering, and to arrange the establishment of a dedicated team with the landowners (see Location Map, Attachment #1, and Pickering Council Resolutions #173/19 and #347-348/20, Attachments #2 and #3). Since that time, a North East Pickering Landowners Group Inc. (NEPLG) has been established. Currently, six landowners comprise the group, although discussions are underway to include other property owners. For the past several months, staff have been having regular meetings with NEPLG representatives to develop a work program for the community planning process, and to establish a terms of reference for the Request for Proposals (RFP) to procure a consultant team to undertake the necessary background and planning studies in support of the vision for this community (see Request for Proposals Particulars Northeast Pickering Community Plan, Appendix I). Also, staff has been working with the NEPLG to secure funding for this initiative. NEPLG has committed to funding the majority of the cost for the consulting team (29 percent is covered by Development Charges; therefore, the NEPLG will be funding 71 percent of the cost). The NEPLG will be fully funding the cost of a 3-year contract City staff member to co-ordinate this project (see Funding Agreement for Northeast Pickering Community Plan Consulting Assistance, Appendix II and Funding Agreement for the Northeast Pickering Senior Project Manager Position, Appendix III). It is recommended that Council approve the Request for Proposals (RFP) Particulars substantially as set out in Appendix I to this Report. The draft funding agreements have been reviewed and approved by the Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor and the Director, Finance & Treasurer. It is recommended that Council approve the funding agreements substantially as set out in Appendices II and III to this Report, and authorize their execution. Further, it is recommended that Council authorize staff to release the RFP, subject to the funding agreements being executed between the NEPLG and the City, and the timing of the contract staff member being hired, and report back to Council with appropriate recommendations. Financial Implications: A planning study for Northeast Pickering is identified in the current 2021 approved budget for Planning & Design with funding to be provided by 71 percent from Landowners and 29 percent from DCs. A full-time, contract Project Manager for Northeast Pickering is identified in the current 2021 approved budget for the Office of the CAO for a total of $155,000. The position is to be funded 100 percent by external sources. The implementation of the recommendations of this report enable funding to be secured from the North East Pickering Landowners Group to: (a) offset 71 percent of the cost of the City retaining the services of a consulting team to undertake an overall community plan for Northeast Pickering community, and (b) offset the full cost of the City hiring a contract Senior Project Manager position (including salary, vacation, benefits, expenses, and equipment (computer, phone, etc.)), for a term of 3 years. - 360 - Report PLN 31-21 June 7, 2021 Subject: Northeast Pickering Area Page 3 Discussion: The planning for the future development of Northeast Pickering area has been underway for the past 4 years (see Location Map, Attachment #1). In response to delegations and submissions from one of the Northeast Pickering landowners (Dorsay Development Corporation), Council passed Resolutions #173/19 and #347-348/20, which included the following actions: • reaffirmed Council’s support for inclusion of the Northeast Pickering lands within an expanded urban area (see Pickering Council Resolution, #140/19); • indicated Council’s support for the proposed community planning principles for Northeast Pickering; • directed staff to outline a process to initiate a secondary plan for the new proposed community in Northeast Pickering; and • requested staff to work with the landowners to establish a dedicated team for this project. Copies of Resolutions #173/19, #347-384/20 and #140/19 are provided as Attachments #2, #3 and #4. In December 2020, the North East Pickering Landowners Group Inc. (the ‘NEPLG’) was established, and as of writing this Report, includes representatives from: • Dorsay Development Corporation; • Stonelake Developments Inc. (Tribute); • Canelli Heights Development Inc. (Greenpark); • Cougs (Lakeridge) Ltd. (Coughlan Homes); • 2750 Highway 7 Inc. (Clark/Ravi); and • Pinebrown Salem Lands Ltd. (the Brown Group). The NEPLG control approximately 40 percent of the lands in Northeast Pickering. The Group has a group manager, a planner, a lawyer, a trustee, and the Group has established a funding mechanism. The NEPLG has revised the community planning principles for Northeast Pickering (which were originally developed by Dorsay Development Corporation, in consultation with City staff), to only ‘consider’, not require, a true-north road configuration, where feasible. The community planning principles form part of the Request for Proposals Particulars (see Appendix I). The NEPLG has committed to funding a 3-year contract staff position for the City to coordinate the community plan process. The NEPLG has also committed to funding 71 percent of the cost of the consulting assistance that the City will require to undertake the community planning process. The remainder of the cost will be funded by Development Charges. The Region of Durham is currently undertaking a Municipal Comprehensive Review of its Official Plan. Through that review process, the need for additional land for urban development is being assessed. Pickering Council is already on record as supporting an expansion to the urban boundary to include Northeast Pickering (see Pickering Council Resolutions #140/19 and #173/19, Attachments #2 and #4). The Region anticipates having its new Official Plan adopted by Regional Council in 2022. The Province is the approval authority for the Region’s new Official Plan. Commencing the community plan process for Northeast Pickering now will allow the Region to be in a position to approve the City’s official plan amendment that will be the outcome of the community plan study. - 361 - Report PLN 31-21 June 7, 2021 Subject: Northeast Pickering Area Page 4 It is recommended that Council approve the Request for Proposals (RFP) Particulars substantially as set out in Appendix I to this Report. It is recommended Council approve the funding agreements, substantially as set out in Appendices II and III to this Report, and authorize their execution. Further, it is recommended that Council authorize staff to release the RFP, subject to the funding agreements being executed between the NEPLG and the City, and the timing of the contract staff member being hired, and report back to Council with appropriate recommendations. Appendices: Appendix I Request for Proposals Particulars Northeast Pickering Community Plan Appendix II Funding Agreement for Northeast Pickering Community Plan Consulting Assistance Appendix III Funding Agreement for the Northeast Pickering Senior Project Manager Position Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Pickering Council Resolution #173/19 3. Pickering Council Resolutions #347-348/20 4. Pickering Council Resolution #140/19 Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Original Signed By Original Signed By Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Kyle Bentley, P. Eng. Chief Planner Director, City Development & CBO Original Signed By Fiaz Jadoon Director, Economic Development & Strategic Projects CR:ld Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Original Signed By Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer - 362 - Appendix I to Report No. PLN 31-21 Request for Proposals Particulars Northeast Pickering Community Plan - 363 - Appendix D – Request for Proposals Particulars Northeast Pickering Community Plan - 364 - Contents A: THE DELIVERABLES ............................................................................. 1 Introduction and Purpose ..................................................................... 1 1.1 Study Area .................................................................................................................... 1 Background ............................................................................................ 1 2.1 Envision Durham .......................................................................................................... 1 2.2 Carruthers Creek Watershed Plan ................................................................................ 2 2.3 Initiating the Community Planning Process .................................................................. 2 Policy Context ........................................................................................ 2 Project Organization and Management ................................................ 2 4.1 City’s Project Manager .................................................................................................. 3 4.2 Consulting Team Project Lead ..................................................................................... 3 4.3 Consulting Team ........................................................................................................... 4 4.4 Steering Committee ...................................................................................................... 4 Scope of Work ....................................................................................... 5 5.1 Phase 1: Develop Work Plan and Confirmation of Vision and Principles ..................... 5 5.1.1 Develop Work Plan .................................................................................. 5 5.1.2 Develop Stakeholder Engagement Strategy ............................................ 5 5.1.3 Confirm Vision and Guiding Principles ..................................................... 6 5.1.4 Lakeridge Health Acute Care Hospital – Request for Information ............ 6 5.2 Phase 2: Background Studies ...................................................................................... 6 5.2.1 Prepare Terms of Reference ................................................................... 6 5.2.2 Undertake Required Background Studies ................................................ 6 Planning Report and Community Master Plan ......................... 6 Community Services and Facilities Study ................................ 7 Transportation Background Analysis ....................................... 7 High Level Background Servicing Analysis ............................. 8 Natural Heritage and Hazard Background Analysis ................. 8 Archeological Assessment ...................................................... 9 Cultural Heritage Analysis ....................................................... 9 Urban Design Guidelines ........................................................ 9 Housing Affordability Strategy ................................................. 9 - 365 - Retail Market Study ............................................................... 10 Agricultural Impact Assessment ............................................ 10 Sustainability Plan ................................................................. 10 Employment Lands Strategy ................................................. 10 5.2.3 Develop Community Structure Plan and Neighbourhood Plan Areas ..... 11 5.3 Phase 3: Refinement of Community Structure Plan & Neighbourhood Plan Areas & Preparation of Draft Official Plan Amendment ......................................................................... 11 5.3.1 Prepare Draft Official Plan Amendment ................................................. 11 5.4 Phase 4: Official Plan Amendment Adoption and Approval........................................ 11 5.4.1 Official Plan Amendment Adoption ........................................................ 11 5.4.2 Official Plan Amendment Regional Approval.......................................... 12 Consultation and Engagement Strategy ............................................ 12 Meetings & Presentations ................................................................... 13 Project Schedule.................................................................................. 14 Considerations .................................................................................... 15 9.1 AODA Compliance and City of Pickering Brand Guidelines ....................................... 15 9.2 Submission of Electronic Documents ......................................................................... 16 Resources ............................................................................................ 16 B: MATERIAL DISCLOSURES ................................................................. 19 C: MANDATORY TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS .................................... 20 D: RATED CRITERIA ................................................................................ 21 Appendices Appendix A: Northeast Pickering Community Plan Study Area Appendix B: Preliminary Vision and Community Design Principles - 366 - Northeast Pickering Community Plan RFP-XX-2021 Appendix D – Request for Proposal Particulars Page 1 A: THE DELIVERABLES Introduction and Purpose The City of Pickering is seeking the professional services of a qualified Consulting Team to prepare a Community Plan (Secondary Plan) and associated background studies for lands in Northeast Pickering. The purpose of the Community Plan is to establish a more detailed planning framework in accordance with the City of Pickering Official Plan and Durham Region Official Plan. The Northeast Pickering Community Plan (NPCP) work program will be undertaken as the background study in support of a City-initiated Official Plan Amendment to the Pickering Official Plan. The Amendment will be a “parent” or “Part One” plan, and as a minimum, contain the vision, the guiding principles, the master plan concept, and implementing policies including directions on secondary plan requirements. The Community Plan work program will be undertaken in cooperation with the City of Pickering, the Region of Durham, and in consultation with the public, agencies and other stakeholders. A final work plan shall be prepared by the successful Consulting Team prior to commencement of the Community Planning (Secondary Plan) process. 1.1 Study Area The Northeast Pickering Community Plan (NPCP) Area encompasses approximately 1,600 ha (4,000 acres) in Northeast Pickering. The lands are situated in northeast Pickering, generally north of Highway 7, south of Concession Road 8, west of Lake Ridge Road, and east of Westney Road. The extent of the Community Plan is identified in Appendix A as the Northeast Pickering Lands. Background As part of the Region’s previous Municipal Comprehensive Review, some of the lands in northeast Pickering were recommended for urban development. However, when the Minister of Municipal Affairs & Housing approved the Region’s Official Plan Amendment #128, the Minister did not support the inclusion of the lands at that time. The Minister added policy 7.3.11 p) to the Regional Official Plan that reads as follows: “where a comprehensive review of this Plan includes consideration of lands for Urban Area expansion within the City of Pickering east of the Pickering Airport lands, outside of the Greenbelt Plan, the following additional matters will be assessed and evaluated at that time: i) the amount and rate of development that has occurred in the Seaton Community; and ii) the preparation and completion of a watershed plan update for the East Duffins and Carruthers Creek watersheds.” 2.1 Envision Durham The Region is currently undertaking Envision Durham a Municipal Comprehensive Review of the Regional Official Plan to ensure conformity of the Official Plan with the policies of the - 367 - Northeast Pickering Community Plan RFP-XX-2021 Appendix D – Request for Proposal Particulars Page 2 Growth Plan. A key component of the Envision Durham background studies includes a Growth Management Study (GMS). The Region’s GMS is being completed in two phases. The first focuses on the completion of a Land Needs Assessment (LNA). The LNA is a comprehensive review and calculation of the Region’s land base, including existing urban areas, to determine how the Growth Plan population and employment forecasts can be accommodated and how much, if any, additional urban land is required. The second, focused on determining the most appropriate location for Urban Boundary expansions. As part of the GMS, the Region will be considering the Northeast Pickering lands for Settlement Area Expansion (refer to Durham Region Report 2020-P-15). The GMS will provide the appropriate analysis of the Seaton Community to satisfy subsection i) of policy 7.3.11 p) of the Regional Official Plan. 2.2 Carruthers Creek Watershed Plan Furthermore, the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) initiated a review of the Carruthers Creek Watershed Plan in 2015. The draft watershed plan, was released for public review and comment on March 2020. City staff prepared comments on the draft Watershed Plan (see Pickering Report PLN 16-20). The City of Pickering’s Planning & Development Committee approved the recommendations of the Report on September 24, 2020. The public comment period closed March 19, 2021. Feedback will be incorporated into an updated draft, which will be presented to Durham Regional Council. The final Carruthers Creek Watershed Plan will satisfy the requirements of subsection ii) of policy 7.3.11 p). 2.3 Initiating the Community Planning Process Prior to commencing a Work Program for the NPCP, City staff must report to Council on the Work Program and receive Council’s authorization to proceed. This is building on Resolution #173/19 from the November 25, 2019 Council Meeting, see attached modified Principles in Appendix B. The NPCP will be a prototypical community focused on the mental and physical well-being of its residents and the sustainability of its natural environment. This will be accomplished through ground-breaking approaches to environmental and social place-making, healthy living practices, and community resiliency. The NPCP is conceptualized and realized through a holistically planned community that is Complete, Thriving (sustainable) and Connected (smart).” Policy Context The Community Plan must conform with and be consistent with all applicable policies and land use planning requirements of the City of Pickering, Region of Durham, and Province of Ontario. The City of Pickering Official Plan should serve as the starting point for this analysis. Project Organization and Management The City of Pickering is looking for a superior interdisciplinary Consulting Team to undertake the - 368 - Northeast Pickering Community Plan RFP-XX-2021 Appendix D – Request for Proposal Particulars Page 3 Northeast Pickering Community Planning Program. The Consulting Team’s Project Lead and City’s Project Manager will have experience in coordinating major multidisciplinary projects of a similar scope and scale, exercise strong financial control, integrate and inform work underway through related studies by others, and creatively address competing interests. The Consulting Team will demonstrate strong leadership skills and a commitment to implementing a model of sustainable development. The Consulting Team will bring expertise in sustainable community development, urban design, housing, retail market assessment, parks and recreation, transportation, engineering, planning, landscape ecology, communication, consultation and engagement, report writing and drafting policy. The Consulting Team, in collaboration with the City of Pickering, will be responsible for establishing the Work Program and the necessary studies and consultation required to produce the Northeast Pickering Community Plan. The Community Plan will be led by the Consulting Team’s Project Lead and conducted by the Consulting Team. A Project Manager assigned from the City of Pickering will manage the Community Plan process and oversee the Consulting Team’s Project Lead and the Consulting Team. A Steering Committee will provide strategic direction and will consist of representatives from various City departments, agencies, and landowner representatives. The responsibilities of the City’s Project Manager, Consulting Team Project Lead, Consulting Team and Steering Committee are outlined below. 4.1 City’s Project Manager The Community Planning process will be led by the City Development Department who will assign a Project Manager to this process. The Project Manager will be responsible for the supervision of the process ensuring it is carried out to the satisfaction of the City in accordance with this request for proposal, and the Consulting Team’s proposal. The Project Manager will monitor the progress of the process, circulate reports for review and comment, liaise with the Consulting Team’s Project Lead, and exercise budgetary control. The Project Manager is to be: • Kept informed through regular progress meetings with the Consulting Team and Steering Committee for the duration of the Study; • Copied on all correspondence; • Advised of significant problems, issues, options, and solutions considered; • Involved in meetings with the public and stakeholders; • Consulted prior to making any changes to the project schedule; and • Advised of any additional work considered beyond the scope of work (additional work is not to be undertaken without prior written approval by the City’s Project Manager). 4.2 Consulting Team Project Lead The Consulting Team’s Project Lead will make all day-to-day decisions, address requests for information, coordinate the Consulting Team’s work, ensure the process is within budget, and be responsible for all the deliverables outlined in this request for proposal. - 369 - Northeast Pickering Community Plan RFP-XX-2021 Appendix D – Request for Proposal Particulars Page 4 The Project Leader will: • Attend meetings with City staff, the public and stakeholders; • Involve the City’s Project Manager in any meetings with the public, agencies and stakeholders (all liaison with the public and stakeholders by the Company must be approved by the Project Manager); • Prepare agendas, draft meeting notes, and final meeting notes for the Steering Committee meetings and progress meetings; • Provide written responses to questions raised at meetings, as required (the City’s Project Manager is to review and approve responses prior to responding to the public and stakeholders); • Liaise and correspond with the City’s Project Manager to obtain and communicate information related to the Study; • Advise the City’s Project Manager of significant problems/issues and options considered; • Update the City’s Project Manager on a monthly basis on details of the Study; • Co-ordinate project tasks with any related task undertaken by the City; • Prepare and submit reports, drawings and other documentation to the City and obtain comments, and approvals; • Submit progress reports to the City’s Project Manager at least five (5) days prior to any progress meeting; • Prepare for, operate, and follow-up on open houses and other consultations including presentations/displays, and dry-runs; • Record and prepare a summary of comments; and • Receive the City’s Project Manager’s prior written approval for any significant change from the approved project schedule, budget or tasks. 4.3 Consulting Team The Consulting Team shall have the necessary qualifications to undertake the scope of work and deliverables detailed in Section 5.0. 4.4 Steering Committee The Northeast Pickering Steering Committee will be led by the City’s Project Manager and will have senior representation from various City Departments, the Consulting Team Project Lead, Region of Durham, Conservation Authorities, Landowners Group, and other agencies and stakeholders as may be required. The purpose of the Steering Committee is to ensure that all of the major stakeholders in the Community Plan area have a forum and opportunity to make their interests known. The Committee is intended to keep all relevant agencies and organizations up to date on the status up the planning process and timelines for achieving key milestones, as well as to highlight issues and progress that is made on any related studies. The Steering Committee will: • Provide advice and strategic direction to the City and the Consulting Team on the overall Community Plan process; and, - 370 - Northeast Pickering Community Plan RFP-XX-2021 Appendix D – Request for Proposal Particulars Page 5 • Review draft and final meeting notes for Steering Committee meetings. The Steering Committee members will serve as the liaison between their respective agency/organization and the City. Members are responsible for coordinating and representing their agency’s/organization’s position. Scope of Work The NPCPNPCP Work Program is intended to occur in four (4) phases including the following: • Phase 1: Develop Work Plan and Confirmation of Vision and Guiding Principles; • Phase 2: Background Studies, Preliminary Community Structure Plan & Neighbourhood Plan Areas; • Phase 3: Refinement of Community Structure Plan & Neighbourhood Plan Areas & Preparation of Draft Official Plan Amendment; and, • Phase 4: Official Plan Amendment Adoption & Approval Key components of the scope of work required to be undertaken by the Consulting Team as part of each phase is detailed in the subsections below. 5.1 Phase 1: Develop Work Plan and Confirmation of Vision and Principles Phase 1 of the Community Planning Program is intended to occur concurrently with Phase 2 and includes the following key tasks: 5.1.1 Develop Work Plan At the outset of this project, the Consulting Team will be required to develop a W ork Plan, including a chart with key deliverable and meeting milestones, for review and approval by City staff in consultation with the Steering Committee. The Consulting Team’s Work Plan will be based on the Scope of Work detailed in Section 5.0 and the Project Schedule included in Section 8.0 of this document. 5.1.2 Develop Stakeholder Engagement Strategy The Consulting Team will be required to develop a Stakeholder Engagement Strategy with recommended approaches and formats for engaging broad interest and public participation in the Community Plan process (e.g. type of session, required materials etc.). The Strategy at minimum shall include, recommendations for the required Public Consultation Meetings, Statutory Public Meeting and Steering Committee Meetings outlined in Section 7.0. The Strategy shall also clarify the roles and responsibilities of the Project Team. In general, it is expected the Consulting Team will be responsible for preparation, operation and follow-up on open houses and other consultations, including presentations/displays, dry-runs, set-ups, attendance, and compilation of comments. The City will be responsible for preparation and circulation of public notices for the public/stakeholder consultation meetings. Additional consultations with specific stakeholders may be identified through the course of the Study. Further details on the Stakeholder Engagement Strategy are provided in Section 6.0. - 371 - Northeast Pickering Community Plan RFP-XX-2021 Appendix D – Request for Proposal Particulars Page 6 5.1.3 Confirm Vision and Guiding Principles The Consulting Team will be required to facilitate visioning sessions with key stakeholders and the public. The sessions are intended to aid the City in confirming an overall vision and guiding principles for the NPCP, as well as to support the development of a Community Structure Plan and Neighbourhood Plan Areas. This task includes six (6) Public Consultation Session as identified in Section 7.0. The Vision and Community Design Principles included as Appendix B should form the preliminary basis of this exercise and shall be refined by the Consulting Team, in consultation with the City, as a result of stakeholder and public engagement. 5.1.4 Lakeridge Health Acute Care Hospital – Request for Information The Consulting Team is to use a $20,000 total budget allotment (excluding HST) to assist the City of Pickering’s Hospital Task Force with the completion of the necessary Lakeridge Health Request for Information (RFI) and/or Request for Proposal (RFP) processes associated with a new acute care hospital site selection within Durham Region. It is the understanding, that Lakeridge Health will be undertaking a RFI and/or RFP process for the new acute care hospital site located within Durham Region. In addition to the budget allotment, the Consulting Team is to include appropriate tasks within the Work Plan to include address the potential for a hospital site located within the NPCP. 5.2 Phase 2: Background Studies Phase 2 of the Community Planning Program includes the following key tasks: 5.2.1 Prepare Terms of Reference The initial step of the Phase 2 Work Program involves the preparation of detailed Terms of Reference for required studies, circulation of draft Terms of Reference to the Steering Committee for review and comment, and finalization of Terms of Reference prior to commencing work on the respective studies. This task includes one (1) Steering Committee Meeting as identified in Section 7.0. 5.2.2 Undertake Required Background Studies The following studies and analyses will be required to be completed by the Consulting Team. It is expected that the City will circulate draft reports to all relevant agencies and stakeholders for review and comment and that reports will be finalized based on this input. Planning Report and Community Master Plan This report provides the overall planning framework and policy recommendations for the Northeast Pickering Community Plan (“NPCP”). The key sub-deliverables of the report will include: - 372 - Northeast Pickering Community Plan RFP-XX-2021 Appendix D – Request for Proposal Particulars Page 7 1) An overall statement of the intended character and objectives for the NPCP will be included to provide the framework and vision. 2) Compliance matrix addressing the requirements of Provincial Plans, Durham Region Official Plan, and Pickering Official Plan policies. 3) A growth management analysis, including the forecasted population, employment, housing mix, density, and recommended phasing policies to stage development. 4) Recommended NPCP Community Structure Plan, including: a. Recommended location of community structural elements such as community facilities, parks, hospital, arterial and major collectors roads, and centres and corridors. b. Proposed land use structure and designations, c. Delineation of Neighbourhood Plan Areas, d. Description of the other background studies that feed into the analysis. The report will form the planning basis for a Community Structure Draft Official Plan Amendment for the NPCP. The Community Structure OPA provides a framework for the preparation of Neighbourhood Plans by establishing policies on land use, accessible, affordable & age-friendly housing, transportation, urban design, community facilities, environmental protection, and servicing and infrastructure for the NPCP. Relevant work completed to-date: Veraine Master Plan Report, prepared by Sasaki, dated October 2019; Community Services and Facilities Study Community, cultural, recreational and other public uses are an essential component of the development of the Northeast Pickering Community. The Community Services and Facilities Study assesses the need for community services and facilities (e.g. community centres, parks and open space, schools, places of worship, emergency services) required to adequately support the planned population of the NPCP. The key sub-deliverables of the report include: 1) A review of the community services and facility goals and objectives of the Region and City Official Plans, including a review of all relevant documents including the City’s Recreation and Parks Master Plan. 2) An assessment of the need for community services and facilities based on population driven service ratios or other City and agency standard service levels and requirements; 3) A description of where, how, and when the public services and facilities could be provided. 4) a recommendation based on best practices regarding parks and recreation and opportunities for the development of joint and/or mixed-use facilities to achieve land use efficiencies. Transportation Background Analysis This analysis is required to assess the adequacy of existing local and regional infrastructure (transportation/transit, including pedestrian and bicycle paths), as well as evaluate and identify infrastructure requirements (i.e., new or upgraded local and Regional infrastructure) that will be - 373 - Northeast Pickering Community Plan RFP-XX-2021 Appendix D – Request for Proposal Particulars Page 8 necessary to service the Northeast Pickering Community. This analysis will build off Durham’s Transportation Master Plan and Pickering’s Integrated Transportation Master Plan (for which a Notice of Study Completion has been issued), as well as the City and Region Official Plan policies. The key sub-deliverables of the report will include: 1) An integrated transportation/transit strategy (e.g., road network, public transit, active transportation, complete streets) that will support a well-connected network of corridors and complete streets (roads, rails, sidewalks, trails and bikeways). 2) Phases 1 and 2 of the Environmental Assessment (EA) process under the Environmental Assessment Act, with respect to the planning and layout of any arterial or major (mid-block) collector roads. Policies will also be included in the Plan to inform the later completion of Phases 3 and 4 of the EA process. Relevant work completed: Preliminary Transportation Study Veraine, Pickering: Final Report, prepared by IBI Group, dated October 2019; High Level Background Servicing Analysis The servicing analysis will be required to examine and identify the adequacy of existing local and regional water and wastewater infrastructure, as well as major infrastructure requirements (i.e., new or upgraded local and Regional infrastructure) necessary to service the Northeast Pickering Community. Information from the Region’s Water and Wastewater Master Plan Study Review (currently underway), as well as City and Regional Official Plan policies should be used to inform this analysis. The key sub-deliverables of this study will include: 1) An evaluation of alternatives and recommendations for a preferred strategy. 2) The preferred means of servicing the community. Relevant work completed: Preliminary Master Servicing Report Veraine – North East Pickering, prepared by SCS Consulting Group Ltd., dated April 2020; Natural Heritage and Hazard Background Analysis This analysis will inventory, characterize and assess natural hazard, natural heritage and water resource features and functions within the NPCP. The analysis will provide recommendations for the protection, conservation and management of natural hazard, natural heritage, and water resource features within the NPCP. The Natural Heritage and Hazard Background Analysis will draw on the City and Regional Official plan policies as well as TRCA and CLOCA guidelines. The key sub-deliverables of this study will include: 1) A hydrology assessment based on flood plain modelling and land use concept and a Regional Flood Analysis and an Assessment of Mitigation Measures 2) A desktop assessment of natural heritage features, and recommendations for the creation of a natural heritage system, including mapping and proposed policies; 3) Recommendations for a management strategy, implementation and monitoring plan to be implemented through the NPCP and future Neighbourhood Planning Programs. - 374 - Northeast Pickering Community Plan RFP-XX-2021 Appendix D – Request for Proposal Particulars Page 9 Relevant work completed: Veraine Environmental Conditions Report: Final Report, prepared by GeoProcess Research Associates, dated June 2020; Veraine Hydrologic and Hydrogeologic Characterization Final Report, prepared by GeoProcess Research Associates, dated June 15, 2020; Archeological Assessment The archaeological assessment will identify, assess, and inventory significant archaeological resources or sites and develop a strategy to conserve those archaeological resources as per Ministry of Heritage, Sport, Tourism and Culture Industries 2011 Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists. The assessment will also need to draw upon policies of the City and Regional Official Plans. The key sub-deliverables of this study will include: 1) Stage 1 and Stage 2 assessments including: a. background study, b. property inspection, c. property assessment, d. identification of lands requiring further study. Cultural Heritage Analysis This cultural heritage analysis will identify, inventory and assess the significance of cultural heritage resources (built heritage resources and cultural heritage landscapes) within and in close proximity to the Northeast Pickering Community. Further, it will provide recommendations for the conservation of the cultural heritage resources within the Northeast Pickering Community and draw upon the City and Regional Official Plan policies. Information from Pickering’s Municipal Heritage Register and Cultural Strategic Plan, among other plans and studies should be used to inform this analysis. Urban Design Guidelines The Urban Design Guidelines will result in urban design recommendations that assist in the interpretation of the City’s Official Plan policies. The guidelines will detail and illustrate how the Official Plan urban design goals and objectives for the built and natural environment will be achieved within the NPCP Neighbourhoods. The guidelines will provide high-level design direction and will inform the preparation of more detailed urban design and sustainability guidelines as part of future Neighbourhood Planning processes. Housing Affordability Strategy The strategy will detail the means to achieve the affordable housing targets established by the City and Regional Official Plan policies in housing forms considered affordable to low- and moderate-income households. The strategy will include a demographic and housing profile of the City of Pickering, an analysis of affordability and recommend policies and implementation measures to accommodate affordable housing within the NPCP area and future Neighbourhood Plan areas. The strategy will also need to consider the findings of Durham Region’s At Home in Durham (Housing Plan) and Pickering’s Housing Strategy Study (currently underway), as well - 375 - Northeast Pickering Community Plan RFP-XX-2021 Appendix D – Request for Proposal Particulars Page 10 as the City and Regional Official Plan policies. The Housing Affordability Strategy will be implemented through the NPCP. Retail Market Study The Retail Market Study will determine the total amount, type, role and function of retail uses to properly serve residents in the Northeast Pickering Community. The study will recommend the distribution of retail space within a retail hierarchy as well as identify the most appropriate locations for designating retail commercial land. In completing the Retail Market Study, the consulting team should consult with the Region of Durham as to whether a Regional Interest in commercial planning has been triggered. This study will also draw from City and Regional Official Plan policies. Agricultural Impact Assessment This assessment will include a review of agricultural land uses within and surrounding the Northeast Pickering Community and the applicable planning policies and regulations. The assessment will identify the potential of adverse physical and operational impacts of the proposed land uses on surrounding agricultural uses and where applicable propose mitigative measures. It will also need to consider how the change in land use will adversely affect existing and future agricultural production or activities in the area. The assessment will need to draw upon the work and recommendations of the Durham Region Agricultural Strategy and the City and Region Official Plan policies. Information from OMAFRA’s Guidance Document for Agricultural Impact Assessments, among other plans and studies, should be used to guide this analysis. Relevant work completed: High Level Agricultural Assessment for Agricultural Capability, Livestock Operations and Identification of Agri-food Network Operators Durham Region, prepared by DBH Soil Services Inc., dated October 2019. Sustainability Plan The purpose of the Sustainability Plan is to establish sustainable initiatives, principles and implementation measures to guide future development. The plan should align with and build upon the goals and objectives found within the City and Regional Official Plans. The plan should review and consider the City of Pickering Sustainable Guidelines (latest version currently under review), Guideline #1 and Guideline #2 as well as Durham’s Community Climate Action Plan. Furthermore, it should identify sustainability measures at different stages of the development process (e.g. those applicable at draft plan of subdivision vs those more appropriate at site plan control and building permit. Relevant work completed: The Veraine Sustainability Report, prepared by Urban Equation, dated October 2019; Employment Lands Strategy The Employment Lands Strategy (ELS) will provide a recommended vision and strategy to ensure the provision of an adequate supply of jobs for the City of Pickering’s growing population. The ELS is to include a review of the City of Pickering’s current employment land areas and related policies, best practices review, and analysis of trends/factors influencing - 376 - Northeast Pickering Community Plan RFP-XX-2021 Appendix D – Request for Proposal Particulars Page 11 employment. It will assist in identifying employment land locations (primarily along the Highway 407 corridor) and offer guidance on the planning framework and policy recommendations for the NPCP. 5.2.3 Develop Community Structure Plan and Neighbourhood Plan Areas Based on the results of the visioning exercises and the findings and recommendations of preliminary background study work the Consulting Team will refine the Community Structure Plan and Neighbourhood Plan Areas and will identify next steps and requirements for Neighbourhood Plans. The Consulting Team, along with City staff and in consultation with the Steering Committee will assess the merits of the Community Structure Plan and delineated Neighbourhood Plan Areas. This task includes one (1) Public Consultation Session and one (1) Steering Committee Meeting as identified in Section 7.0. 5.3 Phase 3: Refinement of Community Structure Plan & Neighbourhood Plan Areas & Preparation of Draft Official Plan Amendment Phase 3 of the Community Planning Program includes the following key tasks: 5.3.1 Prepare Draft Official Plan Amendment This task involves the preparation of draft Official Plan Amendment policies and associated schedules for the NPCP. The draft Official Plan Amendment will be a “parent” or “Part One” plan, and at minimum shall contain the vision, the guiding principles, the master plan concept, and implementing policies including directions on secondary plan requirements. The draft amendment will be circulated to relevant agencies and stakeholders for review and comment. This task includes one (1) Steering Committee Meeting as identified in Section 7.0. 5.4 Phase 4: Official Plan Amendment Adoption and Approval Phase 4 of the Community Planning Program includes the following key tasks: 5.4.1 Official Plan Amendment Adoption This task involves the refinement of the draft Official Plan Amendment and associated schedules in response to agency and stakeholder comments. It will result in the preparation of a draft final Official Plan Amendment and associated schedules for consideration by the City’s Planning & Development Committee and Council for adoption. This task includes one (1) Statutory Public Meeting and one (1) Committee/Council Meeting for the Recommended By-law. - 377 - Northeast Pickering Community Plan RFP-XX-2021 Appendix D – Request for Proposal Particulars Page 12 5.4.2 Official Plan Amendment Regional Approval The Council adopted Official Plan Amendment and supporting background studies will be provided by the City to the Region of Durham for approval. This task includes City staff’s and the Consulting Team’s review and response, as required, to Regional comments and proposed modifications regarding the Council adopted Official Plan Amendment. Consultation and Engagement Strategy Initiating a dialogue with the public and stakeholders, and facilitating participation in the process is key to achieving broad support in the development and successful implementation of the new By-law. A strong emphasis placed on consultation in this Study. The consultation strategy is to include proposed consultations (information and response components) with Aboriginal communities, First Nations and Métis communities. It is noted that the strategy is to be flexible and adaptable, considering the information obtained throughout the consultation strategy. As such, the Consulting Team shall prepare, and include in their proposal, a consultation strategy that demonstrates how they propose to obtain early input from the public and stakeholders in an effort to advance the resolution of issues, and identify concerns requiring further research. The consultation strategy is to incorporate the City of Pickering’s digital engagement platform. The final consultation strategy is to be developed following the project kick-off meeting and in coordination with the City of Pickering’s Corporate Communicates staff to ensure that it utilizes current communication methods/platforms. Over the course of the Community Plan process, the Consulting Team will facilitate public consultation, host open houses, present the draft discussion papers and draft By-law to Planning & Development Committee and Council, and present the recommended By-law to Planning & Development Committee. The City shall be responsible for the preparation and circulation of public notices for public/stakeholder consultation meetings and public meetings. Additional consultations with specific stakeholders may be required. The Consulting Team will be responsible for the following: • Facilitation, presentation and subject matter expertise at public and stakeholder meetings, including the preparation and delivery of any presentations, preparation and printing of handout material and/or display boards, and, staffing for public consultation sessions; • Presentation and subject matter expertise at meetings of the Planning & Development Committee and Council; including the preparation and delivery of any presentations, display boards, and consolidation/summary of comments; • Creation and maintenance of a public consultation file, including a matrix documenting public and stakeholder comments with the Project Team and City staff responses; • Preparation of agenda, draft meeting notes, and final meeting notes for the progress meetings and Steering Committee meetings; • Advice/input on consultation proposed by The City, such as media releases and - 378 - Northeast Pickering Community Plan RFP-XX-2021 Appendix D – Request for Proposal Particulars Page 13 newspaper ads, social media advertisements, website page, brochures, etc; and, • Recommended approach for consultation (and form of consultation) with specific stakeholders that may be warranted or appropriate to seek input on specific topics. The City’s Project Manager will be responsible for the following: • Establishment and updating of a study page on the City’s website to facilitate communication with the public; • Creation and maintenance of a database of public, stakeholder and agency contacts; • Posting of social media messaging; • Booking of venues and audio visual equipment, and provision of refreshments (as warranted) for all public and stakeholder meetings; • Circulation of any study documents/deliverables; and, • Preparation and circulation of public notices in the local newspaper, mail, email, on the City’s website, etc. All external consultation elements will require pre-approval by the City’s Project Manager and are subject to participation by the City. The consultation strategy proposed by the Project Team shall comply with Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act requirements. Meetings & Presentations The following lists the type and minimum number of meetings that are to be included in the proponent’s proposal. The Project Schedule identified in Section 8.0, includes preliminary targets by phase for key meetings/presentations. Meeting Minimum Number Start-up Meeting • One (1) Start-up Meeting with Consultant Team and City’s Project Manager 1 Steering Committee Meetings • One (1) Kick-off Meeting • One (1) Terms of Reference Review Meeting • Two (2) Draft Background Studies, Preliminary Concept, Structure and Neighbourhood Plan Areas Review Meeting • Two (2) Draft Official Plan Amendment Review Meeting 6 - 379 - Northeast Pickering Community Plan RFP-XX-2021 Appendix D – Request for Proposal Particulars Page 14 Public Consultation Sessions • One (1) Session on Visioning and Guiding Principles; • One (1) Session on Preliminary Concept, Structure and Neighbourhood Plan Areas • One (1) Recommended Structure and Neighbourhood Plan 3 Planning & Development Committee Meetings and/or Council Meetings These meetings include: • One (1) Statutory Public Meeting • One (1) Information/Update Meeting • One (1) Meeting for Recommended By-law 3 TOTAL 13 Additional Meetings may be required over the course of the Community Plan process. These meetings will be identified by the City’s Project Manager, in consultation with the Consulting Team Project Lead and Steering Committee, during the course of the Community Plan process. Project Schedule The Community Plan process is expected to take approximately twenty-four (24) months with an award and start-up meeting between the Consulting Team and City’s Project Manager prior to [INSERT DATE]. Proponents shall submit a work plan, in the form of a Gantt Chart (or other similar illustration), for all portions of the contract in accordance with the estimated timeline below. The work plan must contain detailed descriptions of all tasks to be performed, staff responsible for each task, key milestones and activities for completing the work. Proponents may propose alternative milestone events and/or dates, provided that the proposed overall duration does not exceed twenty-four (24) months. Expected Date Award of Contract TBD Phase 1 – Develop Work Plan and Confirmation of Vision and Principles 4 months (concurrent with Phase 2) Start-up Meeting TBD Complete Stakeholder Engagement Strategy TBD - 380 - Northeast Pickering Community Plan RFP-XX-2021 Appendix D – Request for Proposal Particulars Page 15 Steering Committee Kick-off Meeting TBD Public Consultation Meeting #1 TBD Phase 2 – Background Studies, Preliminary Community Structure Plan & Neighbourhood Plan Areas 12 months (concurrent with Phase 1) Complete Terms of Reference for Background Studies TBD Complete Draft Background Studies TBD Complete Preliminary Concept, Structure and Neighbourhood Plan Areas TBD Public Consultation Meeting #2 TBD Phase 3 – Community Structure Plan & Neighbourhood Plan Areas Refinement & Draft Official Plan Amendment 6 months Complete Draft Official Plan Amendment TBD Phase 4 – Official Plan Amendment Adoption & Approval 6 months Statutory Public Meeting at Planning and Development Committee TBD Official Plan Amendment Adoption TBD Official Plan Amendment Approval TBD Considerations 9.1 AODA Compliance and City of Pickering Brand Guidelines Studies, reports, plans and presentations that will be published on the City of Pickering website must be provided to the City in an accessible format compatible to Adobe Acrobat XI or higher. Companies performing the work for the City must comply with the Accessibility for Ontarians With Disabilities Act, 2005 (“AODA”), in particular the Integrated Accessibility Standards, O. Reg. 191/11. Unless determined by the City to not be practicable, Companies shall ensure that any information, products, deliverables and/or communications (as defined in the Integrated Regulation) produced pursuant to a contract shall be in conformity with World Wide Web Consortium Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 Level AA and shall - 381 - Northeast Pickering Community Plan RFP-XX-2021 Appendix D – Request for Proposal Particulars Page 16 be provided in accessible Word, Excel, PowerPoint, PDF, etc. Visit Ontario.ca for rules on how to comply. Materials produced must comply with the City’s Creating Accessible Documents Procedure. All documents and products produced by the Company that will be released to the public (electronic and hard copy) must also comply with the City’s Brand Guidelines. This includes PowerPoint presentations, reports, newsletters, brochures and any other handout material. 9.2 Submission of Electronic Documents All electronic documents produced by the Project Team during the course of the study and at the conclusion of it will be compatible with the City’s Information Technology systems and software. At the conclusion of the Study, the Company will compile and submit to the City all electronic files corresponding, but not limited to, the following: • letters and communications, memorandums, meeting minutes and agendas in Microsoft Word 2016 • background and technical documents in Microsoft Word or Excel, as applicable • study report(s) and appendices, including draft By-laws in the following formats, as applicable: o Microsoft Word 2016 o Adobe InDesign o PDF (compatible with Acrobat Pro Version 2019.010.20091) • GIS and AutoCAD (Map 3D 2018) files in the following format: o GIS shapefile georeferenced to NAD_1983_UTM_Zone_17N o WKID: 26917 Authority: EPSG • sketches, drawings, illustrations and graphics in the following, as applicable: o AutoCAD (map 3D 2018) georeferenced to NAD_1983_UTM_Zone_17N o Corel Draw (X8) o Adobe Illustrator Resources The City will, upon request, make a variety of documents and data available to the Project Team. In certain circumstances, the Project Team may need to enter into an agreement with the City or other public body to access or use certain data sets. The study resources include: • Planning Act • Provincial Policy Statement - 382 - Northeast Pickering Community Plan RFP-XX-2021 Appendix D – Request for Proposal Particulars Page 17 • A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe • Greenbelt Plan • Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan • TRCA Living City Policies • Carruthers Creek Watershed Plan • OMAFRA’s Guidance Document for Agricultural Impact Assessments and Minimum Distance Separation Formulae Region of Durham • Durham Regional Official Plan • Transportation Master Plan • Water and Wastewater Master Plan Study Review (in progress) • At Home in Durham (Housing Plan) • Durham Region Agricultural Strategy City of Pickering • Pickering Official Plan • Recreation & Parks Master Plan • Integrated Transportation Master Plan (in progress) • Cultural Strategic Plan • Housing Strategy Study (in progress) • City of Pickering Sustainable Guidelines • Municipal Heritage Register Landowner Group Documents • Why Veraine? Settlement Boundary Expansion Rationale, prepared by Sorensen Gravely Lowes Planning Associates Inc., dated June 2020 • Veraine Master Plan Report, prepared by Sasaki, dated October 2019 • Veraine Environmental Conditions Report: Final Report, prepared by GeoProcess Research Associates, dated June 2020 • Veraine Hydrologic and Hydrogeologic Characterization Final Report, prepared by GeoProcess Research Associates, dated June 15, 2020 • Preliminary Transportation Study Veraine, Pickering: Final Report, prepared by IBI Group, dated October 2019 • Preliminary Master Servicing Report Veraine – North East Pickering, prepared by SCS Consulting Group Ltd., dated April 2020 - 383 - Northeast Pickering Community Plan RFP-XX-2021 Appendix D – Request for Proposal Particulars Page 18 • The Veraine Sustainability Report, prepared by Urban Equation, dated October 2019 • High Level Agricultural Assessment for Agricultural Capability, Livestock Operations and Identification of Agri-food Network Operators Durham Region, prepared by DBH Soil Services Inc., dated October 2019 - 384 - Northeast Pickering Community Plan RFP-XX-2021 Appendix D – Request for Proposal Particulars Page 19 B: MATERIAL DISCLOSURES The material disclosures that apply to this Request for Proposals, if any, are set out below. Not applicable for this Proposal. The pre-conditions of award that apply to this Request for Proposals, if any, are set out below. 1. The Proponent agrees to provide to the City for review after closing: a) A copy of the City’s Health & Safety form (currently dated and signed); b) A certificate of insurance completed by the Company’s agent, broker or insurer (City form is attached); and c) Such further information as the City may require, as requested in writing. Items (a) and (b) do not have to be submitted with the proposal. Documentation (a) and (b) shall be provided within three (3) business days of written request by the City. The City’s findings shall be used to serve the best interests of the Corporation of the City of Pickering. 2. Supplementary Documents: Subsequent to the Request for Proposal opening and upon request, the following documentation may be requested by the City for approval at any time throughout the duration of the project: a) A completed Accessibility Regulations for Contracted Services from; b) A completed Sub-contractors List, listing all sub-contractors who may be carrying out any part of this Contract; and c) Such further information, as the City may request in writing. Documentation shall be provided within three (3) business days of written request by the City. The City’s findings shall be used to serve the best interests of the Corporation of the City of Pickering. - 385 - Northeast Pickering Community Plan RFP-XX-2021 Appendix D – Request for Proposal Particulars Page 20 C: MANDATORY TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS The mandatory technical requirements that apply to this Request for Proposals, if any, are set out below. Not applicable for this Proposal. - 386 - Northeast Pickering Community Plan RFP-XX-2021 Appendix D – Request for Proposal Particulars Page 21 D: RATED CRITERIA The following is an overview of the categories and weighting for the rated criteria of the Request for Proposals. Proponents who do not meet a minimum threshold score for a category will not proceed to the next stage of the evaluation process. Rated Criteria Category Weighting (Points) Threshold Company’s Experience and Qualifications 15 Understanding of Project 15 Work Plan and Deliverables 30 Project Manager, Project Team and Resources 20 Quality of References 5 Total Rated Criteria Points 85 51 Pricing 15 Total Points 100 Interview (up to 3 Proponents, if required) 25 Total Points (if interview required) 125 Company’s Experience and Qualifications = 15 Points a) Provide a Company profile and three (3) relevant examples of past projects within the last five (5) years that are comparable in scope. This should include a project synopsis that identifies the team members assembled who worked on the project, the current project status, budgeted costs versus actual costs, scheduling issues and resolutions, and design challenges or efficiencies. Provide client names, contacts and up-to-date contact phone numbers. b) A description demonstrating the Company’s substantial resources and support services available. c) A description of the Company’s proven methodology for communicating information to the applicable stakeholders. Understanding of Project = 15 Points The Proposal should include information that provides: a) Information that the Proponent understands the objectives and requirements of this project. Proponents must relate these objectives to past experience or expertise of the Proponent and/or their team; and - 387 - Northeast Pickering Community Plan RFP-XX-2021 Appendix D – Request for Proposal Particulars Page 22 b) A summary of the risks, problems or issues associated with the work and how they will be mitigated. Work Plan and Deliverables = 30 Points The Proponent is to provide a written response which clearly and concisely details the following: 1. An indication of when the Consultant can commence the work; 2. A detailed work plan for Phases 1 - 4 indicating and detailing the method, tasks and deliverables, including an outline of the methods to engage and communicate with the public; 3. A preliminary work schedule that identifies work phases (by Gantt Chart or other similar illustration) including key dates for major deliverables (concept, goals and objectives, development criteria, community workshops and focus groups, infrastructure and implementation) in the proposed detailed work plan; 4. Proposed staffing roles and the amount of time that they will be dedicated to this project; 5. State the assumptions regarding the roles and involvement of City staff; 6. Identification of “value-added” services brought by the Consultant’s team; and 7. A description of the quality control methods that will be employed throughout the work phases. Project Manager, Project Team and Resources = 20 Points It is important that the Work be provided by a staff team that can demonstrate knowledge of, and experience in providing similar services for projects of comparable nature, size and scope. In particular, the Proponent should provide an overview of the key personnel who would be primarily involved in the project and include the following: a) Identify the prime firm submitting the Proposal and the sub-consultant firms (if applicable) that will be assembled to undertake the work for each part of the deliverables. b) The name, title, mailing address, phone number and e-mail address of the Project Manager; c) Condensed resumes and professional credentials of each individual on the Project Team that highlights their education, training, and work history; d) The respective roles of the team members and their current office locations. Team members named in this RFP cannot be replaced without prior written approval from the City; - 388 - Northeast Pickering Community Plan RFP-XX-2021 Appendix D – Request for Proposal Particulars Page 23 e) Current and future project list that will be undertaken by members of the Proponent’s team including their current workload (i.e., identify other competing priorities that are assigned to each member within this project timeline); and f) Organizational chart that clearly defines the chain of command for each individual with the team. Quality of References = 5 Points Relevance of projects similar in scope and value completed over the last five (5) years. Complete Appendix E – Reference Form (or supply on other paper stock) and submit with the proposal. The City will contact the references provided as part of its evaluation process. Pricing = 15 Points Proponents should review, complete and submit Appendix C, Pricing Form. Interview – 25 Points (if required) Up to a maximum of three (3) of the top-ranked Proponents may be selected to attend an interview with key City staff at a mutually agreeable date/time at the City’s specified location. Interview questions may be provided to those Proponents who have been chosen, prior to the interview. - 389 - Northeast Pickering Community Plan RFP-XX-2021 Appendix D – Request for Proposal Particulars Page 24 Appendix A – Northeast Pickering Community Plan Study Area - 390 - Northeast Pickering Community Plan RFP-XX-2021 Appendix D – Request for Proposal Particulars Page 25 Appendix B – Preliminary Vision and Community Design Principles Vision for Northeast Pickering Community Plan “To create a world-renowned community based on healthy, sustainable and thriving principles that will enable leading edge innovations in housing affordability, environmental stewardship and improved quality of life.” Modified Community Design Principles from Resolution #173/19 (attached). - 391 - Community Planning Principles: Veraine Appendix 1 Veraine will be a prototypical community focused on the mental and physical well-being of its residents and the sustainability of its natural environment. This will be accomplished through ground-breaking approaches to environmental and social place-making, healthy living practices, and community resiliency. Veraine is conceptualized and realized through a holistically planned community that is Complete, Thriving (Sustainable) and Connected (Smart). 1. A Complete Community: a. Neighbourhoods that support a fully inclusive and integrated lifestyle where residents and visitors alike can live, learn, work and socialize; all within the bounds of their own community. b. A multi-generational community offering a wide variety of housing choice and affordability, that is designed for residents from all walks and stages of life—a community to age in place. c. A mixed-use town-centre acting as a central focal point for shopping, entertainment, high-rise living, and employment, in cohesion with neighbourhoods containing a mix of densities to generate demand for the local transit and active transit network. d. Integrates with the greater surrounding area and region by embracing its authenticity, as well as its diversity of people, places, and natural habitats. e. Walkable neighbourhoods linked by multi-modal connections and an intuitive grid network which offer seamless opportunities for healthy living and active and safe active transport along streets and intersections. 2. A Thriving (Sustainable) Community: a. Create a highly resource efficient community that deploys cost-effective, community scale solutions to achieve reduced greenhouse gas emissions, energy and water consumption, and waste generation. b. Celebrates and enhances the Region's ecological systems and resources for future generations through land stewardship and the preservation of natural heritage. c. Resilient to a changing climate and the varying characteristics of Canadian weather through infrastructure, building, home, and community design. d. Achieves economic sustainability through the inclusion of a strong employment node with a focus on health and wellness, higher education, and a wide variety of commercial and professional service industries to ensure a diverse range of employment options and opportunities. e. Strives for excellence in environmental and social placemaking through a myriad of initiatives including maintaining existing/historic hedgerows and concession roads for use as a natural trail system and managing North East Pickering Landowners Group Inc. Proposed Modifications to the Veraine - Community Planning Principles Attachment 2- 392 - Community Planning Principles: Veraine Appendix 1 stormwater using sustainable design that strives to capture the greatest amount of rainwater that the nat ural system will allow. 3.A Connected (Smart) Community a.A future-focused community that is adaptable and evolving, supporting future opportunities for innovative forms of transportation through adaptable infrastructure. b.Provides and allows for the potential of various incoming multi-modal transportation opportunities that take advantage of smart technologies including Autonomous Vehicles (AV). c.Integrated planning approach to land use to maximize the potential for dual use functions such as resource efficient structure being integrated with inclusive neighbourhood spaces. d.Achieves a sustainable and healthful way of life through the deployment of low-carbon and smart systems and technologies at the district-scale and building-scale. e.Optimizes solar gain opportunities through a grid street network potentially aligned with True North where feasible. North East Pickering Landowners Group Inc. Proposed Modifications to the Veraine - Community Planning Principles Attachment 2- 393 - Appendix II to Report No. PLN 31-21 Funding Agreement for Northeast Pickering Community Plan Consulting Assistance - 394 - NORTH EAST PICKERING COMMUNITY PLAN FUNDING AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made this  day of , 2021 BETWEEN: THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING (hereinafter referred to as the “City”) and NORTH EAST PICKERING LANDOWNERS GROUP INC. (hereinafter referred to as the “Trustee”) RECITALS: A. The Trustee represents owners of land listed in Schedule “A” (the “Owners”). B. The Owners’ lands are located in the north east area of the City of Pickering identified and depicted on Schedule “B” within the thick red line (the “North East Pickering Area ”). C. The Owners have agreed to initiate a process to pursue the development of the North East Pickering Area including, inter alia, the completion of a proposed community plan (“Community Plan”). D. The Owners have agreed to fund the full costs associated with the preparation of the Community Plan, subject to the terms of this Agreement. E. The Trustee has been appointed by the Owners to act on their behalf in order to implement the terms of this Agreement. F. The Trustee and the City have entered into this Agreement to confirm the manner in which the Owners, through the Trustee, will provide funding for the Community Plan, participate in the process of the Community Plan, and recover costs in the future. G. The City is authorized to execute this Agreement through the enactment of By- law  by the City’s Council on  . NOW THEREFORE THIS AGREEMENT WITNESSES that in consideration of the covenants and agreements herein contained, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties covenant and agree as follows. ARTICLE 1 DEFINITIONS 1.1 Definitions - In this Agreement, the following terms and expressions shall have the following meanings: (a) “Actual Costs” means all actual costs incurred by the City, and any other costs agreed to by the City and the Trustee, to complete the Community Plan, and includes, but is not limited to, HST and project management or administrative costs of the City associated with the completion of any aspect of the preparation and approval of the Community Plan. (b) “Additional Costs” means any amount of the Actual Costs (or any component thereof) that exceeds the Estimated Costs (or the - 395 - 2 applicable component thereof) by more than the Contingency Allowance. (c) “Agreement” means this agreement and all Schedules attached hereto, as same may be amended from time to time. (d) “Business Day” means a day other than Saturday or Sunday or any day upon which the principal commercial banks in the geographic area of the City are not open for business during normal banking hours. (e) “Community Plan” has the meaning ascribed to it in Recital C. (f) “Community Plan Area” is the area depicted on a preliminary basis as the lands shown outlined in red on Schedule “B”, and subject to adjustment as determined by the Consultant and the City. (g) “Consultant” means the consulting firm retained by the City to complete the Community Plan. (h) “Contingency Allowance” means an allowance of ten percent (10 %) of the Consultants’ fees, which has been included in the calculation of the Estimated Costs by the City. (i) “Development Charges” means charges imposed pursuant to the Development Charges Act. (j) “Development Charges Act” means the Development Charges Act, 1997, S.O. 1997, c. 27, as amended, revised or consolidated from time to time and any successor legislation. (k) “DC By-law” means a by-law to impose Development Charges pursuant to Section 2(1) of the Development Charges Act. (l) “Estimated Costs” means the City’s estimate of the costs to complete the Community Plan to be incurred pursuant to this Agreement set out for reference in Schedule “D” prior to the confirmation of the Actual Costs. (m) “Non-Participating Benefitting Owner” means the owner of any land in the Community Plan Area who is not a “Owner”, as confirmed by the Trustee. (n) “North East Pickering Area” has the meaning ascribed to it in Recital B. (o) “Owner” means an owner of land in the North East Pickering Area currently listed in Schedule “A”, as well as any other owner of land in the North East Pickering Area who contributes its share of the Actual Costs, as confirmed by the Trustee. (p) “Planning Act” means the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended, revised, or consolidated from time to time and any successor legislation. (q) “Steering Committee” is defined in Section 3.2. (r) “Terms of Reference” means the terms of reference to be adhered to by the Consultant to prepare the Community Plan dated , a copy of which is attached hereto as Schedule “C”. ARTICLE 2 PRINCIPLES 2.1 Principles – The parties agree that the following constitute the principles which govern the interpretation, application, and administration of this Agreement: - 396 - 3 (a) The City will retain the Consultant to complete the Community Plan in accordance with the Terms of Reference; (b) The Trustee and the Owners will provide input to the completion of the Community Plan as provided for in the Terms of Reference and this Agreement; (c) The Trustee, on behalf of the Owners, will administer payments to the City of the Actual Costs as set out in this Agreement; (d) The City will use best efforts to seek future contributions to the Costs from Non-Participating Benefitting Owners in accordance with the policies of the Official Plan of the City; (e) The Trustee, on behalf of the Owners, has entered into this Agreement on the basis of the understanding that the City will initiate and pursue the completion and final approval of the Community Plan; and (f) Any consent or approval required or permitted under this Agreement shall be sought and considered reasonably, in good faith and in a timely basis. ARTICLE 3 COMMUNITY PLAN PROCESS 3.1 Initiation of Community Plan – The City will be the proponent of the Community Plan. The City covenants and agrees to retain the Consultant and all necessary sub-consultants and complete all necessary work related to the undertaking and completion of the Community Plan, in accordance with the Terms of Reference and the process set out in this Agreement. 3.2 Steering Committee – The parties acknowledge and agree that: (a) The Community Plan will be undertaken in accordance with the process described in the Terms of Reference, which will include the creation of a “Steering Committee” comprising the following persons: (i) The City’s Project Manager (Chair); (ii) The Consulting Team Project Lead (iii) Staff of the City; (iv) Staff of the Region of Durham; (v) Staff of the Conservation Authorities; (vi) The Trustee; and (vii) At least two (2) Owner representatives. (b) The Steering Committee will provide direction related to the Community Plan, be a sounding board for ideas, provide key directions and input for criteria for evaluation of land use alternatives, review all technical input, and oversee the schedule of the project. (c) Through ongoing meetings of the Steering Committee (which will be held regularly) the Trustee and its appointees will be given a meaningful opportunity to comment on the Community Plan process, including, without limitation, with respect to the review, negotiation and approval of any Additional Costs or contingencies. The authorization for the completion of these Additional Costs, either in whole or in part, will be evaluated on an ongoing basis through the Community Plan process, and approved by the Owners through discussion with the Steering - 397 - 4 Committee to be undertaken at which time it is deemed to be necessary and appropriate. (d) The Consultant will provide leadership to the Steering Committee to ensure that the Community Plan process adheres to the applicable consultation and notification requirements to satisfy the requirements of the Community Plan. Each participant in the Steering Committee will be encouraged to provide the Consultant with any and all relevant background studies that may be in their possession, and will provide the Consultant with all relevant information requested by the Consultant in as timely a manner as is reasonably possible. ARTICLE 4 ADMINISTRATION 4.1 Payments of Costs – The City will, on a phased basis as outlined in the terms of reference, invoice the Trustee in respect of the Estimated Costs (including Contingency Allowance) prior to commencing the next Phase of the Community Plan process. Provided that the City’s invoice is appropriate for the applicable Phase of the Community Plan in accordance with the approved budget of Estimated Costs set out in Schedule “D”, the Trustee will provide payment to the City in the amount set out in the invoice received from the City within fifteen (15) Business Days following receipt of such invoices. 4.2 Cost oversight – In the event that the Owners have an objection to any Additional Costs or if Additional Costs are projected to exceed the contingency amount set out in Schedule “D”, the Trustee, on behalf of the Owners, may request a meeting with the City for the purpose of resolving the issue. In the event that the Trustee delivers written notice of such an objection to the City, a meeting between the City, the Trustee and representatives of the Owners shall be held as soon as possible, and an automatic extension of at least five (5) Business Days following the date that such meeting is held shall apply with respect to the time period for the Trustee to remit any related payment to the City, if any. ARTICLE 5 TRUSTEE 5.1 Appointment – The Trustee represents that it has been duly appointed by the Owners to act as Trustee for the Owners for the purposes of this Agreement. 5.2 Functions of Trustee – The Trustee shall perform the functions specified in this Agreement and functions ancillary thereto. The Trustee shall generally do all such things required to give effect to those provisions of this Agreement, in accordance with the intentions of the parties as expressed by the terms of this Agreement. 5.3 Representative of Trustee – For the purpose of any of the functions of Trustee that entail communications and/or interactions between the Trustee and the City pursuant to this Agreement, the affairs and functions of the Trustee shall be controlled, managed, and performed by lawyers at a law firm retained to act on behalf of the Trustee and the Owners for this purpose. ARTICLE 6 REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES 6.1 Trustee representations and warranties – The Trustee represents and warrants that, as of the date of this Agreement: (a) It is duly incorporated, organized, and subsisting under the laws of the Province of Ontario. (b) It has all necessary capacity, power, and authority to enter into and to carry out the provisions of this Agreement. (c) Neither the execution of this Agreement nor the fulfilment of or compliance with the terms and conditions hereof: - 398 - 5 (i) Conflicts with or will conflict with or result in a breach of any of the terms, conditions, or provisions of or constitute a default under the constating documentation of the Trustee; and (ii) Conflicts in a material respect with or will conflict in a material respect with or result in a material breach of any of the terms, conditions, or provisions of or constitute a material default under any agreement, licence, or other instrument to which the Trustee is a party or by which it is bound. (d) To its knowledge after due inquiry, there are no actions, suits or proceedings pending or threatened against the Trustee which could reasonably be expected to materially adversely affect its ability to perform its obligations under this Agreement. 6.2 City representations and warranties – The City represents and warrants that, as of the date of this Agreement that: (a) It is a municipal corporation duly established and organized under the laws of the Province of Ontario. (b) It has all necessary capacity, power, and authority to enter into this Agreement pursuant to Part II of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c. 25, as amended and, subject only to the qualifications expressly provided in this Agreement, to carry out the provisions of this Agreement. (c) To its knowledge after due inquiry, there are no actions, suits or proceedings pending or threatened against the City which could reasonably be anticipated to materially adversely affect its ability to perform its obligations under this Agreement. ARTICLE 7 TERM AND TERMINATION 7.1 Effective date of this Agreement – This Agreement shall be of no force and effect until executed by the City and the Trustee. Once so executed, the effective date of this Agreement shall be deemed conclusively to be the date shown on the first page of the Agreement. 7.2 Termination – This Agreement shall terminate upon such time as the Community Plan is complete, finally approved and in force, and the City confirms that the Actual Costs have been paid by the Trustee. ARTICLE 8 OWNER RECOVERIES 8.1 Development Charges – The City acknowledges that policies in the City’s Official Plan permit the Actual Costs to be included in an existing and/or future DC By-law for the City. The City will include the Actual Costs within a DC By- law for the City and will provide any available Development Charge credits to the Owners in relation to the Actual Costs. 8.2 Recoveries from Non-Participating Benefitting Owners – The City agrees to use its best efforts to recover the portions of the Actual Costs funded by the Owners through the Trustee pursuant to this Agreement for the benefit of Non- Participating Benefitting Owners, by requiring, as a condition of development, that appropriate cost sharing arrangements be entered into by Non- Participating Benefitting Owners. The City further agrees to support the inclusion of a specific policy in the Community Plan that requires that appropriate cost sharing arrangements be entered into by Non-Participating Benefitting Owners to reimburse the Owners for the Actual Costs as a condition of development approval. - 399 - 6 ARTICLE 9 NOTICE 9.1 Notice particulars – Any notice, demand, acceptance, request, or other communication (“Notice”) required to be given hereunder shall be given in writing and shall be given by personal delivery or email and addressed to: (a) The City as follows: The Corporation of the City of Pickering One The Esplanade Pickering, ON L1V 6K7 Attention: Catherine Rose, Chief Planner Email: crose@pickering.ca (b) The Trustee as follows: North East Pickering Landowners Group Inc. c/o Davies Howe LLP The Tenth Floor 425 Adelaide Street West Toronto, ON M5V 3C1 Attention: Daniel Steinberg Email: daniels@davieshowe.com 9.2 Method of notice – Any notice shall be conclusively deemed to have been given to and received by the party to which it is addressed (a) if personally delivered, on the date of delivery; or (b) if by email or facsimile, on the day transmission delivery is confirmed by the party delivering the notice, provided that if delivery occurs after 5:00 p.m., Eastern Standard time, on a Business Day or at any time which is not a Business Day, delivery shall be conclusively deemed to have been given on the next Business Day. ARTICLE 10 GENERAL PROVISIONS 10.1 Recitals – The parties agree that the recitals herein are true and accurate and form part of this Agreement. 10.2 Singular and plural – Words importing the singular include the plural and vice versa. 10.3 Gender – Words importing gender include all genders. 10.4 Captions and headings – The captions and headings contained herein are for reference only and in no way affect this Agreement or its interpretation. 10.5 Covenants – Each agreement and obligation of each party hereto in this Agreement, even though not expressed as a covenant, shall be considered for all purposes to be a covenant. 10.6 Applicable law – This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the Province of Ontario and the laws of Canada applicable thereto and shall be treated in all respects as an Ontario contract. 10.7 Currency – All references to currency in this Agreement shall be references to Canadian dollars. 10.8 Entire agreement – This Agreement, the schedules referred to herein constitute the entire agreement between the parties hereto and supersede all prior agreements, representations, reports, recommendations, statements, promises, information, arrangements, and understandings, whether oral or - 400 - 7 written, express or implied, with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement. 10.9 Successors and assigns - It is hereby agreed by the parties hereto that this Agreement shall be enforceable by and against the parties, their administrators, heirs (where applicable), successors and permitted assigns. 10.10 Force majeure – If the City is delayed or hindered in or prevented from the performance of any act required to be performed by the City under this Agreement by reason of acts of God, strikes, lockouts, unavailability of materials, curtailment of transportation facilities, failure of power, prohibitive governmental laws or regulations, riots, insurrections, war, terrorist activities, explosions, unavoidable casualty or the act or failure to act of any other party (except those for whom in law the City is responsible), adverse weather conditions preventing the performance of work, or other unspecified, unforeseen or uncontrollable events beyond the City’s control, then the time for performance of such act shall be extended for a period equivalent to the period of such delay. 10.11 Modifications and amendments – No modifications or amendment to this Agreement may be made unless agreed to by the parties in writing. 10.12 Further assurances – At all times and from time to time hereafter upon every reasonable written request to do so, the Parties shall make, execute, deliver or cause to be made, done, executed and delivered, all such further acts, deeds, assurances and things as may be reasonably required to implement and carry out, the true intent and meaning of this Agreement. 10.13 Parties to act reasonably – Notwithstanding anything else in this Agreement, wherever in this Agreement any decision, action, consent, approval, or fee is to be made, taken or charged by or on behalf of any party hereto, this Agreement requires that the parties and their respective agents, servants, consultants or contractors shall act reasonably, expeditiously, and in good faith in respect thereof. 10.14 Time of the essence – Time shall be of the essence of this Agreement. 10.15 Counterpart execution – This Agreement may be executed in counterparts (i.e. it shall not be necessary for all of the parties to have signed the same copy hereof) and may be executed and/or transmitted by facsimile or e-mail. 10.16 No fettering – W here any provision of this Agreement contemplates a future legislative or policy decision within the discretion of Council of the City, such decision shall remain within the sole and unfettered legislative or policy discretion of Council of the City. 10.17 Schedules – The following schedules are attached to and form an integral part of this Agreement: Schedule “A” List of Owners Schedule “B” Plan Depicting North East Pickering Area Schedule “C” Terms of Reference Schedule “D” Estimated Costs The parties are signing this Agreement on the date above first written. [SIGNATURE PAGES TO FOLLOW] - 401 - PICKERINGWHITBY8TH CON RD 7TH CON RD SALEM RDSIDELINE 6SIDELINE 4SIDELINE 2WESTNEY RDSIDELINE 8SIDELINE 4HWY 7 LAKE RIDGE RDWESTNEY RDLAKE RIDGE RDKINSALE RD6TH CON RD £¤407 3 2 20 1 10 4 5 8 19 17 12 16 14 13 15 6 11 7 18 21 9 Sources: Goog le Earth Im ag ery, May 2018 Contains inform ation licensed und er the Open Governm ent Licence – Ontario North East Pickering Municipal Boundary Greenbelt Plan - Protected Country Hamlet Non-Developable Area Hwy 407 Right-of-Way 30m Hydro Corridor Natural Area/Natural Heritage System Participating Landowners Armland Group Brown Group Clark (Ravi) Coughlan Homes Dorsay Trinison Tribute 0 250 500125 metres Ü PARTICIPATING LANDOWNERS NORTH EAST PICKERING MGP File: 20-2918 Date: May 17, 2021 KINSALE GREENWOOD KINSALE PARTICIPATING LANDOWNERS DEVELOPABLE AREA Notes: 1. Areas m easured in hectares. 2. Developable area exclud es: - Greenbelt Plan (outsid e of Veraine Com m unity) - Hig hw ay 407 R ig ht-of-Way - 30m Hyd ro Corrid or - Natural Area Desig nation from Sched ule I: Land Use Structure, Pickering Official Plan, Ed ition 8, June 2018 - Natural Heritag e System Desig nation w ithin Active R ecreational Areas from Sched ule III A: R esource Manag em ent - The Natural Heritag e System , Pickering Official Plan, Ed ition 8, June 2018. GREENWOOD Map ID Participating Landowner Gross Area Developable Area 21 Arm land Group 4.0 3.5 11 Brow n Group 8.4 4.3 17 Clark (R avi)31.8 6.1 14 Coug hlan Hom es 18.1 16.8 1 50.2 31.2 2 68.9 41.7 3 104.2 77.7 4 38.4 26.8 7 4.0 2.2 10 82.2 63.6 12 27.2 0.3 13 13.1 9.5 16 19.1 12.6 18 4.8 3.0 5 37.2 25.5 6 6.2 6.2 8 36.3 19.4 9 0.8 0.8 15 12.1 12.1 19 69.6 14.4 20 118.7 61.5 Total Participating Landowners 755.5 439.2 Tribute Dorsay Trinison - 402 - Appendix III to Report No. PLN 31-21 Funding Agreement for Northeast Pickering Senior Project Manager Position - 403 - DH 01709084 4 NORTH EAST PICKERING SENIOR PROJECT MANAGER POSITION FUNDING AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made this  day of , 2021 BETWEEN: THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING (hereinafter referred to as the “City”) and NORTH EAST PICKERING LANDOWNERS GROUP INC. (hereinafter referred to as the “Trustee”) RECITALS: A. The Trustee represents owners of land listed in Schedule “A” (the “Owners”). B. The Owners’ lands are located in the north east area of the City of Pickering identified and depicted on Schedule “B” within the thick red line (the “North East Pickering Area ”). C. The Owners have agreed to initiate a process to pursue the development of the North East Pickering Area including, inter alia, the completion of a proposed community plan (“Community Plan”). D. The Owners and the City have agreed that the Owners will front-fund the fees and expenses of a senior project manager to assist the City in the Community Plan formulation process (the “City’s Project Manager”), subject to the terms of this Agreement. E. The Trustee has been appointed by the Owners to act on their behalf in order to implement the terms of this Agreement. F. The Trustee and the City have entered into this Agreement to confirm the manner in which the Owners, through the Trustee, will provide funding for the City to pay City’s Project Manager and recover costs in the future. G. The City is authorized to execute this Agreement through the enactment of By- law  by the City’s Council on  . NOW THEREFORE THIS AGREEMENT WITNESSES that in consideration of the covenants and agreements herein contained, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties covenant and agree as follows. 1.1 Definitions - In this Agreement, the following terms and expressions shall have the following meanings: (a) “Actual Costs” means all actual fees and expenses (including HST) of the City’s Project Manager. (b) “Additional Costs” means any amount of the Actual Costs that exceeds the Estimated Costs by more than the Contingency Allowance. (c) “Agreement” means this agreement and all Schedules attached hereto, as same may be amended from time to time. (d) “Business Day” means a day other than Saturday or Sunday or any day upon which the principal commercial banks in the geographic area of the City are not open for business during normal banking hours. (e) “City’s Project Manager” has the meaning ascribed to it in Recital D. (f) “Community Plan” has the meaning ascribed to it in Recital C. - 404 - DH 01709084 4 2 (g) “Community Plan Area” is the area depicted on a preliminary basis as the lands shown outlined in red on Schedule “B”, and subject to adjustment as determined by the City’s Project Manager and the City. (h) “Development Charges” means charges imposed pursuant to the Development Charges Act. (i) “Development Charges Act” means the Development Charges Act, 1997, S.O. 1997, c. 27, as amended, revised or consolidated from time to time and any successor legislation. (j) “DC By-law” means a by-law to impose Development Charges pursuant to Section 2(1) of the Development Charges Act. (k) “Disbursement Allowance” means an allowance of $5,500 paid at the beginning of the first year and $1,500 paid up front each year thereafter, which has been included in the calculation of the Estimated Costs by the City. (l) “Estimated Costs” means the City’s estimate of the fees and expenses of the City’s Project Manager set out for reference in Schedule “D”, prior to the confirmation of the Actual Costs. (m) “Non-Participating Benefitting Owner” means the owner of any land in the Community Plan Area who is not a “Owner”, as confirmed by the Trustee. (n) “North East Pickering Area” has the meaning ascribed to it in Recital B. (o) “Owner” means an owner of land in the North East Pickering Area currently listed in Schedule “A”, as well as any other owner of land in the North East Pickering Area who contributes its share of the Actual Costs, as confirmed by the Trustee. (p) “Planning Act” means the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended, revised, or consolidated from time to time and any successor legislation. ARTICLE 2 PRINCIPLES AND GENER AL OBLIGATIONS 2.1 Principles – The parties agree that the following constitute the principles which govern the interpretation, application and administration of this Agreement: (a) The City will retain the City’s Project Manager; (b) The Trustee and the Owners will provide funding for and input into the selection of the City’s Project Manager, which is subject to this agreement and to the Community Plan process pursuant to a separate agreement to be entered into between the City and the Trustee; (c) The anticipated term of employment of the City Project Manager is three (3) years, which is related to the duration of the Community Plan process; (d) The term of employment may be extended in six (6) month increments if approved in writing by the City and the Trustee, to ensure completion of the Community Plan process; (e) The Trustee, on behalf of the Owners, will administer payments to the City of the Actual Costs as set out in this Agreement; (f) The City will use best efforts to seek future contributions to the Costs from Non-Participating Benefitting Owners in accordance with the policies of the Official Plan of the City; - 405 - DH 01709084 4 3 (g) The Trustee, on behalf of the Owners, has entered into this Agreement on the basis of the understanding that the City will initiate and pursue the completion and final approval of the Community Plan; and (h) Any consent or approval required or permitted under this Agreement shall be sought and considered reasonably, in good faith and in a timely basis. 2.2 Retainer of City’s Project Manager – The City will retain the City’s Project Manager to assist the City with the project management and implementation of the Community Plan process. 2.3 Payments of Costs – The City will make written requests for funds from the Trustee on a semi-annual basis to fund the Estimated Costs (including the Disbursement Allowance). Provided that the City’s request is appropriate for the Estimated Costs of the applicable semi-annual term in accordance with the approved budget set out in Schedule “C”, the Trustee will provide payment to the City in the amount set out in the request received from the City within fifteen (15) Business Days following receipt of such request. 2.4 Cost oversight – In the event that the Owners have an objection to any Additional Costs or if Additional Costs are projected to exceed the estimated amount set out in Schedule “D”, the Trustee, on behalf of the Owners, may request a meeting with the City for the purpose of resolving the issue. In the event that the Trustee delivers written notice of such an objection to the City, a meeting between the City, the Trustee and representatives of the Owners shall be held as soon as possible, and an automatic extension of at least five (5) Business Days following the date that such meeting is held shall apply with respect to the time period for the Trustee to remit any related payment to the City, if any. ARTICLE 3 TRUSTEE 3.1 Appointment – The Trustee represents that it has been duly appointed by the Owners to act as Trustee for the Owners for the purposes of this Agreement. 3.2 Functions of Trustee – The Trustee shall perform the functions specified in this Agreement and functions ancillary thereto. The Trustee shall generally do all such things required to give effect to those provisions of this Agreement, in accordance with the intentions of the parties as expressed by the terms of this Agreement. 3.3 Representative of Trustee – For the purpose of any of the functions of Trustee that entail communications and/or interactions between the Trustee and the City pursuant to this Agreement, the affairs and functions of the Trustee shall be controlled, managed, and performed by lawyers at a law firm retained to act on behalf of the Trustee and the Owners for this purpose. 3.4 Trustee representations and warranties – The Trustee represents and warrants that, as of the date of this Agreement: (a) It is duly incorporated, organized, and subsisting under the laws of the Province of Ontario. (b) It has all necessary capacity, power, and authority to enter into and to carry out the provisions of this Agreement. (c) Neither the execution of this Agreement nor the fulfilment of or compliance with the terms and conditions hereof: (i) Conflicts with or will conflict with or result in a breach of any of the terms, conditions, or provisions of or constitute a default under the constating documentation of the Trustee; and (ii) Conflicts in a material respect with or will conflict in a material respect with or result in a material breach of any of the terms, - 406 - DH 01709084 4 4 conditions, or provisions of or constitute a material default under any agreement, licence, or other instrument to which the Trustee is a party or by which it is bound. (d) To its knowledge after due inquiry, there are no actions, suits or proceedings pending or threatened against the Trustee which could reasonably be expected to materially adversely affect its ability to perform its obligations under this Agreement. 3.5 City representations and warranties – The City represents and warrants that, as of the date of this Agreement that: (a) It is a municipal corporation duly established and organized under the laws of the Province of Ontario. (b) It has all necessary capacity, power, and authority to enter into this Agreement pursuant to Part II of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c. 25, as amended and, subject only to the qualifications expressly provided in this Agreement, to carry out the provisions of this Agreement. (c) To its knowledge after due inquiry, there are no actions, suits or proceedings pending or threatened against the City which could reasonably be anticipated to materially adversely affect its ability to perform its obligations under this Agreement. ARTICLE 4 TERM AND TERMINATION 4.1 Effective date of this Agreement – This Agreement shall be of no force and effect until executed by the City and the Trustee. Once so executed, the effective date of this Agreement shall be deemed conclusively to be the date shown on the first page of the Agreement. 4.2 Termination – This Agreement shall terminate upon such time as all Actual Costs have been paid or mutually agreed by the City and the Trustee, provided that a minimum of 60 days notice is provided. ARTICLE 5 OWNER RECOVERIES 5.1 Development Charges – The City acknowledges that policies in the City’s Official Plan permit the Actual Costs to be included in an existing and/or future DC By-law for the City. The City will include the Actual Costs within a DC By- law for the City and will provide any available Development Charge credits to the Owners in relation to the Actual Costs. 5.2 Recoveries from Non-Participating Benefitting Owners – The City agrees to use its best efforts to recover the portions of the Actual Costs funded by the Owners through the Trustee pursuant to this Agreement for the benefit of Non- Participating Benefitting Owners, by requiring, as a condition of development, that appropriate cost sharing arrangements be entered into by Non- Participating Benefitting Owners. The City further agrees to support the inclusion of a specific policy in the Community Plan that requires that appropriate cost sharing arrangements be entered into by Non-Participating Benefitting Owners to reimburse the Owners for the Actual Costs as a condition of development approval. ARTICLE 6 NOTICE 6.1 Notice particulars – Any notice, demand, acceptance, request, or other communication (“Notice”) required to be given hereunder shall be given in writing and shall be given by personal delivery or email and addressed to: The City as follows: - 407 - DH 01709084 4 5 The Corporation of the City of Pickering One The Esplanade Pickering, ON L1V 6K7 Attention: Catherine Rose, Chief Planner Email: crose@pickering.ca The Trustee as follows: North East Pickering Landowners Group Inc. c/o Davies Howe LLP The Tenth Floor 425 Adelaide Street West Toronto, ON M5V 3C1 Attention: Daniel Steinberg Email: daniels@davieshowe.com 6.2 Method of notice – Any notice shall be conclusively deemed to have been given to and received by the party to which it is addressed (a) if personally delivered, on the date of delivery; or (b) if by email or facsimile, on the day transmission delivery is confirmed by the party delivering the notice, provided that if delivery occurs after 5:00 p.m., Eastern Standard time, on a Business Day or at any time which is not a Business Day, delivery shall be conclusively deemed to have been given on the next Business Day. ARTICLE 7 GENERAL PROVISIONS 7.1 Recitals – The parties agree that the recitals herein are true and accurate and form part of this Agreement. 7.2 Singular and plural – Words importing the singular include the plural and vice versa. 7.3 Gender – Words importing gender include all genders. 7.4 Captions and headings – The captions and headings contained herein are for reference only and in no way affect this Agreement or its interpretation. 7.5 Covenants – Each agreement and obligation of each party hereto in this Agreement, even though not expressed as a covenant, shall be considered for all purposes to be a covenant. 7.6 Applicable law – This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the Province of Ontario and the laws of Canada applicable thereto and shall be treated in all respects as an Ontario contract. 7.7 Currency – All references to currency in this Agreement shall be references to Canadian dollars. 7.8 Entire agreement – This Agreement, the schedules referred to herein constitute the entire agreement between the parties hereto and supersede all prior agreements, representations, reports, recommendations, statements, promises, information, arrangements, and understandings, whether oral or written, express or implied, with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement. 7.9 Successors and assigns - It is hereby agreed by the parties hereto that this Agreement shall be enforceable by and against the parties, their administrators, heirs (where applicable), successors and permitted assigns. 7.10 Force majeure – If the City is delayed or hindered in or prevented from the performance of any act required to be performed by the City under this Agreement by reason of acts of God, strikes, lockouts, unavailability of materials, curtailment of transportation facilities, failure of power, prohibitive - 408 - DH 01709084 4 6 governmental laws or regulations, riots, insurrections, war, terrorist activities, explosions, unavoidable casualty or the act or failure to act of any other party (except those for whom in law the City is responsible), adverse weather conditions preventing the performance of work, or other unspecified, unforeseen or uncontrollable events beyond the City’s control, then the time for performance of such act shall be extended for a period equivalent to the period of such delay. 7.11 Modifications and amendments – No modifications or amendment to this Agreement may be made unless agreed to by the parties in writing. 7.12 Further assurances – At all times and from time to time hereafter upon every reasonable written request to do so, the Parties shall make, execute, deliver or cause to be made, done, executed and delivered, all such further acts, deeds, assurances and things as may be reasonably required to implement and carry out, the true intent and meaning of this Agreement. 7.13 Parties to act reasonably – Notwithstanding anything else in this Agreement, wherever in this Agreement any decision, action, consent, approval, or fee is to be made, taken or charged by or on behalf of any party hereto, this Agreement requires that the parties and their respective agents, servants, consultants or contractors shall act reasonably, expeditiously, and in good faith in respect thereof. 7.14 Time of the essence – Time shall be of the essence of this Agreement. 7.15 Counterpart execution – This Agreement may be executed in counterparts (i.e. it shall not be necessary for all of the parties to have signed the same copy hereof) and may be executed and/or transmitted by facsimile or e-mail. 7.16 No fettering – W here any provision of this Agreement contemplates a future legislative or policy decision within the discretion of Council of the City, such decision shall remain within the sole and unfettered legislative or policy discretion of Council of the City. 7.17 Schedules – The following schedules are attached to and form an integral part of this Agreement: Schedule “A” List of Owners Schedule “B” Plan Depicting North East Pickering Area Schedule “C” Approved Budget Schedule “D” Estimated Fees and Expenses The parties are signing this Agreement on the date above first written. [SIGNATURE PAGES TO FOLLOW] - 409 - PICKERINGWHITBY8TH CON RD 7TH CON RD SALEM RDSIDELINE 6SIDELINE 4SIDELINE 2WESTNEY RDSIDELINE 8SIDELINE 4HWY 7 LAKE RIDGE RDWESTNEY RDLAKE RIDGE RDKINSALE RD6TH CON RD £¤407 3 2 20 1 10 4 5 8 19 17 12 16 14 13 15 6 11 7 18 21 9 Sources: Goog le Earth Im ag ery, May 2018 Contains inform ation licensed und er the Open Governm ent Licence – Ontario North East Pickering Municipal Boundary Greenbelt Plan - Protected Country Hamlet Non-Developable Area Hwy 407 Right-of-Way 30m Hydro Corridor Natural Area/Natural Heritage System Participating Landowners Armland Group Brown Group Clark (Ravi) Coughlan Homes Dorsay Trinison Tribute 0 250 500125 metres Ü PARTICIPATING LANDOWNERS NORTH EAST PICKERING MGP File: 20-2918 Date: May 17, 2021 KINSALE GREENWOOD KINSALE PARTICIPATING LANDOWNERS DEVELOPABLE AREA Notes: 1. Areas m easured in hectares. 2. Developable area exclud es: - Greenbelt Plan (outsid e of Veraine Com m unity) - Hig hw ay 407 R ig ht-of-Way - 30m Hyd ro Corrid or - Natural Area Desig nation from Sched ule I: Land Use Structure, Pickering Official Plan, Ed ition 8, June 2018 - Natural Heritag e System Desig nation w ithin Active R ecreational Areas from Sched ule III A: R esource Manag em ent - The Natural Heritag e System , Pickering Official Plan, Ed ition 8, June 2018. GREENWOOD Map ID Participating Landowner Gross Area Developable Area 21 Arm land Group 4.0 3.5 11 Brow n Group 8.4 4.3 17 Clark (R avi)31.8 6.1 14 Coug hlan Hom es 18.1 16.8 1 50.2 31.2 2 68.9 41.7 3 104.2 77.7 4 38.4 26.8 7 4.0 2.2 10 82.2 63.6 12 27.2 0.3 13 13.1 9.5 16 19.1 12.6 18 4.8 3.0 5 37.2 25.5 6 6.2 6.2 8 36.3 19.4 9 0.8 0.8 15 12.1 12.1 19 69.6 14.4 20 118.7 61.5 Total Participating Landowners 755.5 439.2 Tribute Dorsay Trinison - 410 - Westney RoadSalem RoadLake Ridge RoadHighway 407 High w a y 7Sideline 8Eighth Concession Road Sideline 2Seventh Concession Road Sideline 4Sideline 6Sideline 121:30,000 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 DevelopmentDepartment Location MapProperty Description for Northeast Pickering Lands: THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. Date: Jul. 24, 2020 Parts of Lots A, 1 to 11, Parts of Concessions 5, 6 and 7 L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\Other\02- CityDevelopment\Planning Studies\D1100-99_Veraine\LocationMap - Northeast Pickering.mxd Legend Northeast Pickering Lands MTO Owned Lands Greenbelt Boundary Hamlets Attachment #1 to Report #PLN 31-21 - 411 - Attachment #2 to Report #PLN 31-21 Council Decision Resolution #173/19 WHEREAS, at the September 23, 2019 Council meeting, the City of Pickering adopted Resolution #140/19 “An Age Friendly Affordable Housing Strategy”; And Whereas, included in this Resolution was a request for Durham Region to include in their Municipal Comprehensive Review all lands within the City of Pickering that meet the following criteria: •lands not restricted by availability of servicing •lands that do not compromise a specialty crop area •lands that are not within a natural heritage system •lands not located in the moraine natural core and linkage areas •lands experiencing growth pressures and/or with locations in the white belt that are appropriate for growth and can achieve a healthy, connected, thriving and complete community •lands that have existing or planned infrastructure to support and accommodate growth; And Whereas, at the Planning and Development Committee meeting of November 4, 2019, the Community of Veraine presentation was made to the City of Pickering, being a new community proposed for northeast Pickering based on thriving, connected and complete community principles that comprise inclusivity and affordability; And Whereas, among other things Veraine provides an opportunity that can address the need for age friendly, affordable housing options for future generations for decades to come; Now therefore be it resolved that the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering: 1.Supports the Vision and Community Planning Principles for the lands in northeast Pickering known as Veraine, and reaffirms its request that the Region of Durham include these lands in the settlement area boundary during its current Municipal Comprehensive Review; 2.That City Staff be directed to report back to Committee in Q1 2020 outlining a process to initiate a secondary plan for the new community of Veraine based on the Community Planning Principles in Appendix 1 attached to this Motion; 3.That City Staff be directed through the CAO’s Office to discuss with the landowners an arrangement for a dedicated team that will work on the Veraine file, without impacting other priorities of the City of Pickering; and, 4.That a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Region of Durham. - 412 - Attachment #3 to Report #PLN 31-21 Council Decision Resolution #347/20 & #348/20 1.That Corr. 29-20, dated June 17, 2020, from Geoffrey Grayhurst, President and CEO, Dorsay (Pickering) Limited, regarding a Request to Initiate a Ministerial Zoning Order for Lands in Northeast Pickering – the Community of Veraine, be received; 2.a) That the Deputy Mayor, on behalf of Council, be directed to make a request to Minister Steve Clark, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, for a Minister’s Zoning Order for the Community of Veraine; b)That Staff be directed to include in the August Secondary Plan Strategy, the ability to implement an interim control by-law, prior to any approvals, to ensure that the Town of Ajax is satisfied with any matters pertaining to the watershed on Carruthers Creek; and, 3.That the request and this resolution be copied to the Premier of Ontario, the Honourable Doug Ford and Pickering-Uxbridge MPP, the Honourable Peter Bethlenfalvy. - 413 - Attachment #4 to Report #PLN 31-21 Council Decision Resolution #140/19 WHEREAS, the City of Pickering is projected to be a driving force for residential and economic growth in Durham Region and the GTA over the next 2 decades; And Whereas, by the year 2031 the estimated population of Pickering will grow to 190,000; And Whereas, the lack of affordable and sustainable housing options have reached a crisis in parts of Canada, and in particular the Greater Toronto area; And Whereas, the City of Pickering recognizes that there is an urgent need to create an age friendly housing strategy that includes reviewing and redefining its urban/living boundaries consistent with current and future growth within the GTA, Durham, and City of Pickering beyond 2031; And Whereas, the City of Pickering considers all serviceable lands with access to water and sewer within its current and potential urban/living boundaries be considered as a living area; And Whereas, the Province of Ontario has recognized the need for more housing choices and more affordability; And Whereas, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing has produced its “More Homes, More Choice: Ontario’s Housing Supply Action Plan”, and has given royal assent to Bill 108 (More Homes, More Choice Act, 2019) to address housing supply, housing variety and affordability; And Whereas, the City of Pickering has commenced a Strategic Plan Review that includes redefining its urban/living boundaries; And Whereas, the Provincial Government amended the Growth Plan to permit some additional options for urban area boundary expansions, and to allow upper and single- tier municipalities to request alternative intensification targets to address, among other matters, greater housing supply, and affordability; And Whereas, proposed amendments to the Provincial Policy Statement will allow consideration of market demands and needs in determining housing options, as a strategy to provide a more diverse range of grade related homes; And Whereas, the Region of Durham is currently undertaking a municipal comprehensive review of its settlement areas, including a land needs assessment as required by the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe; And Whereas, on February 27, 2019, Durham Regional Council commented on Amendment 1 to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe 2017 in support of a minimum density of 50 persons and jobs per gross hectare for new greenfield developments, and a region-wide intensification target of a minimum 45% within the existing built boundary; - 414 - Council Decision Resolution #140/19 And Whereas, the City of Pickering supports the Region’s comments on Amendment 1 to the Growth Plan; Now therefore be it resolved that the Council of the Corporation for the City of Pickering request that the Region of Durham in their review include: 1. All lands within the City of Pickering meet the following criteria: • Lands not restricted by availability of servicing • Lands that do not comprise a Specialty Crop Area • Lands that are not within a Natural Heritage System • Lands not located in the Moraine Natural Core and Linkage Areas • Lands experiencing growth pressures and or with locations in the white belt that are appropriate for growth and can achieve a healthy, connected, thriving and complete community • Lands that have existing or planned infrastructure to support and accommodate growth 2. That the Region of Durham be requested to seek approval of the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing to an alternate intensification rate of 45% for Durham Region that will enable greater flexibility to provide a more diverse range of grade related housing mix; 3. That City staff be directed to report back to Planning & Development Committee in the first quarter of 2020 outlining a process to develop an age friendly housing strategy, including changes to Pickering’s Official Plan and any required secondary plan reviews of those lands in Pickering that meet the stated criteria of recommendation #1; and, 4. That a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Premier of Ontario, Durham Region MPPs, all Durham Regional Municipalities, and the Region of Durham. - 415 -