Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/23/2006 • (Afif;qWW Energizing Ontario GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE DATE: JANUARY 23, 2006 TIME: 9:30 A.M. PLACE: COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. ROLL CALL 2. DISCLOSURES OF PECUNIARY INTEREST 3. MINUTES (a) Minutes of a Regular Meeting of January 9, 2006 301 4.(a) PRESENTATIONS No Presentations (b) DELEGATIONS (i) Lou Devuono — Rockey's Motorcycle Charity Ride (ii) Tom Barrie, Agriculture Advisory Committee —Annual Report to Council (iii) Glenn Case, Manager, Projects & Facilities Development, Low Level Radioactive Waste Management Office, regarding Report PSD-007-06 — Port Granby Project (iv) Mark Foley, Phip Limited (The Foley Group), regarding Report PSD-008-06 —Application for Rezoning to Permit 14 Residential Units 5. PUBLIC MEETINGS (a) Application to Amend the Zoning By-Law 84-63 501 Applicant: Barry McCabe Report: PSD-006-06 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T (905) 623-3379 G.P. & A. Agenda - 2 - January 23, 2006 6. PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT (a) PSD-006-06 — Rezoning Application to Convert an Existing Workshop 601 into a Garden Suite Applicant: Barry McCabe (b) PSD-007-06 — Port Granby Project —Analysis Regarding Double Base 609 Liner, Lakeshore Road Grade Separation, and Pre-Construction Road Upgrades (c) PSD-008-06 — Zoning By-law Amendment to Permit the Construction of 655 Fourteen Dwellings Applicant: Phip Limited (The Foley Group) (d) PSD-009-06 — Places to Grow— Draft Growth Plan for the Greater 664 Golden Horseshoe 7. ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT (a) EGD-003-06 — Monthly Report on Building Permit Activity for 701 December, 2005 (b) EGD-004-06 — Clarington Corners Submission Phase 1 Stage 3, 706 Bowmanville, Plan 40M-1940, 'Certificate of Acceptance' and 'Assumption By-law', Final Works Including Roads and Other Related Works (c) EGD-005-06 — Bridle Court Extension Subdivision, Courtice 711 Plan 40M-2106, 'Certificate of Acceptance' and 'Assumption By-laws', Final Works Including Roads and Other Related Work 8. OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT No Reports 9. EMERGENCY AND FIRE SERVICES DEPARTMENT (a) ESD-002-06 — Monthly Response Report — December, 2005 901 10. COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT No Reports 11. CLERK'S DEPARTMENT No Reports 1 G.P. & A. Agenda - 3 - January 23, 2006 12. CORPORATE SERVICES DEPARTMENT (a) COD-004-06 — CL2005-47 — Mill Street Watermain Realignment, 1201 Newcastle (b) COD-005-06 — RFP2005-17 — Mail-in Voting Service 1207 (c) COD-006-06 — RFP2005-19 —Supply of Automated Count Process 1210 For Municipal Elections (d) COD-007-06 — Tender 2005-38 — Street Lighting Improvements at 1214 Various Locations 13. FINANCE DEPARTMENT No Reports 14. CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER'S DEPARTMENT No Reports 15. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 16. OTHER BUSINESS 17. ADJOURNMENT cladfloon General Purpose and Administration Committee t.mv�u1,ut Minutes January 9, 2006 Minutes of a meeting of the General Purpose and Administration Committee held on Monday, January 9, 2006 at 9:30 a.m., in the Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Present Were: Mayor J. Mutton Councillor A. Foster Councillor D. MacArthur Councillor P. Pingle Councillor G. Robinson Councillor J. Schell Cuuncillor C. Trim Also Present: Chief Administrative Off.icer, F. Wu Director of Engineering Services, T. Cannella Director of Community Services, J. Caruana Director of Planning Services, D. Crome Director of Operations, F. Horvath Director of Corporate Services, M. Marano Director of Finance/Treasurer, N. Taylor Director of Emergency & Fire Services, G. Weir Deputy Clerk, A. Greentree Clerk Il, C. Tennisco Mayor Mutton chaired this portion of the meeting. DISCLOSURES OF PECUNIARY INTEREST There were no disclosures of pecuniary interest stated for this meeting. MINUTES Resolution #GPA-001-06 Moved by Councillor Schell, seconded by Councillor Trim THAT the minutes of the regular meeting of the General Purpose and Administration Committee held on December 5, 2005, be approved. CARRIED Mayor Mutton extended a Happy New Year to members of Council and the residents of Clarington. 301 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes January 9, 2006 PRESENTATION Samveg Saxena, President & Founder- UOIT Solar Vehicle Team presented to Mayor Mutton and Council a "Certificate of Appreciation" in recognition of The Municipality of Clarington's valuable contributions to UOIT Solar Vehicle Team. Mr. Saxena informed Council that $30,000.00 has been raised to assist in the completion of their solar powered car. The UOIT Solar Vehicle Team has implemented an "Adopt-A-Cell Program" to fund the costs of approximately 500 solar cells that will be required to power the team's solar car. The cells may be adopted at a cost of$50.00 per cell. In closing, Mr. Saxena extended an invitation to Council to visit the University to view the construction site of the solar car. DELEGATION There were no delegations. Councillor Schell chaired this portion of the meeting. PUBLIC MEETING (a) Subject: Application to Amend the Clarington Official Plan and Zoning By-Law 84-63 and for Approval of a Proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision Applicant: Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited Report: PSD-001-06 Cynthia Strike, Senior Planner, gave a verbal report pertaining to Report PSD-001-06. Jason Gibson, a resident residing east of the proposed site and a local apple farmer, spoke in opposition to this application. Mr. Gibson is concerned that the population growth related to a development of this size in the Newcastle area could negatively affect the area in the future. Mr. Gibson requested that Council heavily consider the impact that a major development of this size will have on Newcastle in the future. In closing, Mr. Gibson stated he is not opposed to development, but encourages Council to slow it down. We do not inherit land from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children. Doug Rombough, resident and owner of property in Newcastle, spoke in opposition to the application. Mr. Rombough is concerned about the adverse effects such amendments and future conversion of prime agricultural land will have on his property and the local community. His major concerns are: increased urbanization and the effect it would have on the nature and charm of the Village of Newcastle; protection of ecological systems and agricultural resources; proposed reduction in street widths adding to the on-street parking concerns and the risks associated for children and other pedestrians; cluster housing not compliant with the Clarington Official Plan; and the funding required for the infrastructure (roads and right- of-ways, storm sewers and drainage systems). In closing, Mr. Rombough requested an -2 - 302 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes January 9, 2006 Environmental Site Assessment of the proposed land, a copy of the Neighbourhood Design Plan and Watershed Study, and that he be advised of any subsequent meetings, adoption of the proposed amendments, and approval of the Draft Plan of Subdivision. Mr. Rombough distributed a letter to members of Council documenting his concerns. Joanne Raymond, a resident of Newcastle, spoke in opposition to this application. Ms. Raymond is concerned that the proposed large concrete draining area will not be pleasing to the eye. She also expressed concerns that the development will negatively affect the local residents' existing septic and sewer systems. Hugh Allin, owner of a local hog farm located north of the proposed development, spoke in support to the proposed development. Mr. Allin confirmed that his farming operations have not increased over the pa-,'. 10 years. He stated that other area farms also generate odours. Bryce Jordan, Sernas Associates, Agent, on behalf of Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited and Smooth Run Developments (Metrus Developments Inc.) spoke in support to the application and acknowledged the concerns of local residents regarding the impact of such a large development. Mr. Jordan introduced Mike Hudson, Urban Design Consultant, The MBTW Group - Community and Resort Planning, Urban Design, Landscape Architecture, to address these concerns. Mike Hudson, Urban Designer, The MBTW Group, presented a slide show in support of Report PSD-001-06. Mr. Hudson stated the design principles incorporated into this community are a healthy community, personal well being of the residents and local neighbourhoods, a strong sense of neighborhood, landscaping to create a continuation of the natural area, inter- connected grid streets with calming effects to cater to pedestrians and cyclists. Various open spaces, schools, parks, and amenities will be easily accessible by pedestrians along a central spine of the community. PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT PROPOSED OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROPOSED NEIGHBOURHOOD DESIGN PLAN FOR VILLAGE NORTH NEIGHBOURHOOD IN NEWCASTLE APPLICATIONS TO AMEND THE ZONING BY-LAW AND FOR APPROVAL OF DRAFT PLANS OF SUBDIVISION TO PERMIT 1469 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, PARKS AND SCHOOLS APPLICANTS: SMOOTH RUN DEVELOPMENTS (METROS DEVELOPMENTS INC.) AND BROOKFIELD HOMES (ONTARIO) LIMITED Resolution #GPA-002-06 Moved by Councillor Robinson, seconded by Councillor Trim THAT Report PSD-001-06 be received; - 3 - 303 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes January 9, 2006 THAT the application to amend the Clarington Official Plan COPA 2005-008, submitted by Smooth Run Developments and Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited be referred back to staff for further processing and the completion of a Neighbourhood Design Plan; THAT the application for Draft Plan of Subdivision S-C-2005-0003 and application for rezoning, ZBA 2005-042 submitted by Smooth Run Developments be referred back for further processing and completion of a Neighbourhood Design Plan; THAT the application for Draft Plan of Subdivision S-C-2005-0004 and application for rezoning, ZBA 2005-043 submitted by Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited be referred back for further processing and the completion of a Neighbourhood Design Plan; THAT the applicants be required to undertake a Financial Impact Analysis to address the impacts of these proposals to the Municipality; THAT Staff conduct a community consultation process for the North Village Neighbourhood Plan; and THAT all interested parties listed in Report PSD-001-06 and any delegation be advised of Council's decision. CARRIED BOWMANVILLE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN GRANTS UPDATE Resolution #GPA-003-06 Moved by Councillor MacArthur, seconded by Councillor Foster THAT Report PSD-002-06 be received; and THAT all interested parties listed in Report PSD-002-06 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. CARRIED ORONO COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN GRANTS UPDATE Resolution #GPA-004-06 Moved by Councillor Robinson, seconded by Councillor Trim THAT Report PSD-003-06 be received; and THAT all interested parties listed for Report PSD-003-06 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. CARRIED -4 - 304 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes January 9, 2006 MONITORING OF THE DECISIONS OF THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT FOR THE MEETINGS OF DECEMBER 1 AND DECEMBER 15, 2005 Resolution #GPA-005-06 Moved by Councillor Pingle, seconded by Councillor Trim THAT Report PSD-004-06 be received; and THAT Council concurs with the decisions of the Committee of Adjustment made on December 1, 2005 for applications A2005-0051 and A2005-0052, and on December 15, 2005 for application A2005/008, and that Staff be authorized to appear before the Ontario Municipal Board to defend the decisions of the Committee of Adjustment. CARRIED ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP PROGRAM UPDATE Resolution #GPA-006-06 Moved by Councillor Foster, seconded by Councillor Pingle THAT Report PSD-005-06 be received; and THAT all interested parties listed for Report PSD-005-06 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. CARRIED Councillor MacArthur chaired this portion of the meeting. ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT ON BUILDING PERMIT ACTIVITY FOR NOVEMBER, 2005 Resolution #GPA-007-06 Moved by Councillor Robinson, seconded by Councillor Schell THAT Report EGD-001-06 be received for information. CARRIED - 5 - 305 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes .January 9, 2006 OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT There were no reports considered under this section of the Agenda. Councillor Pingle chaired this portion of the meeting. EMERGENCY SERVICES DEPARTMENT MONTHLY RESPONSE REPORT - NOVEMBER, 2005 Resolution #GPA-008-uo Moved by Councillor Schell, seconded by Councillor Robinson THAT Report ESD-001-06 be received for information. CARRIED COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT There were no reports considered under this section of the agenda. CLERK'S DEPARTMENT There were no reports considered under this section of the agenda. Mayor Mutton chaired this portion of the meeting. CORPORATE SERVICES DEPARTMENT Reports COD-001-06 and COD-002-06 were withdrawn from the Agenda prior to the meeting. WORK TECH SOFTWARE Resolution #GPA-009-06 Moved by Councillor Schell, seconded by Councillor Trim THAT Report COD-003-06 be received; THAT Work Tech Inc., Grimsby, Ontario be awarded a contract for the Work Tech Software in the amount of$43,000.00 (Plus GST); -6 - 306 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes January 9, 2006 THAT funds required in the amount of$43,000, which have been carried over be drawn from Information Technology Software Account#110-16-162-81611-7401; and THAT the By-law attached to Report COD-003-06, marked Schedule "A", authorizing the Mayor and the Clerk to execute the necessary agreement be approved. CARRIED FINANCE DEPARTMENT There were no reports considered under this section of the agenda. CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER'S DEPARTMENT There were no reports considered under this section of the agenda. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Resolution #GPA-010-06 Moved by Councillor Robinson, seconded by Councillor Pingle THAT the presentation and Certificate of Appreciation of Samveg Saxena, President & Founder— UOIT Solar Vehicle Team regarding the solar vehicle be received with thanks. CARRIED OTHER BUSINESS Mayor Mutton advised that the Mayor's Levee will take place this Sunday, January 15, 2006 from 12:30 p.m. —2:30 p.m. at the Newcastle Community Hall. ADJOURNMENT Resolution #GPA-011-06 Moved by Councillor Robinson, seconded by Councillor Schell THAT the meeting adjourn at 10:50 a.m. CARRIED MAYOR DEPUTY CLERK -7 - 307 PUBLIC MEETING REPORT # PSD-006-06 • CORPORATION OF THE BARRY MCCABE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON Leadi�eg the Way NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION BY: Barry McCabe AN APPLICATION TO AMEND THE ZONING BY-LAW 84-63 TAKE NOTICE that the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington will consider a proposed Zoning By-law Amendment, under Section 34 of the Planning Act, 1990, as amended. APPLICATION DETAILS The proposed Zoning By-law Amendment submitted by Barry McCabe would permit the conversion of an existing workshop to a Garden Suite, an accessory in-law apartment on the lot. The subject property is located at 55 Centre Street, Bowmanville(as shown on reverse). Planning File Nos.: ZBA 2005-0056 PUBLIC MEETING The Municipality of Clarington will hold a public meeting to provide interested parties the opportunity to make comments, identify issues and provide additional information relative to the proposed development. The public meeting will be held on: DATE: Monday,January 23, 2006 TIME: 9:30 a.m. PLACE: Council Chambers,2nd Floor, Municipal Administrative Centre, 40 Temperance St., Bowmanville, Ontario ANY PERSON may attend the public meeting and/or make written or verbal representation either in support of or in opposition to the proposal. The start time listed above reflects the time at which the General Purpose and Administration Committee Meeting commences. If you cannot attend the Public Meeting on this application you can make a deputation to Council at their meeting on Monday January 30, 2006, commencing at 7:00 p.m. Should you wish to appear before Council, you must register with the Clerks Department by the Wednesday noon, January 25, 2006, to have your name appear in the Agenda. COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? If you wish to make a written submission or if you wish to be notified of subsequent meetings or the adoption of the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment, you must submit a written request to the Clerk's Department, 26d Floor, 40 Temperance Street, Bowmanville, Ontario L1 C 3A6. Additional information relating to the proposal is available for inspection between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. at the Planning Services Department, 3'd Floor, 40 Temperance Street, Bowmanville, Ontario L1C 3A6, or by calling Bruce Howarth at(905)623-3379 extension 261 or by e-mail at bhowarth @clarington.net. APPEAL If a person or public body that files a notice of appeal of a decision for the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment to the Ontario Municipal Board does not make oral submissions at a public meeting or does not make written submissions before the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment is approved, the Ontario Municipal Board may dismiss all or part of the appeal. Dated at the unicipality of Clarington this 19`h day of December 2005. D v' Crome, M.C.I.P., R.P.P. 40 Temperance Street Director of Planning Services Bowmanville,Ontario Municipality of Clarington L1C 3A6 501 EXISTING 2 STOREY GARAGE/WORKSHOP TO BE CONVERTED TO AN IN-LAW APARTMENT WW EXISTING HOUSE EXISTING DECK GAZEBO W Z W DRIVEWAY U Bowmanville L�:,Ll I t I I.L., TT I 111 VEST CONCESSION STREET WEST ZBA2005-0056 F_ T1 W o Zoning By-law Amendment CLARINGTON z SUBJECT Z BEECH CENTRE a SITE Lu x t5 Lu w � m N Eli _rnT � Owner: Barry McCabe LOWE STREET LOVERS LANE pwp J 502 • ar.�n n Leading the Way REPORT PLANNING SERVICES PUBLIC MEETING Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: Monday, January 23, 2006 Report#: PSD-006-06 File#: ZBA 2005-0056 By-law#: Subject: REZOKIING TO CONVERT AN EXISTING WORKSHOP TO A GARDEN SUITE APPLICANT: BARRY MCCABE RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report PSD-006-06 be received; 2. THAT provided there are no significant issues raised at the public meeting, the rezoning application. submitted by Barry McCabe be APPROVED and that the attached temporary use Zoning By-law amendment be adopted by Council; 3. THAT a by-law approving the removal of the "Holding (H)" symbol be forwarded directly to Council once an agreement has been entered into; 4. THAT the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to enter into an agreement for the use of a garden suite on the subject property; and 5. THAT all interested parties listed in this report and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. Submitted by: Reviewed by: � D vi J Crome, M.C.I.P., R.P.P. Franklin Wu, Diredtot of Planning Services Chief Administrative Officer BH/CP/DJC/sh/df/lw January 13, 2006 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T (905)623-3379 F (905)623-0830 601 REPORT NO.: PSD-006-06 Page 2 1.0 APPLICATION DETAILS 1.1 Owner: Barry McCabe 1.2 Rezoning: from "Urban Residential Type One (R1)" to "Urban Residential Exception (R1-65)" to convert a portion of an existing workshop temporarily into a garden suite. 1.3 Location: 55 Centre Street, Bowmanville, being Part of Lot 11, Concession 1, fcrmer Town of Bowmanville. 2.0 BACKGROUND 2.1 On November 9, 2005, the Planning Services Department received a rezoning application to permit the conversion of an existing workshop into a garden suite. 2.2 The size of the proposed garden suite is 79 square metres. The second floor workshop and a portion of the ground floor would be converted from an existing 107 square metre garage. 2.3 The property is serviced by a municipal water and storm sewers. 3.0 PUBLIC NOTICE AND SUBMISSIONS 3.1 Public notice was given by mail to each landowner within 120 metres of the subject property and a public notice sign was installed on the Centre Street Frontage. 3.2 As of the writing of this report, no comments have been received with respect to the application. 4.0 LAND CHARACTERISTICS AND SURROUNDING AREAS 4.1 A two storey single detached dwelling, detached garage, gazebo and an in=ground pool occupy the site. The subject property backs onto a three storey multi-residential complex. 4.2 Surrounding Uses: West - Residential North - Residential East - Residential South - Residential 602 REPORT NO.: PSD-006-06 Page 3 5.0 AGENCY COMMENTS 5.1 In consideration of the nature of the application to allow the conversion of an existing workshop into a garden suite, the application was circulated to a limited number of agencies. 5.2 The Region has advised that Residential Development Charges shall be imposed on a garden suite at the rate applicable to a one-bedroom apartment prior to the issuance of a building permit. Development Charges will be refunded in full to the then current Owner, upon request, if the garden suite is demolished or removed within ten years of the issuance of the building permit. 5.3 No circulated ?-encies had an objection to the proposed garden suite. Clarington Building division noted that a building permit would be required. 6.0 PROVINCIAL POLICY STATEMENT 6.1 Section 3 of the Planning Act requires that decisions affecting planning matters "shall be consistent with" the Provincial Policy Statement. The Provincial Policy Statement requires planning authorities to provide an appropriate range of housing types including all forms of housing required to meet the social, health and well-being of current residents. The existing infrastructure has sufficient capacity to accommodate this infill development. 7.0 OFFICIAL PLAN CONFORMITY 7.1 The Durham Region Official Plan designates the property Living Area. This proposal can be considered infill development and will intensify the existing neighbourhood, and is therefore consistent with the intent of this plan. 7.2 The Clarington Official Plan designates the subject property Urban Residential Area. The predominant use of lands designated Urban Residential Area within each neighbourhood shall be for housing purposes. This application is consistent with the intent of this plan. 7.3 The Housing policies of the Clarington Official Plan allows in association with any single detached dwelling through a temporary use by-law for a period of 10 years. The Owner must enter into an agreement with the Municipality of Clarington regarding the occupant, the period of occupancy, the installation, maintenance and removal of the suite, and any financial conditions. 603 REPORT NO.: PSD-006-06 Page 4 7.4 In applying for a temporary use by-law for a garden suite, the applicant must demonstrate that: a) There is a need to provide supervised accommodation or care for an elderly, sick, or disabled person; b) The site is adequate for the garden suite with regard to lot size, layout and private amenity areas; c) The proposal is compatible with adjacent uses considering such matters as privacy, noise and appearance; d) There is adequate on-site parking; and e) There is adequate water supply and sewage disposal services. These policieF � 411 be addressed in the staff comments (section 9.1) of this report. 8.0 ZONING BY-LAW CONFORMITY 8.1 The property is zoned "Urban Residential Type One (R1)" which does not permit a second dwelling unit, hence the subject application. 9.0 STAFF COMMENTS 9.1 The garden suite would comply with the requirements of the Clarington Official Plan. It is proposed to' be utilized by an elderly parent in need of supervised accommodation. The 79 square metre garden suite includes a kitchen and washroom facilities. The proposed garden suite would be setback 38 m from Centre Street and located behind the main dwelling. The structure already exists and no exterior change is proposed. The lot is 2265 square meters, more than 4 times larger than the minimum lot size for a single detached dwelling. Adequate on-site parking is provided. The garden suite would be serviced by municipal water and sewage connected to the main dwelling. Staff consider the use in the existing structure compatible. The building is in keeping with the character of the area and neighbouring accessory buildings. The garden suite proposal, although intensifying the usability of the building, is for an elderly parent in need of supervised care and is not expected to have a significant impact on the current use of the building or the property. 9.2 The applicant will dismantle the garden suite, removing the kitchen and washroom, at the expiry of the by-law, returning it to a workshop.. A temporary use by-law authorizing a garden suite cannot exceed 10 years. 9.3 Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the owner must enter into an agreement with the municipality regarding the occupant, period of occupancy, installation, maintenance and removal of the garden suite. A holding provision is recommended for the by-law until such time an agreement can be negotiated, at which time the (H) would be removed. 604 REPORT NO.: PSD-006-06 Page 6 9.4 The Finance Department advises that taxes have been paid in full. 10.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 10.1 Based on the comments in this report, it is respectfully recommended that the temporary rezoning application be APPROVED for period of 10 years from the day of the passing of the attached by-law. Attachment,i: Attachment 1 - Key heap Attachment 2 - By-law Amendment List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Barry McCabe 605 Attachment 1 To Report PSD-006-4G EXISTING 2 STOREY GARAGE/WORKSHOP TO BE CONVERTED TO AN IN-LAW APARTMENT ui �W Il' EXISTING HOUSE EXISTING GAZEBO I.IJ DECK ' POOL WDRIVEWAY U Bowmanville D m EST CONCESSION STREET WEST ZBA2005-0056 w Zoning By-law Amendment O CLARINGTONz SUBJECT Z BEECH SITE CENTRE a uj w � � m N Owner: Barry McCabe L STREET LOVERS LANE m J 606 Attachment To Report PSD-006-0 THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BY-LAW NO.2006- being a by-law to amend By-law 84-63,the Comprehensive Zoning By-law for the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington deems it advisable to amend By-law 84-63, as amended, of the former Town of Newcastle for ZBA 2005-0056; NOW THEREFORE BE. IT RESOLVED THAT the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington enacts as follows: 1. Section 12.4 "Special Exceptions — Urban Residential Type One (R1) Zone" is hereby amended by adding a new section 12.4.65 as follows: "12.4.65 URBAN RESIDENTIAL EXCEPTION (R1-65)ZONE Notwithstanding Section 12.1, those lands zoned R1-65 on the Schedule 3 to this By- law may, in addition to the other uses permitted in the R1 Zone, be used for a Garden Suite in accordance with the following definition and zone regulations: a) Definition A Garden Suite is a self-contained temporary dwelling unit designed to provide for the care of an elderly, sick and disabled person which is located in the side or rear yard of a property containing a single detached dwelling. b) The Garden Suite shall be removed on or before January 30, 2016. 2. Schedule "3" to By-law 84-63, as amended, is hereby further amended by changing the zone designation from: "Urban Residential Type One (R1) Zone" to "Holding - Urban Residential Exception ((H)R1-65)Zone." As illustrated on the attached Schedule"A"hereto. 3. Schedule"A"attached hereto shall form part of this By-law. 4. This By-law shall come into effect for a period of ten (10) years from the date of passing hereof, subject to the provisions of Sections 34 and 39.1 of the Planning Act. BY-LAW read a first time this day of 2006 BY-LAW read a second time this day of 2006 BY-LAW read a third time and finally passed this day of 2006 John Mutton, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk 607 This is Schedule "A" to By-law 2006- , passed this day of , 2006 A.D. EXISTING 2 STOREY GARAGE!WORKSHOP TO BE CONVERTED TO AN IN-LAW APARTMENT .w.__ W W I Z W U ® Zoning Change From "R1" To "R1-65" John Mutton, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk ON STREET WEST CONCESSION TREET WEST CONCESSION a STREET c� FL z cr > y CLARINGTON w TRUDEAU = BEECH > x o�TRF CENTRE = w o W m Z s 1�0� 4 N w MARCHWOOD CF cti G� Uj �l N LOWE STREET LOVERS LANE w (a TRUDEAU D Rte, z ��lv �YF "✓l (AWE' ALEXANDER BLVD. LIBERTY CARLISLE AVENUE BOWMANl9LL£HIGH SCi cy I � II Bowmanville 608 arin n Leadin the Wa REPORT g y PLANNING SERVICES Meeting: GENERAL. PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: Monday, January 23, 2006 Report#: PSD-007-06 File #: PLN 33.4 By-law#: Subject: PORT G^;NBY PROJECT— ANALYSIS REGARDING DOUBLE BASE LINER, LAKESHORE ROAD GRADE SEPARATION, AND PRE-CONSTRUCTION ROAD UPGRADES RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report PSD-007-06 be received for information; and 2. THAT a copy of Staff Report PSD-007-06 and Council's decision be forwarded to all interested parties indicated in this report. Submitted by: Reviewed by. a J. Crome, M.C.I.P., R.P.P. Franklin Wu, Director of Planning Services Chief Administrative Officer JAS/FUDJC/df 12 January 2006 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T(905)623-3379 F(905)623-0830 609 REPORT NO.: PSD-007-06 PAGE 2 1.0 BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE OF REPORT 1.1 The Legal Agreement that forms the basis of the Port Hope Area Initiative requires the Low Level Radioactive Waste Management Office (LLRWMO), as the Proponent for the Port Granby Project, to obtain the written consent of the Municipality to a preferred option for the long term management of the Port Granby wastes prior to submitting that option to relevant authorities for review and approval. 1.2 In September 2004, Council concurred with the LLRWMO's recommendation that the Port Granby wastes be relocated to a new engineered storage mound north of Lakeshore Road (Qualified .Concept). In February 2005, the LLRWMO formally submitted the Environmental Assessment Study Report (EASR) for the Port Granby Project to th- Municipality. The EASR provided a summary of all of the studies undertaken by the LLRWMO through the EA for the Port Granby Project, including the assessment of the effects of the.Qualified Concept on the natural and socio-cultural environments and human.health and safety. 1.3 On March 29, 2005, Committee considered Staff Report PSD-041-05 which provided the results of the review of the EASR undertaken by staff and the Municipal Peer Review Team (MPRT). This review indicated that the EASR had confirmed that the relocation of the wastes to a new long term storage facility north of Lakeshore Road should proceed as the preferred option for the Port Granby Project. Staff and MPRT also concluded that a double composite base liner, rather than the single composite base liner recommended by the LLRWMO, should be installed under the new long term storage facility. However, the impacts related to the installation of a second liner were not reflected in the .EASR as prepared by the LLRWMO and submitted to Council. 1.4 Council adopted a resolution to request the LLRWMO to investigate the effects of installing a double composite base liner at the new Long Term Waste Management Facility (LTWMF) for the Port Granby Project, and that the EASR be revised accordingly. Council also requested the LLRWMO to examine the possibility of a grade separation under Lakeshore Road between the existing and new waste sites, and pre-construction upgrades to municipal roads to be used for the haulage of construction materials. 1.5 The purpose of this report is to provide an update on the LLRWMO's investigation of the three issues identified by Council, and the results of the review by staff and the MPRT of the work undertaken by the LLRWMO. 2.0 DOUBLE COMPOSITE BASE LINER SYSTEM 2.1 Analysis of Options 2.1.1 The composite base liner system originally proposed by the LLRWMO is comprised of three individual components, as follows (from top to bottom): • 0.5 m thick sand layer to provide a permeable media through which leachate from the waste could travel to the leachate collection system; 610 REPORT NO.: PSD-007-06 PAGE 3 • 0.002 m thick High Density Polyethylene (HDPE) geomembrane to provide a bottom to the sand drainage layer and to assist in the collection of the leachate; • 0.75 m thick compacted clay liner (CCL) to adsorb and further repel any leachate that may migrate through the two previous component layers. The single three component base liner system would be 1.25 m thick, would require 5,650 truck loads of construction material, would cost $4.75 million, and would require 136 days to install. 2.1.2 The LLRWMO reviewed three potential double base liner systems, as follows: • Option 1 Doubling the original three component base liner system. This liner system would be 2.5 m thick and would include two 0.75 m CCL. This option would require 11,300 truck loads of material, would cost $9.5 million, and would require 270 days to install • Option 2 — Doubling the three component base liner system, using a 0.005 m geosynthetic clay liner (GCL) in place of the CCL. .This liner system would be 1.17 m thick, would require 4,650 truck loads, would cost $7.56 million, and would require 165 days to install. • Option 3 — Doubling the original three component system, using both CCL and GCL (a hybrid of Options 1 and 2). This liner system would be 1.75 m thick, would require 7,975 truck loads of material, would cost $8.53 million, and would require 218 days to install. 2.1.3 The LLRWMO's analysis indicated that none of the three options would perform appreciably better in containing leachate than the single three component base liner system originally recommended. The LLRWMO concluded that, since no significant groundwater quality impacts are expected with the original single base liner system, the installation of a second base liner system would not provide any significant technical advantage. The LLRWMO has therefore recommended that the original three component base liner design be retained for the long term storage mound. A copy of the LLRWMO's report forms Attachment 2 to this report. 2.2 Capillary Drainage Layer 2.2.1 The LLRWMO subsequently undertook a comprehensive review of the entire design of the engineered mound to explore other approaches for optimizing the mound performance and ensuring the isolation of the waste from the environment. As a result of this review, the LLRWMO has recommended that a capillary drainage layer be included in the low permeability mound. cover system as a means to improve the overall performance of the mound. The capillary drainage layer would provide an additional level of protection against moisture infiltration into the waste, particularly in the event of 611 REPORT NO.: PSD-007-06 PAGE 4 the deterioration of the geomembrane component of the cap. The drainage layer would passively redirect any moisture that infiltrates into the mound cover away from the waste and to the edges of the mound where it would drain away as clean uncontaminated water. Sensors would be placed in the drainage layer to monitor its performance. The capillary drainage layer would be 0.6 m thick and would increase the thickness of the mound cover to 3.5 m. 2.2.2 While the base liner is intended to contain leachate if moisture infiltrates into the waste, the enhanced cap would reduce the potential for leachate production in the first place by minimizing the potential for moisture to contact the waste. By providing a passive system, it helps to ensure that the mound would continue to protect the environment in the event that institutional controls should fail at sometime in the future. As well, all of the soil neeO-d to construct the capillary drainage layer is available on the site of the new waste management facility, thereby avoiding the need to transport additional construction materials to the site. Attachment 3 shows a cross-section of the mound cover with the capillary drainage layer included. 2.3 Residents' Comments 2.3.1 The LLRWMO presented the enhanced facility design, including the addition of the capillary drainage layer to the cover of the new LTWMF, at three Public Information Centres held at the Newtonville Hall in November 2005. Staff and the Ward 4 Councillors also met with a number of SECRA members in December 2005 and January 2006. 2.3.2 The following is a summary of comments made by area residents with respect to the modified design of the LTWMF: • Generally support the concept of the enhanced mound cover; • A double base liner is still necessary to deal with leachate generated during the construction phase before the mound cover is put in place and during the first 25 years of operation while the waste settles; • A double liner is still necessary in the event that the mound cover fails; • By not installing a double base liner, the LLRWMO is relying on the natural till on-site to contain leachate; • There is sand present on the site of the LTWMF; • The Port Hope LTWMF may have the enhanced mound cover in addition to the double base liner; • The LLRWMO rejected the double base liner because of cost; 612 REPORT NO.: PSD-007-06 PAGE 6 • Staff and the MPRT have reversed their position on the need for a double liner. 2.4 Municipal Peer Review Team Comments 2.4.1 The MPRT has indicated that the second base liner was a redundancy measure that they previously recommended to improve the performance of the original design of the LTWMF developed by the LLRWMO. Some redundancy is required to address the anticipated failure of some systems and the potential loss of institutional control over the long term. Based on their review of the enhanced facility design, the MPRT agrees with the LLRWMO that the enhanced design of the mound cover, together with the single - base liner system, ensures the--redundancy of the overall system and provides the Municipality with a safe and durable long term facility. As such, the MPRT is confident that 'here is no benefit to adding additional redundant systems as represented by the double liner system. 2.4.2 In indicating their support for the enhanced mound design, the MPRT cited the following factors: • The capillary drainage layer would intercept any moisture that infiltrates through the overlying layers in the mound cover, further reducing the potential for moisture to contact the waste and thus reducing the amount of leachate produced to negligible levels even if the geomembrane in the mound cover fails; • The enhanced design operates passively based on natural capillary action (i.e. no pumps or other equipment required) to keep the waste dry over the long term; • The installation of instrumentation in the capillary layer enhances the ability to detect moisture infiltration and remediate the cover system if necessary, in contrast to the liner system which cannot be fixed once the mound is closed; • By minimizing the amount of leachate produced in the first place, the enhanced mound cover provides a more proactive approach to isolating the waste than would a double base liner. 2.4.3 The base liner under the new LTWMF is primarily required to deal with leachate created during construction, when the mound is open and the waste is exposed to precipitation, and for the 5 to 10 year period following closure of the mound when residual drainage of leachate will occur. Even though much of the LLRW has a high moisture content, it is expected to generate very little leachate after this period and significantly smaller amounts of leachate than a domestic landfill The MPRT has concluded, based on their review, that a double base liner system is not required to deal with the leachate generated during construction and the period immediately following closure. There will be no degradation of the liner system during this short period of time and any leachate generated will be collected through the leachate collection system. Also, the regulatory agencies and the LLRWMO will be carefully monitoring leachate generation and the ability of the mound to collect and treat leachate during this time. Any potential difficulties with the liner system would be 613 REPORT NO.: PSD-007-06 PAGE 6 generation of additional leachate, and the multiple components of the base liner will serve to prevent any leachate from contaminating the natural environment. 2.4.4 The details of the enhanced facility design are at a conceptual stage at this point and, as with most of the components of the Qualified Concept, more detailed study will be necessary in order to obtain a construction licence from the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC). The MPRT has made a number of recommendations to the LLRWMO to support the design process and assure the performance of the capillary barrier system as expected. A copy of the MPRT's report forms Attachment 4 to this report. 2.5 Staff Comm,--',,! 2.5.1 In Report PSD-041-05, Staff supported the MPRT's recommendation that a double base liner should be constructed at the Port Granby LTWMF. Reasons given for this support included the need to provide redundant protection systems and to increase public confidence in the LTWMF. However, it is important to note that this recommendation related to the design of the LTWMF as previously proposed by the LLRWMO. Studies undertaken by the LLRWMO have indicated that the installation of the double liner would not improve the performance of the LTWMF and thus not provide the redundant level of protection being sought by the Municipality. 2.5.2 Staff has been directly involved with the technical discussions with the LLRWMO regarding the double base liner and the enhanced mound cover. As a result of these discussions and the positive response of the MPRT to the inclusion of the capillary drainage layer in the mound cover, Staff is supporting the MPRT's position that the enhancement of the mound cover through the inclusion of a capillary drainage layer is a more appropriate approach to achieving the redundant protection that the Municipality is seeking. 2.5.3 As well, Staff cannot support the residents' request that a double base liner be installed in addition to the enhanced mound cover. As noted by Section 2.1.2 of this report, the studies undertaken by the LLRWMO indicated that two of the options would have resulted in a significant increase in both the truck traffic along area roads and the length of the construction period. In this regard, there is a need to balance the very minimal potential for leachate to escape from the bottom of the LTWMF against the additional impacts on area residents that would be created by the construction of the double base liner. Option 2 for the base liner would have resulted in a 17% reduction (as compared to the single base liner) in the number of trucks and an additional 29 construction days. However, this option would cost an additional $2.8 million. Staff agree with the LLRWMO that the additional expenditure of public funds to install a double base liner is not justified if it does not produce any appreciable improvement in the performance of the LTWMF. 614 REPORT NO.: PSD-007-06 PAGE 7 2.5.4 The single base liner will be 1.25 m thick, and will be comprised of 0. 5 m of sand (to drain any leachate) lying overtop of a thin HDPE membrane and 0.75 m of imported low permeability clay (to adsorb any remaining leachate). The single base liner system, as currently proposed, is thus already a multi-component system with built-in redundant levels of protection. As well, the bottom of the Port Granby mound will be underlain by 8 to 12 m of relatively impermeable native till, and would be located between 5 to 20 m above the water table. Therefore, because of the geotechnical characteristics of the Port Granby site, a double base liner system would not be required to prevent leachate from contaminating the water table and Port Granby Creek. In contrast, a double base liner is required for the new Port Hope LTWMF given the relatively porous soils found on the site and the proximity of the base of the mound to the water table. 3.0 MUNICIPAL RnAD UPGRADES 3.1 At Council's request, the LLRWMO also undertook a detailed engineering assessment of both the Main Haul Route, which would be used for the hauling of construction materials to the existing and new waste sites, and the Contingency Route, which would be used very occasionally for the transport of equipment too large to pass through the rail underpass on Elliott Road. The Main Haul Route and the Contingency Route are shown on Attachment 5. 3.2 The LLRWMO's analysis indicated that those portions of Newtonville Road and Concession Road 1 on the Main Haul Route are structurally deficient and not capable of supporting construction traffic related to the Port Granby Project. The LLRWMO will be responsible for the full cost of upgrading these roads. Since Elliott Road is currently unimproved, the LLRWMO is also responsible for upgrading this road allowance between Concession Road 1 and the entrance to the new LTWMF. 3.3 The LLRWMO's analysis indicated that large sections of the Contingency Route are also not structurally suitable to carry heavy loads. However, a further review of the dimensions of the rail underpass on Elliott Road indicated that any equipment that cannot fit through the underpass could be off-loaded from the truck and driven through. Accordingly, the .LLRWMO now anticipates that only very limited, if any, use of the Contingency Route will be required and, as such, has indicated that pre-construction upgrades for the municipal roads along the Contingency Route should not be necessary. 3.4 The Engineering Services Department has reviewed the analysis provided by the LLRWMO and has agreed that pre-construction improvements would not appear to be required for Lakeshore Road and Newtonville Road south of Concession Road 1, subject to the following conditions: • No exemptions to the half-load restrictions in spring; • Approval by the Municipality of a Road Occupancy Permit for the movement of wide or heavy loads a minimum of one week prior to each occurrence; 615 REPORT NO.: PSD-007-06 PAGE 8 • An inspection by municipal Operations staff of the road conditions on the Contingency Route prior to each occurrence; • A follow-up inspection of road conditions by municipal Operations staff; and • A commitment by the LLRWMO to immediately repair any damage to the roads to the satisfaction of Engineering Services. 3.5 The required road improvements will proceed prior to work being undertaken on the new LTWMF. Approval from the Municipality's Engineering Services Department will be required prior to this work proceeding. 4.0 LAKESHORE ROAD GRADE SEPARATION 4.1 The Municipality requested the LLRWMO to investigate the feasibility of constructing a grade separation under Lakeshore Road to be used by vehicles travelling between the existing WMF and the site of the new LTWMF. Of specific concern is the approximately 100,00 truck trips (50,000 return trips) required to move the waste from the old site to the new facility. 4.2 The LLRWMO studied the issue and has recommended that a culvert style underpass be built between the two sites (see Attachment 6). Due to topography, the underpass can be constructed with very little impact on the vertical alignment of Lakeshore Road. Construction will take approximately 12 to 16 weeks. As with .the municipal road upgrades, the LLRWMO will be responsible for the full cost of constructing the underpass. Any decision to retain or remove the underpass once the Project is completed can be. deferred to a later time. 4.3 The construction of the underpass for the inter-site haul route should significantly reduce the impact of the Project on the local community and on traffic using Lakeshore Road. As well, the use of a dedicated route for the hauling of the waste should provide significant operational benefits to the Project. 4.4 The Municipality's Engineering Services and Operations Departments will be involved with the design and construction of the underpass. 5.0 CONCLUSION 5.1 Over the past 10 months, the LLRWMO, the MPRT and staff have worked diligently to address the three issues identified by Council for additional study. The improvement to the overall design of the LTWMF as the result of this professional cooperation clearly demonstrates the value of the peer review process to the overall success of the Port Granby Project. 5.2 There are a number of outstanding issues identified by both the MPRT and residents that have yet to be fully resolved. Staff will prepare a report in the spring to address as many 616 REPORT NO.: PSD-007-06 PAGE 9 of these issues as possible, recognizing the complexity of the Project and the additional detailed engineering and study that must still be undertaken. 5.3 The LLRWMO is proceeding to revise the EASR for the Port Granby Project to incorporate the changes to the Project Description and to address the impacts related to these changes. A draft EASR will be available in the spring for review by the MPRT and the public. The target date for Council to provide its endorsement of a Preferred Option for the Port Granby Project is June 2006. Attachments: Attachment 1 - Glossary of Terms Attachment 2 - Letter and Technical Report from Glenn Case, August 24, 2005 Attachment 3 - Cross-Section of Enhanced Mound Cover Attachment 4 - Municipal Peer Review Team Report Attachment 5 - Proposed Haul Routes Attachment 6 - Conceptual Design - Lakeshore Road Underpass List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Ms. Sharon Baillie-Mato Office of Bev Oda, M.P. Mr. Glenn Case, Director Rupert McNeill . Michael Ayer and Julie Jones Lord and Stuart Munro Vito Binetti Tim and Laurel Nichols Wayne Boucher Dora Nichols Ray Coakwell and Frances Brooks Carole Owens Walter Burham Jean Payne Rosemary Cooper James B. Robertson Marion and Stuart DeCoste Ulrich Ruegger Frederic DeSourdy Linda and Paul Ryerse Robert Edgar Sarwan Sahota Mel Edwards Barb Spencer Wilma Entwisle John Stephenson Gord and Penny Ewington Brian and Penny Stripp Betty and Stephanie Formosa Ken Shrives Paulette Gerber Midori Tanabe Lord Graham Brian Tayng Frank Hart Harvey Thompson Luanne Hill Stan and Rosemary Tisnovsky A. Karacsonyi Julie Tutla Susan Kinmond Richard Walker Maria Kordas - Fraser Mary and Harry Worrall Jane Lawrence Eric Leeuwner Gerry Mahoney and Bonnie McFarlane Andrew McCreath Joanne McNamara 617 Attachment 1 To PSD-007-06 GLOSSARY OF TERMS CCL Compacted Clay Liner CNSC Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission EA Environmental Assessment EASR Environmental Assessment Study Report GCL Geosynthetic Clay Liner HDPE High Density Polyethylene LLRWMO Low Level Radioactive Waste Management Office WMF Waste Management Facility LTWMF Long Term Waste Management Facility MPRT Municipal Peer Review Team 618 Attachment 2 To PSD-007-06 z' AE EACL Low-Level Radioa ctive Bureau de gestion des Waste Management dechets radioactifs Office de faible activite Ms. Janice Szwarz 5 Mill Street South 5,rue Mill sud Port Hope,Ontario Port Hope(Ontario) Senior Planner Canada UA 2S6 Canada L1A 2S6 Municipality of Clarington (905)885-9488 (905)885-9488 Fax(905)885-0273 Fax(905)885-0273 40 Temperance St. File: 2133-P1-3, 2245-P3-2 Bowmanville, ON GGC-05-456 L1C 3A6 2005 August 24 Dear Ms. Szwarz: Examination of Three Clarin2ton Issues Related to Port Granby EASR In March 2005, the Municipality of Clarington requested that the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Office(LLRWMO) examine three items in greater detail prior to the finalization of the draft Environmental Assessment Study Report (EASR) for the Port Granby Project. These items relate to i) an alternative design for the internal haul road's at-grade crossing at Lakeshore Road, ii) pre-construction upgrades to the municipal roads identified as the recommended haulage routes for the delivery of construction materials to the new facility, and iii) investigation of the effects of installing an additional composite base liner system for the proposed Port Granby Long-Term Management Facility. Over the past few months the LLRWMO has examined these items and the attached Technical Memorandum presents the results of these investigations. With respect to the alternative design for the internal haul road at-grade crossing, the LLRWMO conducted a technical and financial assessment of an alternative design utilizing a culvert style underpass for the waste haul trucks that would eliminate the at-grade crossing. Based on this investigation, the LLRWMO recommends that this type of underpass beneath Lakeshore Road be incorporated into the design for the inter-site haulage road between the existing Port Granby WMF and the new Port Granby LTWMF. With respect to the municipal road upgrades, the recommended routes identified in the EASR were divided into two specific-purpose haulage routes, namely i)the Main Haulage Route using Newtonvi lie Road and Concession 1, and ii) the Contingency Route for oversized loads using Newtonville Road south of Concession 1 and Lakeshore Road to the new site. Based on the results of a comprehensive field testing program along these road segments and the subsequent technical and financial evaluation of the data, it is recommended by the LLRWMO that a cost-sharing agreement be developed with the Municipality of Clarington to address the incremental costs associated with the upgrading of the various road segments along the Main Haulage Route that would be used for the haulage of construction materials to the new LTWMF site. This evaluation also indicated that due to the limited usage of the Contingency Route, pre-construction upgrades to the road segments associated with this route are not necessary for Project purposes. Atomic Energy Energie atomique of Canada Limited du Canada limitie, 2 To address the effects of installing an additional composite base liner system for the long-term management facility, three design options were developed by the LLRMWO engineering team and examined in the context of the original three-component base liner system. The three options utilized combinations of original design components (compacted clay), as well as geosynthetic clay liners, to create the additional composite base liner system. These options were examined from the perspectives of technical performance, volumes of raw materials required for construction of the liner systems, number of truck loads for-haulage of raw materials to the site, duration to construct the base liner system, and additional cost for liner construction. Based on the results of this examination, the LLRMWO has concluded that there is no significant technical advantage to be achieved by the installation of an additional composite base liner system. It is therefore the recommendation of the LLRMWO to remain with the original three component liner design constructed in conjunction with the existing underlying low permeability native till deposit and a low permeability eight-component cover system. As noted above, the attached technical memorandum provides more details on the investigations conducted by the LLMRWO on the three issues raised by the Municipality of Clarington prior to the finalization of the Port Granby EASR. We believe that these investigations adequately address the Municipality's concerns and that based on the recommendations put forward by the LLRMWO, the draft Port Granby EASR can be finalized. The LLRWMO would be pleased to address any questions or provide additional ! clarification during your review of the attached material. Sincerely, G. G1 Case,P. Eng., Mana er, Projects & Facilities Development GGC:sdp attach. 620 AECL TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Office Atomic Energy of Canada Limited 5 Mill St., S Port Hope, Ontario, L1A 2S6 (905) 89 5-9488 Fax (905) 885-0273 File_ 2133-P1-3, 2245-P3-2 To: Glenn Case RR-05-0007 From: Rick Rossi 2005 Aug 19 Investigation of Clarington Requested Modifications to the Port Granby Project 1.O BACKGROUND Over the past four years the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Office (LLRWMO) has conducted various studies to identify and assess potential environmental effects associated with the Port Granby Project. This work will culminate in the fall of 2005 with the submission of the Draft Port Granby Environmental Assessment Study Report (PG EASR) to the Responsible Authorities (RAs). In March 2005, subsequent to the Municipality of Clarington's review of the working draft PG EASR, Clarington Council passed Resolution #GPA-148-05 requesting that the LLRWMO investigate the effects of installing an additional composite base liner system at the new LTWMF and that the EASR be revised accordingly. In addition, through further general correspondence, Clarington requested that the municipal roads affected by the Project be upgraded prior to commencement of activities and that an underpass at Lakeshore Road be incorporated in the design of the inter-site haulage route between the proposed long term waste management facility (LTWMF) and the existing Port Granby WMF. This memo summarizes the results of the investigations that have been conducted by the LLRWMO to address the Municipality of Clarington's three requests. The results of each investigation are presented in the following individual sections. 621 2 2.0 ADDITIONAL LINER SYSTEM 2.1 Proposed Liner System Design During the conceptual design phase for the proposed fully encapsulating aboveground storage mound the LLRWMO's engineering team recommended a three-component base liner system comprising of the following (from top to bottom): - 500 mm thick sand layer to provide a permeable media through which leachate from the wastes could travel to a specified collection sump; - 80 mil (2 mm) thick High Density Polyethylene (HDPE) geomembrane layer to prc,'IC a bottom or liner for the sand drainage layer to'assist in the collection of leachate; and 750 mm thick compacted clay liner (utilizing imported clay material) to absorb and further repel any contaminated leachate that may migrate through the two previous component layers. This three-component liner system was recommended in conjunction with an eight-component 2.6 metre thick capping system. It was felt that the three-component liner system would provide an acceptable level of leachate containment working in conjunction with the existing underlying low permeability native till deposit and the proposed low permeability eight-component capping system. The proposed site for the new LTWMF was selected because of the existing underlying native till deposit (up to 25 m in thickness) that would serve as a contaminant diffusion barrier 1 and adsorption media in the unlikely event that there was migration of contaminants through the three-component liner system. Because the native till deposit is an integral part of the design, this liner system should really be considered as a four-component liner system. The acceptable performance of the overall containment system incorporating the three-component liner system was subsequently demonstrated by contaminant transport modeling carried out as part of the Environmental Affects Assessment (EAA)by the Geology/Hydrogeology Technical Study Author. 'In contrast, the site for the proposed Port Hope LTWMF is underlain by generally higher permeability soils (sands and gravels) without sufficient deposits of natural clay to serve as an effective backup in the event of contaminants leaving the mound. As a result, the LLRWMO engineering team chose to incorporate redundancy into the design and created a six-component liner (effectively doubling the original three-component design). Through the public and municipal consultation phase of the EA, concerns were raised that the Port Granby design was inferior to the Port Hope design as it utilizes only three components instead of six. To address this issue, Clarington requested that further investigations be conducted as to the applicability of adding additional components to the base liner system. 2.2 Alternative Base Liner System Configurations In response to the Municipality of Clarington's resolution identified in Section 1.0, the LLRWMO considered three base liner system configurations. Each of these three options is described below: 622 .3 Option One is a six-component system that utilizes clay as the natural low permeability/contaminant absorption media. This option has a total thickness of approximately 2500 mm and comprises the following elements (from top to bottom): - 500 mm thick sand drainage layer; - 80 mil (2 mm) thick HDPE geomembrane liner; - 750 mm thick compacted clay liner(utilizing imported clay material); - 500 mm thick sand drainage layer; - 80 mil (2 mm) thick HDPE geomembrane liner; and - 750 mm thick compacted clay liner (utilizing imported clay material). Option Two is a six-component system that utilizes geosynthetic clay liner in lieu of compacted clay as the natural low permeability/contaminant absorption media. Geosynthetic clay liner (GCL) consists of a layer of unhydrated, loose, powdered bentonite mechanically adhered to and sandwiched between two layers of non-woven geotextile fabric. It is manufactured under controlled conditions in a factory with a high rate of uniformity and subjected to rigid quality controls to achieve consistently high performance standards. Once installed and subjected to a confining pressure such as that due to the weight of the overlying waste fill and then exposed to moisture (leachate and/or moisture from the underlying soils), the bentonite swells and forms a low permeability barrier layer. GCLs are manufactured in panels (approximately 4.5 m wide x 30 m long x 5 mm thick) and are joined in the field by overlapping. This option has a total thickness of approximately 1010 mm and comprises the following elements (from top to bottom): - 500 mm thick sand drainage layer; - 80 mil (2 mm) thick HDPE geomembrane liner; - geosynthetic clay liner(-5 mm thick); - 500 nun thick sand drainage layer; - 80 mil (2 mm) thick HDPE geomembrane liner; and - geosynthetic clay liner(-5 mm thick). Option Three is also a six-component liner system and is a hybrid of Options One and Two, utilizing both compacted clay and geosynthetic clay liner components as natural low permeability/contaminant absorption media. This option has a total thickness of approximately 1755 mm and comprises the following elements (from top to bottom): - 500 mm thick sand drainage layer; - 80 mil (2 mm) thick HDPE geomembrane liner; - geosynthetic clay liner(--5 mm thick); - 500 mm thick sand drainage layer; - 80 mil (2 mm) thick HDPE geomembrane liner; and - 750 mm thick compacted clay liner (utilizing imported clay material). 623 4 2.3 Material and Transportation Considerations Table 1 provides a comparison of material quantities and trucking requirements for the four liner design options (Original, One, Two and Three). Option Two using two GCL layers involves import of approximately 22,500 m3 less soil (i.e., 1,000 fewer truck loads) compared to the originally proposed liner system, whereas Option One using two compacted clay layers would require 112,500 m3 more soil (i.e., 5,650 more truck loads) than the originally proposed liner system. The reduction in the number of trucks for Option Two reflects the fact that GCLs are very thin and are transported in large rolls on flat bed trucks, compared to thick compacted clay liners, which require import of large volumes of clayey soil in dump trucks. Option Three, the hybrid design, would require 45,000 m3 more soil (i.e., 2,325 more truck loads) than the originally prop. .cd liner system. For all three options,no significant changes are expected to the daily numbers of total worker vehicles, average trucks per day (during the haulage campaigns) or the total number of oversized trucks; however, for Option Two the haulage campaign would be the shortest at an estimated 21 days, while Option One would have the longest haulage campaign at 48 days. 2.4 Construction Duration and Cost Considerations Table 2 presents a comparison of construction duration and cost for the four liner design options. The comparison assumes that the individual elements of the liner system are placed sequentially (i.e., placement of a given element is fully completed prior to placement of the overlying l element). This assumption provides a conservative estimate of the number of working days since placement of any given element can commence over completed areas of the underlying element while construction of the underlying element proceeds. As shown in Table 2, the estimated number of working days for construction of Option Three (double GCL) at 165 days is not much greater than that for the Original Option at 136 days, whereas that for Option One (double compacted clay) is significantly greater at 270 days. The total number of workers on site each day for construction of either type of liner system is expected to be similar. No significant change is expected to the overall project schedule for Options Two or Three utilizing GCLs, whereas Option One (double compacted clay) could cause the addition of 1 year to the project schedule. With respect to cost in comparison to the Original Design, Option Two (double GCLs) is approximately$2.8 M more,whereas Option One (double compacted clay)is approximately$4.8 M more expensive. In terms of cost and schedule, Option Three (the hybrid) falls approximately midway between Options One and Two. 2.5 Environmental Performance Considerations In regards to environmental performance, all three optional liner designs would provide an additional level of redundancy with respect to leachate containment. However, considering that the contaminant transport modelling carried out for the Original Design has indicated no significant groundwater quality impacts, even for the malfunction scenario involving failure of 624 5 the HDPE geomembrane element, the additional level of redundancy offered by these various options is not expected to result in any significant improvement in overa 11 environmental performance of the waste management facility. 2.6 Recommendation Option One is not recommended because it would cost$4.8 M more,extend the construction period by possibly an additional year and material haulage would require more th an 5,000 additional truck loads of soil materials compared to the Original Design. Options Two and Three are not recommended because they would cost an additional $2.8 to$3.8 M, extend the construction period by 29 to 82 days, with no significant improvement in overall . environmental performance relative.to the Original Design. The recommendation of the LLRWMO resulting from this investigation of the effects of installing an additional composite base liner system at the new LTWMF is to remain with the original three component liner design constructed in conjunction with the existing underlying low permeability native till deposit and a low permeability eight-component cover system. 625 6 Table I Comparison of Base Liner Material Quantities/Truck Loads t ORIGINAL DESIGN OPTION ONE OPTION TWO OPTION THREE Base Liner Element Double Double Hybrid Double Single Composite Composite Liner Composite Liner Composite Liner Liner System System (Using System(Using; System (GCL& Compacted Clay) Two GCLs) CCL) 1.Sand drainage,dyer 45,000 m3 90,000 m3 90,000 m3 90,000 m3 (500 mm thick) 2,250 loads 4,500 loads 4,500 loads 4,500 loads 2.80'mil High Density 90,000 m2 180,000 m2 180,000 m2 180,000 m2 Polyethylene(HDPE) 25 loads 50 loads SO loads 50 loads 3.Geosynthetic Clay Liner - - 180,000 m2 90,000 m2 (GCL) - 100 loads 50 loads 4.Compacted Clay Liner 67,500 m3 1 35,000 m3 - 67,500 m3 (750 mm thick) 3,375 loads 6,750 loads _ 3,375 loads Totals for Soils 112,500 m3 225,000 m3 90,000 m3 157,500 m3 Base Geosynthetics 90,000 m2 180,000::2 360,000 m2 270,000 m2 Liner System Truck loads 5,650 loads 11,300 loads 4,650 loads 7,975 loads Affected Soils 237,000 m3 350,000 m3 215,000 m3 282,000 m3 Totals for Geosynthetics 300,000 m2 390,000 m2 570,000 m2 480,000 m2 overall LTWW Yr 1 and 2 (Section Haulage 26 days 48 days 21 days Y 35 days 4.1.7) Campaigns 2 � -Based on a total liner surface area of 90,000 m2 and 35 tonnes 20 m3 ( )per truck load 2-Based on an average of 125 trucks per day carrying 20 m3 of soil/granular material for the construction of the base liner system and on-site facilities such as internal roads, parking areas, buildings. The total soil/granular volumes for the base liner are presented in this table. The total volume for on-site facilities is estimated at approximately 15,000 m3. Base liner and facilities construction is assumed to equally split between years 1 and 2. 3- These volumes do not include material required for road upgrades. 626 7 Table 2 Comparison of Base Liner Construction Durations and Cost ORIGINAL OPTION OPTION DESIGN OPTION ONE Typical TWO THREE Base Liner Element Placement Single Double Composite Double Hybrid Double Rate/Unit Cost om C osite Composite Liner(Using p Composite Liner Compacted Clay) Liner(Using Liner(GCL & GCLs) CCL) 1.Sand drainage layer 2,000m3/day 23days 45 days 45 days Y 45 days (500 mm thick) $40/m3 $ 1.8 M $3.6 M $ 3.6 M $3.6 M 2.80 mil High Density 2,000m2/day 45 days 90 days 90 days 90 days Polyethylene(HDPE) $14/m2 $ 1.26 M $2.52 M $ x.52 M $2.52 M 3.Geosynthetic Clay 6,000m2/day - 30 days 15 days Liner(GCL) $ 8/m2 _ - $ 1.44 M $0.72 M 4.Compacted Clay 1,000m3/day 68 days 135 days - 68 days Liner(750 mm thick) $25/m3 $ 1.69 M $3.38 M _ $ 1.69 M Totals 136 days 270 days 165 days 218 days $4.75M $9.5M $ 7.56M $8.53M 627 8 3.0 MUNICIPAL ROAD UPGRADES 3.1 Back round During the conceptual design phase, the LLRWMO engineering team conducted visual examinations of the roadways comprising the main construction materials haul route as well as the contingency route for oversized loads. It was determined that since damage to these roads may occur as a result of the increased traffic loading, monitoring would be conducted during the construction phase with maintenance initiated on an as needed basis. Through municipal consultation, Clarington's Engineering Dept. expressed concern that the roadways would suffer extensive damage and that the LLRWMO should commit to upgrade these roads prior to the construction phase. The Main Haul Route for Construction Materials to the new LTWMF comprises the following segments: Newtonville Road from Hi.ehwav 401 to Concession 1 • 0.8 kilometre in length • combination asphalt & surface treatment road surface types Concession Road I from Newtonville Road to Elliot Road • 1.6 kilometres in length • surface treatment road surface type The Contingency Route For Oversized Loads comprises the following segments: Newtonville Road from Concession 1 to Lakeshore Road • 2.75 kilometres in length • surface treatment road surface type Lakeshore Road from Newtonville Road to the new LTWMF • 1.7 kilometres in length • combination surface treatment and asphalt road surface types 3.2 Assessment of Existing Road Conditions In response to the request from the Municipality of Clarington, the LLRWMO conducted detailed engineering assessments of the road segments noted above utilizing field information obtained from shallow boreholes and Falling Weight Deflectometer testing (Golder, 2005). It was. determined that the Newtonville Rd and Concession 1 sections are structurally deficient and are not capable of supporting current traffic loads or the increased traffic loads due to construction traffic. The analysis recommended that these roads be upgraded prior to the construction phase, resulting in an estimated cost increase of$535K for the Main Haul Route and $400 K for the Contingency (oversized load) route. A four to six week construction period would be required for 628 9 this work. Additional costs and time may be incurred for potential rehabilitation of section of Newtonville Road near Hwy 401 under MTO jurisdiction. For more detail see Appendix A. During the investigation it became evident that these roads are currently structurally deficient and require some upgrading to accommodate current and projected traffic loadings even if the project was not implemented. A follow-up study was therefore conducted to determine the extent of related hypothetic upgrades as well as the associated costs. These upgrades would cost approx $160 K for the Main Haul Route and approximately$235 K for the Contingency Route.For more detail see Appendix B. It should be noted that the Contingency Route for oversized loads was identified early in the design phase as a potential need in the event that some of the'construction equipment needed for the project cannot pass through the existing CP Rail underpass at Elliot Road. Conservative loading assumpti-ns were made to estimate the associated upgrades referenced above. During the most recent construction planning it has been determined these loading assumptions are most likely over-conservative and that the Contingency Route may not be needed at all. 3.3 Recommendations Based on the technical and financial results of the Golder investigations, it is recommended by the LLRWMO that a cost-sharing agreement be developed with the Municipality of Clarington to address the incremental costs associated with the upgrading of the various road segments along the Main Haulage Route for the construction materials to the new LTWMF site. Based on the technical and financial results of the Golder investigations, it is recommended by the LLRWMO that due to the limited usage of this Contingency Route (-5 loads per year), pre-construction upgrades to these road segments are not necessary for Project purposes. As a result the Project would not contribute to the cost of pre-construction upgrades to these road segments. The environmental effects of conducting this work have not yet been assessed, but a preliminary consideration of the potential upgrades has determined that the scenarios that were already assessed during the Effects Assessment phase would likely bound the activities associated with the road upgrade work. 629 10" 4.0 LAKFSHORE ROAD UNDERPASS 4.1 Background During the conceptual design work for the new Port Granby LTWMF, the LLRWMO engineering team identified the need for trucks hauling waste materials from the existing PGWMF to the new PG LTWMF to cross over Lakeshore Road. Due to the low volumes of local traffic using Lakeshore Road it was determined that an at-grade crossing would be acceptable and would not ca se ton se a significant adverse effect on the local traffic. This was verified ' through the detailed effects assessment. However, through municipal consultation, Clarin s g Engineering Dept. expressed concern that to further safeguard public traffic, a grade separation should be implemented at the crossing. 4.2 Investigations by LLRWMO The LLRWMO subsequently conducted investigations and identified a route similar to that proposed for the at-grade option and prepared a conceptual design that utilized a culvert style underpass for the waste haul trucks. Due to the topography an underpass at this location would have very little impact on the vertical alignment of Lakeshore Road. In order to construct the underpass a temporary disruption to the use of Lakeshore Rd would be required. A temporary detour would be provided immediately north of the affected portion of Lakeshore Rd. The underpass would have an incremental cost of about $1,050 K and would take about . to 16 weeks to construct. At the culmination of the project, the or be removed and the area reinstated to the previous conditions. If the culvert were to a place to be i removed, the temporary detour would need to be reinstated. The removal would cost approximately$560 K and take about five to eight weeks. For more details see Appendix C. 4.3 Recommendation Based on the results of the technical and financial investigations, it is recommended by the LLRWMO that an underpass beneath Lakeshore Road be incorporated into the design for the inter-site haulage road between the existing Port Granby WMF and the new Port Granby LTWMF. The environmental effects of conducting this work have not yet been fully assessed, but a preliminary consideration of the underpass by the LLRWMO's Technical Study consultants determined that the scenarios that were already assessed during the Effects Assessment phase would likely bound the activities associated with the construction and use of the underpass. RR:sdp 630 PLOT DATE: November 11. 2005 FILENAME: T:\Projects\2005\05-1113-161 (LLRWMO, Port Granby)\—CA-2 Final Cover Design\051113161CA03.DWG 0.3m ROCK PROTECTION LAYER PERMETER DITCH NON-WOVEN GEOTEXTILE FlLTER GEOMEMBRANE LINER GEOSYNTN=TiC CLAY LINER IF 0.75m THICK COMPACTED CLAY WASTE GEOMEMBRANE LINER 0. THICK SAND DRAINAGE LAYER • • • b DA'm mss ` imp • • ENHANCED FINAL COVER DESIGN u I ESM FSB 4 BARRIER ®m 0.3m SAND KD DRAINAGE LAYER FiE"°• 051113161 CA03.DWG CHECK FSB ..� � � FIGUM p CAPILLARY BREAK LAYER OS-1113-161-2 REV. A ZVI- .3m THICK INTERIM COVER THICK SAND DRAINAGE LAYER 1:,25 PROPOSED PERIMETER DETAIL DA'm sr NOV.11, 2005 ENHANCED FINAL COVER DESIGN u I ESM FSB OPTION 2 co) CAD Mlealasauga,OMario,Canada KD , FiE"°• 051113161 CA03.DWG CHECK FSB PORT GRANBY PROJECT FIGUM p PRO'E�NO• OS-1113-161-2 REV. A REVEW V � j Attachment 4 To PSD-007-06 Peer Review of the LLRWMO's Enhanced Facility Design for the Port Granby Project January 2006 Prepared for Municipality of Clarington Prepared by: Hardy Stevenson and Associates Limited H A R D Y 364 Davenport Road STEVENSON Toronto, Ontario M6R 1K6 AND ASSOCIATES p: 416-944-8444 t: 1-877-267-7794 f: 416-944-0900 632 Table of Contents 1 Introduction....................................:.......................................................................... l 1.1 Purpose of this Report.................................................................................... 2 1.2 Background.....................................................................................................2 1.3 Overview of the MPRT's Conclusions.......................................................... 5 2 Review of the Enhanced Facility Design...... ......... ................................................6 2.1 History and Use of Capillary Barriers at other Facilities............................... 6 2.2 Components of the Capillary Barrier.............................................................. 7 2.3 How the Capillary Barrier Functions............................................................. 9 2.4 Strengths of the Enhanced Facility Design at the Port Granby WMF........... 9 3 Enhancements to the Capillary Barrier Concept................................................ 13 3.1 Considerations to Enhance Design.............................................................. 13 3.2 Analysis Required During Detailed Design................................................. 15 4 Conclusion............................................................................................................... 18 5 References................................................................................................................ 19 Peer Review of Enhanced Facility Design for the Port Granby Project i 633 1 introduction Hardy Stevenson and Associates Limited (HSAL)has been retained by the Municipality of Clarington("the Municipality")to provide peer review assistance for the Port Granby Long-Term Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Project("the Port Granby Project"). A Municipal Peer Review Team (MPRT)under the direction of HSAL is engaged in providing the peer review. The core of its activities consists of reviewing studies undertaken by the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Office (LLRWMO) as Dart of the environmental assessment of the Port Granby Project. MPRT's primary concern as peer reviewers has been to ensure that the design of the Long-Term Waste Management Facility (LTWMF)protects the natural and social environment over the long term and that the project can be implemented without adverse environmental effects. The Port Granby Project consists of relocation of historic low-level radioactive waste (LLRW) and marginally contaminated soils (MCS) from the existing waste management site to a new engineered mound north of the existing site. The proposed new mound utilizes a low permeability composite cover system ("cover system")to prevent moisture from entering the top of the mound. It also includes a low permeability composite base liner system ("liner system")to prevent moisture from escaping from the bottom of the mound by collecting and treating leachate. Both the cover and liner systems as originally proposed by the LLRWMO consist of multiple components (8 components in the cover and 3 in the liner)made of natural soils and synthetic materials, each with a specific purpose. Together these components create highly durable and impermeable cover and liner systems. Following a review of the above concept proposed in the draft Environmental Assessment Study Report(EASR), the MPRT recommended a number of improvements to the Port Granby Project and mound design. One such improvement was the addition of a second liner system to provide redundancy and extra protection compared to the single liner system. The LLRWMO considered the benefits of adding a second liner system along with other engineered solutions for improving the performance of the LTWMF. Resultantly, the LLRWMO developed an enhanced facility design for the Port Granby Project that is intended to further reduce water infiltration to the waste,particularly in the Peer Review of Enhanced Facility Design for the Port Granby Project 634 event of failure of the synthetic component in the cover system. This design incorporates a capillary barrier system between the cover system and the waste. It is the LLRWMO's position that a second liner system is not required to further improve the performance provided by the enhanced facility design. 1.1 Purpose of this Report This report briefly describes the components of the enhanced facility design and explains how the design functions. It provides MPRT's rationale for supporting the LLRWMO's enhanced facili*- design in lieu of a double liner system and our recommendations for further optimizing the performance of this design. The remainder of the Introduction provides the background to the development of the enhanced facility design by the LLRWMO and an overview of the MPRT's conclusions. The remaining sections summarize our review. Section 2 (Review of the Enhanced Facility Design) discusses the development of capillary barriers in the waste management industry and the strengths of the enhanced facility design. Section 3 (Improvements to the Capillary Barrier Concept)outlines the MPRT's recommendations for improving the enhanced facility design and for further analysis and demonstration during the detailed design phase of the project. Section 4 summarizes the MPRT's conclusions regarding the enhanced facility design. 1.2 Background After reviewing the Port Granby Environmental Assessment Study Report (EASR) in March 2005, the MPRT concluded that the LTWMF as proposed in the EASR could be constructed, operated, and maintained in a way that would result in minimal adverse effects on the environment. Furthermore, the MPRT was confident that appropriate mitigation measures could be developed to minimize any potential adverse effects (HSAL, March 2005). Nonetheless, the MPRT recommended improvements regarding the ability of the LTWMF to effectively contain the wastes and the associated leachate over the lifetime of Peer Review of Enhanced Facility Design for the Port Granby Project 2 635 the facility. The MPRT's key concern was that the redundancy of the liner system over the life of the facility was insufficient and should be improved. The MPRT's issues included: • The hydrogeological characteristics of the site and the importance of protecting underlying soils from leachate; • The uncertainty as to whether the geomembrane liner within the liner system will deteriorate over the life of the facility; • The preferential use of double liners at other hazardous waste management facilities in the waste management industry; • The increased sense of comfort that a double liner system could provide to residents by decreash.,;the likelihood of leakage to the underlying till and groundwater contamination; and, • The ease of decommissioning the site (should such action be necessary),which would be difficult with a failed liner system and spread of contamination (HSAL, March 2005: 39-40). Based on a review of the above issues,the MPRT recommended in its Peer Review Report of the Port.Granby Project EASR that a double liner system be investigated by the LLRWMO. In the design proposed in the EASR,the bottom liner system includes a compacted clayey soil liner, a geomembrane liner, an d a sand leachate drainage layer. The underlying till soil environment provides natural attenuation as part of the Design Concept in the event of a liner failure. The recommendations highlighted the need to protect the natural till deposit at the site and the surrounding environment from leakage in case of a failure of the single liner system. Shortly after, Municipal Council passed Resolution#GPA-148-05 requesting that the LLRWMO investigate the effects of installing an additional composite base liner system at the new LTWMF. In response, the LLRWMO prepared a Technical Memorandum in August 2005 that compared the original single liner system to three alternative double liner systems based on the amount of additional material to be transported, construction duration and cost, and environmental performance (LLRWMO, August 2005). Each alternative consisted of an additional three component system with a sand drainage layer, high density polyethylene, and various combinations of compacted clay liner or geosynthetic clay liners. Based on the results of their analysis, LLRWMO staff concluded that the original single liner design should be retained, citing additional costs that could be incurred (ranging from $2.8 to 4.8 million), additional material haulage involved, an extended construction period, and insignificant improvement in environmental performance in the various options that were studied(LLRWMO, August 2005: 5). Peer Review of Enhanced Facility Design for the Port Granby Project 3 636 After reviewing the analysis, the MPRT deemed the Technical Memorandum to be incomplete with regard to the issues raised in the Peer Review Report. While agreeing with the LLRMWO's conclusions regarding cost and construction effects of these systems, the MPRT sought more analysis regarding the technical performance of the double liner systems. In a joint meeting of the MPRT and the LLRWMO, it was agreed that a comprehensive review of the entire design comprising the cover and liner systems be undertaken to assure isolation of the waste from the environment. As a result of this review,the LLRWMO developed an alternate enhanced facility design for the engineered mound that utilizes a capillary barrier and drainage system as part of the cover system. A major concern with all low-level radioactive waste management facilities is the possibility of moisture entering the mound and drawing out contaminants as the moisture exits the mound. Such a barrier is intended to prevent wetting of the waste in the event of leakage through the cover system, obviating the need to enhance the redundancy of the proposed liner system with a second liner system. The LLRWMO is of the opinion that the proposed enhanced system would provide additional protection from leachate leaking into the environment by keeping the waste drier over the long term. As a result, the LLRMWO has concluded that the double liner system would not be needed. To assess the appropriateness of the LLRWMO's conclusions, the MPRT reviewed background documentation on industry experience with respect to capillary barriers, including case studies of capillary barriers at other waste management facilities, field demonstrations and analyses. The MPRT also reviewed the preliminary conceptual details of the proposed cover system provided at the meeting, and attended subsequent meetings with the LLRWMO to discuss the proposal. Following its assessment, the MPRT has agreed in principle with the LLRWMO's proposal for the enhanced facility design. The MPRT indicated its support at the Public Information Sessions held in November 2005. The MPRT has spoken with residents, including representatives of the Southeast Clarington Ratepayers Association,to explain why the MPRT supports the new design and to hear their concerns. Peer Review of Enhanced Facility Design for the Port Granby Project 4 637 1.3 Overview of the MPRT's Conclusions Based on our review of the enhanced facility design proposed by the LLRWMO,the MPRT agrees that the concept can be designed to protect the underlying till and prevent leachate from contaminating the groundwater. Thus, the enhanced design ensures the redundancy of the overall system and provides Clarington residents with a safe and durable long terin facility. The MPRT's recommendation for a double liner was based on the uncertainty as to whether the sirs,'_ liner system would function optimally beyond several hundred years. Under such a scenario,the upper till layer would need to provide containment of the leachate to protect the surrounding environment. The enhanced facility design meets the MPRT's expectations with regard to environmental performance, since this concept effectively reduces the amount of moisture contacting the waste. It thereby reduces the amount of leachate produced to negligible levels even in case of failure of the geomembrane in the cover system. Less reliance is therefore placed on the liner system to manage the leachate and protect against groundwater contamination. In addition: ■ The enhanced design operates passively based on natural capillary action(i.e., no pumps or other equipment required) in keeping the waste dry over the long term; ■ It enhances the ability to monitor infiltration and remediate the cover system if needed through the use of instrumentation that is built in to the capillary barrier; ■ It uses local materials recycled from the cell excavation to construct the capillary barrier, avoiding the need to import soil. Overall,the MPRT is of the opinion that the enhanced facility design can provide for sufficient redundancy to ensure that the water infiltration and production of leachate in the long term will be negligible. Furthermore,the MPRT is confident that a double liner system is no longer necessary to provide redundancy. Peer Review of Enhanced Facility Design for the Port Granby Project 5 638 2 Review of the Enhanced Facility Design The enhanced facility design uses a capillary barrier to effectively reduce the amount of moisture entering the mound to negligible levels. While the original cover system proposed in the EASR was designed to reduce the amount of infiltration by means of multiple soil components, a geomembrane and geosynthetic clay liner, any failure of the cover system to perform as expected could potentially produce some leakage and wetting of the waste. By preventing water from entering the waste,the capillary barrier effectively cuts off the production of leachate once the facility is closed. The liner system would need to perform optimally only during the construction period, at which time the collection and treatment of leachate is routinely carried out and the liner performance is closely monitored. Over the long term,the liner system could be maintained to provide a sufficiently redundant barrier in the unlikely event that multiple components of the cap fail. 2.1 History and Use of Capillary Barriers at other Facilities Capillary barriers are used in a number of facilities in the waste management industry to keep waste dry. Dedicated use of capillary barriers for water retention and diversion and their licensing in different types of landfills is now increasing in the industry. In almost all cases, such barriers consist of fine-over-coarse soil layers used as a component of cover designs for hazardous landfills, municipal landfills, mine tailings and other applications where minimization of water infiltration through the cover is a major concern. Capillary barriers are considered to be low-cost, easily constructed, and long-life options used either as alternatives to other surface cover designs or to complement soil cover designs depending on the application(Kampf et al, 1996; Pease et al, 1996; Walter et al, 2000). Capillary barriers are being used in a range of capacities at a number of sites in the US (Lee Acres Landfill Superfund site,New Mexico; Lake County Landfill, Montana; Hanford Superfund radioactive waste site, Washington State; Gaffey Street Sanitary Landfill, California; McPherson County Landfill, Kansas) and at six demonstration projects across the US for hazardous, municipal solid waste, and non-hazardous wastes. Key advantages of the capillary barriers are their ability to retain and divert water, and Peer Review of Enhanced Facility Design for the Port Granby Project 6 639 their constructability using natural materials and configurations that imply longevity. Capillary barriers are also used for water balancing in surface covers to retain water for plant growth and thereby to reduce topsoil erosion of the covers (Golder, 2005). Recent focus on their use in hazardous landfills and for remediation of sites has brought a large amount of R&D effort into demonstrating their performance through numerical analysis tools and field and laboratory demonstrations. The efficiencies of capillary barriers have been studied in a number of test projects where they have successfully demonstrated prevention of water-infiltration into waste deposits (Kampf et al, 1996; Pease et al, 1996; Walter et al,2000). 2.2 Components of the Capillary Barrier System As can be seen from Figure 1,the capillary barrier proposed for the LTWMF consists of two layers: the capillary drainage layer is a fine-grained soil layer that contains silty sand with some clay and fine gravel;the capillary break layer is a coarse-grained soil layer containing medium to coarse gravel. The capillary barrier is provided as a complementary barrier(i.e., in addition to all the natural and synthetic components in the cover system) and is located below the geomembrane and the geosynthetic clay layer (GCL)within the cover system, and above the interim cover of the waste mound. Being situated below the geomembrane and the GCL, the capillary barrier will be unsaturated. The main purpose of the capillary barrier system will be to function when and if there is a failure of the geomembrane. A perimeter drainage system will capture the lateral flow of uncontaminated moisture that is conveyed by the capillary drainage layer. The capillary barrier system will also include embedded instrumentation to monitor the condition of the capillary barrier such as moisture levels and potential high flow situations. The instrumentation could be used to monitor the condition of the cover system, providing the information necessary to carry out any remedial work. Peer Review of Enhanced Facility Design for the Port Granby Project 7 640 Figure 1—Layers of a Capillary Barrier System (diagram prepared by Golder Associates,2005) CAPILLARY BARRIER SYSTEM F9E TO MEM M SILTY BAND MTN SC ME CLAY (CAPILLARY LAYER) MEDIUM TO COARSE SAM V47H(TRAVEL (CAPR LARY BREAK LAYER) 0) 6%(MIN.) ----- ORIGINAL CAP DESIGN COMPONENTS VEGETATION 0.3m T14ICK TOPSOIL 1.2m THK:i{GIADm FILL (LiOC.ALTILL'"OL) NON4NOVEN GEO EXTILE FILTER 0.5m THCK HTRIJSION SAMER(MM STONE) 0.3m T14CK WDIU M TO COARSE SAND CUSPROM ORMNAaE LAYER 60"(14%w)TW.X LINEAR LOVY DENSITY POLYETHYLENE GEONERABRAI E LINER GEOSYNTHETIC CLAY LINER INTERIM COVER(LOCAL TILL SOK.) WASTE FILL 2.3 How the Capillary Barrier Functions The.capillary barrier operates by natural capillary action to store and convey moisture away from the waste. Under unsaturated conditions moisture is retained and travels within the fine-grained layer more easily than into the coarse grained layer below. This is due to the larger surface area of the fine-grained soil particles, thus creating surface tension forces that overcome the gravitational forces. As a result, moisture is pulled laterally throughout the upper fine-grained soil layer. Since this layer is sloped, as the moisture continues to travel laterally it flows downward as well until it drains away to the flanks of the mound. To sustain the capillary function, mixing of soil between the two layers should be prevented, and a geotextile fabric is often considered to separate the two layers (not currently provided in the LLRWMO concept). It is also important to ensure through proper sloping that the water migrating towards the edges of the barrier does not accumulate along the migration path and break through the capillary barrier. For proper functioning of the capillary barrier,the barrier must remain unsaturated. Normally such barriers are considered for and or semi-arid areas in the waste management industry and saturation is not a concern. Being located below the geomembrane and GCL, it can be expected that the capillary barrier is essentially in a near dry state required for the proper functioning of the barrier. 2.4 Strengths of the Enhanced Facility Design at the Port Granby WMF As discussed previously, although the MPRT was confident that the concept as presented in the EASR would provide long-term containment of the waste, it was not completely satisfied that the WMF would achieve that goal based on the information and analysis included in the report. The enhanced facility design,based on a capillary barrier and drainage system, is expected to further enhance the performance of the Port Granby Waste Management Facility by minimizing moisture entering the mound to negligible levels as a first priority and the near-elimination of leachate generation in the long term after the facility is closed. The strengths of this enhanced design are described below. Peer Review of Enhanced Facility Design for the Port Granby Project g 642 2.4.1 Enhanced design reduces the amount of leachate produced in the mound Under normal conditions, the original cover system described in the draft EASR was expected conservatively to permit less than 0.01% of the total precipitation from entering the waste. According to preliminary modelling prepared by the LLRMWO,the capillary barrier would reduce the moisture that infiltrates into the waste to barely measurable amounts. Thus,the enhanced design of the cover system reduces reliance on the liner system to manage the leachate and protect against groundwater contamination by minimizing the amount of leachate that could potentially be created. 2.4.2 Enhanced design provides an eff ective backup for the cover system The capillary barrier provides a more noticeable benefit under less than optimal conditions, such as severe weather events or failure of the cover system. A fully intact geomembrane and the geosynthetic clay liner normally would not allow any noticeable infiltration to the waste. However, should there be minor imperfections such as tears or punctures, some moisture could be expected to funnel its way through such imperfections. The capillary barrier is designed to capture such infiltration before it contacts the waste. By virtue of its holding capacity, the infiltration is retained and diverted laterally to the edge of the mound where it naturally drains away,thus providing an effective backup to the geosynthetic clay liner and the other layers of the cover system. 2.4.3 Capillary barrier operates passively based on natural capillary action and is durable Unlike the leachate collection system, the operation of the capillary barrier does not rely on pumps or other mechanical and electrical systems. Because the barrier uses natural capillary action to retain or direct moisture away from the waste, it is not subject to mechanical failure. Required longevity is expected since the capillary barrier is composed of natural materials, thus minimizing the need for long-term institutional control. Peer Review of Enhanced Facility Design for the Port Granby Project 10 643 2.4.4 Capillary barrier is constructed using local materials recycled from the cell excavation As explained previously,the capillary barrier is comprised of two layers: a capillary drainage layer that contains silty sand with some clay and fine gravel, and a capillary break layer, which is medium to coarse gravel. The material needed to construct these layers is available on-site through cell excavation, thus minimizing transportation impacts and nuisance effects associated with trucking of construction materials. 2.4.5 Capillary barrier is not exposed to the elements nor to leachate The capillary barrier is protected from the elements by about 2.3 metres of material that comprises the original cover system. It is highly unlikely that the barrier layers would be disturbed by the elements. Furthermore,the barrier is placed above the waste,thereby preventing any contact with leachate,which is created in the mound during the construction period. As the waste dries up following construction phase,the capillary barrier can be expected to be unsaturated and become fully dry with time. Thus,the barrier system is expected to remain fully functional over the lifetime of the facility. 2.4.6 Capillary barrier has an active monitoring system An important element of the capillary barrier is the active monitoring system. The LLRWMO proposes to use two types of instrumentation: (1)thermoconductivity sensors, which measure negative porewater pressure, or the ability for water to be retained within the capillary drainage layer; and (2)neutron probes,which measure the water content in the soil. These instruments will be able to verify that the cover system is functioning as intended. With proper design,the instrumentation can help locate the failure of the liner and aid in cover remediation. These instruments can also detect a failure of the capillary barrier(such as due to saturation)before it occurs and indicate whether the waste could become wet. This will allow for necessary remediation of the cover system. This system adds a level of sophistication not found in the original design. Peer Review of Enhanced Facility Design for the Port Granby Project f f 644 2.4.7 Capillary barrier can be repaired if necessary Should the active monitoring system identify a breach in the barrier,the capillary barrier can be repaired more easily than the original design or a double liner system. Given its location above the waste, repairing the barrier requires only the layers of the cover system be removed, rather than excavation of the waste. Peer Review of Enhanced Facility Design for the Port Granby Project 12 645 3 Enhancements to the Capillary Barrier Concept Based on the information provided to us by the LLRWMO and supplementary research, the MPRT agrees that the enhanced facility design is a significant improvement to the original WMF design. It meets the key objectives that the MPRT sought from the original design,namely: • Protecting the underlying till; • Preventing leachate from contaminating the groundwater; • Providing reaundancy in the design of the facility; and, • Providing Clarington residents and Council with a state-of-the-art facility and an increased level of confidence. The MPRT understands from the LLRWMO that the EASR is being revised to incorporate this concept, and that preliminary modelling and analysis has been undertaken to determine whether the enhancements to the design have any influence on the predicted environmental effects. Should these assessments confirm that the enhanced facility design will not have any adverse effects, the MPRT would support the adoption of the enhanced facility design into the project. Furthermore,the MPRT would expect to see construction/development and safety performance details provided in the Design and Construction Plan that is submitted as part of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) licensing requirements. Such details should demonstrate that all necessary parameters discussed earlier in this section have been assessed and that the capillary barrier will function as intended in the operational stage. 3.1 Considerations to Enhance Design The MPRT recognizes that the information provided to date,while indicative of the conceptual details of the enhanced facility design, requires further elaboration in terms of environmental effects and engineering details. The following considerations are intended to support such a process and assure the performance of the capillary barrier system as expected at the current conceptual stage. The MPRT expects that the LLRMWO will Peer Review of Enhanced Facility Design for the Port Granby Project 13 646 take into account these considerations in the design and during modeling to fully demonstrate the effectiveness of the capillary barrier system. 3.1.1 Investigate whether a transport layer would improve the ability of the capillary barrier to divert moisture The capillary barrier proposed by the LLRWMO uses two layers: a capillary drainage layer and a capillary break layer. Studies have shown that the addition of a transport layer between the two layers significantly improves capillary performance by reducing the amount of moisture in the upper layer. Transport layers are also capable of increasing the Ciorizontal) distance that moisture is diverted (Pease et al, 1996). Typically,the transport layer i,, constructed of fine sand and located immediately above the fine/coarse interface. Introduction of such a transport layer should be investigated. 3.1.2 Extend the geomembrane liner to "wrap around" the capillary break layer In the conceptual design,the capillary layer extends beyond the edge of the two geomembrane liners, installed in the cover and liner systems, in order to drain moisture into the perimeter ditch(see Figure 1). In the event of heavy flooding, it is possible that moisture could back up and travel against gravity along the capillary drainage layer, break through the capillary break layer, and enter the mound. To prevent this situation from occurring, the MPRT suggests extending the geomembrane liner in the liner system so that it covers a portion of the capillary break layer. Alternately,the drainage ditch could be an enclosed system not accessible to the outside soil environment. 3.1.3 Ensure durability and redundancy of monitoring instrumentation One of the benefits of the enhanced facility design is the ability to monitor the performance of the capillary layer. While the instrumentation should be designed to be durable, malfunctions and breakdowns are possible. To reduce the chances of failure and provide redundancy, we recommend that additional redundant instrumentation be added to the capillary layer. Such instrumentation will also improve the ability to pinpoint the location of any leakage leading to saturation in the capillary layer. Peer Review of Enhanced Facility Design for the Port Granby Project 14 647 3.2 Analysis Required During Detailed Design As described in Section 2.1, capillary barriers are used in a number of facilities in the waste management industry for containing hazardous, municipal solid waste, and non- hazardous wastes. At these facilities,the capillary barriers provide the primary and sole means of keeping the waste dry. The capillary barrier concept as envisaged by the LLRWMO, namely to provide redundancy for a cover system, has not been explicitly applied for the pirposes described here. The concept must be customized to the requirements of the waste, soils and the geological conditions of the site. Being at a conceptual level, the performance of the barrier must be fully demonstrated through detailed hydraul� modeling and laboratory testing. Areas requiring analysis are described below. 3.2.1 Determine maximum flow before breakthrough occurs Under normal conditions,the geomembrane in the cover system is considered essentially impervious with less than 0.1 mm of moisture expected to reach the capillary barrier per year. Should the geomembrane fail and significant infiltration occurs,the capillary barrier may need to drain larger amounts of moisture away from the mound. The MPRT would like to see the results of detailed performance modeling to determine the maximum flow that the capillary barrier can handle before becoming saturated and .failing,thus necessitating remedial response. As described above,the addition of a transport layer should increase the amount of flow that the barrier can handle before its performance is compromised. 3.2.2 Assess the effect of funneling flow patterns on the capillary barrier When used at municipal landfills, the capillary barrier is positioned at the top of the surface cover and is exposed to surficial infiltration over the full extent of the barrier surface. In other words,the amount of moisture that the capillary barrier is exposed to is uniform throughout the landfill. Conversely, in the enhanced facility design for the Port Granby WMF, the capillary barriers will likely be exposed to very localized infiltration due to tears or punctures in the geomembranes. Such infiltration could introduce localized funneling flows,the effects of which could be different on the capillary layer in terms of maximum flows before breakthrough occurs (Walter et al, 2000). The effect of such funneling should be investigated. Peer Review of Enhanced Facility Design for the Port Granby Project 15 648 3.2.3 Optimize the slope and length of the capillary barrier layers Because the capillary barrier acts by natural capillary action, and hence is influenced by gravity,the slope of the soil layers is essential to the effective functioning of the barrier. The proposed slope (of 5%) needs to be analyzed. A steeper slope may be required to properly drain the water without breakthrough of the water to the capillary block. It is also necessary to ensure that the slope length is appropriate so that the accumulation of moisture along the diversion path does not lead to capillary breakthrough. 3.2.4 Optimize the soil depths and hydraulic properties of the layers of the capillary barrier system The soil depths and hydraulic properties of the layers are also crucial to effective functioning of the barrier. In the conceptual drawings for the enhanced facility design, all the layers are shown to be of uniform depth throughout the mound. The results of hydraulic modeling may indicate that the depth of the capillary barrier layers should be greater at the edge of the mound to handle the larger volumes of moisture. 3.2.5 Assess the possibility of mixing of soils within the capillary barrier layers The chances of fine soil gravitating towards coarse soil during placement or over time should be minimized since this could impair the effectiveness of the barrier. Laboratory testing should be used to determine whether the soils proposed for the various layers of the capillary barrier are appropriate for construction purposes. 3.2.6 Determine how to construct the facility effectively and efficiently The cover system, including the capillary barrier system, consists of 10 layers of material, both natural and synthetic. To function optimally, the cover system needs to be installed based on tested methods, as does the liner system. With respect to the capillary barrier, there may be a need for field trial testing to assure constructability and material processing. Peer Review of Enhanced Facility Design for the Port Granby Project 16 649 3.2.7 Assess institutional requirements towards the caretaking and maintenance and remedial actions The capillary and drainage system will require some degree of caretaking and maintenance over the life of the facility. As indicated in the MPRT's comments on the Port Granby EASR,plans must be prepared to describe how the necessary resources for caretaking and maintenance will be in place long after construction is completed. These plans must apply to all aspects of the Port Granby facility, including the capillary barrier system. The MPRT expect that these plans will be prepared during the detailed design. phase of this project, and furthermore, that such plans will identify the specific institutional requirements of the capillary barrier, in addition to all other elements of the engineered fa:"-11. Peer Review of Enhanced Facility Design for the Port Granby Project 17 650 F14 77CConclusion The MPRT is pleased that the LLRWMO has considered our concerns regarding the redundancy of the original Port Granby LTWMF design and has developed an enhanced facility design. The MPRT concurs with the LLRWMO that the enhanced facility design addresses the concerns of the MPRT expressed in the Peer Review Report of the EASR, making a double liner system unnecessary. As indicated previously, we are confident that this concept can be designed and constructed to: ■ Protect the underlying till; ■ Prevent leachate from contaminating the groundwater; ■ Provide redundancy in the design of the facility; and, ■ Provide Clarington residents and Council with a state-of-the-art facility and an increased level of confidence. Because this design is at the conceptual level, we expect to see additional analysis and modeling done to optimize the design and demonstrate that it functions as expected. The MPRT would also like to see the LLRWMO investigate several changes to the design of the capillary barrier system that it feels will enhance the performance. These were discussed in Section 3. During our review of the revised EASR, the MPRT will be cognizant of any changes to the findings of the EASR associated with the introduction of the capillary barrier and drainage system in the construction and operation of the LTWMF. The MPRT will work closely with the LLRWMO to resolve any new issues that may arise as a result of the enhanced facility design. Peer Review of Enhanced Facility Design for the Port Granby Project 18 651 5 References Atomic Energy of Canada Limited. 2005. Investigation of Clarington Requested Modifications to the Port Granby Project, Technical Memorandum from Rick Rossi to Glenn Case, August 19, 2005. Golder Associates. 2005. Publications on Capillary Barriers for Minimizing Infiltration. Golder Associates. 2005. Schematic of Capillary Barrier System for Mound Cover Design. Hardy Stevenson and Associates Limited. 2005. Peer Review of the Port Granby Environmental Assessment Study Report. Kampf, Markus,Tilman Holfelder and Hector Montenegro. 1998. "Inspection and Numerical Simulations of Flow Processes in Capillary Barrier Cover Systems", Institute of Hydraulic and Water Resources Engineering, Darmstadt University of Technology. Pease, R.E. and J.C. 1996. "Stormont: Increasing the Diversion Length of Capillary Barriers", University of New Mexico. Proceedings of the HSRC/WERC Joint Conf. On the Environment. Walter., M.T., et al. 2000. "Funneled Flow Mechanisms in a Sloping Layered Soil: Laboratory Investigation", Water Resources Research. Peer Review of Enhanced Facility Design for the Port Granby Project 19 652 Attachment To PSD-007-0, -+UG4AY 401 � NEWTONVILLE RD. EXIT 448 CONCESSION ROAD 1 Q O 0 Q 0 PNO HUDSON RAIL WAY AY RENC� w 9� �� RAILWAY NATIONAL CANA IAN Cl) J LTWMF = O MOUND J � -� • Z Q W ' Z Z :• O Q • J ' W Z EXISTING .SITE `AKESH�FtE READ LAKE ONTARIO Transportation Access Routes Primary Haul Route Contingency Haul Route "" '" see Inter-Site Route 653 a�wz , • arm n Leading the Way REPORT PLANNING SERVICES Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: Monday, January 23, 2006 Report #: PSD-008-06 File #: ZBA 2005-013 By-law #: Subject: ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF FOURTEEN DWELLINGS APPLICANT:PHIP LIMITED (THE FOLEY GROUP) RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report PSD-008-06 be received; 2. THAT the rezoning application submitted by Phip Limited be APPROVED and that the attached Zoning By-law Amendment be adopted by Council; 3. THAT a By-law to remove the Holding (H) symbol be forwarded to Council at such time that all the conditions related to development of these lands have been fulfilled; 4. THAT the Mayor and Cleric be authorized by By-law to execute an agreement with the applicant for this development; and 5. THAT all interested parties listed in Report PSD-008-06, any delegations, and the Regional Municipality of Durham Planning Department be advised of Council's decision. Submitted by: — /7,zv� Reviewed b . D J. Crome, MCIP, R.P.P. Franklin Wu, Director of Planning Services Chief Administrative Officer BR/CP/DJC/sh/df January 16, 2006 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T(905)623-3379 F(905)623-0830 655 REPORT NO.: PSD-008-06 PAGE 2 1.0 APPLICATION DETAILS 1.1 Owner: Gerrit Van Londen 1.2 Applicant: Phip Limited (The Foley Group) 1.3 Rezoning: From "Agricultural (A) Zone" and "Urban Residential Exception (R2- 22) Zone" to appropriate residential zones to permit the creation of 14 single detached dwelling lots 1.4 Area: 0.906 hectares (2.239 acres) 1.5 Location: The west side of Bradshaw Street, including the Winnstanley Road allowance, and 80 and 94 Bradshaw Street, being Part of Lot 9, Concession 2, former Town of Bowmanville (see Attachment 1). 2.0 BACKGROUND 2.1 On May 3, 2005, the Planning Services Department received an application from Phip Limited (The Foley Group) (ZBA 2005-013) to rezone the above area to permit the development of 14 single detached lots. 2.2 On May 18, 2005, the Planning Services Department received a request from Phip Limited (The Foley Group) for the removal of Part Lot Control (ZBA 2005-022) with respect to Lots 26, 28, 30, 32, 34, 36, 38, 40 in Block "B" in Plan H50077 (Attachment 1) (the 'Porter and Bradshaw Plan"). The Porter and Bradshaw Plan was originally registered in the Durham County Registry Office on October 3, 1856. Registration of this Plan of Subdivision was certified by the Land Registrar in the (Whitby) Land Registry Office on January 18, 1994. 2.3 At the 'south limits of the Van Londen property, on the west side of Bradshaw Street, the Municipality of Clarington owns the unopened Winnstanley Street road allowance as well as a 3.92 metre wide parcel of land abutting to the south of the road allowance. The applicant inquired about purchasing these lands and requested that these lands be included in the rezoning application as they would complete the development pattern on the west side of Bradshaw Street. Staff concurred with this request and the public notice for this meeting included these lands. 3.0 LAND CHARACTERISTICS AND SURROUNDING USES 3.1 The subject lands, consist of three parcels owned by Mr. Van Londen, the unopened road allowance and a Municipality-owned strip of land. Two of the Van Londen parcels have existing detached dwellings, 80 Bradshaw, which is to be retained, and 94 Bradshaw, which is to be demolished. The balance of the lands are vacant. 656 REPORT NO.: PSD-008-06 PAGE 3 3.2 The surrounding land uses (north, south, east and west) are all Urban Residential - Low Density. 4.0 PUBLIC NOTICE AND SUBMISSIONS 4.1 Public notice was given by mail to each landowner within 120 metres of the subject properties and two public notice signs were installed, one on the north end and one on the south end, of the properties' Bradshaw frontage. 4.2 As a result of the public notification process, to date, the Planning Services Department has received two telephone inquiries from nearby residents. One resident questioned if the rezoning and eventual lotting of the subject lands on the west side of Bradshaw would trigger the opening of Bradshaw Street at its north end so as to intersect with Apple Blossom Boulevard. The rezoning will not trigger the street opening onto Apple Blossom and no such change is proposed. The other resident was interested in purchasing one of the proposed lots for his daughter and was referred to the developer. 4.3 A public meeting for the proposed rezoning was held on September 6, 2005. Two residents spoke at the meeting. One resident was concerned about the construction of 14 houses and the impact of construction on residents already living on the street. He wondered about the road widening and the opening of the barrier at the north end of Bradshaw Street currently preventing connection to Apple Blossom Boulevard. The other resident was also concerned about the road widening and the removal of the barrier at the north end of Bradshaw Street and a possible connection with Apple Blossom Boulevard. The applicant, Mr. Mark Foley of The Foley Group, reassured the Committee that he is not proposing Bradshaw Street and Apple Blossom Boulevard to be linked and that the road widening is for public utilities only. These issues are addressed in Section 9.5 to 9.7 of this report. 5.0 PROVINCIAL POLICY STATEMENT CONFORMITY 5.1 The proposed infill development within a fully serviced settlement area is, in short, a land use efficiency, consistent with the policy statement. 6.0 OFFICIAL PLAN CONFORMITY 6.1 Within the Durham Regional Official Plan, the subject property is designated as Living Area and the application conforms. 6.2 Within the Clarington Official Plan, the subject property is designated as Urban Residential (Low Density) and the application conforms. 657 REPORT NO.: PSD-008-06 PAGE 4 7.0 ZONING BY-LAW COMPLIANCE 7.1 Within Comprehensive Zoning By-law 84-63 of the former Town of Newcastle, all of the subject lands are zoned "Agricultural (A)" except the 3.92 metre wide parcel owned by the Municipality located south of the Winnstanley Road allowance. This parcel is zoned "Urban Residential Exception (R2-22)". 7.2 The proposed development does not conform, hence, the necessity for the submission of this rezoning application. 8.0 AGENCY COP8114ENTS 8.1 The rezoning application was circulated to various agencies and other departments by the Planning Services Department. The public school board, the separate school board and Clarington Emergency and Fire Services had no objections. Other comments received to date are as follows. .8.2 Central Lake Ontario Conservation offered no objections to the application's approval. However, the applicant was to be informed that the site is subject to Ontario Regulation 145/90, and that prior to filling and/or grading on-site, written permission from the Authority is required. 8.3 Veridian Connections provided no objection to the application for rezoning. However, they provided a number of requirements associated with the development of the lots. 8.4 Clarington Engineering Services also had no objection to the rezoning but provided a. number of requirements for the development of the lots. These requirements must be fulfilled prior to the removal of holding being approved. The requirements deal with road widening, grading and drainage, financial matters and other typical conditions of draft approval. 8.5 The Regional Planning Department noted the use is permitted, municipal services are pre-stubbed to each lot, and there are no matters of provincial interest regarding this application. 9.0 STAFF COMMENTS 9.1 The application proposes the development of the subject lands at the north end of Bradshaw Street for 14 single detached dwellings. The entire Bradshaw Street was designed, and reconstructed with full municipal services in approximately 1992 at the time of development of the south end of Bradshaw Street through registered plan of subdivision 40M-1676. The servicing for the street was based largely on a lotting pattern of 12.Om minimum frontage singles, with few smaller lots to accommodate frontage shortfalls and a few larger lots to accommodate existing dwellings and accessory 658 REPORT NO.: PSD-008-06 PAGE 5 buildings. The proposed rezoning from Agricultural (A) to a residential zone to allow the creation of 14 lots is consistent with the service connections constructed for Bradshaw Street. In addition to the Van Londen property, the rezoning application applies to the unopened Winnstanley Street road allowance and the adjoining 3.92m parcel of land also owned by the Municipality of Clarington to the south of the road allowance. 9.2 At a meeting in June 2005, Council considered a confidential report dealing with closing and conveyance of a portion of the unopened Winnstanley Street road allowance, and declaring the same surplus. At the same meeting, a report declaring the.adjoining 3.92m wide parcel to the south as surplus, was also considered and approved. The above resolutions along with the proposed rezoning of the lands allow the eventual development of the lands together with the adjoining property for residential lots. 9.3 The majority or the lots proposed will have a minimum 12.Om wide frontage consistent with the servicing plan and many of the existing lots on Bradshaw Street. An exception to this will be the existing house at 80 Bradshaw Street. It will retain a frontage of 21.Om and the zoning will allow the future redevelopment of the property with the creation of two 10.5m wide lots for single detached dwellings. The other exception will be the most southerly portion of the municipally-owned road allowance and the surplus parcel to the south which together only accommodates a 10.5m wide lot. 9.4 The subject lands are within an existing Plan of Subdivision, and the Planning Act allows the division of lots and blocks within a Plan of Subdivision through the use of Removal of Part Lot Control. This related application will be dealt with once. the applicant has entered into a subdivision agreement with respect to this development. To further ensure these obligations have been satisfied, the rezoning will maintain a Holding (H) Symbol consistent with the policies of Section 23.4.3 of the Clarington Official Plan until such time as all conditions of approval, as typically contained in draft approved plans of subdivision, including the need for a development agreement, have been complied with. 9.5 In response to issues raised through the public process, the municipality cannot control the pace of construction generally, and a key factor will be real estate market conditions. When dwelling construction does begin, it will be subject to municipal policies that control dust and roadway mud whenever construction activity occurs in Clarington. The proposed construction will no doubt create noise for area residents. However, it is not anticipated to be a significant problem and can be controlled through the Clarington Noise By-law. 9.6 Trees that are both preservable and outside the construction envelope on each lot will be preserved. Eleven (11) street trees, one per newly created lot, and conforming to municipal standards, must be provided by the developer. 9.7 This development proposal does not connect Bradshaw Street with Apple Blossom Boulevard and there is no plan by the Municipality to open Bradshaw Street to Apple Blossom Boulevard. Similarly, there are no provisions to widen the travelled portion of the street and therefore, cars will not be moving relatively faster. The required road 659 REPORT NO.: PSD-008-06 PAGE 6 widening brings the road allowance up to the standard 20 metre width for local streets and further assists in providing appropriate spacing for services and street trees. 9.8 The Finance Department advises that the taxes for all three properties have been paid in full. 10.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 10.1 Based on the comments in this report, it is respectfully recommended that the rezoning application be approved. Attachments: Attachment 1: Site Location Key Map and Property Plan Attachment 2: Zoning By-law Amendment Attachment 3: Authorization for Agreement List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Gerrit Van Londen Mark Foley Sean Powers Don Chandler 660 Attachment 1 To Report PSD-008-06 —W I of A I,, ; I or S 1 50L94m. I Ei B•t U.H a/1 n e.Tefe s MID or -- � I a.n ---- I _g = —_—_ g 00 T I ---- a r .- -a ---- ---- ---9— ---$ A WOW a.s m ---- g 8 s' L % g Eu N t: t n1•stxo J sae� �� _$_.s _ n n� e��st=wFr—Jsn�^�-•{=zl . .bo��Rr1 • 48.80m LP 4. 0m. BowmanviUe Key Map %fi I I I ZBA 2005-013 TILL i �rxa e�ossal e�w '�"W i2 Zoning By-Law Amendment oyy� Subject ' aU Lands ZBA 2005-022 W - ; TUCKER ROAD x E „ro„ Lands Affected By _ QQ� Part Lot Control Removal g GUNNEL[ GRES Eeryµ A >'C V 2 6 Z 3 � NERRIWN STP.EET m CHMM Owner: Gerrit Van Londen and Municipality of Clarington pNCESSIGN STREET EAST CONCESSK7N STREET EAST TTT�IcTT'T'l-1'T7 I= R—rTrrT 661 Attachment S To Report M-008-0E CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BY-LAW NUMBER 2006- being a By-law to amend By-law 84-63,the Comprehensive Zoning By-law for the Corporation of the former Town of Newcastle WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington deems it advisable to amend By-law 84-63, as amended, of the Corporation of the former Town of Newcastle to implement application ZBA 2005-013; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT, the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarngton enacts as follows: 1. Schedule"3"to By-law 84-63, as amended, is hereby further amended by changing the zone designation from "Agricultural (A)Zone"to "Holding- Urban Residential Type Two ((H)R2) Zone", from "Agricultural (A) Zone" to "Holding - Urban Residential Exception ((H)R2-17) Zone" and from "Urban Residential Exception (R2-22) Zone" to "Holding - Urban Residential Exception ((H)R2-17)Zone", as illustrated on the attached Schedule "A"hereto. 2. Schedule"A"attached hereto shall form part of this By-law. 3. This By-law shall come into effect on the date of the passing hereof, subject to the provisions of Section 34 of the Planning Act. BY-LAW read a first time this day of 2006 BY-LAW read a second time this day of 2006 BY-LAW read a third time and finally passed this day of 2006 John Mutton, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk 662 This is Schedule "A". to By-law 2006- , passed this day of . 2006 A.D. I 50L94m —- "„.” I L--- 9 p nn a - " I z z I a e Lu- a ---- -- ® Zoning Change From"A To"(H)R2" E F _ ® Zoning Change From"A"To"(H)R2-17" Vt E - a°'o ; Zoning Change From"R2-22" j O n ---- To"(H)R2-17" 3 � s . . Q N 48.80m "'4. Om John Mutton, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk TILL tI' gOVLEVARD APPLE SLOSSom RLVD. 90 rn z oyy� Subject z W Lands DRIVE N w ; N Z TUCKER ROAD y EDGERTON R (L a 0 GLANVILLE CRES = 3 FlA%MAN AVE m o z m HERRIMAN STREET CHANCE CRT :DNCESSION w STREET EAST CONCESSION STREET EAST — rTl��TT'1TZ—T'1 Bowmanville 663A Attachment 3 To Report PSD-008-06 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BY-LAW NUMBER 2006- being a By-law to authorize entering into an agreement with the Owners of lands subject to Part Lot Control application ZBA 2005-022 and any Mortgagee who has an interest in the said Lands, and the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington in respect of Part Lot Control application ZBA 2005-022 WHEREAS the Council on September 13, 2005 approved a Part Lot Control Application located in Part Lot 9, Concession 2,former Town of Bowmanville and authorized.the execution of a development agreement with the Owner; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT, the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington enacts as follows: 1. That the Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized to execute, on behalf of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington and seal with the Corporation's sea, an agreement between the Owners of the lands subject to Part Lot Control ZBA 2005-022; 2. That the Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized to accept; on behalf of the Corporation of the Municipality, the said conveyances of lands required pursuant to the aforesaid Agreement. BY-LAW read a first time this day of 2006 BY-LAW read a second time this day of 2006 BY-LAW read a third time and finally passed this day of 2006 John Mutton, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk tt3B lar.�• n n Leading the Way REPORT PLANNING SERVICES Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: Monday, January 23, 2006 Report#: PSD-009-06 File #: PLN 1.1.12 By-law#: Subject: PLACES TO GROW DRAFT GROWTH PLAN FOR THE GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report PSD-009-06 be received and endorsed as the Municipality's comments on the Proposed Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe; and 2. THAT Report PSD-009-06 be forwarded to the Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal and the Region of Durham Planning Department. Submitted by: Reviewed b K K� J. Crome, M.C.I.P., R.P.P. Franklin Wu, rvZctor of Planning Services Chief Administrative Officer DJ/COS/DJC/df January 17, 2006 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T(905)623-3379 F (905)623-0830 664 REPORT NO.: PSD-009-06 PAGE 2 1.0 BACKGROUND 1.1 In July, 2004 the province released a discussion paper for growth management for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. The Municipality provided comments via Report PSD-114- 04. The Municipality's primary concerns were: Infrastructure funding for transit needs to occur in many growing areas outside of the Priority Urban Centres as Clarington was not identified as a Priority Urban centre. • The extension of GO Rail to Bowmanville is critical. • Future growth areas should be policy driven and not mapped. • The province needs to recognize Clarington's emerging cluster of energy-related industries. Intensification needs to be defined and incentives for intensification are necessary for it to be ;able including changes to the development charges system, property assessment and taxation, income and sales tax. Municipalities need stronger tools to control the phasing of development in urban areas Performance measures should include provincial ministries 1.2 On February 16th, 2005 the Province released the Draft Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. The objective of the Draft Plan is to provide growth management policy direction to the year 2031 to address the problem of sprawl and the economic competitiveness of Central Ontario as reflected in congested transportation routes, ineffective public transit, soaring infrastructure costs, conversion of employment areas, deprivation of the natural environment and human health. Through the Plan, the Province intends to significantly alter growth management by using its planning powers and infrastructure funding capacity. In April 2005 the Municipality provided comments via Report PSD-057-05 that were forwarded to the Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal and the Region of Durham Planning Department. Some of the major issues that were outlined in the response are: • The omission of identifying Bowmanville as an Urban Growth Centre; • Limited intensification targets in Clarington in terms of the intensification target; • The need to have Provincial incentives and financial tools in place to encourage intensification; • Concern that the inner ring sub area, of which Clarington is part of, may be too large for proper consultation/participation; • A lack of clarity concerning urban boundary expansion policies for there is a strong possibility of no further expansion of the urban boundaries of Clarington; and The need to have Clarington recognized as a Special Employment Area in the sub-area strategy exercise. 665 REPORT NO.: PSD-009-06 PAGE 3 1.3 Subsequently, the Provincial government enacted the Places to Grow Act 2005 on June 13, 2005. To implement the Act, the Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal released the Proposed Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe on November 24, 2005. A copy of this Proposed Growth Plan is attached (Attachment 1). 1.4 Notable changes from the earlier Draft Growth Plan dated 16 February 2005 are as follows: • Removal of the contextual element from all subsections reflecting its evolving status as a statutory plan. • The deletion of the sub-area strategies, which included the urbanizing portion of Glarington in the Toronto/Hamilton conurbation. Sub-area strategies were seen as a duplication of the regional planning and too time-consuming. • Technical and sub-area assessments is to be conducted by the Ministry of Public Infrastructure and Renewal in consultation with upper- and single-tier municipalities. These procedures will partly replace/substitute the initial sub-area strategies. Other work from the sub-area strategies has been moved into the Growth Plan. • Delineation of the "built boundary" by the Provincial Authority to measure all future intensification efforts. The inclusion of this policy clearly indicates that the Province is taking "aggressive" action on managing growth and promoting intensification. • Setting of a range of urban growth centre density targets. Setting targets provides a measurable tool and clearly distinguish urban growth centres as being the focal points for intensification, job creation and infrastructure provision. • The incorporation of Major Transit Stations as one of the key focal points for intensification and the provision of transit supportive uses. • Removal of the Oshawa to Bowmanville corridor from the proposed "Higher Order Transit" to 2031. • The inclusion of community infrastructure as a key component in the intensification process. Human settlement is an integrated process — the inclusion of this policy recognises the importance of timely and sufficient delivery of services e.g. schools, clinics, recreation, aimed at create "complete communities". • The introduction of a new section: "Rural Areas" and associated development criteria. The rationale is to clearly distinguish between urban settlements that encompass urban growth centres, small cities, towns and hamlets and areas falling outside the settlements areas and to set out distinguishable intensification and development criteria. 666 REPORT NO.: PSD-009-06 PAGE 4 • The inclusion of the requirement that settlement boundary expansion may only occur through a municipal comprehensive review and the expansion of the criteria to be met through such review. • The identification of Public Transit as first priority for transportation infrastructure. That clearly underlines that transportation planning is and should be "hand in glove" with growth policies. In order to implement the growth plan's policies, additional data gathering and analysis is required over the next 8-12 months. The work to be undertaken through the implementation analysis falls into two categories: • Technicai assessment that will be undertaken by the Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal in consultation with upper- and single-tier, and affected lower tier municipalities, and will address: verification and finalization of the built boundary, determining the scope of urban growth centres and the assessment of the need for future urban lands. • Sub-area assessment that be undertaken by the Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal in consultation with partner ministries and municipalities within each sub-area that will consist of a regional economic assessment to guide planning for employment, refining and phasing of the proposed transport network, analysis of water/wastewater capacity and requirements to serve projected growth and identification of the natural system and the prime agricultural areas. 1.5 Staff will provide a presentation on the Proposed Growth Plan at the Committee 2.0 MUNICIPAL COMMENTS Comments on the Proposed Growth Plan are as follows: 2.1 Support for the Region of Durham's recommendations on the Proposed Growth Plan The Regional Planning Department prepared a comprehensive response to the Province on the Proposed Growth Plan (Report No. 2005-P-9) that was presented to Planning Committee on January 10, 2006 (Attachment 2). Prior to the presentation of this report, the Region hosted a meeting attended by area municipalities to discuss and comment upon the Proposed Growth Plan. Clarington staff attended this meeting. The Municipality of Clarington generally supports the Regional Staff report and the recommendations contained within the report unless otherwise noted herein. The comments and recommendations of the Municipality of Clarington set out below are intended to reinforce and expand upon the Region's recommendations and not to detract from them. 667 REPORT NO.: PSD-009-06 PAGE 5 2.2 Identify Bowmanville as an Urban Growth Centre From a regional planning perspective Bowmanville forms a logical and very significant nodal (structural & functional) link between the identified Peterborough and Oshawa Downtown Urban Growth Centres. Clarington is one the fastest growing municipalities in Durham. Being the eastern anchor to a number of growing urban areas that extend beyond Port Hope, Cobourg and Lindsay and the gateway to the so-called "inner ring" require a higher priority listing and growing financial and infrastructure investment. 2.3 Intensification targets need to respect the unique characteristics of urban settlements within municipalities The Provincial Growth Plan requires a 40% intensification target by 2015 and every year thereafter within the upper tier area (eg. Durham Region). Theoretically, this allows for some municipalities to take more intensification while others can take less due to unique circumstances in each municipality. In reality, the target is so high that no municipality will take greater than 40%, so no municipality could be lower. Clarington has a significant number of heritage buildings and areas that require protection and limits potential for intensification. Certain urban areas have certain unique density characteristics based on certain historical and/or economic factors e.g. Newcastle's residential densities are lower than that of Courtice and Bowmanville. Most of residential development in Clarington occurred in the last 20 years which further limits the opportunity for intensification within the "built boundary". The Growth Plan needs to recognise unique density patterns and significant heritage areas and could provide policy guidelines as to how or to what extent unique density patterns and significant heritage areas should be addressed in the intensification process. The Places to Grow Plan and the implementing legislation should enhance municipal Council's rights to determine the character and future of the Community. The Council makes these decisions based on extensive public participation. The Places to Grow Plan could be expanded to include an Urban Design Section to better reflect recently introduced Bill 51 to mainly mend the Planning Act and the Conservation Land Act. Bill 51 would allow municipalities a larger role in determining the quality of development through urban design standards. These standards need to be complementary to the intensification targets of the Places to Grow Plan. 2.4 Density targets for residents should be separated from jobs and more clarity is required in terms of how the targets are to be measured The density target of 50 jobs and residents combined for greenfields will be difficult to monitor as residential development and job creation/development on employment lands do not necessarily occur concurrently, in conjunction or in the same geographic location. It would be advisable to set separate density targets for residents and jobs and to provide clear guidelines with regard to the actual application of this density target by lower tier municipalities. 668 REPORT NO.: PSD-009-06 PAGE 6 2.5 More recent assessment information is needed to plan for the future The designation of the built boundary is to be. based on year-end 2003 assessment data. Clarington has experienced two high growth years since then which will result in an "inaccurate" platform or point of departure to plan or assess intensification and future urban expansion in Clarington. 2.6 Clarington supports the proposed sub-area assessments to identify potential economic clusters and provincially significant designated employment areas through formal consultation with lower tier municipalities There should b- proper consultation with the Municipality of Clarington specifically with regard to the emerging cluster of energy-related industries at the proposed Energy Park in Courtice and the proposed Science and Technology Park in Bowmanville where the first tenant has already constructed its first building for biotechnology research. 2.7 Include local municipalities in the sub-area assessment consultation process If the Growth Plans promulgates an integrated planning approach then there should be greater commitment to consultation in the development of the sub-area assessments. The inclusion of lower tier municipalities in the sub-area assessments and technical assessments is advisable as it will result in sufficient formal consultation with municipalities and timely funding. 2.8 The Growth Plan should be amended to reflect the improved higher order transit to be extended from Oshawa to Bowmanville The Growth Plan sets policies in place that would guide expenditure decisions in the GGH, but it should also identify the proposed Bowmanville GO station and extension of higher order transit to Bowmanville. Complete communities can only be developed in Clarington if the transit network is extended and improved. The timely provision of higher order transit is key to accomplish this goal. This is consistent with the Regional Official Plan and the long-term service expansion planned by GO Transit. Future station sites have also been acquired in Oshawa and Bowmanville. The withdrawal of the proposal to improve the transit link shown in the draft Growth Plan is not acceptable. 2.9 The Growth Plan needs to build on the natural system and agricultural policies already in place The Municipal Official Plan and Regional Official Plan contain detailed plans and policies with regard to the protection of the natural and agricultural systems outside the Greenbelt Area —there is no need to repeat these detailed studies. 669 REPORT NO.: PSD-009-06 PAGE 7 2.10 The Growth Plan Implementation needs to include clear funding mechanisms, fiscal incentives and subsidies for intensification and infrastructure There is a need for a greater and timelier financial commitment to the initiative and the identification of long-term fiscal incentives to create a more compact driven environment. In particular, the property tax system and the development charge system needs to reflect a premium for lower density and/or greenfield development. 2.11 The Growth Plan should be expanded to include plans to mobilize and involve the relevant service providers and stakeholders in the provision of community infrastructure The introduction of policies that deals particularly with the provision of community infrastructure is welcomed. However, the success of the implementation of the Growth Plan, as in the case of any development plan, depends mainly upon the actual method of implementation. It is hoped that the relevant service providers and stakeholders will be properly consulted on and involved in the implementation of the Growth. Plan and that the where, what and who will be properly identified before implementation. 2.12 Major community infrastructure should not be included in density calculation The proposed methodology for calculating density excludes only environmental lands. Major community parks, open space areas and major community facilities like high schools are included. The intent is to encourage more compact building forms and efficient lands uses. While this may be desirable for community facilities, municipalities should not have to develop at higher densities as a result of providing major park facilities. 3.0 CONCLUSION . 3.1 The Province's intervention and greater role in the urban development in the Greater Golden Horseshoe through the implementation of the Growth Plan and the sub-area assessments will significantly alter our physical environment over the next 25 years, will hopefully result in more "complete" urban communities and set the tone for further development beyond 2031. 3.2 The success of the Growth Plan will largely depend upon the transparency of governance: consulting and involving all stakeholders and implementing agents in the procedures and studies to follow, and putting the necessary financial tools in place to realise the intent of the Growth Plan will eventually determine its level of success. 3.3 Another key element for the success of the Plan is the necessary balance among the roles of the Province, the Region, and the local councils that will define the character and future of our communities. 670 REPORT NO.: PSD-009-06 PAGE 8 3.4 To what extent Clarington is going to be affected will become clearer through the technical and sub-area assessment processes and the implementation phase. It is however critical for the Province to recognise the significance of.Clarington as being the eastern gate-way to the inner ring, its interrelationship with surrounding urban nodes and to provide a timely infrastructure and fiscal plan to strengthen the functionality and sustainability our municipality in collaboration with the Region of Durham. Attachments: Attachment 1 — Places to Grow: Proposed Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe Attachment 2 — Durha, 1 Planning Commissioner's Report 2005- P-9 671 BETTER CHO '10ES . BRIG`fTER FUTURE . Proposed Growth ' Plan for:the Greater Golden Horseshoe November 2005 Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal Ontario Proposed Growth , Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe November 2005 Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal Q Ontario 673 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION 4 1.1 Context 4 1.2 Vision for 2031 6 1.2.1 A Vision for the Greater Golden Horseshoe 6 1.2.2 Guiding Principles 7 1.3 General Authority 8 1.4 How to Read This Plan 8 2 WHERE AND HOW TO GROW 10 2.1 Context 10 2.2 Policies for Where and How to Grow 11 2.2.1 Growth Forecasts 11 2.2.2 Managing Growth 11 2.2.3 General Intensification 12 2.2.4 Urban Growth Centres 14 2.2.5 Major Transit Station Areas and Intensification Corridors 14 2.2.6 Employment Lands 15 2.2.7 Designated Greenfield Areas 16 2.2.8 Settlement Area Boundary Expansions 17 2.2.9 Rural Areas 18 3 INFRASTRUCTURE TO SUPPORT GROWTH 19 3.1 Context 19 3.2 Policies for Infrastructure To Support Growth 20 3.2.1 Infrastructure Planning 20 3.2.2 Transportation—General 20 3.2.3 Moving People 21 3.2.4 Moving Goods 22 3.2.5 Water and Wastewater Systems 23 3.2.6 Community Infrastructure 24 2 PLACES TO GROW ®Ontario 674 4 PROTECTING WHAT IS VALUABLE 26 4.1 Context 26 4.2 Policies for Protecting What is Valuable 26 4.2.1 Natural System 26 4.2.2 Prime Agricultural Areas 27 4.2.3 Mineral Aggregate Resources 27 4.2.4 A Culture of Conservation 27 5 IMPLEMENTATION AND INTERPRETATION 29 5.1 Context 29 5.1.1 Places to Grow Act, 2005 29 5.1.2 Implementation Analysis 30 5.2 Policies for Implementation and Interpretation 30 5.2.1 General Implementation and Interpretation 30 5.2.2 Monitoring/Performance Measures 32 5.2.1 Public Engagement 32 6 DEFINITIONS 33 7 SCHEDULES Schedule 1 Greater Golden Horseshoe Growth Plan Area Schedule 2 Places to Grow Concept Schedule 3 Distribution of Population, Households& Employment for the Greater Golden Horseshoe 2001-2031 Schedule 4 Urban Growth Centres Schedule 5 Moving People Schedule 6 Moving Goods 8 APPENDICES Appendix 1 Context Map: Location of the Greater Golden Horseshoe within Ontario Appendix 2 Illustration Diagram: Growth Plan Land-use Terminology QOntario PROPOSED GROWTH PLAN 3 675 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 CONTEXT Greater Golden Horseshoe(GGH is one of the fastest growing regions in North America.It is also the destination of choice for many people and businesses relocating from other parts of Canada and around the world.They resettle here because of the high quality of life and the economic opportunities.This is a place of prosperity where,through their skills and talents,people are building a great future for themselves. Over the next 30 years, communities within the GGHwill continue to experience the benefits that come with growth, including: vibrant, diversified economies; higher education institutions; and arts, culture and recreation facilities. However,without properly managing growth, the negative aspects of rapid growth, such as, increased traffic congestion, risk of deteriorating air and water quality, and the consumption of agricultural lands and natural resources, will continue to be experienced. This Plan has been prepared under the Places to GrowAct,2005.It is a framework for implementing the Government of Ontario's vision for building stronger, prosperous communities by better managing growth to 2031.This is a plan that recognizes the realities facing our cities and smaller communities,and that acknowledges what governments can and cannot influence.It demonstrates leadership for improving the ways in which our cities,suburbs,towns,and villages will grow over the long-term. This Plan will guide decisions on a wide range of issues— transportation, infrastructure planning,land-use planning,urban form,housing, natural heritage and resource protection— in the interest of promoting economic prosperity. It will create a clearer environment for investment decisions and will help secure the future prosperity of the GGH. This Plan builds on other key government initiatives including:the Greenbelt Plan,PlanningAct reform and the Provincial Policy Statement,2005 (PPS,2005). This Plan does not replace municipal official plans,but works within the existing planning framework to provide growth management policy direction for the GGH. This Plan reflects a shared vision amongst the Government of Ontario,the municipalities of the GGHand its residents. Successful implementation of this Plan's vision will be dependant upon collaborative decision-making. 4 PLACES TO GROW ®Ontario In preparing for the future, it is essential that planning for the GGHtake into account the importance, unique characteristics and strengths of our economy. These include: • A diverse economy supported by a wide array of manufacturing industries of which the largest is the automotive sector, and other key industry clusters such as financial and business services,hospitality and tourism, education and research,life sciences, information services,and agriculture; • An economy in transition,with economic activity and wealth increasingly generated by service and knowledge industries; • Trade that accounts for over half of Ontario's GDP, over 90 per cent of which is with the United States;' • A highly educated workforce,whose social and economic diversity are critical factors for success in the growing knowledge economy; • Abundant natural heritage features and areas, and prime agricultural areas, and the government's commitment to protecting them,as demonstrated through initiatives such as the Greenbelt Plan, make our communities more attractive and healthier places to live and work; • Cultural amenities that offer the kinds of creative and recreational activities that attract knowledge workers. The GGHmust remain competitive with other city-regions,yet urban sprawl can affect its competitiveness. Despite its many assets, Ontario and the GGH face a number of challenges in sustaining and growing its economy: • Increasing numbers of automobiles are travelling over longer distances resulting in clogged transportation corridors, including those that provide access to our critical border crossings.Traffic congestion and the delay of goods movement costs Ontario upwards of$5 billion in lost GDP each year;' • Attractive and efficient public transit is difficult to introduce into sprawling communities, and this limits our ability to respond effectively to growing traffic congestion issues; • Employment lands are being converted from their intended uses, thereby limiting future economic opportunities; • New infrastructure is being built to service lower-density areas while existing infrastructure in the older parts of our communities remains underutilized; 'TD Economics.Ontario:The Land of Opp itunity.September 2004,pg.2 =Ontario Chamber of Commerce.Cart ofBarderDe/a s to Ontario.May 2004,pg.8 QQ Ontario PROPOSED GROWTH PLAN 5 677 • Urban sprawl contributes to the degradation of our natural environment, air quality and water resources,and the consumption of agricultural lands and other natural resources so critical to the future economy. Decades of neglect and lack of sufficient investment have resulted in the current infrastructure deficit.Tens of billions of dollars,beyond current levels of investment,will be required before the situation is back in balance.All levels of government are under pressure to meet public infrastructure needs.Additional support from federal partners; innovative,alternative partnership arrangements that protect the public interest; and the strategic staging of infrastructure investments are all required to respond to these challenges. Ultimately,better investment in our cities will help to mitigate sprawl. Enhancing infrastructure, integrating and improving transit systems, protecting valuable natural resources and strengthening local government will all go far towards the implementation of this Plan. This Plan addresses these challenges through policy directions that— • direct growth to built-up areas where the capacity exists to best accommodate the expected population, household and employment growth while providing strict criteria for settlement area boundary expansions • promote transit-supportive densities and a healthy mix of residential and employment land uses • preserve employment lands for future economic opportunities • identify and support a transportation network that links urbangrowth centres through an extensive multi-modal system anchored by efficient public transit and highway systems for moving people and goods • plan for community infrastructure to support growth • ensure sustainable water and wastewater services are available to support future growth • identify a natural system and prime agricultural areas, and enhance the conservation of these valuable resources. 6 PLACES TO GROW ®Ontario 7 1.2 VISION FOR 2031 1.2.1 A VISION FOR THE GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE More than anything,the Greater Golden Horseshoe will be a great place to live in 2031.Its communities will be based on the pillars of a strong economy, a clean and healthy environment and social equity. The Greater Golden Horseshoe will offer a wide variety of choices for living. Thriving,livable,vibrant and productive urban and rural areas will foster community and individual well-being.The region will be supported by modern,well-maintained infrastructure built in accordance with a broad plan for growth.Residents will have easy access to shelter,food,education and health-care facilities,arts and recreation and information technology. Getting around will be easy.An integrated transportation network will allow people choices for easy travel both within and between urban centres throughout the region.Public transit will be fast,convenient and affordable. Roads,while still a significant means of transport,will be only one of a variety of effective and well-used choices for transportation.Walking and cycling will be practical elements of our urban,transportation systems. A healthy natural environment with clear air,land and water will characterize the Greater Golden Horseshoe.The Greenbelt, including significant natural features,such as the Oak Ridges Moraine and Niagara Escarpment,will be enhanced and protected in perpetuity.They will form the key building blocks of a Greater Golden Horseshoe natural system.The Greater Golden Horseshoe's" rivers and streams,forests and natural areas will be protected and accessible for residents to enjoy their beauty.Open spaces in our cities,towns and the countryside will provide people with a sense of place. Unique and high-quality agricultural lands will be protected for future generations.Farming will be productive, diverse and sustainable. Urban centres will be characterized by compact settlement and development patterns and will provide a diversity of opportunities for living,working and enjoying culture.The evolving regional economy of the Greater Golden Horseshoe will have matured into an economic powerhouse of global significance. It will function as Canada's principal international gateway. The Greater Toronto and Hamilton area will be a thriving metropolis with an extraordinary waterfront. And at the heart of this metropolis is Toronto, a celebrated centre of influence for commerce,culture and innovation. All of this will translate into a place where residents enjoy a high standard of living and an exceptional quality of life. (5 Ontario PROPOSED GRow,rH PLAN 7 679 1.2.2 GUIDING PRINCIPLES The vision for the GGHis grounded in the following principles that provide the basis for guiding decisions on how land is developed,resources are managed and public dollars invested: • Build compact,vibrant and complete communities. • Plan and manage growth to support a strong and competitive economy. • Protect, conserve,enhance and wisely use the valuable natural resources of land, air and water for current and future generations. • Optimize the use of existing and new infrastructure to support growth in a compact,efficient form. • Provide for different approaches to managing growth that recognize the diversity of communities in the GGH. • Promote collaboration among all sectors— government, private and non-profit sectors and citizens — to achieve the vision. 1.3 GENERAL AUTHORITY This Plan for the GGHderives its authority from the Places to GmwAct,2005. This Plan is approved through an Order in Council made by the Lieutenant Governor in Council under that Act. This Plan applies to the GGHlands designated by Ontario Regulation 416/05. 1.4 HOW TO READ THIS PLAN This Plan consists of policies,schedules,definitions and appendices. It also includes non-policy contextual commentary to provide background and describe the intent of the policies. This Plan informs decision-making regarding growth management in the GGH. It contains a set of policies for managing growth and development to the year 2031.While certain policies have specific target dates,the goals and policies of this Plan are intended to be achieved within the life of this Plan. The land-use planning process within the GGHis governed primarily by the Planning Act and the Government of Ontario's existing planning system.The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) provides overall policy directions on matters of provincial interest related to land use and development in Ontario,and applies to the CGH.This Plan should be read in conjunction with the applicable PPS. 8 PLACES TO GROW ®Ontario This Plan should also be read in conjunction with relevant provincial plans, including the Greenbelt Plan, Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan and the Niagara Escarpment Plan.These plans apply to parts of the GGHand provide specific policy on certain matters.This Plan, in conjunction with these other plans and the PPS, 2005 express the Government of Ontario's interests and directions with regard to growth management in the GGH. The Places to GrowAct, 2005, includes provisions related to conflicts between a growth plan and other provincial plans and policies. QQ Ontario PROPOSED GROWTH PLAN 9 2 WHERE AND HOW TO GROW 2.1 CONTEXT The GGHis one of the fastest growing regions in North America.By 2031, the future population of this area is forecast to grow by an additional 3.7 million (from 2001) to 11.5 million people,accounting for over 80 per cent of Ontario's population growth.The magnitude and pace of this growth necessitates a plan for building healthy and balanced communities and maintaining and improving our quality of life. To ensure the development of healthy, safe and balanced communities,choices about where and how growth occurs in the GGHneed to be carefully made. Better use of land and infrastructure can be made by directing growth to the existing urban areas.This Plan envisages increasing intensification of the existing built-up area,with a focus on urban gmwth centres, intensification corridor, major transit stations areas, bmwnfield sites and greyf7elds Concentrating intensification in these areas provides a focus for transit and infrastructure investment to support growth. Urban growth centres are particularly important, not only because they can accommodate growth,but also because they will be regional focal points.They are meeting places,and locations for cultural facilities,public institutions,major services,and transit hubs.They also play a key role in supporting the economy of the surrounding area.These centres are not all at the same stage of development: some are the downtowns of older cities,while others are newly planned suburban centres.They all have potential for accommodating significant growth. Better use of land and infrastructure can also be achieved by building more compact greenfield communities that reduce the rate at which land is consumed. New communities will need to grow at transit-supportive densities,with transit- supportive street configurations,and provide opportunities for people to work close to where they live. Providing opportunities for business and employment is fundamental to using land wisely and ensuring a prosperous economic future.It is particularly important to ensure an adequate supply of land for industrial uses traditionally found in employment areas.This Plan strongly discourages converting employment areas to other uses,including major retail uses. There is a large supply of land already designated for future urban development in the GGH, there is enough land in most communities to accommodate projected growth based on the growth forecasts and intensification target and 10 PLACES TO GROW ®Ontario 682 density targets of this Plan.It is important to understand how we will optimize the use of existing land supply before designating more land for future urban development.This Plan's emphasis on intensification and optimizing the use of the existing land supply,represents a new approach to city-building in the GGH, one which concentrates more on making better use of our existing infrastructure,and less on continuously expanding the urban edge. This Plan recognizes and promotes the traditional role of rural settlement areas as a focus of economic activities for surrounding rural and agricultural areas. This P.an is about building complete communities These are communities which accommodate people in all stages of life and have the right mix of housing,a good range of jobs,and easy access to stores and services to meet their daily needs. Complete communities are well-designed and offer transportation choices. Complete communities, compact urban form and extensive intensification efforts go hand-in-hand with more transit: not only do they support each other,they are all necessary.This co-relation is fundamental to where and how we grow. 2.2 POLICIES FOR WHERE AND HOW TO GROW 2.2.1 GROWTH FORECASTS 1. Population,household and employment forecasts for all upper-and single-tier municipalities contained in Schedule 3 will be used as the basis for planning and managing growth in the GGH. 2. The Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal will review and as appropriate, amend the forecasts contained in Schedule 3 at least every five years in consultation with upper- and single-tier municipalities. 2.2.2 MANAGING GROWTH 1. Population,household and employment growth will be accommodated by— a) directing a significant portion of new growth to the built-up areas of the community through intensification b) focusing intensification in intensification arras c) building compact, transit-supportive communities in greenfields d) reducing dependence on the automobile through the development of mixed use, transit-supportive, pedestrian-friendly urban environments e) providing convenient access to intra- and inter-city transit QOntario PRC)POS[_D GROWTH PLAN 11 f) ensuring the availability of sufficient land in designated employment areas to accommodate forecasted growth to support the GGHs economic competitiveness g) planning and investing for a balance of jobs and housing in communities across the GGHto reduce the need for long distance commuting and to increase the modal share for transit,walking and cycling h) encouraging cities and towns to develop as complete communities with a diverse mix of land uses,a range and mix of employment and housing types, high quality public open space and easy access to local stores and services 1) directing development to settlement areas except for development related to the management or use of resources,resource-based recreational activities and other rural land uses that cannot be located in settlement amas j) directing major growth to settlement areas that offer municipal water and wastewater services and limiting growth in settlement areas that are serviced by other forms of water and wastewater services k) prohibiting the establishment of new settlement areas 2.2.3 GENERAL INTENSIFICATION 1. By the year 2015 and for each year thereafter, a minimum of 40 per cent of all residential development occurring annually within each upper- and single-tier municipality will be within the built-up area. 2. If at the time this plan comes into effect,a municipality is achieving a percentage of intensification higher than the minimum intensification target identified in policy 2.2.3.1, this rate of intensificatiornwill be considered the minimum intensification target for that municipality. 3. If at the time this plan comes into effect, a municipality has established in its official plan an intensification target that is higher than the minimum intensification target identified in policy 2.2.3.1, this target will be considered the minimum intensification target for that municipality. 4. The Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal may review and permit an alternative minimum intensification target for an upper- or single-tier municipality located within the outerringto ensure the intensification target is appropriate given the size, location and capacity of intensification areas. 5. The Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal,in consultation with individual upper- and single-tier municipalities,will verify and delineate the built boundary. 12 PLACES TO GROW ®Ontario 684 6. All upper- and single-tier municipalities,in consultation with lower-tier municipalities,will develop and implement official plan policies and outline a strategy to phase-in and to achieve the intensification target.These policies and the strategy will— a) be based on the forecasts contained in Schedule 3 b) encourage intensification generally throughout the built-up area c) identify intensification areas to support achievement of the intensification target d) incorporate the built boundary delineated in accordance with '3--licy 2.2.3.5 into their Official Plans e) recognize urban growth centres and major transit station areas as a key focus for development to accommodate intensification f) facilitate and promote intensification g) identify the appropriate type and scale of development in intensification areas h) include minimum density targets for intensification areas consistent with the planned transit service levels,and any transit-supportive land use guidelines established by the Government of Ontario I) achieve a range and mix of housing,including affordable housing needs j) encourage the creation of secondary suites throughout the built-up area. 7. All intensification areas will be planned and designed to — a) cumulatively attract a significant portion of population, household and employment growth b) provide a diverse mix of land uses to support vibrant neighbourhoods, including residential and employment uses c) create high quality public open spaces with site design and urban design standards that support opportunities for transit,walking and cycling d) support transit use for everyday activities e) generally achieve higher densities than the surrounding areas f) ensure an appropriate transition of built form to adjacent areas. 8. Ministers of the Crown and municipalities will use infrastructure investment and other implementation tools and mechanisms to facilitate intensification. l�Ontario PROPOSED GRow'rH PLAN 13 685 2.2.4 URBAN GROWTH CENTRES 1. Urban growth centres for the GGHare identified in Schedule 4. 2. The Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal, in consultation with individual upper- and single-tier municipalities,will further refine the scope and scale of the urbangrowth centres: 3. Urban growth centres will be designated in official plans and planned— a) as focal areas for investment in institutional and region-wide public services, as well as commercial,recreational, cultural and entertainment uses b) to accommodate and support major transit infrastructure c) to serve as high density major employment centres that will attract provincially, nationally or internationally significant employment uses d) to accommodate a significant share of population and employment growth. 4. Municipalities will delineate the boundaries of the urban growth centres identified in this Plan within their official plans. 5. Urban growth centres will be planned to achieve, by 2031 or earlier, a minimum gross density target of— a) 400 residents and jobs combined per hectare for each of the urban growth centres in the City of Toronto b) 200 residents and jobs combined per hectare for the Brampton City Centre,Downtown Burlington, Downtown Cambridge, Downtown Hamilton, Downtown Milton,Markham City Centre,Mississauga City Centre,Newmarket Centre,Midtown Oakville, Downtown Oshawa,Downtown Pickering,Richmond Hill/Langstaff Gateway, Vaughan Corporate Centre, Downtown Kitchener and Uptown Waterloo urban gro wth centres c) 150 residents and jobs combined per hectare for the Downtown Barrie, Downtown Brantford, Downtown Guelph, Downtown Peterborough and Downtown St. Catharines urbangrowth centres: 6. If at the time this plan comes into effect, an urban growth centre is already planned to achieve, or has already achieved,a gross density that exceeds the minimum density target established in Policy 2.2.4.5,this density will be considered the minimum density target for the urban growth centre. 2.2.5 MAJOR TRANSIT STATION AREAS AND INTENSIFICATION CORRIDORS 1. Major transit station areas and intensification corridors will be designated in official plans and planned to — 14 PLACES TO GROW ®Ontario a) serve as locations for large office and commercial development b) achieve residential and employment densities that support existing and planned transit service levels. 2. Major transit station areas will be planned and designed to provide access from various transportation modes to the transit facility, including related considerations for pedestrians, bicycle parking and commuter pick-up/ drop-off areas. 3. Intensification corridors will generally be planned to accommodate local services, including commercial,recreational,cultural and entertainment uses. 2.2.6 tMPLOYMENT LANDS 1. An adequate supply of employment lands providing locations for a variety of appropriate employment uses will be maintained to ensure the vitality of the GGHand the provincial economy. 2. The downtown Toronto office core will continue to be the primary centre for international finance and commerce of the GGH. 3. Major office and appropriate major institutional development will be located in urban growth centres, major transit station areas, or other areas with existing frequent transit service,or existing or planned higher order transit service. 4. Municipalities may permit conversion of lands within designated employment areas,to non-employment uses or major retail uses,only through a municipal comprehensive ieviewwhere it has been demonstrated that— a) there is a need for the conversion b) the conversion will not adversely affect the achievement of the intensification target and density targets, and other policies of this Plan c) the existing or planned infrastructure and community infrastructure required to accommodate the proposed conversion can be provided in a financially and environmentally sustainable manner d) lands do not comprise prime industrial lands e) lands are not required over the long term for the employment purposes for which they are designated, or f) the conversion or designation is necessary to address other provincial priorities such as community health and safety enhancement. 5. The Government of Ontario recognizes the importance of cross-border trade with the United States.To facilitate this economic opportunity, designated employment areas within a gateway economic zone will be identified ®Ontario PROPOSED GROWTH PLAN 15 687 and supported for uses primarily focused on cross-border trade, movement of goods and tourism-related opportunities. 6. Through sub-area assessment,the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal, in consultation with other Ministers of the Crown,and in consultation with upper-and single-tier municipalities,will guide planning for employment by— a) identifying existing and potential economic clusters b) assessing the demand for land associated with future economic growth c) defining and identifying provincially significant designated employment areas, including prime industrial lands 7. Municipalities are encouraged to designate and preserve lands within settlement areas in the vicinity of existing major highway interchanges, ports, rail yards and airports as areas for manufacturing,warehousing, and associated retail, office and ancillary facilities,where appropriate. 8. In planning for employment lands, municipalities will facilitate development of compact built form and minimize surface parking. 2.2.7 DESIGNATED GREENFIELD AREAS 1. The designatedgreenfield area of each upper- or single-tier municipality will be planned to achieve a minimum density target that is not less than 50 residents and jobs combined per hectare.This density target will be measured over the entire designatedgreen field area of each upper- or single-tier munici- pality,excluding natural heritage features and areas where development is not permitted in accordance with provincial plans and policies. 2. Upper- and single-tier municipalities will develop and implement official plan policies,including phasing policies,and other strategies,for da4natedgmen8eld areas to achieve the intensification target and density targets of this Plan. 3. New development taking place in designatedgreenfleld areas will be designated, planned, zoned and designed in a manner that— a) creates complete communities b) creates street configurations, densities, and urban form that support the early integration and sustained viability of transit services c) provides a diverse mix of land uses to support vibrant neighbourhoods, including residential and employment uses d) creates high quality public open spaces with site design and urban design standards that support opportunities for transit,walking and cycling. i 16 PLACES TO GROW Q Ontario. 2.2.8 SETTLEMENT AREA BOUNDARY EXPANSIONS 1. The policies in this section apply only to the expansion of a settlement area within a municipality. 2. The Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal, in consultation with individual upper- and single-tier municipalities,will determine the need for and maximum amount of additional designatedgrrenfield area required for each upper- and single-tier municipality to accommodate the growth forecasts contained in Schedule 3. 3. A settlement area boundary expansion may only occur as part of a municipal comprehensive review where it has been demonstrated that — a) the proposed expansion does not exceed the maximum amount of additional designatedgreenfield area established in accordance with policy 2.2.8.2 b) the timing of the expansion and the phasing of development within the designatedgreenfields area will not adversely affect the achievement of the intensification target and density targets,and other policies of this Plan, and where applicable,will be consistent with the relevant policies of the Greenbelt, Oak Ridges Moraine and Niagara Escarpment Plans c.) the existing or planned infrastructure and community infrastructure required to accommodate the proposed expansion can be provided in a financially and environmentally sustainable manner d) in prime agricultural arras I. the lands do not comprise specialty crop areas ii. there are no reasonable alternatives that avoid prime agricultural areas iii. there are no reasonable alternatives on lower priority agricultural lands in prime agricultural arras e) impacts from expanding on agricultural operations which are adjacent or close to the settlement areas are mitigated to the extent feasible f) in determining the most appropriate location for expansions to the boundaries of settlement areas, the policies of Sections 2 (Wise Use and Management of Resources) and 3 (Protecting Public Heath and Safety) of the PPS, 2005 are applied g) for small cities and towns within the outer ring,such expansions maintain or result in a minimum of one full-time job per three residents within or in the immediate vicinity of the small city or town, or the expansion will directly result in the small city or town moving significantly toward such a ratio. ®Ontario PROPOSED GROWTH PLAN 17 2.2.9 RURAL AREAS 1. Development in rural areas may be permitted in accordance with Policy 2.2.2.1 i, only where it is compatible with the rural landscape and can be sustained by rural service levels. 2. New multiple lots and units for residential development will be directed to settlement areas 3. New lots and uses in rural areas will be compatible with, and will not hinder, surrounding agricultural operations. 4. For lands within the GreenbeltAma,the applicable policies in the Greenbelt,Niagara Escarpment and Oak Ridges Moraine Plans apply. 18 PLACES TO GROW ®Ontario 3 INFRASTRUCTURE TO 'SUPPORT GROWTH 3.1 CONTEXT Ready and accessible public infrastructure is essential to the viability of Ontario's communities and critical to economic competitiveness,quality of life and the delivery of public services.But increasing demand,low-density land-use patterns and historic underinvestment have resulted in a substantial infrastructure deficit to meet the needs of current residents as well as those of future Ontarians. This Plan provides the framework for infrastructure investments in the GGH,so that existing infrastructure and future investments are optimized to serve growth to 2031 and beyond.The policy directions for intensification and compact urban form in this Plan guide many of the infrastructure priorities in this section.It is estimated that over 20 per cent of infrastructure capital costs could be saved over 25 years in the GTA—generating an estimated $12.2 billion that could be more efficiently invested—by moving from lower density development to more efficient and compact urban form.' This Plan guides strategic investment decisions to support population and economic growth— particularly in the three key areas of transportation,water and wastewater systems,and communityinfiastructura This Plan will be supported by long-term multi-year provincial infrastructure investment strategies,such as ReNew Ontario,and by sustainable financing models and sound infrastructure asset management practices. The transportation policies in this section guide the planning and development of an integrated transportation system needed to support a vibrant economy and quality of life in the GGH.The policies promote co-ordination and consistency among land-use and transportation planning and investment by all levels of government and other transportation stakeholders in the GGH.To further facilitate co-ordination and to implement transportation initiatives in this Plan, the Minister of Transportation is exploring options for establishing a Greater Toronto Transportation Authority. Investment in water and wastewater systems by all levels of government has also lagged behind GGHgrowth and many municipalities are now faced with significant renewal and capacity expansion issues.There is a need to co-ordinate investment in water and wastewater infrastructure to support future growth in 'GTA Task Force.Greater Toronto:Report ofthe GTA Task Form.January 1996,p.12;Slack,Enid. Municipal Finar"and the Pattern of Urban Growth,C.D.Howe Institute.No.160,February 2002,p.6; TD Economics.Greater Toronto Area:CanadasPrimary EmnomicLomwaveinNeedafRepairs May 2002,p.15. Q® Ontario PR0P05ED GROW1`hi PLAN 19 691 ways that are linked to the determination of how these systems are paid for and administered.Improved maintenance and upgrading of existing systems are necessary to ensure the provision of reliable and safe water. Investment in community infrastructure–such as hospitals,long-term care facilities,schools and affordable housing–should be planned to keep pace with changing needs and to promote more complete communities.In the case of housing, there is an underlying societal need for aff`omable housing in many municipalities that is heightened by growth pressures. Long-term infrastructure strategies such as ReNew Ontario are addressing this infrastructure gap and directing investments to help achieve complete communities. 3.2 POLICIES FOR INFRASTRUCTURE TO SUPPORT GROWTH 3.2.1 INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING 1. Infrastructure planning,land-use planning, and infrastructure investment will be co-ordinated to implement this Plan. Infrastructure includes but is not limited to transit and transportation corridors,water and wastewater systems,waste management systems, and communftyinfrastructurV. 2. Priority will be given to infrastructure investments made by the province that support the policies and schedules in this Plan. 3. The Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal will work with other Ministers of the Crown and other public sector partners to identify strategic infrastructure needs to support the implementation of this Plan through multi-year infrastructure planning, and through the sub-area assessment of transit and transportation, and water and wastewater systems as provided for in policies 3.2.2.4 and 3.2.5.6. 3.2.2 TRANSPORTATION—GENERAL 1. The transportation system within the CCHwill be planned and managed to— a) provide connectivity among transportation modes for moving people and for moving goods b) offer a balance of transportation choices that reduces reliance upon any single mode and promotes transit,cycling and walking c) be sustainable,by encouraging the most financially and environmentally appropriate mode for trip-making d) offer multi-modal access to jobs, housing,schools, cultural and recreational opportunities, and goods and services e) provide for the safety of system users. 20 PLACES TO GROW QQ Ontario 692 2. Transportation system planning, land-use planning, and transportation investment,will be co-ordinated to implement this Plan. 3. In planning for the development,optimization,and/or expansion of new or existing transportation corridors,the Ministers of Public Infrastructure Renewal and Transportation,other Ministers of the Crown,and municipalities will— a) ensure that corridors are identified and protected to meet current and projected needs for various travel modes b) support opportunities for multi-modal use where feasible, in particular prioritizing transit and goods movement needs over those of single occupant automobiles c) consider separation of modes within corridors,where appropriate d) for goods movement corridors, provide for linkages to planned or existing inter-modal opportunities where feasible. 4. Through sub-area assessment,the Ministers of Transportation and Public Infrastructure Renewal in consultation with upper- and single-tier municipalities,will further refine and address phasing and coordination of transportation infrastructure planning and investment. 5. Upper- and single-tier municipalities will develop and implement transportation demand management policies in their official plans or other planning documents,to reduce trip distance and time,and increase the modal share of alternatives to the automobile. 3.2.3 MOVING PEOPLE 1. Public transit will be the first priority for transportation infrastructure planning and major transportation investments. 2. All decisions on transit planning and investment will be made according to the following criteria: a) Using transit infrastructure to shape growth; b) Placing priority on increasing capacity on existing transit systems to support intensification areas, c) Expanding service areas to support transit-supportive residential and employment densities; d) Facilitating improved linkages from nearby neighbourhoods to urban growth centres and major transit station areas, e) Consistency with the strategic framework for future transit QOntario PROPOSED (:;ROWTH PLAN 21 investments outlined on Schedule 5; f) Increasing the modal share of transit. 3. Municipalities will ensure that pedestrian and bicycle networks are integrated into transportation planning to— a) provide safe,comfortable travel for pedestrians and bicyclists within existing communities and new development b) provide linkages between intensification areas,adjacent neighbourhoods, and transit stations, including dedicated lane space for bicyclists on the major street network where feasible. 4. Schedule 5 provides the strategic framework for future transit investment decisions, including capacity improvements on existing transit systems to support intensification, and proposed higher order transit and inter-regional transit links between urbangmuth centres, in the GGH. Schedule 5 should be read in conjunction with the policies in this Plan.The transit linkages on Schedule 5 provide a strategic framework and are not drawn to scale. Actual timing, phasing and alignments are subject to further study and, where applicable, the environmental assessment process. 3.2.4 MOVING GOODS 1. The first priority of highway investment is to facilitate efficient goods movement by linking inter-modal facilities; international gateways, and communities within the GGH. 2. The Ministers of Public Infrastructure Renewal and Transportation, other appropriate Ministers of the Crown, and municipalities will work with agencies and operators to— a) co-ordinate and optimize goods movement systems b) improve corridors for moving goods across the GGHconsistent with Schedule 6 of this Plan c) promote and better integrate multi-modal goods movement and land-use and transportation system planning,including the development of freight-supportive land use guidelines. 3. Development in and adjacent to highway corridors outside of settlement areas will be discouraged unless it is directly related to servicing the operations of the corridor, or required for strategic employment purposes identified through the sub-area assessment provided for in policy 2.2.6.6. 4. The Ministers of Public Infrastructure Renewal,Municipal Affairs and 22 PLACES 70 GROW ®Ontario 694 Housing, and Transportation will work with municipalities to plan and design highway corridors in such a way to discourage development outside of settlement areas,in support of policy 3.2.4.3. 5. Municipalities will provide for the establishment of priority truck routes, where feasible, to facilitate the movement of goods into and out of areas of significant employment, industrial and commercial activity and to provide alternate routes connecting to the provincial network. 6. Municipalities will plan for land uses in settlement areas along or in the vicinity of inter-modal facilities,truck routes, railway corridors and yards, airports, dockyards,highways and major interchanges that are compatible w!4'- ;e primary goods movement function of these facilities,while balancing these considerations with the other policies in this Plan for intensification areas and existing built-up areas 7. Schedule 6 provides the strategic framework for future goods movement investment decisions in the GGFI.Schedule 6 should be read in conjunction with the policies in this Plan.The proposed corridors shown on Schedule 6 provide a strategic framework and are not drawn to scale.Actual timing, phasing, and alignments are subject to further study and,where applicable, the environmental assessment process. 3.2.5 WATER AND WASTEWATER SYSTEMS I. Municipal water and wastewater systems will generate sufficient revenue to recover the full cast of providing water and wastewater services. 2. For lands within the Greenbelt Area,all policies regarding water and wastewater systems or stormwater set out in provincial plans, applicable to lands within the Greenbelt Area,continue to apply. 3. Municipalities are encouraged to plan and design municipal water and wastewater systems that return water to the watershed from which the withdrawal originates. 4. In settlement areas,construction of new or expansions of existing municipal or private mmmunal water and wastewater systemsshould only be considered where the following conditions are met: a) Strategies for water conservation and other water demand management initiatives are being implemented in the existing service area; b) Plans for expansion or for new services are to serve growth in a manner that supports achievement of the intensification target and density target, c) For municipal water and wastewater systems,the plans for expansion have l�Ontario PROPOSED GROWTH PLAN 23 695 been considered in the context of the Great Lakes Basin and applicable inter-provincial,national or bi-national agreements regarding the basin. 5. In rural areas,the extension of municipal or private communal water and wastewater systems will only be permitted to address a human health issue, or to service existing uses that were legally established prior to the date this Plan came into force,and such extensions shall not be used as the basis for new development. 6. Through sub-area assessment,the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal, in consultation with upper-and single-tier municipalities,will undertake an analysis of water and wastewater capacity and requirements to service the growth forecasts set out in this Plan. 7. Municipalities that share an inland water source and/or receiving water body,should co-ordinate their planning for potable water, stormwater, and wastewater systems to ensure that water quality and quantity is maintained and improved on a watershed basis. S. Municipalities, in conjunction with conservation authorities,are encouraged to prepare watershedplansand use such plans to guide development decisions and water and wastewater servicing decisions. 9. Municipalities are encouraged to implement and support innovative stormwater management actions as part of redevelopment and intensification,such as co-ordinated approaches across several properties or across municipal boundaries, reuse of stormwater, and.on-site storage and detention. 3.2.6 COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE 1. Community infrastructure planning,land use planning, and community infrastructure investment will be co-ordinated to implement this Plan. 2. Development will take into account the availability and location of existing and proposed community infrastructure so that new and expanded community infrastructure can be provided efficiently,effectively,and in a logical fashion. 3. A range of appropriate community infrastructure should be provided to support needs resulting from population/demographic changes,including those related to intensification,and to foster complete communities 4. Services planning, funding and delivery sectors are encouraged to develop a community infrastructure strategy to facilitate the co-ordination and planning of community infrastructure with land use, infrastructure and investment through a collaborative and consultative process. 5. Municipalities will establish and implement minimum affordable housing 24 PLACES TO GROW Ontario targets in accordance with Policy 1.4.3 of the PPS, 2005. 6. Upper- and single-tier municipalities will develop a housing strategy in consultation with lower-tier municipalities,the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing and other appropriate stakeholders.The housing strategy will set out a plan including Official Plan policies to meet the needs of all residents, including the need for affordable housing— both home ownership and rental housing.The housing strategy will include the planning and development of a range of housing types and densities to support the achievement of the intensification target and density targets ®Ontario PROPOSED GROWTH PLAN 25 4 PROTECTING WHAT IS VALUABLE 4.1 CONTEXT The GGHis blessed with a broad array of unique natural and cultural heritage features and sites,and valuable renewable and non-renewable resources that are essential for the long-term economic prosperity,quality of life,and environmental health of the region.These valuable assets must be wisely protected and managed as part of planning for future growth. Some of these features and areas are already protected through legislation, statements of provincial policy such as the PPS, 2005,and provincial plans such aN the Greenbelt Plan,the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, and the Niagara Escarpment Plan.This Plan supports and builds on these initiatives. 4.2 POLICIES FOR PROTECTING WHAT IS VALUABLE 4.2.1 NATURAL SYSTEM 1. Through sub-area assessment,the Ministers of Public Infrastructure Renewal and Natural Resources, in consultation with upper- and single-tier municipalities, will identify the natural system of the GGH, and where appropriate, policies for its protection. 2. The natural system will include natural heritage features and areas and linkages between and among these features and with natural systems outside the GGHand inside the Greenbelt Area.It will also include sensitive or vulnerable surface water features and ground water features: 3. For lands within the Greenbelt Area,the natural system will be the Natural System as described in the Greenbelt Plan.All policies regarding natural systems set out in provincial plans, applicable to lands within the Greenbelt Area, continue to apply. 4. Planning authorities are encouraged to identify locally significant natural areas that link and augment the natural system. 5. Municipalities,conservation authorities,non-governmental organizations,and other interested parties are encouraged to develop a system of publicly accessible parkland,open space and trails,including shoreline areas,within the GGHthat— a) clearly demarcates where public access is and is not permitted b) is based on a co-ordinated approach to trail planning and development,and c) is based on good land stewardship practices for public and private lands. 26 PLACES TO GROW ®Ontario 698 6. Municipalities are encouraged to establish an urban open space system within built-up areas,which may include rooftop gardens,communal courtyards,and public parks. 4.2.2 PRIME AGRICULTURAL AREAS 1. Through sub-area assessment,the Ministers of Public Infrastructure Renewal and Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, in partnership with appropriate Ministers of the Crown and in consultation with upper- and single-tier municipalities,will identify the prime agricultural areas,including the specialty crop areas,of the GGH,and where appropriate, policies for their protection. 2. For lands within the Greenbelt Area, the agricultural areas will be the Agricultural System as described in the Greenbelt Plan.All policies regarding agricultural areas and the agricultural system set out in provincial plans, applicable to,lands within the Greenbelt Area,continue to apply. 3. Municipalities are encouraged to maintain,improve and provide opportunities for farm-related infrastructure such as drainage and irrigation. 4. Municipalities are encouraged to establish and work with agricultural advisory committees and consult with them on decision-making related to agricultural planning. 4.2.3 MINERAL AGGREGATE RESOURCES 1. The Ministers of Public Infrastructure Renewal and Natural Resources will work with municipalities, producers of mineral aggregate resourres, and other stakeholders to develop a long-term strategy for ensuring the wise use, conservation,availability and management of mineral aggregate resources in the GGH,as well as identifying opportunities for resource recovery and for co-ordinated approaches to rehabilitation where feasible. 4.2.4 A CULTURE OF CONSERVATION 1. Municipalities will develop and implement official plan policies and other strategies in support of the following conservation objectives: a) Water conservation, including i. Water demand management to reduce per capita consumption and improve resource efficiency ii. Water recycling to maximize the reuse and recycling of water ®Ontario PROPOSED GROWTH PLAN 27 699 b) Energy conservation, including I. Energy conservation for municipally owned facilities ii. Identification of opportunities for, and where possible locations for, alternative energy generation and distribution iii. Energy demand management to reduce energy consumption iv. Land-use patterns and urban design standards that encourage and support energy-efficient buildings and opportunities for cogeneration c) Air quality protection, including I. Reduction in emissions from municipal and residential sources d) Integrated waste management, including I. Enhanced waste reduction, composting,and recycling initiatives and new opportunities where appropriate ii. Comprehensive planning for the management of residual waste iii. Promotion of reuse, recycling, and renovation of the built environment iv. Integrated approaches including recycling,reuse,waste diversion, and the disposal of waste that cannot be recycled, composted or otherwise diverted from disposal v. Consideration of waste management initiatives within the context of long-term regional planning, and in collaboration with neighbouring municipalities e) Cultural heritage conservation, including I. Conservation of cultural heritage and archaeological resources as built-up areas are intensified. 28 PLACES TO GROW ®Ontario 700 5 IMPLEMENTATION AND INTERPRETATION 5.1 CONTEXT Key to the success of this Plan is its effective implementation. Successful implementation will require that all levels of government,non-governmental organizations,the private sector,and citizens work together in a co-ordinated and coilaborative way to implement the policies of this Plan and realize its goals.The success of this Plan is dependent on a range of mechanisms being in place to implement the Plans policies.This includes the legislative framework provir'" by the Places To CrowAct, 2005, and the application of this Plan to all decisions on matters, proceedings or applications, made under the Planning Act and the Condominium Act. A wide range of complementary planning and fiscal tools will be used to implement this Plan.These include instruments found in.the Plannmgktand the Municipal Act,2001. Measuring the success of this Plan will also require rigorous and consistent evaluation of its progress.One method to measure this Plan's progress currently under development is an index that will monitor changes in the amount of land developed and the increased percentage of new development taking place within the built-up areas of the CCH. 5.1.1 PLACES TO GROW ACT,2005 The Places to CmwAct, 2005provides the legislative framework for this Plan. It gives the Lieutenant Governor in Council the authority to establish any area of land in the Province as a growth plan area and requires that the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal prepare a growth plan for all or part of that area. The growth plan area for this Plan is defined by Ontario Regulation 416/05. It is set out on Schedule 1 of this Plan. A growth plan works in conjunction with other provincial legislation, policies, plans and regulations. Land use within the growth plan area continues to be governed by the Planning Act and Ontario's existing planning system and is also subject to the conformity, requirements and conflict provisions of the Places to Crow Act, 2005 The Act also includes processes for making and amending growth plans.This includes the requirement that the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal review each growth plan at least every 10 years after the plan comes into force. Under the Act,the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal may propose an Q Ontario PROPOSED GROWTh! PLAN 29 amendment to a growth plan.When an amendment is proposed,the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal will give notice and invite written submissions on the amendment.Any significant modification to the plan requires approval of the Lieutenant Governor in Council. 5.1.2 IMPLEMENTATION ANALYSIS In order to implement the policies of this Plan, the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal, in consultation with other Ministers of the Crown will: 1. verify and delineate the built boundary 2. develop a detailed assessment of the need for future designatedgreenBeld areas 3. determine the scope and scale of urbangmwth centres 4. undertake sub-area assessment to refine the policies in this Plan at a regional scale: i. regional economic assessment to guide planning for employment ii. refinement and phasing of the proposed transportation network iii. analysis of water/wastewater capacity and requirements to serve projected growth iv. identification of the natural system v. identification of prime agricultural and rural areas The work on the built boundary, designatedgreenfield areas,and urbangmwth centres will be undertaken by the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal,through one-on-one consultation with individual upper- and single-tier municipalities. The sub-area assessment will be undertaken by the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal and other Ministers of the Crown, in consultation with upper- and single-tier municipalities.The sub-area assessment will provide further refinement to this Plan's policies and inform implementation strategies at a scale smaller than the GGH. Differing contexts within each sub-area means that implementation strategies will need to be tailored to circumstances and coordinated across municipal boundaries. 5.2 POLICIES FOR IMPLEMENTATION AND INTERPRETATION 5.2.1 GENERAL IMPLEMENTATION AND INTERPRETATION 1. This Plan,including context sections,policies,definitions and schedules,should be read in its entirety and all relevant policies are to be applied to each situation. 30 PLACES TO GROW ®Ontario 2. The appendices to this Plan are provided for information purposes only. 3. Terms in italics are defined in the Definitions section of this Plan.The definitions apply to these italicized terms regardless of whether the terms are singular or plural. 4. In the Definitions section,sources have been cited where the definitions are the same or have the same content as the definitions provided in the policy or statute cited. 5. The policies and targets of this Plan represent minimum standards.This Plan does not prevent planning authorities and decision-makers from going beyond minimum standards established in specific policies and targets,unless doing so would conflict with any policy of this Plan,the applicable PPS,or any other provincial plan. 6. The boundaries and lines displayed on the schedules,unless otherwise stated provide strategic direction only and should not be read to scale. 7. The built boundary,shown on schedules 2, 4, 5,and 6,is conceptual and should be used as guidance to implement the relevant policies of this Plan. 8. The settlement area boundary as shown on Schedules 2,4, 5,and 6 is conceptual. For the actual boundary,the appropriate municipal official plans should be consulted. 9. Where this Plan indicates that further analysis and assessment will be carried out but the analysis has not been completed,all relevant policies of this Plan continue to apply and any policy that relies on information that will be available from further analysis should be implemented to the fullest extent possible. 10. A coordinated approach will be taken both within the Government of Ontario and its dealings with municipalities,to implement this Plan,in particular for issues that cross municipal boundaries. 11. Where policies contain a list of sub-policies,the list of sub-policies is to be applied in its entirety unless otherwise specified. 12. References to the responsibilities of the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal set out in this Plan should be read as the Minister, his or her assignee,his or her delegate pursuant to the Places to GrowAct, 2005,or any other member of Executive Council assigned responsibility for growth plans under the Places to Grow Act, 2005 ®Ontario PROPOSED GROWTH PLAN 31 5.2.2 MONITORING/PERFORMANCE MEASURES 1. The Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal,will develop a set of indicators to measure the implementation of the policies in this Plan. 2. The Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal will monitor the implementation of this Plan, including reviewing performance indicators concurrent with any review of this Plan. 3. Municipalities will monitor and report on the implementation of this Plan's policies within their municipality, in accordance with guidelines developed by the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal. 5.2.3 PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT 1. The Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal will ensure ongoing consultation with the public and stakeholders on the implementation of this Plan. 2. The Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal will provide information to the public and stakeholders in order to build understanding of growth management and facilitate informed involvement in the implementation of this Plan. 3. Municipalities are encouraged to engage the public and stakeholders in local efforts to implement this Plan and to provide the necessary information to ensure the informed involvement of local citizens. 32 PLACES TO GROW ®Ontario 6 DEFINITIONS AFFORDABLE a) in the case of ownership housing, the least expensive of 1. housing for which the purchase price results in annual accommodation costs which do not exceed 30 per cent of gross annual household income for low and moderate income households; or 2. 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 1. a unit for which the rent does not exceed 30 per cent of gross annual household income for low and moderate income households; or 2. a unit for which the rent is at or below the average market rent of a unit in the regional market area. For the purposes of this definition: Low and moderate income households means,in the case of ownership housing, households with incomes in the lowest 60 per cent of the income distribution for the regional market area; or in the case of rental housing, households with incomes in the lowest 60 per cent of the income distribution for renter households for the regional market area. Regional market area refers to an area, generally broader than a lower-tier municipality that has a high degree of social and economic interaction. In southern Ontario, the upper or single-tier municipality will normally serve as the regional market area.Where a regional market area extends significantly beyond upper-or single-tier boundaries, it may include a combination of upper-, single and/or lower-tier municipalities. (Provincial Policy Statement, 2005) BROWNFIELD SITES 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. (Provincial Policy Statement, 2005) BUILT-UP AREAS All land inside the built boundary. ®Ontario PROPOSED GROWTH PLAN 33 705 BUILT BOUNDARY The edge of the developed urban area as defined by the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal. COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE Community infrastructure refers to lands, buildings, and structures that support the quality of life for people and communities by providing public services for health,education, recreation, socio-cultural activities,security and safety, and affordable housing. COMPACT URBAN FORM A land-use pattern that encourages efficient use of land,walkable neighbourhoods, mixed land uses (residential,retail,workplace and institutional all within one neighbourhood), proximity to transit and reduced need for infrastructure. Compact urban form can include detached and semi-detached houses on small lots as well as townhouses and walk-up apartments, multi-storey commercial developments, and apartments or offices above retail. COMPLETE COMMUNITIES Complete communities meet a person's needs for daily living through their whole lifetime by providing convenient access to an appropriate mix of jobs, a full range of housing including affordable housing, schools, retail, and community infrastructure for their residents. Convenient access to public transportation and options for safe, non-motorized travel is also provided. DENSITY TARGETS The density target for urbangrowth centrnris defined in Policy 2.2.4.5 and Policy 2.2.4.6.The density target for designatedgmenfield areas is defined in Policy 2.2.7.1. DESIGNATED EMPLOYMENT AREA Areas designated in an official plan for clusters of business and economic activities including,but not limited to,manufacturing, warehousing and associated office, retail and ancillary facilities but does not include major retail uses. DESIGNATED GREENFIELD AREA The area between the built boundary and the settlement area boundary. DRINKING-WATER SYSTEM A system of works,excluding plumbing,that is established for the purpose of providing users of the system with drinking water and that includes any thing used for the collection,production,treatment,storage,supply or distribution of 34 PLACES TO GROW ®Ontario water;any thing related to the management of residue from the treatment process or the management of the discharge of a substance into the natural environment from the treatment system;and a well or intake that serves as the source or entry point of raw water supply for the system. (Safe WaterDrinkingAct, 2002) EMPLOYMENT LANDS Lands zoned or designated within settlement areas for employment uses. These lands may be located outside of a designated employment area. FULL COST The full cost of providing water and wastewater services includes the source protection costs,operating costs, financing costs, renewal and replacement costs and improvement costs associated with extracting,treating or distributing water to the public, and collecting, treating or discharging wastewater. GATEWAY ECONOMIC ZONE Settlement areas that, due to their proximity to major international border crossings,have unique economic importance to the region and Ontario, as depicted on Schedules 2, 5,and 6. GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE(GGH) The geographic area designated as the Greater Golden Horseshoe growth plan area in Ontario Regulation 416/05. GREENBELT AREA The geographic area of the Greenbelt as defined by Ontario Regulation 59/05 as provided by the Greenbelt Act, 2005 GREYFIELDS Previously developed properties that are not contaminated.They are usually, but not exclusively, former commercial properties that may be underutilized, derelict or vacant. GROUND WATER FEATURE Water-related features in the earth's subsurface,including recharge/discharge areas,water tables,aquifers and unsaturated zones that can be defined by surface and subsurface hydrogeologic investigations. (Provincial Policy Statement, 2005) ®Ontario PROPOSED GROWTH PLAN 35 707 HIGHER ORDER TRANSIT Transit that operates in its own dedicated right-of-way, outside of mixed traffic, and therefore can achieve a frequency of service greater than mixed- traffic transit. Higher order transit can include heavy rail (such as subways), light rail (such as streetcars), and buses in dedicated rights-of-way. INFILL Development on vacant or underutilized land in the built-up area. INNER RING Defined as the geographic area consisting of the municipalities of Hamilton and Toronto and the upper-tier municipalities of Durham,Halton, Peel and York. IN i ENSIFICATION The development of a property,site or area at a higher density than currently exists through: a) redevelopment,including the reuse of brownfield sites; b) the development of vacant and/or underutilized lots within previously developed areas; c) inllll development; and d) the expansion or conversion of existing buildings. (Provincial Policy Statement, 2005) INTENSIFICATION AREAS Lands identified by municipalities or the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal within the built boundary that are to be the focus for accommodating more intense development. Intensification areas include urban growth centres, intensification corridors, major transit station areas,and other major opportunities that may include inli'll, redevelopment, bmwnli'eld sites, the expansion or conversion of existing buildings and greyfrelds INTENSIFICATION CORRIDORS Lands along major roads,arterials or higher order transit corridors within the built boundary that have the potential to provide a focus for higher density mixed-use development consistent with planned transit service levels. INTENSIFICATION TARGET The intensification target is as established in Policy 2.2.3.1, Policy 2.2.3.2 and Policy 2.2.3.3. 36 PLACES TO GROW ®Ontario 7 INTER-MODAL FACILITY A location where transfers between carriers can be made, as part of a single journey. A typical freight inter-modal facility is a rail yard where containers are transferred between trucks and trains. MAJOR OFFICE Major Office is generally defined as freestanding office buildings of 10,000 ml or greater,or with 500 jobs or more. MAJOR TRANSIT STATION AREA The area including and around any existing or planned higher order transit station within a settlement area;or the area including and around a major bus depot in an urban core.Station areas generally are defined as the area within an approximate 500m radius of a transit station,representing about a 10-minute walk. MINERAL AGGREGATE RESOURCES Gravel,sand, clay, earth,shale,,stone,limestone, dolostone,sandstone, marble, granite, rock or other material prescribed under the Aggregate ResourcesAct suitable for construction,industrial, manufacturing and maintenance purposes but does not include metallic ores,asbestos, graphite, kyanite, mica, nepheline syenite,salt,talc,wollastonite, mine tailings or other material prescribed under the MiningAct. (Provincial Policy Statement, 2005) MODAL SHARE Modal share is the percentage of person-trips made by one travel mode, relative to the total number of person-trips made by all modes. MULTI-MODAL Refers to the availability or use of more than one form of transportation,such as automobiles,walking,cycling,buses,rapid transit,rail (such as commuter and freight),trucks,air and marine. MUNICIPAL COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW An official plan review,or an official plan amendment,initiated by a municipality that comprehensively applies the policies and schedules of this Plan. MUNICIPAL WATER AND WASTEWATER SYSTEMS Municipal Water Systems are all or part of a drinking-watersystenf.. a) that is owned by a municipality or by a municipal service board established under section 195 of the MunicipaiAct, 2001, b) that is owned by a corporation established under section 203 of the Municipal Act, 2001, ®Ontario PROPOSED C;Row,rH PLAN 37 c) from which a municipality obtains or will obtain water under the terms of a contract between the municipality and the owner of the system, or d) that is in a prescribed class (Safe Water Drinking Act, 200 . Municipal Wastewater Systems are defined as any sewage woFks owned or operated by a municipality. NATURAL HERITAGE FEATURES AND AREAS Features and areas, including significant wetlands,significant coastal wetlands, fish habitat,significant woodlands south and east of the Canadian Shield, significant valleylands south and east of the Canadian Shield,significant habitat of endangered species and threatened species,significant wildlife habitat,and significant areas of natural and scientific interest,which are important for their environmental and social values as a legacy of the natural landscapes of an area. For the purposes of this definition: Wetlands means lands that are seasonally or permanently covered by shallow water, as well as lands where the water table is close to or at the surface. In either case the presence of abundant water has caused the formation of hydric soils and has favoured the dominance of either hydrophytic plants or water tolerant plants.The four major types of wetlands are swamps, marshes, bogs and fens. Periodically soaked or wet lands being used for agricultural purposes which no longer exhibit wetland characteristics are not considered to be wetlands for the purposes of this definition. Coastal wetland means any wetland that is located on Lake Ontario, Lake Erie, Lake Huron,or the Niagara River; or any other wetland that is on a tributary to any of the above-specified water bodies and lies,either wholly or in part, downstream of a line located 2 kilometres upstream of the 1:100 year floodline (plus wave run-up) of the large water body to which the tributary is connected. Fish habitat,as defined in the Fisheries Act, c. F-14, means spawning grounds and nursery,rearing, food supply, and migration areas on which fish depend directly or indirectly in order to carry out their life processes. Woodlands means treed areas that provide environmental and economic benefits to both the private landowner and the general public,such as erosion prevention, hydrological and nutrient cycling, provision of clean air and the long-term storage of carbon, provision of wildlife habitat, outdoor recreational opportunities, and the sustainable harvest of a wide range of woodland products. Woodlands include treed areas,woodlots or forested areas and vary in their level of significance at the local, regional and provincial levels. 38 PLACES TO GROW ®Ontario 71 Valleylands means a natural area that occurs in a valley or other landform depression that has water flowing through or standing for some period of the year. Endangered species means a species that is listed or categorized as an "Endangered Species"on the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources'official species at risk list,as updated and amended from time to time. Threatened species means a species that is listed or categorized as a "Threatened Species"on the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources'official species at risk list, as updated and amended from time to time. Wildlife habitat means areas where plants, animals and other organisms live, and find adequate amounts of food,water,shelter and space needed to sustain their populations. Specific wildlife habitats of concern may include areas where species concentrate at a vulnerable point in their annual or life cycle, and areas that are important to migratory or non-migratory species. Areas of natural and scientific interest (ANSI) means areas of land and water containing natural landscapes or features that have been identified as having life science or earth science values related to protection,scientific study or education. In regard to the above,significant means: a) in regard to wetlands, coastal wetlands and areas of natural and scientific interest,an area identified as provincially significant by the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources using evaluation procedures established by the Province, as amended from time to time; b) in regard to the habitat of endangered species and threatened species,the habitat,as approved by the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources,that is necessary for the maintenance, survival, and/or the recovery of naturally occurring or reintroduced populations of endangered species or threatened species, and where those areas of occurrence are occupied or habitually occupied by the species during all or any part(s) of its life cycle; c) in regard to woodlands, an area which is ecologically important in terms of features such as species composition,age of trees and stand history; functionally important due to its contribution to the broader landscape because of its location,size or due to the amount of forest cover in the planning area; or economically important due to site quality,species composition, or past management history; and d) in regard to other features and areas,ecologically important in terms of features, functions,representation or amount, and contributing to the quality and diversity of an identifiable geographic area or natural system. ®Ontario PROPOSED GROWTH PL_l"IN 39 Criteria for determining significance for the resources identified in sections (c)-(d) are recommended by the Province,but municipal approaches that achieve or exceed the same objective may also be used. While some significant resources may already be identified and inventoried by official sources, the significance of others can only be determined after evaluation. (Provincial Policy Statement, 2005) NATURAL SYSTEM As defined by Policy 4.2.1.1 and Policy 4.2.1.2. NEW MULTIPLE LOTS AND UNITS FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT The creation of more than three units or lots through either plan of subdivision, consent or plan of condominium. OUTER RING Defined as the geographic area consisting of the cities of Barrie, Brantford, Guelph, Kawartha Lakes, Orillia and Peterborough; the counties of Brant, Dufferin, Haldimand, Northumberland, Peterborough, Simcoe and Wellington; and the Regions of Niagara and Waterloo. PRIME AGRICULTURAL AREA Areas where prime agricultural lands predominate.This includes areas of prime agricultural lands and associated Canada Land Inventory Class 4-7 soils, and additional areas where there is a local concentration of farms which exhibit characteristics of ongoing agriculture. For the purposes of this definition: Prime agricultural land includes specialty cro p areas and/or Canada Land Inventory Classes 1, 2, and 3 soils, in this order of priority for protection. (Provincial Policy Statement, 2005) PRIVATE COMMUNAL WATER AND WASTEWATER SYSTEMS Private Communal Water Systems is defined as a drinking-waters that serves six or more lots or private residences and is not owned by a municipality. Private Wastewater Systems is defined as a sewage works that serves six or more lots or private residences and is not owned by a municipality. REDEVELOPMENT The creation of new units, uses or lots on previously developed land in existing communities, including brownfieldsites. (Provincial Policy Statement, 2005) RURAL AREAS 40 PLACES TO GROW (2)Ontario Lands which are located outside settlement areas and that are not prime agricultural areas SETTLEMENT AREAS Urban areas and rural settlement areas within municipalities (such as cities, towns,villages and hamlets) that are: a) built-up areas where development is concentrated and which have a mix of land uses; and b) lands which have been designated in an official plan for development over the long-term planning horizon provided for in Policy 1.1.2 of the Provincial Policy Statement, 2005. SEWAGE WORKS Any works for the collection, transmission,treatment and disposal of sewage or any part of such works, but does not include plumbing to which the Building Code Act, 1992 applies. (Ontario Water Resources Ac6 For the purposes of this definition: Sewage includes, but is not limited to drainage,storm water,residential wastes, commercial wastes and industrial wastes. SMALL CITIES AND TOWNS Settlement areas that do not include an urbangrowth centre. SPECIALTY CROP AREA Areas designated using evaluation procedures established by the Province,as amended from time to time,where specialty crops such as tender fruits (peaches, cherries, plums),grapes,other fruit crops,vegetable crops,greenhouse crops,and crops from agriculturally developed organic soil lands are predominantly grown, usually resulting from: a) soils that have suitability to produce specialty crops, or lands that are subject to special climatic conditions, or a combination of both; and/or b) a combination of farmers skilled in the production of specialty crops, and of capital investment in related facilities and services to produce, store, or process.specialty crops. (Provincial Policy Statement, 2005) ®Ontario PROPOSED GROWTH PLAN 41 SUB-AREA A sub-area is an area identified by the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal within the Greater Golden Horseshoe at a scale generally larger than any one upper- or single-tier municipality. SURFACE WATER FEATURE Water-related features on the earth's surface,including headwaters,rivers,stream channels,inland lakes,seepage areas,recharge/discharge areas,springs,wetlands, and associated riparian lands that can be defined by their soil moisture,soil type, vegetation or topographic characteristics. (Provincial Policy Statement, 2005) TRANSIT-SUPPORTIVE Makes transit viable and improves the quality of the experience of using transit. When used in reference to development, it often refers to compact, mixed-use development that has a high level of employment and residential densities to support frequent transit service.When used in reference to urban design, it often refers to design principles that make development more accessible for transit users,such as roads laid out in a grid network rather than a discontinuous network; pedestrian-oriented uses along roads to encourage walking to transit; reduced setbacks and placing parking at the sides/rear of buildings; and improved access between arterial roads and interior blocks in residential areas. TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR A thoroughfare and its associated buffer zone for passage or conveyance of vehicles or people.A transportation corridor includes: a) major roads, arterial roads,and highways for moving people and goods, b) rail lines/railways for moving people and goods, c) transit rights-of-way/transitways including buses and light rail for moving people. TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT A set of strategies that results in more efficient use of the transportation system by influencing travel behaviour by mode, time of day, frequency, trip length, regulation,route, or cost. Examples include: carpooling,vanpooling, and shuttle buses; parking management; site design and on-site facilities that support transit and walking; bicycle facilities and programs; pricing (road tolls or transit discounts); flexible working hours; telecommuting; high occupancy vehicle lanes; park-and-ride; and incentives for ride-sharing; using transit, walking and cycling; and, initiatives to discourage drive-alone trips by residents, employees, and students. 42 PLACES TO GROW ®Ontario TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM A system consisting of corridors and rights-of-way for the movement of people and goods, and associated transportation facilities including transit stops and stations,cycle lanes,bus lanes, high occupancy vehicle lanes, rail facilities, park-and-ride lots,service centres,rest stops,vehicle inspection stations, inter-modal terminals,harbours, and associated facilities such as storage and maintenance. (Provincial Policy Statement, 2005) URBAN GkOWTH CENTRES Locations set out in Schedule 4.Urban growth centres will be delineated, pursuant to Policy 2.2.4.2,Policy 2.2.4.3,and Policy 2.2.4.4. WATERSHED An area that is drained by a river and its tributaries. (Provincial Policy Statement, 2005) WATERSHED PLAN A watershed plan provides a framework for integrated decision-making for the management of human activities,land,water, aquatic life and aquatic resources within a watershed. It addresses how water quality and quantity and ecosystems are to be protected and enhanced, and includes matters such as a water budget, conservation plan,setbacks from water bodies,stormwater management require- ments and a monitoring plan. ®Ontario PROPOSED GROWTH PLAN 43 7 a'. L v { "nx si :a t : �z � COUNTY. .. CITY�F ORIL'EI RY OF PETERBOROUGH KAWARTHA COUNTYOF � SIMCO X LAKES am ff, r. s : Y C `€' �€ �' OF w.. R ROUGH k l 1- F COUNT. F BLANDv <, DUFFER) atl COUNTYOF WELLINGTON CITYO'Fw TORONTO T CI�.1 F �7 EL v°. 4—sue" i u rE •tz `' s.s."C7 `a ` 'ray -' s z h E uu "'T, t :`€ REGION OF �' WATERLOO..::: E r s k„ . . � ' C A` j BRTF RD. COUNTY O OF 'BRAN R GARA . HALDIMAN D Legend COUNTY: •' € r "` , r�` x �, "'— Boundary of Upper and Single-Tier Municipalities Greater Goklen s & l Horseshoe Growth Greenbelt Area' Plan Area- Sources:Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal,Ministry of Natural Resources and Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. 'Ontario Regulation 59/05 1 ° "Ontario Regulation 416105 ��s� N�� : lY C k E!'z "ETXIv`r YS €".,. —:r � ��: c" .: �a 20 10 0 20 40 Km �� 1 1 1 1 N .r Ontario 1 PLACES TO � � ' . Golden Horseshoe 1 Plan ' . the boundaries and linesdisplayed inthemap abovearenot toscale. do not claimto. € 1 and planning boundaries.Dataand informalionreproduced with oneor more municipalities and may not theup to date and accutateas ofthe date of publication. municipalities or completeness,For more information on precise boundaries,the appropriate municipality should be consulted,for more information on Greenbelt Area boundaries,the Grcenbelt Pldn 2005 should�u Lon�ullud 716 J J 1 5 5D i'E`R k°`° ' R5 £ t€may+;p Legend RUN Urban Growth Centres Future Goods Movement Corridors Existing Major Highways ---- Highway Extensions OMajor Ports _ Improved Higher Transit Proposed Higher Transit to 2031* _ Improved Inter-F Transit to 2031 ® International Airy 0 5D R5 £ Legend RUN Urban Growth Centres Future Goods Movement Corridors Existing Major Highways ---- Highway Extensions OMajor Ports _ Improved Higher Transit Proposed Higher Transit to 2031* _ Improved Inter-F Transit to 2031 ® International Airy DISTRIBUTION OF POPULATION,HOUSEHOLDS AND EMPLOYMENT FOR THE GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE 2001-2031(rigures in 000s) POPULATION HOUSEHOLDS EMPLOYMENT 2001 2011 2021 2031 2001 2011 2021 2031 2001 2011 2021 2031 City of Toronto 2,590 2,760 2,930 3,080 940 1,070 1,180 1,270 1,440 1,540 1,600 1,640 Region of Peel 1,030 1,320 1,490 1,640 310 410 480 540 530 730 820 870 Region of York 760 1,060 1,300 1,500 220 '330 420 500 390 590 700 780 Region of Durham 530 660 810 960 170 230 290 350 190 260 310 350 Region of Halton 390 520 650 780 130 190 240 300 190 280 340 390 City of Hamilton 510 540 590 660 190 210 240 270 210 230 270 300 GTAH TOTAL* 5,810 6,860 7,770 8,620 1,960 2,440 2,850 3,230 2,950 3,630 4,040 4,330 County of Northumber'?nd 80 87 93 96 30 34 39 42 29 32 33 33 County of Peterborough* 131 137 144 149 50 55 61 64 54 59 60 60 City of Kawartha Lakes 72 80 91 100 27 31 37 43 20 23 25 27 County of Haldimand 46 49 53 56 16 18 21 23 17 19 19 20 Region of Niagara 427 442 474 511 162 179 200 218 186 201 209 218 County of Brant' 129 141 157 173 45 52 60 67 55 62 67 71 Region of Waterloo 456 526 623 729 161 200 244 289 236 282 324 366 County of Wellington' 195 223 269 321 68 85 106 128 99 117 137 158 County of Dufferin 53 62 71 80 17 21 26 29 r19 22 25 27 County ofSimcoe* 392 484 583 667 137 177 223 260 153 197 230 254 OUTER RING TOTAL" 1,980 2,230 2,560: 2,880 710 850 1,020 1,160 870 1,010 1,130 1,240 TOTAL GGH** 7,790 9,090' 10,330 11,500 2,680 3,290 3,870 4,390 3,810 4,640 5,170 5,560 Source:Hemson Consulting Ltd., 'The Growth Forecast for the Greater Golden Horseshoe;January 2005 Note:Numbers rounded oil to nearest 10 000for GT/)Nmunicipalides and nearest 1,000for outer ring municipalities. *Indudes single tier municipalities that am laratedgeographically within county,e.g.Simcoe County forecasts includes City ofBarfie and City of 0rillia. Separate forecasts for all single-tiermunidpalities will be determined. 'Totals may not add up due to rounding. Y Ontario PLACES TO .O Distribution of 'op Households & Employment for • Greater d• o• 2001-203 718 l . i.Down t � � r z r ; eTorough,� Me` a' V. :. IR b � P keys WN, Gil R, a :Mate j " ,lyut f f Do Braritfb <u" Legend urban Growth Centres �m a z ° « Built-Up Area-Conceptual Greenbek Arm• Greater Golden Designated Greenfield Area Horseshoe Growth Conceptual Plan Area- Sources:Mint stry of Public LVrastructrae Renewal,Ministry of Natural Resources,Ministry of Rnance and Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. 'Ontario Regulation 59/05 y, "Ontario Regulation 416/OS y f 20 10 0 20 40 on d. Ontario PLACES ROUrban -t approved land-use and planning boundaries.Data and 11forrml lorl r elroofil(vd her cill Is to I�'('I hj,rol Die btjtjndaf�es and lines displayed in the map above are illustr3tive and not to scale.They do not accurately reffer, one or ,re municipalities and may not be r, •date of publication. , municipalities assume any liability or responA)Illy IiIIII to Mccurauy or corriffilcturicss.for more.information oil prectse boundaries.file appropriate municipality should be consulted.for mute infonjollion oil Greenbelt Area IcuundaTics.the Gfeenheit Kin 20n sli�ufd fie corl4h.'d. 719 •F. S yii� .S f r 4 "`... Y itl.LEI! It ..r..-L t £ Ali a � x t ' Ai w IS f m I � • � � "eye "`" '���,'_.�� +.M ° Z im N 9'cs, EI L' �3 x;64 � � _�.�{ 'Si� .✓, � 1 f�a� BtML Le¢en Urban Growth Centres r ,.. Improved Higher Older - . International Airports Transit' X% Proposed Airport +~Tra Higher Order Gateway Economic Tale Transit to 2031 Improved Inter-Regional • ' Built Up Area-Conceptual Greenbelt Area' Designated Greenfield Area Greater Golden gar eS a d" :? Horseshoe Growth Conceptual - Plan Area•• Unes shown are conceptual and illustrative and not to scale. only They are not aligned wHfi Infrastructure a municipal boundaries. Sources:Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal,Ministry of Transportation,Ministry of Nature)Resources and Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. 1V 4'Sw � 3F'b - € x fr x ,... ' Reg ulation 59/05 Regulation 416/05 x E `v %r z4 ,:r ,' - '` 2a 10 0 20 10 Km upmmk. `' Ontario SCHEDULE boundaries PLACES TO GROW Moving People Tile and lines displayed if)tire Map a and not do not accurately approved 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 with 1 1 more I. and 1 1 1 1 1 and 1 1 1 publication. 1 vince nor such MUMCIPalitieS 1 or I or 1 leteness.for more information oil precise boundiries, EIPPRIPHate municipality 1 be 1.For mi infirmation on Greenbelt Afua boundaries, f 720 M I n t Northem;Odt•n" acs f k and estem CinitNl* fH x . f o+ 0 . %I tot2uifibeel us. b o , � + WT '. i• sic'` "% 9�' ,, ip' � .:, n r <, , �,.� `h� •�'' : �! Urban Growth Centres • Intemwdal Hubs e __Ni r �k '� .. Gateway Economic Zone Pfd lntermodai � -a"na �E ;,•. ® Hubs Future Goads Mc wxnent Crossings Corridors. be=be=Border Existing Major Highways' ® International Airports Highway Extensions LX. Proposed Airport E dstng Rail Unes' © Major Ports t ...4o1 to Windsor/Detrau Sarnia ' 4e ♦ Bulk-Up Area-Conceptual K Greenbelt Area Designated Greenfield Area Horseshoe Growth ze wry t ` .Conceptual Plan Area '� .' r s��c," �'� ''xa,.. In^`aE ,fix •Unes shown are conceptual and IAustraUve only and not to scale. They are not aligned with Infrastructure or municipal bounldar m Sources:Min' of public Infrastructure Renewal,Ministry of Transportation,Ministry of Natural Resources and Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. a. s �' 'Ontario Regulation 59/05 � :w�"'s� �s Ontario Regulation 416/05 m to 0 10 40 ft w� Ontario • PLACES TO • • Moving Goods Theboundaries and lines displayed and not to Scale.Ihey do not accurately reflect approved 1 • 1 planning 1 Data 1 information repToduced tivith one or more 1 1 may not be 1 date and • of date of 1 1 Province 1 r such municipalities assume any liability or 11 4or completeness. 1 lomise boundaries, appropriate 1 should be consulted. boundaries, 1 721 TM k A Manitoba �5,� ¢Pfr C 4s r� a ;rte•^.-.,,,� �{� ° Quebec Ontario f� XV £ { A.2 d ' r S A � \ & • • s rY Sources:Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal and Ministry of Natural Resources n �r Ontario TO GROW Context Map: the Greater d• o• within Ontario The boundaries f scale.This appendix , only f be , 722 ti x 1 i F : � �a a�;,fir�. '�.,���.�' �•� Ontario APPENDIX 2 PLACES TO GROW Illustration Diagram: ­11011 i,1111 V1 Al i N°Ii'l��I 'i Growth Plan land-use terminology The boundaries and lines displayed in the map above are not to scale.This appendix is included for information only and should not he read as a part of the Proposed Gnnnh Plan for Ulu Greater Golden Horseshoe. WE WELCOME YOUR COMMENTS FEEDBACK ON THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE SUBMITTED TO- Proposed Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal Ontario Growth Secretariat 777 Bay Street, 4th Floor Toronto, ON M5G 2E5 Fax: 416-325-7403 E-mail: placestogrow@pir.gov.on.ca To submit your comments electronically,you can complete an on-line feedback form available at www.placestogrow.pir.gov.on.ca For more information please call our toll free line at 1-866-479-9781. Toronto-area residents can call 416-325-1210. We would appreciate your feedback by January 27, 2006. 724 Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal ISBN 0-7794-9089-4 Paid for by the Government of Ontario © Queen's Printer for Ontario, 2005 Existe en franQais 725 Hnacnment Z To Report PSD-009-06 The Regional Municipality of Durham To: The Planning Committee From: Commissioner of Planning Report No.: 2005-P-9 . ' Date: January 10, 2006 SUB_ Province's Proposed Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, File: 026-02-04 Standing Committee Correspondence No. 2005-100 from Mr. Jason Thorne, Manager, Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal RECOMMENDATION: a) THAT the following comments and the contents of this report be forwarded to the Province as Durham Region's response to the Places to Grow: Better Choices. Brighter Future. Proposed Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe: i) the Province must accept the Region's forecasts which recognize the growth potential that will result from the realization of key structural elements, including the proposed airport in Pickering, improvements to Highway 401, completion of Highway 407, the continued growth of the University of Ontario Institute of Technology and a more diversified regional economy; ii) the Province must ensure that Durham also becomes-a "complete community" that no only accommodates residents, but also an appropriate mix of jobs. To accomplish this, the Province must establish a target of 1 job for every 2 residents as an objective in the Growth Plan and commit to work with Durham Region to significantly move toward achieving this objective by 2031. Commitment to improvements to Highway 401, the extension of Highway 407 and investment in other major infrastructure is needed; iii) before the 40 percent intensification policy is approved, the Province must work with municipalities to confirm that the target is realistic (i.e. sustainable) and can be realized, particularly in Durham Region, 726 Report No.: 2005-P-9 Page No. 2 recognizing that much of Durham's development is of recent vintage and will not be easily redeveloped; iv) a density of 200 residents and jobs per hectare (80 residents & jobs/ac.) in Durham's Urban Growth Centres can only be realized with significant investment in water, sewer and transportation infrastructure, which will require funding assistance from the Province; v) one density target for residents and jobs combined will be difficult to monitor. The Growth Plan should provide separate targets for residents and jobs; vi) fiscal incentives must be provided to shift market/consumer preferences from the single-detached dwelling to more compact denser forms of housing. This will involve a major shift for the development community and the consumer. The Province cannot simply expect that "planning tools" such as community improvement incentives, that put all the burden of incentives on municipalities, will be sufficient. The Province must contribute significantly as well; vii) policies related to "complete communities" must recognize that a jobs to population ratio of 1 to 2 is a desirable target for the Greater Toronto Area and Hamilton sub-area. This will assist Durham in retaining it's designated employment land base. The Province must also provide stronger policies to assist municipalities in protecting all appropriately located employment lands from conversion to other uses; viii) Provincial determination of Durham's,urban land needs is a significant intrusion into the Region's growth management responsibilities; ix) the criteria for considering urban boundary expansions must include additional criteria ensuring that sufficient employment lands are designated to achieve a minimum of 1 job per 2 residents; x) the schedules should be modified to show an "Improved Higher Order Transit" designation south of Highway 401, corresponding to the 727 Report No.: 2005-P-9 Page No. 3 existing CN rail line between Rouge Park and the existing Oshawa GO Train station; xi) the schedules should be modified to show the "Proposed Higher Order Transit Designation to 2031" to reflect the future extension of GO Train service from Oshawa to Bowmanville. The schedules should also be modified to only show an "Improved Inter-Regional Transit to 2031" designation between Bowmanville and Peterborough; xii) 0—chedule 5— Moving People, should be modified to reflect our previous requests for Proposed Higher Order Transit corridors, consistent with the Transportation Master Plan and the proposed Regional Official Plan review amendment, as follows: • Highway 407 transitway to the East Durham Link, and along the East and West Durham Links to Highway 401; and • Simcoe Street between downtown Oshawa and Highway 407; xiii) Schedule 6—Moving Goods should be modified to show the future Highway 404 extension to Highway 12/48. This corridor is important for goods movement, particularly as a future aggregate haul route between north Durham, Simcoe County (i.e. Ramara) and Kawartha Lakes and much of the GTA; xiv) while the policies of the Proposed Growth Plan advocate the co- ordination and implementation of transportation initiatives involving MTO and other Provincial ministries, it is silent on the role, mandate and responsibilities of the Greater Toronto Transportation Authority (GTTA). This must be detailed before the Growth Plan is approved. Also, the Region must be represented on the GTTA to advance Durham's transportation and transit interests; xv) the Province has a broader role to play in Transportation Demand Management. As such, it must establish a role for itself and commit to 728 Report No.: 2005-P-9 Page No. 4 working with municipalities in the development and implementation of TDM initiatives across the Greater Toronto Area and Hamilton; xvi) the Region and the other Greater Toronto Area and Hamilton (GTAH) municipalities have been committed to addressing infrastructure needs and investments, through the implementation of long-term fiscal and servicing strategies. There is no need for the Province to duplicate these efforts. This is a significant intrusion into an area of Regional responsibility. If there is a need for Provincial involvement in certain municipalities where this capacity does not exist, they should be specifically identified. The Province's involvement in the GTAH should concentrate on providing funding assistance for the infrastructure improvements needed to sustain growth and financial incentives that encourage intensification. The Province must also ensure that the Environmental Assessment process is configured to facilitate and not hinder the planning and implementation of infrastructure required to accommodate planned growth; xvii) the Province must focus its attention on providing access to the "long- term multi-year provincial infrastructure investment strategies"to provide funding assistance to ensure that municipalities have the means to ensure that these facilities are available to sustain the level of anticipated growth; xviii) there is no need for the Growth Plan to duplicate the efforts of upper and single-tier municipalities in developing policies and mapping for the natural system and prime agricultural areas. The Region should be able to proceed with the approval of that portion of the ROP Review, which the Province, in the normal course, will have an opportunity to review and comment. The Province should focus its attention on providing support, financial and otherwise, to assist in the establishing the long-term viability of the agricultural industry. Full support for the GTA Agricultural Action Plan is a place to start; xix) it is imperative that Provincial policy commitments and investments in infrastructure be made to ensure that Durham is given the opportunity 729 Report No.: 2005-P-9 Page No. 5 to achieve a healthy jobs to population ratio (i.e. 1 job per 2 residents). This is a key consideration in Durham evolving into a "complete community". The regional economic assessment must also assist Durham in protecting it's employment land base and promoting economic growth and diversification; xx) the regional economic assessment must also provide an opportunity for Durham to promote economic clusters, such as automotive manufacturing and energy; and provincially significant designated employment areas (prime industrial lands), particularly around key transportation corridors such as Highway 401 and 407; xxi) the Province must work with Durham through the transportation assessment, to ensure planned infrastructure such as the completion of Highway 407 through Durham and Highway 401 improvements, remain a priority for Provincial funding and are accelerated to completion. Sustainable transit funding and a streamlined environmental assessment process for the consideration of transit projects are also key considerations; xxii) the Province must work with the municipalities to ensure that sufficient funding is available for the infrastructure necessary to sustain growth. The Province must also provide an effective suite of tools, financial and otherwise, to support the goals and objectives of the Growth Plan. Full cost development charges and a streamlined environmental assessment process are measures that must be considered; xxiii) in moving forward with proposed timelines, the Province must be sensitive to the Region's responsibility to consult with its area municipalities, particularly in regards to considerations for urban land needs; and b) THAT a copy of Commissioner's Report No. 2006-P-9 be forwarded to the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, and the Durham area municipalities. 730 Report No.: 2005-P-9 Page No. 6 REPORT: 1. PURPOSE 1.1 On November 24, 2005, the Province released a document entitled, Places to Grow: Better Choices. Brighter Future. Proposed Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (PGP), requesting comments by January 27, 2006. 1.2 The Region had previously commented on a Growth Plan Discussion Paper in September 2004 and a Draft Growth Plan in March 2005, through Commissioner's Reports 2004-P-73 and 2005-P-30 respectively. 1.3 On June 13, 2005, the Province passed the Places to Grow Act, 2005, which provides the legislative framework for the Province to establish a growth plan area, and allow the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal (MPIR) to prepare a growth plan for all or part of that area. The Act defines processes for preparing and amending growth plans and outlines the general contents of such plans. Ontario Regulation 416/05 was also passed in June 2005, designating the Greater Golden Horseshoe as the first growth plan area. 1.4 As part of the review of the PGP, Regional Planning staff convened a meeting of planning staff from the area municipalities to generate comments from a Region-wide perspective; and obtained comments from the Durham Agricultural Advisory Committee (DAAC) and Durham Environmental Advisory Committee (DEAC). 1.5 The purpose of this report is to review and provide a Regional response to the PGP. 731 Report No.: 2005-P-9 Page No. 7 2. PROPOSED GROWTH PLAN 2.1 Generally, the PGP (previously distributed through Commissioner's Report No. 2005-P-99) is very similar to the March 2005 Draft. As such, this report focuses on key elements of the PGP, particularly relating to the Region's previous comments and protecting the Region's planning and infrastructure interests. 2.2 Similar to the Draft, the purpose of this PGP is to "guide decisions on a wide range zif issues—transportation, infrastructure planning, land-use planning, urban form, housing, natural heritage and resource protection —in the interest of promoting economic prosperity". This version of the Growth Plan is presented as more of a policy document than the previous Draft, with much of the context removed. Growth Forecasts 2.3 The PGP sets out population, household and employment forecasts that are to be used as the basis for planning and managing growth in our communities. The Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal (MPIR) will review and as appropriate, amend the forecasts at least every five years, in consultation with upper and single-tier municipalities. The review of the forecasts will coincide with the release of the national census, the next of which is to occur in 2006, with a 2007 release. 2.4 The forecasts for Durham have not changed from the previous Draft. The Province forecasts a population of 960,000 and 350,000 jobs for Durham by 2031. This is significantly less than the most recent forecasts prepared for the Regional Official Plan (ROP) Review'. The Recommended Directions for the Population, Employment and Land Needs component of the ROP Review would see Durham's population growth to 1.05 million with 398,000 jobs by A key message from the study of Durham's Employment Needs prepared by C.N. Watson&Associates for the ROP Review indicated that the Region is well positioned to capture a significant share of GTA employment growth over the long term. The Region's employment growth,over the long term,should exceed the anticipated employment growth forecast by the Province. 732 Report No.: 2005-P-9 Page No. 8 2031. The Province must accept the Region's forecasts which recognize the growth potential of Durham that will result from the realization of key structural elements, including the proposed airport on the Federal lands in Pickering, the completion of Highway 407, improvements to Highway 401, continuing growth of the University of Ontario Institute of Technology and a more diversified regional economy. 2.5 Of particular concern is the forecast for jobs. As previously noted, the Growth Plan IIds forecasted Durham's employment to reach 350,000 jobs by 2031 (50,000 less than the Region's forecast). The Province's forecast has the jobs to population ratio decline from 1 job for every 2.5 persons in 2011 to 1 job for every 2.7 persons in 2031. This is not acceptable. 2.6 In the Growth Plan Discussion Paper, the Province indicated that a target of 1 job for every 2 residents was necessary to achieve its vision for a "complete community". This is consistent with the ROP. As such, it is essential that the Province establish as its growth objective that all efforts be made to ensure an equitable distribution of jobs to all communities. The Province must ensure that Durham also becomes a "complete community". To accomplish this, the Province must establish a target of 1 job for every 2 residents as an objective in the Growth Plan, and commit to work with Durham Region to significantly move toward achieving this objective by 2031. Commitment to improvements to Highway 401, the extension of Highway 407 and investment in other major infrastructure is needed. Intensification 2.7 As in the previous Draft, the PGP calls for a minimum of 40 percent of all residential development occurring annually, to be within the "built-up area", by 2015. Once the intensification target is reached it will continue to apply as a minimum throughout the remainder of the planning period (i.e. 2031). 2.8 As indicated in our previous submission, the ROP calls for 20 percent intensification based on the built-up urban boundary defined in 1991. As part of the ROP Review Population, Employment and Urban Land Discussion Paper, this level of intensification was recommended as appropriate for the 733 Report No.: 2005-P-9 Page No. 9 continued growth and development of the Region over the next 25 years (i.e. 2031). This will result in more transit supportive densities, including the highest densities within our centres and along our arterial road corridors. 2.9 As indicated in our previous submission, achieving 40 percent intensification in Durham by 2015 will be extremely difficult, particularly since there are several years supply of un-built units in draft approved and registered plans of subdivision that will continue to build out at prevailing densities. In the longer term, financial incentives will be required to build and maintain the 40 percent level c; intensification. As well, significant investment in hard infrastructure will be required within the "built-up areas" to accommodate the intensification target. Moreover, significant societal change will have to take place to accept more dense forms of housing. Based on the ROP Review forecasts, 195,000 additional urban residential units will be constructed between 2006 and 2031 to support anticipated population growth. At 20 percent, approximately 39,000 units would have to be accommodated as intensification within our existing built up areas. At 40 percent, this number rises to 78,000 units. Discussions with area municipal staff suggest that 20 percent intensification will be difficult to accommodate over the forecast period. 2.10 Given that most of the larger urban communities consist of relatively new housing stock, much of which has come on stream since the mid— 1980's, there is limited opportunity for substantial redevelopment in the foreseeable future. As such it is questionable whether the degree of intensification the Province is suggesting is achievable. Before the 40 percent intensification policy is approved, the Province must work with municipalities to confirm that that the target is realistic (i.e. sustainable) and can be realized, particularly in Durham Region, recognizing that much of Durham's development is of recent vintage and will not be easily redeveloped. Urban Growth Centres 2.11 As in the previous Draft, Downtown Oshawa and Pickering are identified as Urban Growth Centres (UGC). UGC's are to be the focus of institutional, commercial, recreational, cultural and entertainment uses; able to support 734 Report No.: 2005-P-9 Page No. 10 major transit infrastructure; and able to accommodate a significant share of population and employment growth. This is generally consistent with the current and proposed ROP policies. As well, the PGP indicates that these areas will be the focus of Provincial investment. 2.12 However, the PGP requires Durham's Official Plan to include policies to plan for a minimum gross density in the UGC's of 200 residents and jobs per hectare (80 residents &jobs/ac.) by 2031. As noted in our previous submission, this is similar in development density as the Yonge and Eglinton area of Toronto today. While this may be an appropriate long term vision for our Urban Growth Centres, the PGP fails to recognize the need for adequate infrastructure to accommodate this level of density. The PGP seems to assume that adequate infrastructure exists or can be easily provided to our urban centres. 2.13 As noted in our previous submission, a density of 200 residents and jobs per hectare (80 residents &jobs/ac.) in Durham's UGC's can only be realized with significant investment in water, sewer and transportation infrastructure, which will require funding assistance from the Province. If Provincial infrastructure funding for UGC's is to be contingent on reaching the density targets, then those centres that are unable to accommodate significant growth due to infrastructure constraints would not be eligible for funding assistance, and therefore would never achieve the expected density. 2.14 Considerations of"density performance" will also depend upon the ability to monitor the growth of the UGC's. The density target for residents and jobs combined will be difficult to monitor. The Growth Plan should provide separate targets for residents and jobs. 2.15 Realizing the types of uses and densities contemplated in the UGC's and other Regional Centres in Durham, will require more than infrastructure. Fiscal incentives must be provided to shift market/consumer preferences from the single-detached dwelling to more compact, denser forms of housing. This will involve a major shift for the development community and the consumer. The Province cannot simply expect that "planning tools" such as community improvement incentives, that put 735 Report No.: 2005-P-9 Page No. 11 all the burden of incentives on municipalities, will be sufficient. The Province must contribute significantly as well. For example, the Province should consider relief from the school portion of the property tax on an incremental basis, for any development that meets the intensification objectives of the Growth Plan in a UGC. This would be similar to the Brownfields Tax Incentive Program under the Brownfield Statute Law Amendment Act. Employment Lands 2.16 As in the previous Draft, the PGP requires that the conversion to non- employment uses or major retail uses only be considered through a municipal comprehensive OP Review. Further, conversions may only occur where it has been demonstrated that the land is not required over the long term for employment purposes. 2.17 The general policy intent of protecting designated employment lands is supported. However, the lower Provincial employment forecast for Durham will make it more difficult for the Region and its area municipalities to defend against employment land conversions. Therefore, as identified previously, the policies related to "complete communities" must recognize that a jobs to population ratio of 1 to 2 is a desirable target for the Greater Toronto Area and Hamilton sub-area. This will assist Durham in retaining it's designated employment land base. The Province must also provide stronger policies to assist municipalities in protecting all appropriately located employment lands from conversion to other uses. Designated Greenfield Areas 2.18 As in the previous Draft, the PGP requires that designated greenfield areas be planned to achieve a minimum density target of 50 residents and jobs per hectare (20 residents &jobs/ac.). This level of density for new development is considered to be transit supportive and is consistent with the densities used to determine urban land needs through the ROP Review process. 736 Report No.: 2005-P-9 Page No. 12 2.19 What is important for Durham is the ability to ensure the appropriate mix of jobs, not just residential units. Therefore as previously noted, the Province must commit to working with the Region to assist us in evolving into a "complete community", that not only accommodates residents, but also an appropriate mix of jobs. Urban Boundary Expansions 2.20 In the previous Draft, the need for and phasing of new greenfield areas and urban boundary expansions was to be assessed by the Province in consultation with the GTAH municipalities collectively. The PGP now directs MPIR to consult with each upper and single-tier municipality, individually, to determine the need for and amount of additional greenfield land required to accommodate the Province's growth forecasts. 2.21 As noted in our previous submission, Provincial determination of Durham's urban land needs is a significant intrusion into the Region's growth management responsibilities. 212 Once MPIR determines the amount of additional land required, the Region must consider expansions to its urban boundaries as part of a comprehensive review subject to the following: • the proposed expansion does not exceed the maximum amount of additional greenfield land established in accordance with the Provincial forecasts; • the timing of the expansion and the phasing of development within the designated greenfield areas will take into account the intensification target (40%) and density targets of the UGC's (200 residents &jobs/ha) and greenfield areas (50 residents &jobs/ha); • the existing and planned infrastructure required to accommodate the proposed expansion can be provided in a financially and environmentally sustainable manner; 737 Report No.: 2005-P-9 Page No. 13 • expansions will not encroach into prime agricultural areas unless there are no reasonable alternatives; and • the determination of appropriate locations for urban expansions should take into account the policies of Sections 2 (Wise Use and Management of Resources) and 3 (Protecting Public Health and Safety) of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS). 2.23 With the exception of assumptions for density and intensification, the PGP criteria for considering urban boundary expansions are similar to those set out in the ROP. However, the criteria for considering urban boundary expansions must include additional criteria ensuring that sufficient employment lands are designated to achieve a minimum of 1 job per 2 residents. Infrastructure -Transportation 2.24 As in the previous Draft, the focus of the transportation infrastructure policies is on transit and goods movement. 2.25 Schedule 2— Places to Grow Concept and the transit schedule (Schedule 5— Moving People) have been modified as follows: • the "Existing Higher Order Transit" designation has been replaced by an "Improved Higher Order Transit" designation, which includes a corridor between downtown Pickering and Oshawa; and • the "Proposed Higher Order Transit to 2031" designation between Oshawa and Bowmanville has been replaced by a new designation entitled, "Improved Inter-Regional Transit to 2031", and has been extended from Bowmanville to Peterborough. 2.26 The "Improved Higher Order Transit" designation generally corresponds to existing GO Train and TTC Subway/LRT services elsewhere in the GTA. In Durham, this designation is shown north of Highway 401 directly linking downtown Pickering and downtown Oshawa along Highway 2, in Schedule 2 738 Report No.: 2005-P-9 Page No. 14 — Places to Grow Concept. This is consistent with the Transit Priority Network introduced as part of the ROP Review. The schedules should be modified to show an "Improved Higher Order Transit" designation south of Highway 401, corresponding to the existing CN rail line between Rouge Park and the existing Oshawa GO Train station. 2.27 The "Proposed Higher Order Transit Designation to 2031" should reflect the future extension of GO Train service from Oshawa to Bowmanville. This its consistent with the Regional Official Plan and the long-term service expansion planned by GO Transit. Future station sites have also been acquired in Oshawa and Bowmanville. The schedules should be modified to only show an "Improved Inter-Regional Transit to 2031" designation between Bowmanville and Peterborough. 2.28 Schedule 5— Moving People, should be modified to reflect our previous requests for Proposed Higher Order Transit corridors, consistent with the Transportation Master Plan and the proposed Regional Official Plan review amendment, as follows: • Highway 407 transitway to the East Durham Link, and along the East and West Durham Links to Highway 401; and • Simcoe Street between downtown Oshawa and Highway 407. 2.29 The goods movement schedule (Schedule 6— Moving Goods) has not changed from the previous draft. As recommended in our previous submission, the future Highway 404 extension to Highway 12/48 should be shown. This corridor is important for goods movement, particularly as a future aggregate haul route between north Durham, Simcoe County (i.e. Ramara) and Kawartha Lakes and much of the GTA. 2.30 While the PGP does recognize that the Ministry of Transportation (MTO) "is exploring options for establishing a Greater Toronto Transportation Authority" (GTTA), it provides no detail on what the GTTA will do or what its governance structure will be. While the Policies of the PGP advocate the co- ordination and implementation of transportation initiatives involving MTO and other Provincial ministries (i.e., 3.2.1.3, 3.2.2.3, and 3.2.2.4), it 739 Report No.: 2005-P-9 Page No. 15 is silent on the role, mandate and responsibilities for the GTTA. This must be detailed before the Growth Plan is approved. Also, in keeping with our previous submission, the Region must be represented on the GTTA to advance Durham's transportation and transit interests. 2.31 The PGP recognizes the need to develop and maintain Transportation Demand Management(TDM) policies to reduce trip distance and time, and increase the modal share of other modes. The policies however, are directed only to municipalities. The Province has a broader role to play in TDM. As such, .-i must establish a role for itself and commit to working with municipalities in the development and implementation of TDM initiatives across the GTAH. Infrastructure—Water and Wastewater 2.32 As in the previous Draft, the PGP requires that, "municipal water and wastewater systems will generate sufficient revenue to recover the full cost of providing water and wastewater services". Durham's water and sewer system is fully metered and rates are based on cost recovery principles. Residential and commercial development charges are in place to fund a portion of the expansion of the system to accommodate growth. Some municipalities, like Durham Region, are already undertaking asset management studies to determine the appropriate level of infrastructure investment and the corresponding rate increases which reflect the true costs of water and wastewater services. 2.33 The Province must also recognize the impact of other legislative requirements such as the implementation of Bill 175, the Sustainable Water and Sewerage Systems Act. Under this legislation, it is expected that water rates will increase in order to address increasing investment levels for infrastructure replacement and full cost recovery. If caps are placed on municipal user rates as suggested in the Sustainable Water and Sewage Systems Act, the ability for municipalities to achieve full cost recovery and invest optimally in its infrastructure is limited. 740 Report No.: 2005-P-9 Page No. 16 2.34 Similar to the Draft, the PGP directs MPIR, in consultation with upper and single-tier municipalities, to undertake an analysis of water and wastewater capacity and determine what is required to service the Provincial growth forecasts. The Province must recognize the fiscal strength and professional expertise that already exists in municipalities, such as the Region of Durham, which successfully develop and implement their own long-term infrastructure planning and financing strategies, including water and wastewater capacity requirements. The Region of Durham develops a five-year economic and financiai forecast to address all aspects of Regional operations in order to prepare its annual operating and capital budgets for water and wastewater. As well, the Region has an asset management team to closely monitor the state of the Region's infrastructure and to assist in prioritizing capital infrastructure needs. 2.35 In addition, the recommendations of the "Expert Panel Report on Water and Sewer" appear to be inconsistent with the recommendations of the PGP to have Provincial involvement in determining water and sewer capacity. The Panel approves of water and sewer systems being the responsibility of upper and single-tier municipalities. In fact, the Panel recommends strengthening the role of Regional municipalities to have the exclusive jurisdiction over all elements of water and wastewater. 2.36 As noted in our previous submission, the Region and the other GTAH municipalities have been committed to addressing infrastructure needs and investments, through the implementation of long-term fiscal and servicing strategies. There is no need for the Province to duplicate these efforts. This is a significant intrusion into an area of Regional responsibility. If there is a need for Provincial involvement in certain municipalities where this capacity does not exist, they should be specifically identified. The Province's involvement in the GTAH should concentrate on providing funding assistance for the infrastructure improvements needed to sustain growth and financial incentives that encourage intensification. The Province must also ensure that the Environmental Assessment process is configured to facilitate and not hinder the planning and implementation of infrastructure required to accommodate planned growth. 741 Report No.: 2005-P-9 Page No. 17 Infrastructure—Community 2.37 The PGP has introduced policies for the provision of community infrastructure (health, education, recreation, socio-cultural, activities security and safety and affordable housing). Generally, a range of appropriate community infrastructure should be provided to accommodate the growth of communities, including the establishment of minimum affordable housing targets. 2.38 The community infrastructure policies in the PGP are supported by policies alreac, found in the ROP, Community Strategic Plan and corresponding area municipal policy documents. The Province must focus its attention on providing access to the "long-term multi-year provincial infrastructure investment strategies" to provide funding assistance to ensure that municipalities have the means to ensure that these facilities are available to sustain the level of anticipated growth. Natural System and Prime Agricultural Areas 2.39 As in the previous Draft, the Growth Plan provides policies and criteria for designating the natural system and prime agricultural areas outside the Greenbelt. The PGP states that the Province, in consultation with the upper and single-tier municipalities will further identify the natural system and prime agricultural areas, and policies for their protection for areas outside of the Greenbelt Area. 2.40 As noted in our previous submission, the ROP already provides appropriate policies for the natural system and prime agricultural areas for lands outside of the Greenbelt. This strong policy basis will be reinforced by the proposed policy amendment currently being considered as part of the ROP Review. This amendment is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and conforms to the Greenbelt Plan. The Province will review the proposed amendment through the consultation process currently underway. As such, there is no need for the Growth Plan to duplicate the efforts of upper and single-tier municipalities in developing policies and mapping for the natural system and prime agricultural areas. The Province should focus its attention on providing support, financial and otherwise, to assist in 742 Report No.: 2005-P-9 Page No. 18 the establishing the long-term viability of the agricultural industry. Full support for the GTA Agricultural Action Plan is a place to start. Implementation 2.41 The PGP proposes to implement certain aspects of the Plan through "sub- area assessments", intended to refine the policies of the Growth Plan at a regional scale, with emphasis on: • a regional economic assessment to guide planning for employment; • refinement and phasing of the proposed transportation network; • analysis of water and wastewater capacity and requirements to service the forecast growth; and • identification of the natural system and prime agricultural areas. 2.42 The sub-area assessments (SAA's) will be carried out by MPIR in consultation with other relevant Provincial Ministries and upper and single-tier municipalities. Regional Economic Assessment 2.43 The Province intends to guide planning for employment through the preparation of a regional economic assessment. The assessment will identify existing and potential economic clusters, assess the demand for land and identify provincially significant employment areas, including prime industrial lands. It may also assist in identifying infrastructure needs to support economic activities, and develop new policies to support competitive regional economies. 2.44 This is of particular interest to Durham, where it is imperative that Provincial policy commitments and investments in infrastructure be . made to ensure that Durham is given the opportunity to achieve a healthy jobs to population ratio (i.e. 1 job per 2 residents). This is a key 743 Report No.: 2005-P-9 Page No. 19 consideration in Durham evolving into a "complete community". The regional economic assessment must also assist Durham in protecting it's employment'land base and promoting economic growth and diversification. 2.45 The regional economic assessment must also provide an opportunity for Durham to promote economic clusters, such as automotive manufacturing and energy; and provincially significant designated employment areas (prime industrial lands), particularly around key transportation corridors such as Highway 401 and 407. Transportation Assessment 2.46 The transportation assessment is intended to allow for the refinement, phasing and coordination of transportation infrastructure planning and investment. It will focus on higher order and inter-regional transit of provincial significance, and major roads and highways. 2.47 The Province must work with Durham through the transportation assessment, to ensure planned infrastructure such as the completion of Highway 407 through Durham and Highway 401 improvements, remain a priority for Provincial funding and are accelerated to completion. Sustainable transit funding and a streamlined environmental assessment process for the consideration of transit projects are also key considerations. Water and Wastewater Capacity Assessment 2.48 The water and wastewater assessment would review water and wastewater capacity and major requirements to service the forecast growth. 2.49 As discussed earlier in this report, the Region has been committed to addressing infrastructure needs and investments, through the implementation of long-term fiscal and servicing strategies. There is no need for the Province to duplicate these efforts. However, the Province must work with the municipalities to ensure that sufficient funding is available for the 744 Report No.: 2005-P-9 Page No. 20 infrastructure necessary to sustain growth. The Province must also provide an effective suite of tools, financial and otherwise, to support the goals and objectives of the Growth Plan. Full cost development charges and a streamlined environmental assessment process are measures that must be considered. Natural System and Prime Agricultural Areas Assessment 2.50 The nuwral system and agricultural assessments would identify a provincially significant natural system and prime agricultural areas outside the Greenbelt. 2.51 As discussed earlier in this report, the ROP already provides appropriate policies for the natural system and prime agricultural areas on the lands outside of the Greenbelt. In fact, the proposed ROP Review amendment meets or exceeds the level of environmental protection than would be considered "provincially significant". Therefore formal natural systems and agricultural assessments are not necessary. The Region should be able to proceed with the approval of that portion of the ROP Review, which the Province, in the normal course, will have an opportunity to review and comment. Timing 2.52 It is our understanding that the Province intends to finalize the Growth Plan early in 2006 and complete the Sub-area Assessment for the GTAH within the next year and a half(i.e. mid-2007). 2.53 In moving forward with proposed timelines, the Province must be sensitive to the Region's responsibility to consult with its area municipalities, particularly in regards to considerations for urban land needs. 3. CONCLUSIONS 3.1 Generally, the Proposed Growth Plan is similar to the Draft previously reviewed in March 2005. The most significant difference is in the proposed 745 Report No.: 2005-P-9 Page No. 21 approach to implement the Plan. The Province is no longer proposing to implement the Plan through the development of Sub-area Growth Strategies (SAGS). Rather, the Plan will be primarily implemented through upper and single-tier Official Plans, such as the Durham Region Official Plan. The elimination of the need for SAGS is consistent with our previous comments. Although the Province has changed its approach, it still intends to intrude into some areas of responsibility that have traditionally been in the domain of upper and single-tier municipalities. 3.2 As noted in our previous comments, the Province must develop an effective suite of tools, financial or otherwise, to support the goals and objectives of the Growth Plan. Sustainable transit funding, full cost development charges and a streamlined environmental assessment process are measures that must be considered as a minimum, if the Province's vision is to have any hope of success. 3.3 It is recommended that this report be submitted to the Province as Durham Region's response to the Places to Grow: Better Choices. Brighter Future. Proposed Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe document. 3.4 This report has been prepared in consultation with the Finance, Works and Economic Development Departments. A.L. Georgieff, M.C.I.P., R.P.P. Commissioner of Planning RECOMMENDED FOR PRESENTATION FOR COMMITTEE Garry H. Cubitt, M.S.W. Chief Administrative Officer H:\1-2\agendas\2006\01-10-06\Proposed Growth Plan.doc 746 • Claduaton Leading the Way REPORT ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: Monday, January 23, 2006 Resolution #: Report#: EGD-03-06 File #: By-law#: Subject: MON-NILY REPORT ON BUILDING PERMIT ACTIVITY FOR DECEMBER, 2005. Recommendations: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report EGD-03-06 be received for information. Submitted by: AZM2Reviewed byc_ A. S. Cannella, C.E.T. Franklin Wu Director of Engineering Services Chief Administrative Officer ASC*RP*bb January 10, 2006 CORPORATION OF THE-MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T(905)623-3379 F (905)623-1824 701 REPORT NO.: EGD-03-06 PAGE 2 1. BACKGROUND: 1.1 With respect to the Building Permit Activity for the month of December 2005, Staff wish to highlight the following statistics for the information of Committee and Council. MONTH OF YEAR TO YEAR TO % CHANGE DECEMBER 2005 DATE 2005 DATE 2004 OF VALUE YTD 05-04 Permits Issued 1 50 1 1150 1430 -19.6% VALUE OF CONSTRUCTION Residential $5,560,72 $141,851,046 $167,574,702 -15.4% Industrial $140,00q $34,567,600 $6,797,367 408.5% Government $20,000 $468,500 $4,029,00 -88.4% Commercial $69,000 $11,402,112 $11,993,39 -4.9% Institutional $ $10,845,364 $20,387,50 -46.8% Agricultural $75,00 $4,085,49 $3,066,35 33.2°/ TOTAL $5,864,72 $203,220,11 $213,848,32 -5.0°/ The following is a historical comparison of the building permits issued for the month of "DECEMBER" and "YEAR TO DATE" for a three year period. Historical Data for Month of"December" Historical Data"YEAR TO DATE" $250,000,000 $8,000,000 $7,000,000 $200,000,000 $6,000,000 $150,000,000 $5,000,000 $4,000,000 $100,000,000 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 $50,000,000 $1,000,000 $0 2005 20 2003 $0 2005 2004 2003 04 ®value $5,864,729 $6,816,684 $5,658,588 Mvalue $203,220,114 1$213,848,329 $172,409,655 702 REPORT NO.: EGD-03-06 PAGE 3 The following is a comparison of the types of dwelling units issued for the month of "DECEMBER" and "YEAR TO DATE". Dwelling Unit Type"DECEMBER Dwelling Unit Type "YEAR TO DATE 0 2005" 0 2005" 95 Townhouse Apartment 59 ,.,Apartment' 0% t)% Townhouse 12% 8% 11 286 362 Single Semi- Single Detached Detached Detached 18 \\ Semi- 38% 36% 45% Detached 62% ■Single Detached 11 B Single Detached 362 IS Semi-Detached 18 ®Semi-Detached 286 0 Townhouse 0 ®Townhouse 59 ®Apartment 0 M Apartment 95 1.2 With respect to building permit activities (over $250,000) and large residential building permit activities, the details are provided as follows: APPLICANT CONSTR TYPE LOCATION VALUE Attachment#1 — Monthly Building Permit Activity Report/Historical Comparison of Building Permit 703 MONTH OF DECEMBER 2005 2005 2004 BUILDING CATEGORY NUMBER OF VALUE OF NUMBER OF VALUE OF PERMITS CONSTRUCTION PERMITS CONSTRUCTION Residential 42 $5,560,729 59 $5,377,085 Industrial 3 $140,000 3 $260,000 Government 1 $20,000 0 $0 Commercial 2 $69,000 2 $131,000 Institutional 0 $0 0 $0 .Agricultural 1 $75,000 2 $1,048,599 Demolition 1 $0 2 $0 TOTAL 50 $5,864,7291 68 $6,816,684 YEAR TO DATE 2005 2004 BUILDING CATEGORY NUMBER OF VALUE OF NUMBER OF VALUE OF PERMITS CONSTRUCTION PERMITS CONSTRUCTION Residential 1000 $141,851,046 1279 $167,574,702 Industrial 16 $34,567,600 21 $6,797,367 Government 10 $468,500 5 $4,029,000 Commercial 60 $11,402,112 55 $11,993,397 Institutional 15 $10,845,364 15 $20,387,505 Agricultural 21 $4,085,492 30 $3,066,358 Demolition 28 $0 25 $0 TOTAL 1150 $203,220,114 1430 $213,848,329 Attachment#1 — Monthly Building Permit Activity Repo rt/H istorica I Comparison of Building 704 Municipality of Clarington Building Services - Monthly Activity Report DECEMBER 2005 m= =R E: 2005 2004 December Year to Date December Year to Date PERMIT FEES $48,475 $1,273,937 $49,044 $1,438,534 2005 2004 December Year to Date December Year to Date Building Inspections 478 8263 896 7433 Plumbing Inspections 403 6524 680 5564 TOTALS 881 14787 1576 12997 �-N11 R�U � R�S1 E ;�► tIN'T 2005 2004 December Year to Date December Year to Date Single Detached 11 362 3 411 Semi-Detached 18 286 2 410 Townhouse 0 59 45 157 Apartments 0 95 0 37 TOTALS 29 802 50 965 YEAR: 2005 AREA (to 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 month Bowmanville 307 587 468 345 312 188 184 313 423 217 229 Courtice 241 173 180 133 129 231 . 296 254 295 331 170 Newcastle 202 191 123 131 76 110 78 4 5 3 Wilmot Creek 15 25 29 38 24 19 21 33 21 16 16 Orono 1 2 1 1 1 Darlington 14 15 13 17 47 102 31 14 20 17 21 Clarke 13 10 16 15 9 17 17 12 20 10 7 Burketon 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 Enfield 3 Enniskillen 1 1 2 5 7 6 3 7 3 Hampton 3 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 Haydon 1 1 2 Kendal 1 3 2 1 Kirby 1 Leskard 1 1 Maple Grove 1 Mitchells Corners 1 Newtonville 4 5 3 3 3 1 2 2 Solina 3 3 3 1 1 Tyrone 3 9 3 TOTALS 802 1015 843 701 609 679 640 636 801 601 447 Attachment#1 —Monthly Building Permit Activity Report/Historical Comparison of Building Permit 705 • REPORT (tLeading Elie Way ENGINEERING SERVICES Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: Monday January 23, 2006 Report#: EGD-04-06 File #: B.01.17.001 By-law#: Subject: CLARINGTON CORNERS SUBDIVISION PHASE 1 STAGE 3, BOWMANVILLE, PLAN 40M-1940, `CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE' AND `ASSUMPTION BY-LAW', FINAL WORKS INCLUDING ROADS AND OTHER RELATED WORKS RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report EGD-04-06 be received; 2. THAT the Director of Engineering Services be authorized to issue a 'Certificate of Acceptance' for the Final Works, which include final stage roads and other related Works, constructed within Plan 40M-1940; and 3. THAT Council approve the by-law attached to Report EGD-04-06, assuming certain streets within Plan 40M-1940 as public highways. Submitted by: Anthony Cannella, C.E.T. Reviewed by: Franklin Wu, Director of Engineering Services Chief Administrative Officer NAC/ASC/jo January 9, 2006 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905-623-3379 F 905-623-9282 706 Report#EGD-04-06 Page 2 1.0 BACKGROUND 1.1 The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington entered into a Subdivision Agreement, registered February 22, 1999, with Green Martin Holdings Ltd. to develop lands by plan of subdivision, located in Bowmanville and described as Plan 40M-1940 (Attachment 1). The agreement required the developer to construct all roadworks, including hot-mix paving, sidewalks, curb and gutter, street trees, a storm drainage system and streetlights, hereinafter referred to as the 'Works'. 1.2 The Subdivision Agreement provides for the separation of the Works into four (4) stages: a) Initial Works; b) Street Lighting System; c) Final Works; and d) Stormwater Management System (Not Applicable) 1.3 The Initial Works and Street Lighting System were issued 'Certificates of Completion' and subsequent 'Certificates of Acceptance' by the Director of Engineering Services, as per the maintenance requirements set out in the Subdivision Agreement. 1.4 The Final Works were issued a 'Certificate of Completion' dated September 15, 2004. This initiated a one (1) year maintenance period, which expired on September 15, 2005. The Works were re-inspected at that time and all deficiencies have now been rectified to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services. 1.5 It is now appropriate to issue a 'Certificate of Acceptance' for the Final Works. The Subdivision Agreement requires Council approval prior to the issuance of the 'Certificate of Acceptance' for the Final Works. 707 Report#EGD-04-06 Page 3 1.6 Further to the issuance of a 'Certificate of Acceptance', a by-law is required to permit the Municipality to assume certain streets within Plan 40M-1940 as public highways (Attachment 2). Attachments: Attachment 1 - Key Map Attachment 2 - Proposed By-law 708 Plan 40M-1940 (Ivory Ct.) Clarington Corners Subdivision Phase 1, Stage 3 HighwaYNo ? for '• : :� yC'0 4 9 S ; �0// . -/, e Sonathon Cr �o 0 3 IL r4 w SUBJECT Hwy.N0.2 SITE I t, N LO w E �P• m DRAWN BY:E.L. DATE:Jan.9,2006 ® ® REPORT EGD-04-06 BOWMANVILLE KEY MAP ATTACHMENT NO. 1 709 ATTACHMENT NO.:2 REPORT NO.: EGD-04-06 THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BY-LAW 2006-XX Being a By-law to assume certain streets within the Municipality of Clarington as public highways in the Municipality of Clarington. NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington hereby enacts as follows: 1. THAT the street shown on Plan 40M-1940, and listed below in this section, being in the 1unicipality of Clarington, in the Regional Municipality of Durham, is hereby accepted by the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington as public highways, and assumed by the said Corporation for public use: Ivory Court BY-LAW read a first and second time this 30th day of January 2006. BY-LAW read a third time and finally passed this 30th day of January 2006. John Mutton, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk 710 • �� 11 Vay REPORT (tLeading the I ENGINEERING SERVICES Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: Monday January 23, 2006 Report #: EGD-05-06 File #: D.02.35.028 By-law#: Subject: BRIDLE COURT EXTENSION SUBDIVISION, COURTICE, PLAN 40M-2106, `CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE' AND `ASSUMPTION BY-LAWS', FINAL WORKS INCLUDING ROADS AND OTHER RELATED WORKS RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report EGD-05-06 be received; 2. THAT the Director of Engineering Services be authorized to issue a 'Certificate of Acceptance' for the Final Works, which include final stage roads and other related Works, constructed within Plan 40M-2106; and 3. THAT Council approve the by-laws attached to Report EGD-05-06, assuming certain streets within Plans 40M-2106, and 1 OM-822 as public highways. Submitted by: Anthony Cannella, C.E.T. Reviewed by: Franklin Wu, Director of Engineering Services Chief Administrative Officer NAC/ASC/jo January 12, 2006 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1 C 3A6 T 905-623-3379 F 905-623-9282 711 REPORT NO.: EGD-05-06 PAGE 2 1.0 BACKGROUND 1.1 The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington entered into a Subdivision Agreement, registered August 16, 2002, with Primrose Heights Ltd. to develop lands by plan of subdivision, located in Courtice and described as Plan 40M-2106 (Attachment 1). The agreement required the developer to construct all roadworks, including hot-mix paving, sidewalks, curb and gutter, street trees, a storm drainage system and streetlights, hereinafter referred to as the 'Works'. 1.2 The Subdivision Agreement provides for the separation of the Works into four (4) stages: a) Initial Works; b) Street Lighting System; c) Final Works; and d) Stormwater Management System (Not Applicable) 1.3 The Initial Works and Street Lighting System were issued 'Certificates of Completion' and subsequent 'Certificates of Acceptance' by the Director of Engineering Services, as per the maintenance requirements set out in the Subdivision Agreement. 1.4 The Final Works were issued a 'Certificate of Completion' dated September 4, 2004. This initiated a one (1) year maintenance period, which expired on September 4, 2005. The Works were re-inspected at that time and all deficiencies have now been rectified to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services. 1.5 It is now appropriate to issue a 'Certificate of Acceptance' for the Final Works. The Subdivision Agreement requires Council approval prior to the issuance of the 'Certificate of Acceptance' for the Final Works. 712 REPORT NO.: EGD-05-06 PAGE 3 1.6 Further to the issuance of a 'Certificate of Acceptance', by-laws are required to permit the Municipality to assume certain streets within Plans 40M-2106, and 1OM-822 as public highways (Attachments 2 and 3). Attachments: Attachment 1 - Key Map Attachment 2 - Proposed By-law Attachment 3 - Proposed By-law 713 nF Nash Rd. Plan 40M-2106 Bridle Court Extension Block 25 79n Plan 10M-822 Bridle Court o: m 0 Highway NO. 2 COURTICE SUBJECT m 0 c� SITE N w�E d E s Bridle Ct. o H N High o N 0 Y o.2 m 6. m s DRAWN BY:E.L. DATE:Jan.9,2006 V REPORT EGD-05-06 KEY MAP ATTACHMENT NO. 1 714 ATTACHMENT NO.:2 REPORT NO.: EGD-05-06 THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BY-LAW 2006-XX Being a By-law to establish, lay out and dedicate certain lands as public highway in the Municipality of Clarington. NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington hereby enacts as follows: 1. THAT the block shown on Plan 10M-822, and listed below in this section, being in the Municipality of Clarington, in the Regional Municipality of Durham, is hereby established, laid out, and dedicated by the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington as public highway: - Block 25 BY-LAW read a first and second time this 30th day of January 2006. BY-LAW read a third time and finally passed this 30"'day of January 2006. John Mutton, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk 715 ATTACHMENT NO.: 3 REPORT NO.: EGD-05-06 THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BY-LAW 2006-XX Being a By-law to assume certain streets within the Municipality of Clarington as public highways in the Municipality of Clarington. NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality.of Clarington hereby enacts as follows: 1. THAT the street and _block shown on Plans 4OM-21.06 and 10M-822, and listed below in this section, all being in the Municipality of Clarington, in the Regional Municipality of Durham, are hereby accepted by the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington as public highways, and assumed by the said Corporation for public use: PLAN 40M-2106: Bridle Court PLAN 1OM-822: Block 25 BY-LAW read a first and second time this 30th day of January 2006. BY-LAW read a third time and finally passed this 30th day of January 2006. John Mutton, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk 716 • arm n Leading the Way REPORT EMERGENCY AND FIRE SERVICES Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: January 23, 2006 Report#: ESD-002-06 File # 10.12.6 By-law# Subject: MONTHLY RESPONSE REPORT — DECEMBER 2005 Recommendations: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report ESD-002-06 be received for information. Submitted by: Reviewed by: ordon Weir, AMCT, CMM111 Franklin Wu. Director Emergency& Fire Services Chief Administrative Officer GW*sr CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T(905)623-3379 F (905)623-6506 901 REPORT NO: ESD-002-06 PAGE 2 BACKGROUND AND COMMENT 1. BACKGROUND 1.1 Our report covers the month December, 2005. It is our intent to provide Committee with information relevant to this department, in a timely manner. 2. REPORT 2.1 The department responded to 286 calls during this period and recorded total fire loss at $219,000. A breakdown of calls responded to follows in the table attached. Attachment: Activity Report 902 ATTACM ENT #1 CLARINGTON EMERGENCY & FIRE SERVICES ACTIVITY REPORT Period:December 1, 2005 00:00:00hrs to December 31, 2005 23:59:59hrs CALL TYPES -VOLUME BY STATION STATION 1 STATION 2 STATION 3 STATION 4 STATION 5 TOTALS CALL TYPE Bowmanville Newcastle Orono Courtice Enniskillen PROPERTY FIRE CALLS 5 0 1 3 1 10 includes structure, chimney, vehicle, miscellaneous e.g..furniture, clothing, etc UNAUTHORIZED BURNING 0 0 0 0 T 0 0 (burning complaints) FALSE FIRE CALLS 18 4 6 7 0 35 includes alarm activations-accidental/malicious, human-perceived emer encies, check calls e.g. investi ate an odor PUBLIC HAZARD CALLS 15 4 0 10 0 29 includes propane/nature. leaks, fuel/chemicals ills, power lines down/arcing, C.O. leaks etc. RESCUE CALLS 1 12 1 13 1 14 1 21 1 1 T 61 includes vehicle extrications/accidents, commercial/industrial accidents, home/residential accidents, water/ice rescues MEDICAL ASSIST CALLS 1 65 1 14 1 8 32 2 1 121 includes assistance to ambulance personnel with respiratory and resuscitation emergencies) MISCELLANEOUS CALLS 13 9 1 6 1 30 incidents not found, assistance not re 'd by other agencies, call cancelled on route etc. TOTALS 128 44 1 30 79 F 5 286 DOLLAR LOSS #of Fire Calls 5 0 1 1 1 3 1 10 Dollar Loss$ $45,000 $0 $4,000 $160,000 $10,000 $219,00 VOLUNTEER STANDBY RESPONSES #of Standbys -Calls 8 1 0 0 6 0 14 #of Standbys- T Training 0 0 0 0 2005 MONTHLY CALL VOLUME BY STATION Jan. Feb. Mar. A r. May. Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec. STATION 1 153 118 109 148 133 170 161 157 139 118 137 128 1671 STATION 2 38 36 34 40 26 34 29 31 26 36 34 44 408 STATION 3 28 23 16 20 19 19 24 10 22 19 22 30 252 STATION 4 95 69 90 73 78 92 80 100 69 86 105 79 1016 STATION 5 16 8 4 15 9 10 12 12 11 15 16 5 133 3480 TOTALS 330 254 253 296 265 325 306 310 267 274 314 286 3480 2004 MONTHLY CALL VOLUME BY STATION Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May. Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec. STATION 1 114 111 103 105 98 131 105 105 101 111 117 151 1352 STATION 2 35 29 27 32 24 20 40 31 34 31 19 40 362 STATION 3 18 17 12 13 14 9 10 25 13 11 18 29 189 STATION 4 74 57 70 69 57 81 73 73 65 61 68 76 824 STATION 5 7 4 7 9 9 11 19 16 11 10 5 18 126 2853 TOTALS 248 218 219 228 202 252 247 250 224 224 227 314 2853 903 • Leading the Way REPORT CORPORATE SERVICES DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: January 23rd, 2006 Report#: COD-0104-06 File # By-law# Subject: CL2005-47, Mill Street Watermain Realignment, Newcastle Recommendations: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report COD-004-06 be received; 2. THAT Cobourg Development Services Ltd., Cobourg, Ontario with a total bid in the amount of$275,661.00 (Plus GST), being the lowest responsible bidder meeting all terms, conditions, and specifications of Tender CL2005-47, be awarded the contract for the Mill Street Watermain Realignment, Newcastle as required by the Engineering Department; 3. THAT funds required in the amount of$400,00.00 ($275,661.00 tender plus contingencies, consulting and C.N. Rail Costs) be drawn from Engineering 2005 Capital Budget Account# 110-32-330-83263-7401; and 4. THAT the attached By-law marked Schedule "A" authorizing the Mayor and the Clerk to execute the necessary agreement be approved. Submitted by: Reviewed by —�' arie arano, H.B.Sc., C.M.O. Franklin Wu, Dim r f Coro Ser 'ces Chief Administrative Officer N/ ncy Ta or, .B Dire finance A.S. annella, C.E.T. Director of Engineering Services MM\NT\AC\LAB\km 1201 REPORT NO.: COD-004-06 PAGE 2 BACKGROUND AND COMMENT Tender specifications were provided by Totten Sims Hubicki Associates for the Mill Street Watermain Realignment, Newcastle, Ontario, as required by the Engineering Department and is shown on the map below. W' ''l U Toro»to f r Tenders were advertised in local papers, as well electronically. Subsequently, tenders were received and tabulated as per Schedule "B" attached. The total project cost, including Project Administration, and costing allocation is as detailed in the letter from Totten Sims Hubicki Associates, marked Schedule "B" and will be provided from the 2005 Capital Budget Account # 110-32-330-83263-7401 and are within the total approved budget allocation of$665,000.00 which is included in the overall budget of$1,300,000.00 for the Mill Street Grade Separation. 1202 REPORT NO.: COD-004-06 PAGE 3 The low bidder has previously performed satisfactory work for the Municipality of Clarington. The Director of, Finance has reviewed the funding requirements and concurs with the recommendation. Queries with respect to department needs, specifications, etc., should be referred to the Director of Engineering. After further review and analysis of the bids by the Engineering Department, Totten Sims Hubicki Associates and Purchasing, it was mutually agreed that the low bidder, Cobourg Development Services Ltd., Cobourg, Ontario, be recommended for the contract for the Mill Street Watermain Realignment, Newcastle, Ontario. SCHEDULE "A" By-law SCHEDULE "B" List of Bids CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T(905)623-3379 F (905)623-4169 1203 Schedule "A" THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BY-LAW 2006- Being a By-law to authorize a contract between the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington and Cobourg Development Services Ltd., Cobourg, Ontario, to enter into agreement for the Mill Street Watermain Realignment, Newcastle, Ontario. THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. THAT the Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized to execute, on behalf of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington and seal with the Corporation Seal, a contract between, Cobourg Development Services Ltd., Cobourg, Ontario, and said Corporation; and 2. THAT the contract attached hereto as Schedule "A"form part of this By-law. By-law read a first and second time this day of ,2006. By-law read a third time and finally passed this day of 2006. John Mutton, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk 1204 JAN-03-2006 TUE 11 :58 AM TSH COBOURG FAX NO. 905 372 3621 P. 01 SCHEDULE "B" TMTotten Sims Hubicki Associates engineers 513 Division Street, Cobourg,Ontario,Canada K9A 5G6 architects 1905)372.2121 Fax:(905) 372-3621 planners E-mail:cobourg @tsh.ca www.1sh.ca January 3, 2006 Ms.Lou Ann Birkett, CPP,AMCT Purchasing Manager -Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington 40 Temperance Street BOWMANVILLE, Ontario. L1C 3A6 Dear Ms. B i rkett: Re: Mill Street Watermain Realignment,Newcastle Contract No. CL2005-47,Municipality of Clarington Tenders for the above project were opened at the Municipal Offices on Friday,December 16,2005 at 2:00:00 p.m. A list of the bids received is provided in the table below. All numbers are exclusive of CST. BIDDER TOTAL BID Cobourg Development Services Ltd. $275,661.00 Cobourg, ON Hard-Co Construction.Ltd. $277,635.46 Whitby, ON Safre Infrastructure Inc. $2880,000.00 Brampton, ON 616183 Ontario Tnc. o/a Hollinbworth Construction Co. $297,940.00* Gormley, ON B.N. Fenton Construction Ltd. $312,150.00 Courtice,ON Ron Robinson Limited $326,161.06 lBowmanville, ON Esposito]Bros. Construction Ltd. $329,898.36 Nobleton, ON - Boyle Excavating I_td. $432,633.00 Bowmanville,ON *Extension Error The low bidder's tender has been reviewed and is in order. Cobourg Development Services Ltd. has completed several projects for the Municipality of Clarington,Durham Region, and the development 1205 JAN-03-2006 TUE 11 :58 AM TSH COBOURG FAX NO. 905 372 3621 P. 02 Ms.Lou Ann Birkctl,UP,AMCT SCHEDULE "B" January 3,2006 2. industry in recent years including;the reconstruction of Prestonvale Road in conjunction with Switz- Con Construction Services in 2003. All references contacted, assessed Cobourg Development Services performance to be satisfactory,we therefore recommend that Cobourg Development Services Bid be accepted. Contract deposit cheques or bid bonds should be retained for the low and second low bids until the Contract has been executed. Based on the low bid, we estimate the costs for this component of the Mill Street Grade Separation Project to be as follows: Item Description Estimated Costs Construction—Contract CL2005-47 $275,661.00 Design &Tendering To December 10, 2005 $22,000.00 Contract Administration $30,000.00 CN Rail Costs $20,000.00 Sub-Total $347,661.00 Contingencies $52,339.00 Total $400,000.00 Note: All Costs Exclude G.S.T. The estimated cost of$400,000.00 for this component of the Mill Street project is considerably less than the allowance of$665,000.00 carried as part of the $1,300,000.00 Mill Street Budget item included in the 2005 Capital Budget. Should you require any further information, please contact the undersigned. Yours truly, f, William McCrae, P.Eng, Senior Project Engineer WMc/ym 1-1110)4Wi:orr ;JV'__I3_'7.flod Encl. PC: Mr. A. S. Cannella, C.E.T., Director,Engineering Services,Municipality of Clarington UN 1206 • Leading the Way REPORT CORPORATE SERVICES DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: January 23rd, 2006 Report#: C0171-005-06 File # By-law# Subject: RFP2005-17— Mail-In Voting Service Recommendations: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report COD-005-06 be received; 2. THAT Canada Post Corporation, Ottawa, Ontario with a total bid in the amount of $96,594.96 (Plus GST), being the most responsible bidder meeting all terms, conditions, and specifications of RFP 2005-17, be awarded the contract for the Mail-In Voting Services as required by the Municipal Clerk's Department; 3. THAT funds required in the amount of$96,594.96 (plus GST) be drawn from Account# 100-19-193-10190-7101 ; and 4. THAT the attached By-law marked Schedule"A" authorizing the Mayor and the Clerk to execute the necessary agreement be approved. Submitted by: Reviewed by: Wade Marano, H.B.Sc., C.M.O. Franklin Wu, Dire of Corporate ervic Chief Administrative Officer, Direc r of i atti . Barrie M.C.T nicipa erk MM\NT\AC\LAB\sm 1207 REPORT NO.: COD-005-06 PAGE 2 BACKGROUND AND COMMENT A request for proposal was advertised and issued to provide mail-in voting services for the Municipality'of Clarington. Subsequently, bids were received and tabulated as per schedule"A" attached. As stipulated in the proposal documents, proponents were evaluated based on the following criteria: • Previous experience with mail-in ballots • Previous experience with Ontario Municipal Elections • Previous experience with vote tabulating equipment • Price • Ability to complete projects in accordance with Schedule • Completeness of proposal • Value Added Service • References Upon completion of the review by the selection committee the decision was to award the contract to Canada Post Corporation. The total project cost for this project will be provided from the 2006 Current Budget Account #100-19-193-10190-7101 and is within the total recommended budget_ The Director of Finance has reviewed the funding requirements and concurs with the recommendation. Queries with respect to department needs, specifications, etc., should be referred to the Municipal Clerk. Attached Schedule "A" CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T(905)623-3379 F(905)623-4169 1208 Schedule "A" THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BY-LAW 2006- Being a By-law to authorize a contract between the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington and Canada Post Corporation, Ottawa Ontario to enter into agreement for Mail- in Voting Services. THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. THAT the Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized to execute, on behalf of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington and seal with the Corporation Seal, a contract between, Canada Post Corporation, Ottawa, Ontario, and said Corporation; and 2. THAT the contract attached hereto as Schedule "A"form part of this By-law. By-law read a first and second time this day of , 2006. By-law read a third time and finally passed this day of , 2006. John Mutton, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk 1209 • Leading the Way REPORT CORPORATE SERVICES DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: January 23rd, 2006 Report #: COD-006-06 File # By-law# Subject: RFP2005-19 — Supply of Automated Count Process for Municipal Elections. Recommendations: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report COD-006-06 be received; 2. THAT Dominion Voting Systems Corporation, Toronto, Ontario with a total bid in the amount of$61,452.00 (Plus GST), being the lowest, most responsible bidder meeting all terms, conditions, and specifications of RFP 2005-19, be awarded the contract for the Supply of Automated Count Process for Municipal Elections as required by the Municipal Clerk's Department; 3. THAT funds required in the amount of$61,452.00 (plus GST) be drawn from Account# 100-19-193-10190-7101; and 4. THAT the attached By-law marked Schedule "A" authorizing the Mayor and the Clerk to execute the necessary agreement be approved. Submitted b . Reviewed b4- ane Marano, H.B.Sc., C.M.O. Franklin Wu, Director of Corpor to Services Chief Administrative Officer i A l Nancy aWlo r B.B A., Dir or n e Pa arr' , A.M.C.T. Punicipal Jerk MM\NT\PB\LAB\sm 1210 REPORT NO.: COD-006-06 PAGE 2 BACKGROUND AND COMMENT During the 2003 Municipal Election, the Municipality utilized Vote-By-Mail with a hand count of the returned ballots. At that election, 18,766 ballots were returned, resulting in approximately 150 people being hired to perform the count which took approximately 4 hours to complete. Because of the number of electors in the municipality and the onerous task of counting the ballots by hand, it is the Municipal Clerk's intention that an automated counting process be implemented for the 2006 Municipal Election. A request for proposal was advertised and issued to supply automated count process equipment for the Municipal Elections for the Municipality of Clarington. Subsequently, only one bid was received that was compliant to the specifications issued. As stipulated in the proposal documents, proponents were evaluated based on the following criteria: • Previous experience with mail-in ballots • Previous experience with Ontario Municipal Elections • Hardware maintenance replacement protocol • Response time of on-site and telephone support • Ballot design and process simplicity • Price • Ability to complete projects in accordance with Schedule • Completeness of proposal • Value Added Service available • References Upon completion of the review by the selection committee the decision was to award the contract to Dominion Voting Systems Corporation. The total project cost for this project will be provided from the 2006 Current Budget Account I #100-19-193-10190-7101 and is within the total recommended budget allocation. 1211 REPORT NO.: COD-006-06 PAGE 3 The Director of Finance has reviewed the funding requirements and concurs with the recommendation. Queries with respect to department needs, specifications, etc., should be referred to the Municipal Clerk. CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T(905)623-3379 F(905)623-4169 1212 Schedule "A" THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BY-LAW 2006- Being a By-law to authorize a contract between the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington and Dominion Voting Systems Corporation, Toronto, Ontario, to enter into agreement for the Supply of Automated Count Process for Municipal Elections. THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. THAT the Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized to execute, on behalf of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington and seal with the Corporation Seal, a contract between, Dominion Voting Systems Corporation, Toronto, Ontario, and said Corporation; and 2. THAT the contract attached hereto as Schedule "A"form part of this By-law. By-law read a first and second time this day of , 2006. By-law read a third time and finally passed this day of , 2006. John Mutton, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk 1213 • Leading the Way REPORT CORPORATE SERVICES DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: January 23, 2006 Report #: COD-007-06 File # By-law# Subject: Tender CL2005-38, Street Lighting Improvements at Various Locations Recommendations: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report COD-007-06 be received; 2. THAT Langley Utilities Contracting, Bowmanville, Ontario with a total bid in the amount of$105,838.00 (plus G.S.T.), being the lowest responsible bidder meeting all terms, conditions, and specifications of Tender CL2005-38, be awarded the contract for the Street Lighting Improvements at Various Locations as required by the Engineering Department; 3. THAT the total funds required in the amount of$115,250.00 ($105,838.00 tender plus work by Hydro One, plus addition work under Tender CL2003-27, contingencies, consulting and less works recoverable from developers) be drawn as follows: a) $10,500.00 (Part A)from 2005 Capital Budget Account# 110-32-324-83279- 7401; b) $20,000.00 (Part C,D, E & F)from the 2005 Capital Budget Account# 110-32- 324-83221-7401; C) $9,500.00 additional funds to be reallocated from Part A of 2005 Capital Budget Account# 110-32-324-83279-7401; d) $10,500.00 shortfall for Parts C, D, E and F to be funded from the Roads Contribution Reserve Fund; and e) THAT the remaining funds in the amount of$64,750.00 for Parts B and G be drawn from the 2004 Capital Budget Account# 110-32-324-83248-7401. 4. THAT the attached By-law marked Schedule "A" authorizing the Mayor and the Clerk to execute the necessary agreement be approved. 1214 REPORT NO.: COD-007-06 PAGE 2 Submitted by: —' ' Reviewed by: Mt ne Marano, H.B.Sc., C.M.O. Franklin Wu, Director of Corporate Services Chief Administrative Officer rjawl A.S. Cannella, C.E.T. Director of Engineering Services /W Nancy Taylo , B.B.A., A., Director of finance MM\ASC\NT\LAB\km 1215 REPORT NO.: COD-007-06 PAGE 3 BACKGROUND AND COMMENT Tender specifications were provided by Totten Sims Hubicki Associates for the Street Lighting Improvements at Various Locations within the Municipality of Clarington, as required by the Engineering Department. Tenders were advertised in local papers, as well as electronically. Subsequently, tenders were received and tabulated as per Schedule "B" attached. The total project cost, including Project Administration, and costing allocation is as detailed in the letter from Totten Sims Hubicki Associates, marked Schedule "B" and will be provided from the accounts specified in the recommendations of this report. As the total funds required from the Various Street Lighting Improvement for Parts C, D, E and F Account# 110-32-324-83221- 7401 exceeds the,available funds of$20,000.00, it is recommended that additional funds required in the amount of$9,500.00 be reallocated from the under expenditure of Part A, Account# 110-32-324-83279-7401. It is further recommended that the balance of the funds required for Parts C, D, E and F in the amount of$10,500.00 be drawn from the Roads Contribution Reserve Fund. Note, $7,096.20 has already been expended from Account# 110- 32-330-83205-7401 and has been included in the total funds required for Tender CL2005-38. The low bidder has previously performed satisfactory work for the Municipality of Clarington. The Director of Finance has reviewed the funding requirements and concurs with the recommendation. Queries with respect to department needs, specifications, etc., should be referred to the Director of Engineering. After further review and analysis of the bids by the Engineering Department, Totten Sims Hubicki Associates and Purchasing, it was mutually agreed that the low bidder, Langley Utilities Contracting, Bowmanville, Ontario, be recommended for the contract for the Street Lighting Improvements at Various Locations. ATTACHMENT #1 Schedule 'A' ATTACHMENT #2 Schedule 'B' CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T(905)623-3379 F (905)623-4169 1216 Schedule "A" THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BY-LAW 2006- Being a By-law to authorize a contract between the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington and Langley Utilities Contracting, Bowmanville, Ontario, to enter into agreement for the Street Lighting Improvements at Various Locations THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. THAT the Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized to execute, on behalf of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington and seal with the Corporation Seal, a contract between, Langley Utilities Contracting, Bowmanville, Ontario, and said Corporation; and 2. THAT the contract attached hereto as Schedule "A"form part of this By-law. By-law read a first and second time this day of , 2006. By-law read a third time and finally passed this day of , 2006. John Mutton, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk 1217 JAN-17-2006 TUE 09;59 AM TSH COBOURG FAX NO, 905 372 3621 P, U2/U3 UH SCHEDULE "B" Totten Sims Hubicki Associates 513 Division Street, engineers Cobourg,Ontario,Canada K9A 5G6 archi'tec'ts (906)372-2121 Fax:(905)372-3621 planners E-mail:cobourg@tsh.ca www.tsh.ca January 16, 2006 Ms. Lou Ann Birkett, CPP, AMCT Purchasing Manager Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington 40 Temperance Street BOWMANVILLE, Ontario, L1C 3A6 Dear Ms. Birkett: Re: Contract No. CL2005-38, Street Lighting improvements - Various Locations Part A - Taunton Road and Main Street Intersection, Orono Part B -- Regional Road 57 and Longworth Avenue Intersection, Bowmanville Part C — Turnberry Crescent Walkway, Courtice Part D -- Old Kingston Road from Osgood Gate to East End, Courtice Part E - Soper Court Walkway, Bowmanville Part F- Old Scugog Road, from Salter Crescent to North End of Town, Enniskillen) Part G-Longworth Avenue Street Lighting,Scugog St.to 220 m West of Bridge, Bowmanville Tenders for the above project were opened at the municipal offices on 'Thursday, December 22,2005, at 2:00:00 p.m. The bids received exclusive of GST are summarized as follows: Bidder Total Bid Amount Langley Utilities Contracting Ltd. $105,838.00* Bowmanville, ON Stacey Electric Company Ltd. $128,422.40 Toronto, ON Guild Electric Limited $136,988.85 -Scarborough, ON Dundas Power Line Ltd. $144,568.40 Chesterville, ON Ron Robinson Limited $158,703.54 Bowmanville;, ON * Did amended—Extension Error The low bidder's submitted tender has been reviewed and is in order. Langley Utilities Contracting currently has the Municipality of Clarington's street lighting maintenance and locating contract and in the past has completed several other projects for the Municipality including the Various Lighting contract in 2003. They completed the work to an acceptable suindard and their staff were very knowledgeable and easy to work with. They have also completed a number of contracts for various public utility companies, other municipalities and private developers. All references contacted indicated their performance was acceptable. 1218 JAN-17-2006 TUE 10:00 AM TSH COBOURG FAX NO. 905 372 3621 P. 03/03 Ms.Low Ann tiirkett,CPI',Amcr January 16,2006 SCHEDULE "B" 2. A detailed breakdown of the estimated project costs, which has been prepared in consultation with and approved by Mr. Anthony Cannella, Director, Engineering Services, is provided on the attached cost apportionment. As noted on the cost apportionment,Parts C,D,E alid F (Account#110-32-324-83221-7401)are over budget by$20,000 and Part A (Account#110-32-324-83279-7401) is under budget buy $9,500. The Director of Engineering Services has recommended that the budget shortfall be made up with the$9,500 surplus from Account#110-32-324-83279-7401 and the remaining$10,500 be funded from the Roads Contribution Reserve Fund. Parts Band G (Account#110-32-324-83248-7401)are under budget by $35,250.00. It should be noted that funding for Darts A, C, D, E and F is primarily provided through tax levy while Parts B and G's major funding source is development charges and as such, reallocation of funding for projects from one source (development charges)to the other(tax levy) is not possible. Based on the availability of funding as noted above and the qualifications and past work record of the contractor,we recommend acceptance of the low bid and that Langley Utilities Contracting be awarded Contract No. CL2005-38 in the amount of$105,838.00 excluding GST. Should you require any further information, please contact the undersigned. Best regards Ron Albright, P.Eng. Project Engineer RA/ra 1':\1?-?.�tgg\CuRnsF\3I 353.J,x Encl. pc: Mr.A. S. Cannella, C.E.T., Director, Engineering Services,]Municipality of Clarington (+Encl.) Ms.Leslie Benson,P. Eng., Mgr. of Transportation and Design,Municipality of Clarington (+Encl.) Mr. J. Maloney, Tech 1I1, Municipality of Clarington VH 1219 Municipality of Clarington Street Lighting Improvements-Various Locations Cost Apportionment Based on Low Bid Contract CL2005-38 January 02,2006 T.S.H.Project:12-29439 3 12-29529 Description Total Part A Part C Part 0 Part E Part F Part B Part G Comments Taunton Road 3 Turnberry Old Kingston Soper Court, Old Scugog Road, Reg.Rd.57 3 Longworth Ave.- Main SL, Crescent,Walkway Road,Street Walkway Lighting, Street Lighting, Longworth Ave., Scugog St.to 220 All Parts Intersection Lighting,Courtks Lighting,Courtice Bowmanvi le Enniskillen Intersection m West of Bridge, Lighting,Orono Lighting, Street Lighting, Bowmanville Bowmanville 110-32-32443279- 7401 110-32-32443221-7401 110-32-324.83248.7401 Account Number Construction Costs Contract CL2005-38 Total Construction Cost $105,838.00 $6,167.50 $8,666.50 $3,000.00 $10,297.50 $6,000.00 $9,700.50 $62,006.00 Low Bid Detailed Design,Approvals,Tendering and Contract Administradon(TSH f 12-29439 312-29529) $26,650.00 $1,600.00 $2,200.00 $750.00 $2,600.00 $1,500.00 $2,500.00 $15,500.00 Prorated based on Low Bid Other Cost Improvements by Hydro Authority Required to Estimates(Hydro Authorities to Accommodate Lighting(Hydro One Parts A,B.C.D $6,250.00 $1,000.00 $500.00 $500.00 $750.00 $1,500.00 $500.00 $1,500.00 Confine Pricing) 8 F or Veddian Parts E 3 G) Sub-Totl EsUmatd Projract Coat(excl.contingencies) $138,778.00 $8,787.90 411,3tiSd0 $4,Za0.00 ;513,1$4760 $9,000.00 $12.700.50 °, l$791006 Contingencies(including G.S.T.) $7,233.10 $1,732.50 $493.33 $300.00 $634.88 $307.79 $535.03 $3,229.57 Duct Work Installed Under Contract CL2003-27 $7,096.20 $7,096.20 Previously Paid from Accountf110-32-330-83205-7401 Total Estimated Project Cost $163,087.30 $10,600.00 $40,000.00 $102,567.30 Total Recoverable from Developers for Street Lighting $37,817.30 137,817.30 (Vettd-Includes deduction for Overshring of Poles) NstProjeet.Costs $118.2$0 00 $10.800 00 C. �ib.000+00 Budget Amount $140,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $100,000.00 Eadrnated budget 8urylu�IDeAcN sz4;Taans is,690 90 =Z0,o90•09 ° t$34,260 OD Not:All Cost Exclude G.S.T. N N O P:tt2-295291SpeeslCL2005.3o low bid Lost mppordonmenudsCmt AppatlomreM 1110112006 Y; a: k Y { 2; an S AACC ACCOMPLISHMENTS 2005 The Agricultural Advisory Committee during the past year has monitored a number of issues - emerging and continuing in the agricultural field. We have been able to do this because of the guest speakers that we have had at our meetings and the issues referred to us by Council. Of specific note are the resolutions that Council has endorsed regarding supply management, farm viability, paper fibre bio-solids and other resolutions that have been circulated by the OFA. The agricultural advisory committee would like to thank Council for its endorsement of the tax percentage reduction for agricultural properties; we know that the Mayor as Chair of the Finance Committee had to fight hard to have this resolution endorsed at the Regional level and I would also like to thank Gerry Brown my Vice-Chair for his research and presentation to the Durham Region Finance Committee regarding this issue. The Committee is also happy to see the commitment to farmers that Council continues to make by its policy decisions such as the continued exemption for agricultural buildings under the development charges by-law and the amendment in the bylaw for bunkhouses extending the occupancy from 6-8 months. Other initiatives that the committee has endorsed and will continue to follow-up on are the farm balewrap recycling program by the Region, the recycling of farm/tractor tires and the addition of the Regional "agricultural area" warning signs and expansion of our own signs in areas of active farming. In the past year, the AACC has also been pushing for private land stewardship programs in the GRCA area (Clarke Township) to match the programs offered by CLOCA; and we know that the Mayor has been working on this issue. We have also offered our knowledge and understanding of pesticides to for the Operations Department when they draft a pesticide policy for the Municipality. Meeting with the Operations Director has allowed us to voice our concerns regarding tree-trimming along roadways, snow clearing into fence lines and dog-strangling vine. The Ag Advisory Committee has been involved in the initiation of the very successful Farmer's Market at Newcastle Arena that the Clarington Board of Trade and Councillor Robinson played a major role in setting up. We have provided advise on a number of issue to staff and continue to have a booth at Orono Fair to build awareness of our role in the agricultural community. I would like to congratulate Council on their foresight in setting up an Agricultural Advisory Committee, we have become a role model for other Municipalities and it has provided the agricultural community with a greater voice and understanding of land use policies and vice versa it has provided the planners with an understanding of our issues. GUEST SPEAKERS: January Elaine Collis Biosolids Management Coordinator MaryAnne Found, Supplementary uses for Agricultural lands for the Zoning Bylaw February Philip Coulter, Gamma Engineering Wind Energy March Carole Seysmith, Durham Land Stewardship Johnathan Staples, CLOCA, private land stewardship programmes Susan Ashton, Senior Planner Wind turbine approval through the planning process April Mark Peacock, Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority May Gord Weir, Fire Chief, burning permits, extractions, etc. June Keith Watt—Valuation Manager, Farms, MPAC Michael Porporo— Municipal Relations Representative, MPAC September Fred Horvath, Clarington Director of Operations Murray Devitt, Operations Supervisor Larry Postill, Operations Supervisor Bob Genosko, Operations Supervisor October Perry Sisson, CLOCA new regulation lines November Heather Brooks, Senior Planner, zoning and official plan processes December Mayor John Mutton Russ Powell, CLOC- Greenbelt Task Force PORT GRANBY PRojEcT ranby P 19 . . Water Treatment Ponds West Gorge (c) Ferguson Aviation 905-349-3561 UGorcgie Central Plateau A • �' rx, Ape' PORT GRnxsY PxoEcr Port Granby Project Timeline Who's Involved: • Members of the public and groups • Municipality of Port Hope • Municipality of Clarington • First Nations • Natural Resources Canada • Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Office • Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission • Fisheries and Oceans Canada • Local,provincial and federal agencies 2001 mF. Q Legal Port Hope Area Property Value Project Environmental Agreement Initiative(PHAI) Protection(PVP) Assessment(EA)starts launched Program begins We Are Here 2006 2002 1 Environmental Facility design Assessment& &licence licence decisions applications Cleanup Begins 2007 j- Environmental EA Scope Assessment issued process 2013 Hundreds of Years Remediate sites, Cover&complete Ongoing monitoring construct facilities facility &maintenance Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Office 0 PORT GRANBY PRojEcr 2003 - 2004: Alternative Means Process results in recommendatio to relocate waste to new facility further away from Lake Ontario Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Office 5 �e Tom" Site Plan of Key Project Features a J PR Road I Coss I IR CQ� IN •I PWkNMWdCAMI1C"NY r-- �—--------------_ 1 TafA i I ,A 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Propo:adEntnncrrsto SaocndarY enpb Yaa ��-�� �Mlaatl 1pD Across Roads ��� �Ett p�oyso 7psttsllapt Ettr�nu Epsti�g Wash Maelagawetlt Fxiity Carwas East 1bg wait rtmaj Gems Ana AR''O � •� wad '� h 'I F� end 'x FYapoadmoudalavadoncorNU:Im/MAF uIsIrg alovRlon C0=Ur,;mAhSLr n c —J, ec S:AI[ YR1C ionporarpCh an W1 and Mate Its 9roc4A Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Office 6 PORT GRANBY PROjEcr Recommended Transportation Routes 2 NewtonAlle VJ To Newcastle To Port Hope -0 Concession Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Office 7 cc RECOMMENDED C Cc >% -p SITE -p Ir L-A -an LLJ Z ,J EXISTING * Recommended transportation SITE route for construction materials Ftd. Lakeshore Port Dedicated construction road for waste Granby Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Office 7 PORT GRANBY PROJECT Technical Studies Characterization & Assessment Alternative Means Process Public Consultation Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Office ���n PORT GRANBY PROJECT Consultation and Communications CONTACTS 2001 • Printed material distributed, letters etc. - 87,700 • Presentations & personal dialogue - 4,850 • Surveys - 2,762 • 98 Meetings, briefings, presentations, etc. • Port Granby Project Discussion Group initiated Jan 16, 2006 in Newtonville - 2005 Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Office rIJ� PORT GRANBY PRoxcr Consultation and Communications Fourth Annual Public Attitude Survey 2005 • Mid-October — 252 randomly selected Ward 4 Clarington residents surveyed by IntelliPulse, public affairs and marketing research firm • Almost half (44%) know at least something about the presence of low-level radioactive waste, but only 4% consider it as a top community issue • Closer residents (5 km or less) are more aware and comprise a large portion of the 16% of respondents who often think about the waste management facility • Preferred sources of information on the Project are independent qualified scientists. A committee of local citizens is second and the LLRWMO, Municipal Government and the media tie for third place. Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Office 10 PORT GRANBY PROJECT Feb 2005 - Draft Environmental Assessment Study Report presented to both Municipalities and to the public. • Feb/March 2005 — Opportunity for municipal, public & stakeholder comments on Draft EA Study Report. • March 2005 — LLRWMO received written consent from Port Hope and Clarington to submit the Port Hope Project "preferred option" to the next step in the EA process. • March 2005 — Clarington Council asks for investigation of three site-specific matters before it consents to "preferred option" for Port Granby Project. • April to Nov 2005 — LLRWMO develops responses to Clarington's concerns in consultation with peer review team. Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Office 11 - - --- -- -v - - - - - - - - - - -- -- - - - " - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - Issue Proposed resolution Further redundancy in Capillary drainage layer in cover environmental protection system - described as a "better of concept - additional solution" by the Peer Review Team liner suggested Grade separation at Underpass for internal waste haul Lakeshore Rd for waste road at Lakeshore Road haul road Upgrade of haul roads Newtonville Rd., Concession 1 and prior to project start Elliott Road to be upgraded (use of contingency routes minimized) Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Office 12 Computer image of conceptual design PORT GRANBY *4 00 PROJ,cr Conceptual Design: Proposed Long-Term Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Facility Geomembrane Layer Interim Multi-layer - Geosynthetic Clay Liner Cover Capillary Sand Cushion/Drainage Layer Break Layer Capillary Cover Stone Intrusion Baffler Layer System Geotextile Filter , Rock Protection ° Layer Perimeter Ditch R Compacted Clay Multi layer GeomemLayer Layer Non-perforated Riser Pipe Liner System '�'�`"�`��na�9���'�°91 Leachate Collection Vegetation —Topsoil �— Fill c (Local Till) Cross-section of Sand Layer Perforated J aboveground mound Geotextile Filter Leachate Collection Pipe Drawing r*t to scale Stone Leachate Sump Waste Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Office 13 PORT GRANBY PROJECT How capillary drainage systems wo rk eva trans ration total Animal PreC"ahon LAverage) about 9,7 mngr 11004x1 Ibl�l Grass aUn°ff vegetation `22%4 Cover System a . . ; . Tsa� � d �T .a. at FMII � � r J •� • . J ''J � . d .� ' � ,a.,. •. - as •a-aiT�" w x w Performance ♦ r r a e a C. o r. 0 Gr"n4 Fig Q .a 10 1 s � # ° Ao } 5 > aasc J afi # * s s IP capiNar• •" " Drainage ' Systm Li I Vidal na4 r L ayr GeotexMe Filter Mi0o, Lateral Drainage �i Geamembrane *Miner � rind '.r_ Geosynth�etic !'sr &iegr� ViWari�a4ge (lay Baer _Wifla Br L ( Qk14b3: Lateral Dkr.ai e (17%) 14 PORT GRANBY PROJECT' How capillary drainage systems work Cover System Assuming Complete Failure of Geomembrane Total Anual Predpitatie(Average) vP an adore shou1830 nrnlvn:I0DNA (bl!N /0"_V#� � Runoff b Capillary Drainage System Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Office Geoteutite Aker Lateral Drainage __-yeorimmbraee(10%) _ Lmei(Faladt --- Geosymhetic Clay Liner -.1fil wrrtivningt Lateral Draw, ey Capilary Aeon 15 mo t ♦ Y .` t � Y �� f i } � �+ < t Y c. d � Y a` a,j ? � L d J:. ° 0 jo ° 0 �s Q 0 y.YridjrN Rjo 0 to ° 0 •c ° $ t G ` ' a f'� ` a f� ' a d't i f'� ' a t'U • a t'"� ' �a • a - Yea Y + . z Y�c+ .ids •�� 4 11 •Q O � Q O U t �. . . . Capillary Drainage System Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Office Geoteutite Aker Lateral Drainage __-yeorimmbraee(10%) _ Lmei(Faladt --- Geosymhetic Clay Liner -.1fil wrrtivningt Lateral Draw, ey Capilary Aeon 15 PORT GRANBY PROJECT Transpo tion of Experience shows that radioactive waste containing Uranium, Radium, Arsenic and Thorium 230 can be moved safely. Community concerns regarding excavation and movement of waste will be addressed by appropriate safety measures, continuous monitoring & a haul route with minimal effects on public roadways and local residents. (Proposed temporary underpass at Lakeshore Road illustrated below). 4 16 PoRT GRANBY PRoxcr Anticipated Next Steps it Jan - April 2006 - LLRWMO staff and consultants update Effects Assessment Studies for the Draft EASR, taking into consideration design change recommendations and lessons learned from Authorities' review of the Port Hope EASR. • Mar - Apr 2006 - Draft EASR to be presented to public and Municipality of Clarington for review by MPRT and staff. • May - June 2006 - Clarington Council considers consent to "preferred option" for Port Granby Project. Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Office 17 PoRT GRANBY ,AU*4fw PROjEcr Anticipated Next Steps Environmental Facility design Environmental Assessment & licence Assessment & process applications licence decisions • Summer 2006 — Draft Environmental Assessment Study Report submitted to Responsible Authorities (NRCan, CNSC and FOC) for review by federal and provincial authorities • Spring 2007 — Draft Screening Report issued by Responsible Authorities (RAs) for public review & comment • Fall 2007 — Final Environmental Assessment Screening Report and decision released by RAs • 2007-2008 — CNSC licensing process and decision 2008 — Construction of Port Granby Long-Term Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Facility initiated Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Office 18 PORT GRANBY PROJEcT Creating a better environment together Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Office Natural Resources Ressources naturelles Canada Canada AECL EACL ' Atomic Energy Energie Can&torque Cmada' of Canada Limited du Canada limitee j x Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Office Natural Resources Ressources naturelles Canada Canada AECL EACL ' Atomic Energy Energie Can&torque Cmada' of Canada Limited du Canada limitee