HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/19/19larin
Cgton
Planning and Development
Committee
Agenda
Date: Tuesday, February 19, 2019
Time: 7:00 PM
Place: Council Chambers, 2nd Floor
Municipal Administrative Centre
40 Temperance Street
Bowmanville, Ontario
Inquiries & Accommodations: For inquiries about this agenda, or to
make arrangements for accessibility accommodations for persons attending, please
contact: Samantha Gray, Committee Coordinator, at 905-623-3379, ext. 2106 or by
email at sgray(a.clarington.net.
Alternate Format: If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact
the Accessibility Coordinator, at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131.
Audio Record: The Municipality of Clarington makes an audio record of General
Government Committee meetings. If you make a delegation or presentation at a
General Government Committee meeting, the Municipality will be audio recording you
and will make the recording public by publishing the recording on the Municipality's
website.
Cell Phones: Please ensure all cell phones, mobile and other electronic devices are
turned off or placed on non -audible mode during the meeting.
Copies of Reports are available at www.clarington.net
CIarifl#oII Planning and Development Committee Agenda
Date: February 19, 2019
Time: 7:00 PM
Place: Council Chambers
1 Call to Order
2 New Business — Introduction
Members of Committee are encouraged to provide the Clerk's Department, in advance of the
meeting, a copy of any motion the Member is intending to introduce, (preferably electronic)
such that staff could have sufficient time to share the motion with all Members prior to the
meeting.
3 Adopt the Agenda
4 Declaration of Interest
5 Announcements
6 Adoption of Minutes of Previous Meeting
6.1 January 28 Minutes of a Regular Meeting of January 28, 2019
Minutes
7 Public Meetings
7.1 Public Meeting Application for a Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment
Applicant: 2411 Baseline Limited
Report: PSD -011-19
Location: 2411 & 2415 Baseline Road, Bowmanville
8 Delegations
Page 5
Page 14
8.1 Brenda Metcalf, Chair of the Agricultural Advisory Committee, Regarding the Agricultural
Advisory Committee - 2018 Accomplishments
8.2 Michael Domovitch, President, 1977057 Ontario Limited, Regarding Report
PSD -013-19, Extension of Draft Approval by 1977057 Ontario Limited in Brookhill
Neighbourhood in Bowmanville
Page 2
CIarifl#oII Planning and Development Committee Agenda
Date: February 19, 2019
Time: 7:00 PM
Place: Council Chambers
9 Communications - Receive for Information
There are no Communications to be received for information.
10 Communications— Direction
10.1 Region of Ralph Walton, Regional Clerk/Director of Legislative Page 16
Durham Services, The Regional Municipality of Durham, Regarding
Providing Consultation on Increasing Housing Supply in
Ontario, Report 2019 -COW -1
(Motion for Direction)
11 Presentations
11.1 Mayor Foster, Councillor Hooper and Katharine Warren, Chair of the Education and
Outreach Sub -Committee of the Heritage Committee, Honouring Three Heritage
Properties in Clarington
12 Planning Services Department Reports
12.1 PSD -011-19 An Application by 2411 Baseline Limited to amend the Page 54
Zoning By-law to permit the development of a commercial
property for a variety of uses
12.2 PSD -012-19 An Application by Gerald Sherk Removal of Holding — Page 68
2406 Prestonvale Road, Courtice
12.3 PSD -013-19 Extension of Draft Approval by 1977057 Ontario Limited Page 74
in Brookhill Neighbourhood in Bowmanville
12.4 PSD -014-19 Extension to Draft approval for Lindvest Properties Page 82
(Clarington) Inc. in Newcastle
12.5 PSD -015-19 Proposed Changes to the Growth Plan for the Greater Page 87
Golden Horseshoe
Page 3
GariU00II Planning and Development Committee Agenda
Date: February 19, 2019
Time: 7:00 PM
Place: Council Chambers
13 New Business — Consideration
14 Unfinished Business
None
15 Confidential Reports
No Reports
16 Adjournment
Page 4
Clarftwn Planning and Development Committee
Minutes
January 28, 2019
If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the
Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131.
Minutes of a meeting of the Planning and Development Committee held on Monday,
January 28, 2019 at 7:00 PM in the Council Chambers.
Present Were: Mayor A. Foster, Councillor G. Anderson, Councillor R. Hooper,
Councillor J. Jones, Councillor J. Neal, Councillor C. Traill and
Councillor M. Zwart
Staff Present: A. Allison, F. Langmaid, R. Maciver, K. Richardson, C. Pellarin,
J. Gallagher, S. Gray, A. Burke
1 Call to Order
Councillor Neal called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM.
2 New Business — Introduction
There were no new business items added to the Agenda.
3 Adopt the Agenda
Resolution #PD -001-19
Moved by Mayor Foster, seconded by Councillor Jones
That the Agenda for the Planning and Development Committee meeting of January 28,
2019 be adopted as presented.
Carried
4 Declarations of Interest
There were no disclosures of interest stated at this meeting.
5 Announcements
Members of Committee announced upcoming community events and matters of
community interest.
6 Adoption of Minutes of Previous Meeting
There are no minutes of previous meetings to be adopted, as the previous meeting was
the Joint General Government and Planning and Development Committee meeting of
January 7, 2019 and the minutes have been approved.
-1-
5
Cladwwn Planning and Development Committee
Minutes
January 28, 2019
7 Public Meetings
7.1 Application for a Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment
Applicant: Delpark Homes (Prestonvale) Inc.
Report: PSD -008-19
Locations: 1430 & 1500 Prestonvale Road, Courtice
Brandon Weiler, Planner, made a verbal and electronic presentation to the Committee
regarding the application.
Doug Moser, local resident, spoke in opposition to the application. Mr. Moser stated that
he is concerned with the proposed application and how it will impact their heritage
property. He noted that he is also concerned with the possible impact on the
infrastructure including, water, electrical and sewage in the surrounding area.
Mark Jacobs, Planner, The Biglieri Group Ltd., was present on behalf of the applicant.
Mr. Jacobs advised the Committee that there will be no impact to the heritage property
located on the other side of the road from the proposed development. He also noted
that there will be no impact to the current infrastructure.
8 Delegations
8.1 Beth Meszaros, Regarding Proposed Bill 66, Restoring Ontario's
Competiveness Act, 2018
Beth Meszaros was present regarding Proposed Bill 66, Restoring Ontario's
Competiveness Act, 2018. She thanked the Committee for taking on the challenge of
leading our community in matters that make big differences. Ms. Meszaros explained
that running for office means that the Member has agreed to ensure a healthy
sustainable community, including our air, soil and water. She stated that she is
concerned with Bill 66 and particularly Schedule 10. Ms. Meszaros explained that on
Thursday, January 24, 2019, the provincial government announced an amendment to
remove Schedule 10 from Bill 66. She advised the Committee that she is still concerned
with what will take place, as this is the second time the current provincial government
has looked at the Greenbelt. Ms. Meszaros noted that Bill 66 would have allowed the
Province to override the Municipality and take away the citizens' voice to respond. She
advised the Committee of a similar situation regarding the Ganaraska Region
Conservation Authority and the Morgan's Road large fill site. Ms. Meszaros urged the
Committee to attend all Conservation Authority meetings. She thanked the staff who
contributed to the Report sent by Durham Region and Mayor Foster, and Councillors
Neal and Anderson for their representation on the Regional Council. Ms. Meszaros
advised the Committee that the health of our Province and our Country depends on
valuing farms, forests, clean water solutions and natural resources and building robust
and vibrant communities. She stated that we should be protecting our environment not
destroying it.
-2-
A•
Clarftwn Planning and Development Committee
Minutes
January 28, 2019
8.2 Wendy Bracken, Regarding Unfinished Business Item 14.1, Regarding a
Resolution Regarding Durham Region's Solid Waste Management Servicing
and Financing Study Report #2019 -COW -3
Wendy Bracken was present regarding Unfinished Business Item 14.1, regarding a
resolution regarding Durham Region's Solid Waste Management Servicing and
Financing Study Report #2019 -COW -3. She made a verbal presentation to accompany
an electronic presentation. Ms. Bracken advised the Committee that she has suggested
changes to the draft resolution found in Unfinished Business Item 14.1 of this agenda.
She outlined her suggest changes:
x That paragraph 5 be amended as per slide 2 of her presentation.
x Adding a section regarding sections 6.16 and 6.17 of Report #2019 -COW -3, as
per slide 4 of her presentation.
x Adding a section as per slide 5 of her presentation.
x Adding a section 1.h, as per slide 6 of her presentation.
Ms. Bracken advised the Committee that she supports Linda Gasser's suggestions and
comments, provided to the Committee. She explained that there have been changes to
the Canadian Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) regarding Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2).
Ms. Bracken noted the health effects of NO2, and that children, older adults, asthmatics
and diabetics are the most vulnerable. She outlined the current priorities regarding the
CAAQS from the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME).
Suspend the Rules
Resolution #PD -002-19
Moved by Councillor Jones, seconded by Councillor Hooper
That the Rules of Procedure be suspended to allow the delegation of Wendy Bracken to
be extended for an additional two minutes.
Carried
Ms. Bracken displayed summary table results for the Courtice Station and Rundle Road
Station and highlighted the 2017 Annual Ambient Air Report data. She continued by
displaying a graph showing a comparison of NO2 levels in Southwestern Ontario, noting
that the Courtice station had the highest levels. Ms. Bracken highlighted the 2017
annual ambient air quality monitoring report for the Rundle Road station.
-3-
Clarftwn Planning and Development Committee
Minutes
January 28, 2019
Suspend the Rules
Resolution #PD -003-19
Moved by Councillor Jones, seconded by Councillor Anderson
That the Rules of Procedure be suspended to allow the delegation of Wendy Bracken to
be extended for an additional two minutes.
Carried
She explained that there have been changes to the CAAQS regarding Sulfur Dioxide
(SO2). Ms. Bracken advised the Committee that Durham Region should be held
accountable for the site decision and incinerator decision. She noted that, based on
outdated standards, there is more risk to our community and the Courtice site will be
overburdened. Ms. Bracken concluded her presentation by advising the Committee that
her presentation is sufficient evidence to support her suggestions for amending the
resolution found in Unfinished Business Item 14.1.
8.3 Linda Gasser, Regarding Unfinished Business Item 14.1, Regarding a
Resolution Regarding Durham Region's Solid Waste Management Servicing
and Financing Study Report #2019 -COW -3
Linda Gasser advised the Municipal Clerk's Department, prior to the meeting, that she
would be unable to attend as a delegation.
Alter the Agenda
Resolution #PD -004-19
Moved by Mayor Foster, seconded by Councillor Jones
That the Agenda be altered to consider Unfinished Business Item 14.1, Memo from Faye
Langmaid, Acting Director of Planning Services, Regarding a Resolution Regarding
Durham Region's Solid Waste Management Servicing and Financing Study Report
#2019 -COW -3, at this time.
Carried
93
Clarftwn Planning and Development Committee
Minutes
January 28, 2019
14.1 Memo from Faye Langmaid, Acting Director of Planning Services, Regarding
a Resolution Regarding Durham Region's Solid Waste Management
Servicing and Financing Study Report #2019 -COW -3 [Referred from the
January 21. 2019 General Government Committee Meeting]
Resolution #PD -005-19
Moved by Councillor Jones, seconded by Councillor Zwart
Whereas Regional Staff presented Report #2019 -COW -3, Solid Waste Management
Servicing and Financing Study on January 16, 2019 to outline a number of processes,
amongst them being:
• Endorsement of a long term waste management vision founded on managing
waste as a resource;
• Commencement of public consultation and communications for the Regional
Municipality of Durham's Long Term Waste Management Strategy (Update for
2021-2040);
• Authorization to apply to the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks
(MECP) to increase the processing limit of 140,000 tonnes per year to 160,000
tonnes per year at the Durham York Energy Centre (DYEC);
• Commencement of the focussed Environmental Assessment (EA) Terms of
Reference for the future expansion of the DYEC to 250,000 tonnes per year with
anticipated construction in 10-15 years.
Whereas Clarington is concerned that some of the actions are pre -judging the results of
the Long Term Waste Management Strategy and are a more costly approach to waste
diversion; and
Whereas Clarington is concerned with the on-going operational issues at the DYEC and
in particular the air emissions (ambient and stack) which have shown exceedances in the
past; and
Whereas the emissions sources tests at the DYEC from September 2018 indicate that it
is operating at 91 % of the ECA Compliance Approval Limit for NOx; and
Whereas Section 22.1 of the EA stipulates that the maximum amount of wast that may
be processed at the DYEC is 140,000 tonnes per year; and
Whereas the Region committed to a 70% waste diversion target in the DYEC EA and the
Host Community Agreement; and
-5-
9
Cladwwn Planning and Development Committee
Minutes
January 28, 2019
Whereas on June 13, 2018 Regional Council approved anaerobic digestion (AD) with a
mixed waste transfer and pre-sort facility as the preferred technologies for the Region's
long term organic management strategy (Report #2018 -COW -146) which is necessary to
move from 55% to 70% diversion;
Now therefore be it resolved that:
1. Clarington Council requests Durham Region Council to direct to staff to:
a. Proceed with haste on renewing its commitment to waste reduction, reuse, and
diversion by reviewing, updating, and consulting with the public on the Long Term
Waste Management Strategy which envisions moving from waste to a resource;
and
b. Accelerate the AD process for implementation by Regional staff with a report to
Regional Council before June 2019 outlining steps necessary to complete this
project within a 3 year timeframe; and
c. Prepare a public consultation and communication plan, including anticipated
timelines, to educate the community about the preferred technologies (approval
as per #2018 -COW -146), including the rationale, regulatory process, siting,
opportunities for public input, and how the project contributes to the Region's 70%
waste diversion target; and
d. Clarify how they intend to obtain the input of the public with respect to any
proposed increase to the processing limit of the DYEC; and
e. Provide a timeline for verification of the long-term sampling system for dioxins
and furans (AMESA), as required by the DYEC ECA and, upon completion of the
work plan, report back on the results to Durham Region and Clarington Councils;
and
g. Prepare and implement a communications plan to include greater promotion,
education, enforcement and public awareness of the Region's waste management
system; and
2. Clarington write to the MECP and indicate that is it opposed to any amendment to the
EA to increase the maximum amount of waste proposed at the DYEC beyond 140,000
tonnes per year without a full review under the Environmental Assessment Act, including
the concerns listed above.
3. The concerns respecting local airshed quality be submitted to MECP regarding the
sources and concentrations of NOx and SOx together with a request that the MECP
prepare a report that identifies and evaluates the sources and concentrations of local
airshed emissions, associated health risks, and overall air quality; and
10
Clarftwn Planning and Development Committee
Minutes
January 28, 2019
4. That this resolution be circulated to the MECP, Durham Region, and area
municipalities including York Region.
Referred
See following motion
Resolution #PD -006-19
Moved by Councillor Hooper, seconded by Councillor Traill
That Resolution #PD -005-19, be referred to staff to Report back to the Council meeting
of February 4, 2019.
Carried
9 Communications - Receive for Information
9.1 Kathryn Enders, Executive Director, Ontario Farmland Trust, Regarding
Feedback on Proposed Bill 66, Restoring Ontario's Competiveness Act,
2018
9.2 Chris Jones, Director of Planning and Regulation, CLOCA, Regarding
CLOCA Comments for Bill 66, Restoring Ontario's Competiveness Act, 2018
9.3 Carolyn Lance, Council Services Coordinator, Town of Georgina, Regarding
Bill 66, Restoring Ontario's Competiveness Act, 2018
9.4 Susan Greatrix, Clerk, Town of Orangeville, Regarding Bill 66, Restoring
Ontario's Competiveness Act, 2018
Resolution #PD -007-19
Moved by Mayor Foster, seconded by Councillor Hooper
That Communication Items 9.1 to 9.4, be referred to the consideration of Communication
Item 10.1.
Carried
9.5 Heather Brooks, Director Watershed Planning & Natural Heritage, CLOCA,
Regarding Preserving and Protecting our Environment for Future
Generations: A Made -in -Ontario Environment Plan
Moved by Mayor Foster, seconded by Councillor Hooper
That Communication Item 9.5, be received for information.
Carried
-7-
11
Clarftwn Planning and Development Committee
Minutes
January 28, 2019
10 Communications— Direction
10.1 Correspondence from Faye Langmaid, Acting Director of Planning Services,
to Michael Helfinger, Regarding Comments on Bill 66, Restoring Ontario's
Competiveness Act, 2018
Resolution #PD -008-19
Moved by Mayor Foster, seconded by Councillor Anderson
That Communication Item 10.1 from Faye Langmaid, Acting Director of Planning
Services, to Michael Helfinger, Regarding Comments on Bill 66, Restoring Ontario's
Competiveness Act, 2018, be endorsed.
Carried
10.2 Correspondence from Beth Meszaros, Regarding her Delegation on Bill 66,
Restoring Ontario's Competiveness Act, 2018
Resolution #PD -009-19
Moved by Mayor Foster, seconded by Councillor Hooper
That Beth Meszaros be advised of actions taken, regarding Bill 66, Restoring Ontario's
Competiveness Act, 2018.
Carried
11 Presentation(s)
No Presentations
12 Planning Services Department Reports
12.1 PSD -008-19 Applications by Delpark Homes (Prestonvale) Inc. for a
Clarington Official Plan Amendment, Draft Plan of Subdivision and Zoning
By-law Amendment to permit a 78 dwelling subdivision on the west side of
Prestonvale Road and south of Southfield Avenue in Courtice.
Resolution #PD -010-19
Moved by Councillor Jones, seconded by Councillor Hooper
That Report PSD -008-19 be received;
That the proposed Clarington Official Plan Amendment, Draft Plan of Subdivision and
Zoning By-law Amendment submitted by Delpark Homes (Prestonvale) Inc. continue to
be processed including the preparation of a subsequent report; and
12
Clarftwn Planning and Development Committee
Minutes
January 28, 2019
That all interested parties listed in Report PSD -008-19 and any delegations be advised
of Council's decision.
Carried
12.2 PSD -009-19 2018 Planning Applications
Resolution #PD -011-19
Moved by Councillor Traill, seconded by Councillor Jones
That Report PSD -009 -19 be received for information.
Carried
13 New Business — Consideration
There were no New Business Item to be considered under this Section of the Agenda.
14 Unfinished Business
14.1 Memo from Faye Langmaid, Acting Director of Planning Services, Regarding
a Resolution Regarding Durham Region's Solid Waste Management Servicing
and Financing Study Report #2019 -COW -3 [Referred from the January 21.
2019 General Government Committee Meeting]
Memo from Faye Langmaid, Acting Director of Planning Services, Regarding a
Resolution Regarding Durham Region's Solid Waste Management Servicing and
Financing Study Report #2019 -COW -3 was considered earlier in the meeting during the
delegation portion of the agenda.
15 Confidential Reports
There were no Confidential Reports scheduled under this Section of the Agenda.
16 Adjournment
Resolution #PD -012-19
Moved by Councillor Hooper, seconded by Councillor Jones
That the meeting adjourn at 8:06 PM.
Chair
Carried
M
13
Deputy Clerk
Clarbgtoa
Notice of Public Meeting
A land use change has been proposed, have your say!
The Municipality is seeking public comments before making a decision on an application to amend
the Zoning By-law.
• • .
The Owner of these lands (2411 Baseline Limited) has submitted an application to amend
the Zoning By-law to permit a commercial development consisting of a one -storey building
for restaurant and retail uses, a two-storey building for restaurant, office and retail uses,
and a one -storey building for a daycare. This application has been deemed complete.
2411 & 2415 Baseline Road, Bowmanville.
_ Subject Property
a
D
a
VI
a x
Baseline Road =. Baseline Road
Laneway ;� Proposed '
and 1 Storey
Parking Building
Proposed Loading
2 Storey Area
Building #
Laneway
and
*' Parking
1
Loading
Area
Proposed
1 Story
Building
ZBA 2018-0029f
How
to be Informed
Additional information and background studies are available for review at the Planning Services
Department and on our website at clarington.net/developmentproposals Questions? Please
contact Ruth Porras 905-623-3379, extension 2412, or by email at r orras clarin ton.net
vide
How . ProComments
Speak at the Public Meeting:
Date: Tuesday, February, 19, 2019
Time: 7:00 pm
Place: 40 Temperance Street, Bowmanville, ON L1 C 3A6
Council Chambers, Municipal Administrative Centre
Or write to the Planning Services Department to the attention of Ruth Porras.
File Number: ZBA 2018-0029
14
Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act
The personal information you submit will become part of the public record and may be released to the
public. Questions about the information we collect can be directed to the Clerk's Department at 905-
623-3379, extension 2102.
Accessibility
If you have accessibility needs and require alternate formats of this document or other
accommodations please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131.
Appeal Requirements
If you do not speak at the public meeting or send your comments or concerns to the Municipality of
Clarington before the by-law is passed: a) you will not be entitled to appeal the decision to the Local
Planning Appeal Tribunal; and b) you will not be able to participate at a hearing of an appeal before
the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal, unless in the opinion of the Tribunal, there are reasonable
grounds to do so.
Faye Langmaid, RRP, FCSLA
Acting Director, Planning Services Department
RP/aw
15
■
DURHAM
REGION
The Regional
Municipality
of Durham
Corporate Services
Department
Legislative Services
605 Rossland Rd. E.
Level t
PO Box 623
Whitby, ON l 1 N 6A3
Canada
905-668-7711
1-800-372-1102
Fax: 905-668-9963
durham.ca
Don Beaton, BCom, KRA,
Commissioner of Corporate
Services
February 1, 2019
The Honourable Steve Clark
Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing
17th Floor
777 Bay Street
Toronto ON M5G 2E5
Dear Minister Clark:
RE: Provincial Consultation on Increasing Housing Supply in
Ontario (2019 -COW -1)
Our File: D07
Council of the Region of Durham, at a meeting held on January 30, 2019,
adopted the following recommendations of the Committee of the Whole:
"A) That Report #2019 -COW -1 be endorsed and submitted to the
Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing as Durham Region's
response to Environmental Bill of Rights Registry #013-4190
regarding Increasing Housing Supply in Ontario, including the
following key comments and recommendations:
i) That the Province account for all factors impacting housing
affordability in their action plan, including but not limited to,
land costs, construction costs, housing demand by type, real
interest rates, availability of mortgage financing, speculation,
income levels, consumer confidence, government regulations
and broader economic conditions. A narrow focus on supply is
expected to produce only a limited set of options and potential
solutions;
ii) That the Province recognize that all levels of government need
to work in consultation together to develop solutions that
achieve housing affordability, while respecting the limited
revenue options for municipalities to recover the costs of
infrastructure;
If you require this information in an accessible format, please contact 1-800-372-1102 ext. 2097.
100% Post ns�nier
Page 2
iii) That the Province work with the federal government to
increase the total funding available for the development of
affordable rental units and take additional measures to provide
direct support for low to moderate income households to make
rental housing more affordable;
iv) That the Province respect the following when making decisions
that may impact municipal revenues:
a. The Development Charge framework is a cost recovery
mechanism for growth -related infrastructure;
b. That there are many factors that determine the cost of
housing and development charges represent a relatively
small component of overall housing costs;
C. Development charges are the primary fiscal tool available
to municipalities to fund growth -related infrastructure;
d. There should be flexibility for municipalities that wish to
use development charges as a tool to promote a certain
type or area of development in line with local
circumstances (for example, Durham Region Council
passed a new development charge by-law in June 2018
with modifications to promote the development of
secondary units, infill apartment units and social and
affordable housing),
e. Increases in development charges are driven by general
cost escalation, and new provincial legislation and
regulations;
f. Economic growth in the housing sector relies on municipal
investment in infrastructure required to service land. Any
discount or waiver of municipal development charges may
defer these municipal investments in infrastructure
needed to accommodate future development;
g. Municipal investment in infrastructure contributes to .
economic growth and job creation via the purchase of
material and utilization of contractors to improve the road,
water supply, sanitary sewerage, police, paramedic and
transit infrastructure;
If you require this information in an accessible format, please contact 1-800-372-1102 ext. 2097.
17
Page 3
h. Any discount or waiver of municipal development charges
would undermine the concept of "growth -pays -for -growth"
and would continue to impact housing affordability, as
one-time growth -related costs would be passed on to
existing and future homeowners and businesses through
higher property taxes and user rates on an ongoing basis
to fund the municipal revenue shortfall, as well as delay
servicing; and
There is no mechanism to ensure that any reduction in
development charges will be reflected in lower housing
prices;
v) That the Province maintain the Non -Resident Speculation Tax
and consider increasing the rate above the current 15% as
another way to further control increases in home prices in the
future if necessary;
vi) That the Province reaffirm its commitment to extend GO Rail
service to Bowmanville and build the critical infrastructure
along the Lakeshore East GO line, including new stations in
Oshawa, Courtice and Bowmanville;
vii) That the Province allow municipalities to have discretion to
determine what actions to take, including implementing
financial and planning tools to increase housing supply where it
is needed;
viii)That the Province consider further changes to the Building
Code to make it less onerous for developers to rough in
secondary units during the construction of new homes, without
compromising the safety of future residents;
ix) That the Province maintain rent control and vacancy decontrol
for all rental housing units, but review rent control guidelines
and caps to be more reflective of actual operating costs such
as maintenance, property taxes, heat and electricity rates;
x) That the Province increase resources at the Landlord and
Tenant Board (LTB) and make further process improvements,
including:
a. Allowing landlords to pursue unpaid utility arrears and
related costs at the LTB;
If you require this information in an accessible format, please contact 1-800-372-1102 ext. 2097.
Page 4
b. Encouraging mediation as a first step in LTB action;
C. Providing for dedicated mediation resources at the LTB to
support smaller landlords;
d. Requiring tenants to disclose to the landlord any issues
they intend to raise at rental arrears eviction hearings and
provide reasonable time for the landlord to address these
issues;
e. Allowing a stay of eviction only if all arrears have been
paid; and
Simplifying LTB forms so landlords and tenants can better
understand rights, responsibilities and LTB processes;
xi) That the Province consider the following when evaluating
innovative housing options:
a. Shared ownership - Government investment in shared
ownership will not increase the housing supply or
otherwise contribute to a social benefit. Shared
ownership has always been permissible;
b. Shared equity models, such as Trillium Housing, have a
second mortgage tied to appreciation which is repayable
when the property is sold, or when the mortgage is
refinanced;
c. Shared rental — roommate matching services should be
operated outside of landlord or municipal government
environment; and
d. Investing in the non-profit housing sector will provide
affordable units in perpetuity through funding of financial
incentives to offset development costs, regeneration
initiatives, and operational subsides to support reduced
rents; and
B) That a copy of Report #2019 -COW -1 of the Commissioners of
Planning and Economic Development, Finance and Social
Services be forwarded to Durham's area municipalities."
If you require this information in an accessible format, please contact 1-800-372-1102 ext. 2097.
19
Page 5
Please find enclosed a copy of Report #2019 -COW -1 of the
Commissioners of Planning and Economic Development, Finance and
Social Services.
Ralph Walton,
Regional Clerk/Director of Legislative Services
RW/np
Attach.
c: N. Cooper, Director of Legislative Services & Information/Clerk,
Town of Ajax
A. Greentree, Clerk, Municipality of Clarington
S. Cassel, City Clerk, City of Pickering
D. Leroux, Clerk, Township of Uxbridge
T. Gettinby, CAO/Clerk, Township of Brock
A. Brouwer, Clerk, City of Oshawa
J. P. Newman, Director of Corporate Services/Clerk, Township of
Scugog
C. Harris, Clerk, Town of Whitby
B. Bridgeman, Commissioner of Planning and Economic Development
N. Taylor, Commissioner of Finance
H. Drouin, Commissioner of Social Services
If you require this information in an accessible format, please contact 1-800-372-1102 ext. 2097.
20
If this information is required in an accessible format, please contact 1-800-372-1102 ext. 2564
The Regional Municipality of Durham
Report
To: Committee of the Whole
From: Commissioner of Planning and Economic Development, Commissioner of
Finance, and Commissioner of Social Services
Report: #2019 -COW -1
Date: January 16, 2019
Subject:
Provincial Consultation on Increasing Housing Supply in Ontario
Recommendations:
That the Committee of the Whole recommends to Regional Council:
A) That Report #2019 -COW -1 be endorsed and submitted to the Ministry of Municipal
Affairs and Housing as Durham Region's response to Environmental Bill of Rights
Registry #013-4190 regarding Increasing Housing Supply in Ontario, including the
following key comments and recommendations:
that the Province account for all factors impacting housing affordability
in their action plan, including but not limited to, land costs, construction
costs, housing demand by type, real interest rates, availability of
mortgage financing, speculation, income levels, consumer confidence,
government regulations and broader economic conditions. A narrow
focus on supply is expected to produce only a limited set of options and
potential solutions;
ii. that the Province recognize that all levels of government need to work in
consultation together to develop solutions that achieve housing
affordability, while respecting the limited revenue options for
municipalities to recover the costs of infrastructure;
iii. that the Province work with the federal government to increase the total
funding available for the development of affordable rental units and take
21
Report #2019 -COW -1 Page 2 of 24
additional measures to provide direct support for low to moderate
income households to make rental housing more affordable;
iv. that the Province respect the following when making decisions that may
impact municipal revenues:
a. the Development Charge framework is a cost recovery
mechanism for growth -related infrastructure;
b. That there are many factors that determine the cost of housing
and development charges represent a relatively small component
of overall housing costs;
C. development charges are the primary fiscal tool available to
municipalities to fund growth -related infrastructure;
d. there should be flexibility for municipalities that wish to use
development charges as a tool to promote a certain type or area
of development in line with local circumstances (for example,
Durham Region Council passed a new development charge by-
law in June 2018 with modifications to promote the development
of secondary units, infill apartment units and social and
affordable housing);
e. increases in development charges are driven by general cost
escalation, and new provincial legislation and regulations;
f. economic growth in the housing sector relies on municipal
investment in infrastructure required to service land. Any
discount or waiver of municipal development charges may defer
these municipal investments in infrastructure needed to
accommodate future development;
g. municipal investment in infrastructure contributes to economic
growth and job creation via the purchase of material and
utilization of contractors to improve the road, water supply,
sanitary sewerage, police, paramedic and transit infrastructure;
h. any discount or waiver of municipal development charges would
undermine the concept of "growth -pays -for -growth" and would
continue to impact housing affordability, as one-time growth -
related costs would be passed on to existing and future
homeowners and businesses through higher property taxes and
user rates on an ongoing basis to fund the municipal revenue
shortfall, as well as delay servicing; and
i. there is no mechanism to ensure that any reduction in
2'2
Report #2019 -COW -1 Page 3 of 24
development charges will be reflected in lower housing prices.
V. that the Province maintain the Non -Resident Speculation Tax and
consider increasing the rate above the current 15% as another way to
further control increases in home prices in the future if necessary;
vi. that the Province reaffirm its commitment to extend GO Rail service to
Bowmanville and build the critical infrastructure along the Lakeshore
East GO line, including new stations in Oshawa, Courtice and
Bowmanville;
vii. that the Province allow municipalities to have discretion to determine
what actions to take, including implementing financial and planning tools
to increase housing supply where it is needed;
viii. that the Province consider further changes to the Building Code to make
it less onerous for developers to rough in secondary units during the
construction of new homes, without compromising the safety of future
residents.
ix. that the Province maintain rent control and vacancy decontrol for all
rental housing units, but review rent control guidelines and caps to be
more reflective of actual operating costs such as maintenance, property
taxes, heat and electricity rates.
X. that the Province increase resources at the Landlord and Tenant Board
(LTB) and make further process improvements, including:
a. Allowing landlords to pursue unpaid utility arrears and related
costs at the LTB;
b. Encouraging mediation as a first step in LTB action;
C. Providing for dedicated mediation resources at the LTB to
support smaller landlords;
d. Requiring tenants to disclose to the landlord any issues they
intend to raise at rental arrears eviction hearings and provide
reasonable time for the landlord to address these issues;
e. Allowing a stay of eviction only if all arrears have been paid; and
f. Simplifying LTB forms so landlords and tenants can better
understand rights, responsibilities and LTB processes.
�W
Report #2019 -COW -1 Page 4 of 24
A. that the Province consider the following when evaluating innovative
housing options:
a. Shared ownership - Government investment in shared
ownership will not increase the housing supply or otherwise
contribute to a social benefit. Shared ownership has always
been permissible.
b. Shared equity models, such as Trillium Housing, have a second
mortgage tied to appreciation which is repayable when the
property is sold, or when the mortgage is refinanced.
C. Shared rental — roommate matching services should be operated
outside of landlord or municipal government environment.
d. Investing in the non-profit housing sector will provide affordable
units in perpetuity through funding of financial incentives to offset
development costs, regeneration initiatives, and operational
subsides to support reduced rents.
B) That a copy of Report #2019 -COW -1 be forwarded to Durham's area municipalities.
Report:
1. Purpose
1.1 The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH) has requested comments on
the Increasing Housing Supply in Ontario consultation document, detailed in the
Environmental Bill of Rights Environmental Registry posting (EBR Posting 013-
4190).
1.2 The commenting window for the consultation document closes on January 25, 2019.
To meet this deadline, staff recommends that Committee's report and
recommendations be forwarded to MMAH following Committee of the Whole on
January 16, 2019. A cover letter will indicate that the recommendations will not be
ratified by Regional Council until January 30, 2019 and that the Regional Clerk will
notify the Ministry of Council's decision at that time.
Report #2019 -COW -1 Page 5 of 24
1.3 The purpose of this report is to provide an overview of the provincial consultation
and the Region's comments on Increasing Housing Supply in Ontario (refer to
Attachment #1).
2. Background
2.1 The Increasing Housing Supply in Ontario consultation document states that strong
demand and limited supply in Ontario has resulted in rapidly rising housing costs
over the last few years. The Province proposes to develop an action plan to
address barriers to new housing supply, which it assumes will address cost issues
and in turn affordability.
2.2 Since the consultation document is principally concerned with housing supply, it
does not cover initiatives specifically related to community housing (e.g. social and
supportive housing), other factors that affect affordability, nor does it define
affordability. This will limit the effectiveness of the action plan in stimulating
affordable housing development as defined by the Provincial Policy Statement
(PPS) and as required through the Regional Official Plan and Growth Plan.
2.3 The terms `affordable' and `housing affordability' are used in a general sense in the
consultation document; whereas `affordable housing' is specifically defined in the
PPS for both ownership housing and rental housing. `Affordable housing' is defined
as the least expensive of 30 per cent of household income, or 10 per cent below
market price of a resale home (in the case ownership) or average market rent (in the
case of rental). The definition of `affordable housing' is often criticized for being too
narrow and not reflective of what many consider to be affordable.
2.4 The consultation document is organized into five broad themes as provided below:
1) Speed: It takes too long for development projects to get approved.
2) Mix: There are too many restrictions on what can be built to get the right mix
of housing where it is needed.
3) Cost: Development costs are too high because of high land prices and
government -imposed fees and charges.
4) Rent: It is too hard to be a landlord in Ontario, and tenants need to be
protected.
5) Innovation: Other concerns, opportunities and innovations to increase
29
Report #2019 -COW -1 Page 6 of 24
housing supply.
3. Background on the GTA Housing Market
The Ownership Market
3.1 Since the late 1990s, the ownership housing market in the GTA has been very
strong. After the region recovered from a housing boom of the late 1980s and
subsequent decline of the early 1990's, pent-up demand fueled residential
construction in the early 2000's. Mortgage amortizations were extended in 2007,
which made monthly payments less expensive for homebuyers, and further
stimulated demand.
3.2 Demand for housing was depressed for a short period due to the American financial
crisis in late 2008, but the response of central banks to drop interest rates to historic
levels made borrowing costs lower and home prices resumed their ascent by the
end of 2009.
3.3 Since 2008, home prices in the GTA have more than doubled. Tight housing supply
and strong demand have contributed to escalating home prices across Ontario, and
particularly in the GTA. Housing affordability has become a concern for federal,
provincial and municipal governments.
3.4 Supply is only one of many factors that contributed to deteriorating affordability in
the GTA housing market. Historically low interest rates, the extension of mortgage
amortizations, a relatively strong economy and market speculation (both foreign and
domestic) have increased the demand for housing.
3.5 Home prices in the GTA have risen significantly over the last decade. Durham has
historically offered lower priced housing options when compared to elsewhere in the
GTA, although elevated home prices are still a concern.
Report #2019 -COW -1
$2,500,000
$2,000,000
$1,s0o 000
$1,aoa,000
$500,ODD
Paae 7 of 24
Figure 1
New Single Detached Home Prices in the
GTA
o� 0IS'1 0�1 0� oti0 oyy ti oy'Y o' otic 0�h otic oy1
'L 'l ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti
Durham Toronto York Peel - Halton
3.6 Since 2008 when mortgage rates fell in response to the recession, resale home
prices in Durham have increased 115% (7.2% per year). Similarly, across the GTA
average prices have increased by 108% (6.9% per year) over that period.'
3.7 In January 2018, federally regulated mortgage rules were further tightened to require
that all mortgage applicants (including those who had a down payment of 20 per
cent or more) be required to pass a stress test to ensure that applicants could
handle their mortgage payments if rates increased. These and other measures were
introduced nationally to address increased debt -to -income ratios.
3.8 On December 6, 2018, Bank of Canada Governor Stephen Poloz affirmed that,
"Interest rates have been extraordinarily low for an extraordinarily long time. The
inevitable result has been strong demand for housing, rising house prices and an
accumulation of household debt."2
3.9 Market speculation has also increased demand for housing in the GTA in recent
years. During the first three months in 2017, investors made up over 16.5% of all
low-rise home purchases in the GTA. By comparison, the proportion of sales by
1 Toronto Real Estate Board - Market Watch, average annual resale home prices
2 Bank of Canada Year -End Economic Progress Report, December 6, 2018
Report #2019 -COW -1
Paae 8 of 24
investors was closer to 8% in 2012.3
8.0%
7.5
7.0
6.5
6.0
5.5
5.0
4.5
4.0
Figure 2
Interest Rates vs. GTA Resale Prices
o°N �I ��b �°1 o°I o°� o°A �� �I o�° PN o'�11' otic' oti" otic' oti° otic o��
, ti ti ti ti -v ti ti ti ti ti ti -V ti - ti ti ti
Average TREB Sales Price Avg 5 Yr Mortgage Rate
$900,000
$$00,000
$700,000
$600,000
$500,000
$400,000
$300,000
$200,000
$100,000
$0
3.10 In order to arrive at an effective set of solutions to address housing
affordability, it is recommended that the Province account for all factors
impacting housing affordability in their action plan. A narrow focus on supply
is expected to produce only a limited set of options and potential solutions.
3.11 At the peak of home price appreciation in 2017, the Province introduced a new 15%
Non -Resident Speculation Tax (NRST) to mitigate the influence of foreign
ownership in the Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH) housing market. Similar to
British Columbia, which introduced its own foreign buyers tax in 2016, Ontario's
housing market cooled off for a short period of time. Between April 2017 and April
2018, the average price of a resale home in the GTA decreased from $920,791 to
$804,584 (down 12.6%)4.
3.12 It is recommended that the Province maintain the Non -Resident Speculation
Tax and consider increasing the rate above the current 15% as another way to
further control increases in home prices in the future if necessary.
3.13 The ownership housing market appears to have stabilized over the last two years.
From November 2017 to November 2018, the average price of a resale home in the
3 Realosophy Special Report — A Sticky End, April 2018
4 Toronto Real Estate Board - Market Watch, average monthly resale home prices
;T .7
Report #2019 -COW -1 Page 9 of 24
GTA increased by 3.5% from $761,757 to $788,345.
The Rental Market
3.14 The development of private purpose-built rental accommodations has decreased
significantly across Ontario since the early 1970s, largely due to changes in tax
incentives for developers and the rise of ownership condominium development.
3.15 Federal funding for new social and affordable rental housing began to diminish in
the mid 1980s and was ended in 1993. Following an increase in affordable housing
construction in the mid 1980s to early 1990s, the Province ended its funding for new
construction in 1995.
3.16 In 1997, the Provincial government eliminated rent control for units built after 1991
in order to stimulate new rental housing development, but this was largely
ineffective.
3.17 There has been a decline in the construction of purpose-built rental housing in
Durham Region since the 1980s and very little rental housing has been developed
in the last two decades. Between 1997 and 2017 only 2.3% of housing completions
consisted of rental units.
Figure 3
Housing Completions in Durham
5,000
5,000
4,000
3,000 —
2,000
1,000
0
41 4ti �oo� �oa� pooh �o� ti�°� �oo� �a� �otio ti�tiy ti°tip �oti3 ti�ti� �otih ti�ti� ti�ti�
Ownership ■ Rental
3.18 The last five years has seen a slight increase in rental supply, particularly in luxury
rentals where rents are more than double the average market rent in the region.
Much of the new affordable units developed since the mid 2000s have been as a
result of federal -provincial investment programs.
3.19 About 36 per cent of renters in Durham are housed in the secondary market (e.g.
29
Report #2019 -COW -1 Page 10 of 24
second suites, private condominiums for rent), but there is limited information about
the suitability and affordability of these units.
3.20 Rental vacancy rates in Durham have declined significantly in the last ten years.
The vacancy rate has remained close to 2 per cent or lower since 2011 and monthly
rents are beginning to increase significantly.
4.5%
4.0%
3.5%
3.0%
2.5%
2.0%
1.5%
1.0%
Figure 4
Vacancy Rates vs. Average Monthly Rent
e I? e" 10 e" le e 4
1 1ol
ti 1°.1ti 1°ti3 Ife 16P 1601 10 'VOO
Average Monthly Rent {AMR} Vacancy Rate
$1,300
$1,200
$1,100
$1,000
$900
$800
$700
$600
$500
3.21 In 2017, the Province introduced the Fair Housing Plan that expanded rent control to
units built after 1991, funded a $125M development charge rebate program, and
reduced multi -residential tax rates for new developments. The development charge
rebate program was subsequently cancelled in late 2018, and the Province has
since announced its intention to eliminate rent control for new rental units built after
November 2018.
3.22 Most renters in Durham have low to moderate income, and there is a gap between
the rent they can afford to pay, and the rents required to support the cost of new
rental housing development/investment.
3.23 Since 2005, the Region of Durham has leveraged approximately $63 million in
federal and provincial funding for the development of affordable housing. This has
resulted in construction of 549 new affordable rental units, an average of 30.5 units
per year. Given that there are over 7,000 households on the Durham Access to
Social Housing waitlist for affordable housing, additional investment is needed from
30
Report #2019 -COW -1 Page 11 of 24
both the federal and provincial levels of government to create additional affordable
rental units.
3.24 It is recommended that the Province work with the federal government to
increase the total funding available for the development of affordable rental
units and take additional measures to provide direct support for low to
moderate income households to make rental housing more affordable.
4. Provincially Identified Barriers to New Housing Supply
4.1 The following are staff's comments on the five themes identified in the Province's
consultation document.
Theme 1 — Speed
4.2 The Province has requested input on how to streamline the development approval
process while balancing competing interests and protecting the public interest.
4.3 In 2016, the Region's Affordable and Seniors' Housing Task Force was established
to identify strategies that support the creation and maintenance of affordable rental
and seniors' housing as set out in the Region's Community Strategic Plan, the
Regional Official Plan, and At Home in Durham, the Durham Housing Plan 2014-
2024. On November 8, 2017, Regional Council endorsed 34 Recommendations
including 2 that address streamlining development approvals and improving process
certainty.
4.4 Consistent with Recommendation 2-3 of the Task Force Report, the Region is
engaged with municipal partners, to improve certainty and to advance affordable
rental and seniors' housing projects, where opportunities exist.
4.5 Recommendation 2-4 encourages local municipalities to improve process certainty.
The Region supports municipalities that are considering the adoption of a
Community Planning Permit System, and other opportunities for concurrent review
and approval of official plan amendments, zoning by-laws and site plans.
4.6 Municipalities are working with the development industry to balance the
requirements for development approvals and market supply through expediting
processes, implementing one window comment procedures, streamlining the
circulation process, and working with agency partners.
4.7 Municipalities will continue to implement electronic tracking of applications and
.31
Report #2019 -COW -1 Page 12 of 24
moving towards electronic plan submission so that real time information can be
provided.
4.8 Other examples of efforts in Durham that have made the development approvals
more efficient and provide greater process certainty include the following:
a. The Region has streamlined the site contamination review protocol to provide
flexibility in certain circumstances.
b. The Region has updated the Memorandum of Understanding with its five
conservation authorities to clarify roles and responsibilities.
c. Examples of current area municipal initiatives to expedite priority projects
includes the establishment of dedicated review teams to streamline the review
of major mixed-use projects as well as expedited site plan and building
approval processes for specific priority projects.
4.9 Many time-consuming development approvals matters are related to provincial
agencies such as; Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (Species at Risk
approvals, construction windows for tree removal and instream works), Ministry of
Environment Conservation and Parks (Environmental Assessment Part 2 order
requests, Environmental Compliance Approval for Storm Water Management
facilities), and Ministry of Transportation (submission response times).
4.10 It is recommended that the Province consider increasing provincial staff
budgets to expedite provincial reviews related to development approvals.
Furthermore, the Province should consider scoping provincial requirements
in such a way that will not have a negative effect on the natural environment.
5. Theme 2 — Mix
5.1 In the consultation document, the Province states that concerns have been raised
regarding restrictions on what can be built to get the right housing mix where it is
needed.
5.2 In Durham, there is a healthy supply of land that is suitably designated for
residential development. To conform with the Growth Plan, the Region expanded its
settlement area boundaries through ROPA 128 to accommodate 960,000 people.
At the end of 2018 the Region's population was approximately 690,000.
5.3 At the end of 2017 there were 375 active applications, for a total of 24,159 potential
32
Report #2019 -COW -1
Paae 13 of 24
units, that were either Draft Approved or "In Process" (application received but not
yet draft approved)5. Additionally, new residential units may be created through Site
Plan, Part Lot Control and building permits issued for accessory apartments.
5.4 Through the next decade and beyond, large areas of appropriately designated land
will be developed including: Seaton in Pickering; Brooklin in Whitby; Kedron and
Columbus in Oshawa; and Bowmanville East and West Urban Centres, and
Brookhill in Clarington. Additionally, the Region can expect significant growth
through intensification across its built-up areas.
5.5 The Growth Plan stipulates that 40 per cent of new units be developed within the
built-up area. In the last two years, approximately 50 per cent of all residential
building permits issued in Durham were for new units within the built-up area.
5.6 New housing forms are needed within existing neighbourhoods that support transit
while maintaining the qualities that make these communities desirable places to live.
This includes a balanced mix of more medium density forms of development such
as townhouses and low-rise apartments that can bring gentle density to established
communities. Secondary units can also add density to stable neighbourhoods.
5.7 Durham is making progress to support higher density, mixed communities in line
with the ROP and Growth Plan. In the last ten years, the overall housing mix has
shifted from 61 per cent single -detached homes and 2.8 per cent apartments to 34.4
per cent singles and 25.6 per cent apartments.
Figure 5
Building Permits for New Residential Units in Durham
Town Apt
30.3% 2.8%
Semi
5.9%
1
gle
61.0%
Town
36.4%
Semi
3.6%
Apt
6%
Singie
2017 34.4%
5.8 Over time there has been a trend toward fewer people per household in Durham.
5 Durham Region Annual Subdivision /Condominium Report for 2017 — #2018 -INFO -60
33
Report #2019 -COW -1 Page 14 of 24
Whereas in the past, most households required larger homes with multiple
bedrooms, now many households can be accommodated in smaller units within
higher density housing, in locations well -serviced by existing amenities.
3.60
3.40
a 3.20
a
3.00
2.80
Figure 6
Persons Per Household in Durham
Census Year
5.9 Smaller households can be accommodated in higher density residential
developments within centres and corridors well served by transit, which will
contribute to more housing supply and greater choice for residents.
5.10 In order to accommodate more growth opportunities through transit
supportive intensification in Durham, it is recommended that the Province
reaffirm its commitment to extend GO Rail service to Bowmanville and build
the critical infrastructure along the Lakeshore East GO line, including new
stations in Oshawa, Courtice and Bowmanville. The area around these
stations are "Major Transit Station Areas", where much of the Region's
growth to 2041 will be directed.
Affordable Rental Housi
5.11 A healthy housing mix should include a better balance between home ownership
and rental tenure. There is a need to create more purpose-built rental housing in
Durham Region, as demand is far outpacing supply. This is particularly true for
affordable rental housing as costs have increased well above inflation and income
growth over the past decade.
5.12 However, most renters in Durham lack the income to drive demand for new market
rental development. They face more affordability issues and have fewer housing
Report #2019 -COW -1 Page 15 of 24
options than homeowners.
a. On average, renters have less than half the income of owners.
b. Only about 51 % of renters in Durham can afford CMHC average market rent,
and about 63% are receiving Ontario Works or ODSP.
C. Rental affordability is particularly acute for single non -seniors, who are often
provisionally accommodated (i.e. in temporary accommodation or lacking
security of tenure) and are increasingly using emergency shelters.
5.13 The Region recently completed a survey for online rental listings in Durham. In total,
833 rental listings were surveyed across all eight local municipalities in Durham
through September and October of 2018. The results of the survey indicate that an
average one -bedroom apartment in Durham is listed for $1,518 — far more than the
posted CMHC average market rent of $1,153.
5.14 The gap between what the average renter can pay, and the cost of development
means developers need assistance to make new rental housing profitable (e.g.
through land, up -front capital costs for development, reduced municipal charges, or
through other incentives). However, these costs would need to be offset by other
funding sources, normally collected by municipal or upper tier levels of government
through property taxes or user rates.
5.15 In 2018, the Region approved a new development charge by-law with changes to
promote secondary units, infill apartment developments and social and affordable
housing development as follows:
a. A new service category in the Development Charge By-law was established to
fund capital costs for new social and affordable housing development owned
by the Region or by a third -party developer in receipt of federal or provincial
affordable housing funding. This fund will collect $387 for every single -
detached dwelling built in Durham.
b. The Development Charges Act provides exemptions of up to two additional
residential units within an existing residential unit; however, the new units must
be attached to the existing unit. This exemption from development charges
was broadened to include additional units that are not attached to the primary
residence but are on the same site so as to encourage innovative affordable
housing options as suggested in the Affordable and Seniors' Housing Task
Force recommendations.
.35
Report #2019 -COW -1
Paae 16 of 24
c. The definition of apartment was modified to include single storey dwelling units
within or above a garage or commercial use in the Region's new DC By-law in
order to address the affordability of infill apartment developments. The
previous definition of apartment restricted it to units which are in an apartment
building that consists of a minimum of three dwelling units with a common
entrance to grade. Therefore, a unit within or above a garage or commercial
use would not have previously qualified as an apartment and would be subject
to the medium density multiple development charge rate, which is more than
double the rate for a one bedroom or smaller apartment.
d. The collection of development charges for social and government assisted
affordable housing units which generally occurs at the time of building permit
issuance are deferred up to 18 months from the date of the first building
permit. The purpose of the deferral is to help alleviate cash flow challenges
these, often not-for-profit, developers have when constructing social or
government -assisted affordable housing projects and to align the payment of
development charges with timing of associated grant payments.
5.16 Affordable rental housing in the Region is largely made up of social housing and
some units that have received funding through provincial and federal funding
programs such as Affordable Housing Program and Investment in Affordable
Housing (AHP/IAH). There is no mention made in the consultation document on
reinstating the provincial role or enhanced funding to support the development of
affordable rental or social housing.
5.17 Other solutions to make housing more affordable for tenants are the Regional rent
supplement and a Canada Housing Benefit to be provided by the federal
government as part of the proposed National Housing Strategy. However, such
forms of financial housing assistance will have limited effect in markets like Durham,
which have a low rental supply and low vacancy rates.
5.18 It is recommended that the Province allow municipalities to have discretion to
determine what actions to take, including implementing financial and planning
tools to increase housing supply where it is needed. Any measures taken to
increase supply in the housing market should be designed to address local
needs. In Durham there is a significant need for affordable rental housing.
5.19 Although secondary units such as basement apartments and garden suites can be a
source of affordable rental housing, there is no guarantee of continued rental use or
rental affordability. Although the Province has regulated that secondary units in
existing and new residential units are exempt from development charges, further
Report #2019 -COW -1 Page 17 of 24
incentives for secondary units will not guarantee rental use or rental affordability.
5.20 It is recommended that the Province consider further changes to the Building
Code to make it less onerous for developers to rough in secondary units
during the construction of new homes, without compromising the safety of
future residents.
6. Theme 3 — Cost
6.1 There are many factors that influence the cost of housing. Land costs, construction
costs, housing demand by type, location, real interest rates, the availability of
mortgage financing, speculation, income levels, consumer confidence, government
policy, regulations and broader economic conditions influence housing prices. The
Province articulates in the consultation document that government -imposed costs,
such as development charges, make it more difficult and expensive to develop new
housing.
6.2 Development charges are a small component of overall housing costs but enable
significant investments in local communities and infrastructure. With respect to
government -imposed fees, there are few fiscal tools available to municipalities,
including user rates, municipal land transfer taxes and development charges.
Municipalities alone cannot bear brunt of development costs to incentivize
development. The Region's portion of development charges for a single -detached
home is $29,274, or 4% of an average new home6.
6.3 If municipalities discount or waive development charges, cost-effectiveness and
housing affordability would still be impacted, as follows:
a. One-time growth -related costs will increase the burden on all other property
taxpayers and user rate payers and will be passed on to existing and future
homeowners and businesses through higher taxes and user rates on an
ongoing basis to fund the shortfall.
b. There would be no guarantee that a discount in development charges would
be reflected in the form of lower housing prices, as it would be difficult to
ensure that developers pass any of these reductions on to the homeowner or
renter.
6 CMHC Housing Now — Greater Toronto Area, December 2018
37
Report #2019 -COW -1 Page 18 of 24
c. The lack of dedicated funding to finance growth capital servicing will require
growth capital projects to compete for funding and will likely delay servicing.
6.4 Any government investment in affordable rental housing should provide a social
benefit over the long-term. This is especially true of municipal investments given
that local governments have limited capacity to raise revenues to meet community
needs.
6.5 The following analysis provides the financial impact on Durham's user rates and
property taxes, if development charge funding were not available.
Debt
6.6 There is currently an estimated $65 million in outstanding water and sewer debt to
be repaid from development charges.
a. The debt servicing costs for sewers for 2019 is $13 million, to be repaid by
development charges. Without development charge funding, a sanitary sewer
user rate increase of approximately 13 per cent would be required to fund
these ongoing debt obligations.
b. The debt servicing costs for water is $0.5 million per year to be repaid by
development charges. This would require a 0.5% increase in water rates.
6.7 There is an additional $355 million in potential debenture financing over 2019 — 2028
forecasted to be repaid from development charges related to water supply and
sanitary sewerage services.
Roads Capital Program
6.8 Based on the last three years, development charge funding provides approximately
$35 million in annual funding towards the roads growth -related capital program.
Without this development charge funding, this would need to be financed through
property taxes. A property tax increase of nearly 6 per cent would be required to
fund this shortfall.
Water Supply and Sanitary Sewer Capital Program
6.9 Based on a recent 10 -year forecast, approximately $500 million in development
charge funding will be required to finance the water supply growth related capital
program and over $200 million for the sanitary sewerage capital program. Without
development charge funding, the growth -related capital programs would be re-
examined and reprioritized in accordance with the financial resources available.
PT .
Report #2019 -COW -1
Paae 19 of 24
6.10 Significant increases in water supply and sanitary sewerage user rates would be
required, likely resulting in the delay of growth -related capital projects required to
support future development (residential and non-residential).
6.11 Without development charge funding for growth related capital projects the supply of
serviced land would be restricted, which may drive up the cost of land for future
development.
Other Services
6.12 The Region also collects development charges for other services (Police,
Paramedics, Health and Social Services, Social Housing, Long -Term Care and
Regional Transit) to assist in financing the growth -related cost of facilities and
vehicles. The 2017 Transit DC Study and 2018 Regional DC Study identified
approximately $260 million in capital costs to be funded from development charges
over the next ten years. These costs would have to be financed through property
taxes and/or higher user fees (for transit) if development charge funding was not
available.
Front -Ending Agreements
6.13 The Region has executed two front -ending agreements with the Seaton Landowners
Group and the West Whitby Landowners Group, which are in effect currently. Under
these agreements, the landowners are committed to front-end a significant amount
of capital costs in return for development charge credits as they develop their lands.
The West Whitby landowners are front -ending an estimated $40 million, and the
Seaton landowners are expected to front-end an estimated $300 million for which
they will both be entitled to DC credits. There would be no mechanism for landowner
groups to recover their costs if development charges were no longer in force.
6.14 It is recommended that the Province respect the following when making
decisions that may impact municipal revenues:
a. The Development Charge framework is a cost recovery mechanism for
growth -related infrastructure;
b. That there are many factors that determine the cost of housing and
development charges represent a relatively small component of overall
housing costs;
c. Development charges are the primary fiscal tool available to
municipalities to fund growth -related infrastructure;
9E
Report #2019 -COW -1
Paae 20 of 24
d. There should be flexibility for municipalities that wish to use development
charges as a tool to promote a certain type or area of development in line
with local circumstances (for example, Durham Region Council passed a
new development charge by-law in June 2018 with modifications to
promote the development of secondary units, infill apartment units and
social and affordable housing);
e. Increases in development charges are driven by general cost escalation,
and new provincial legislation and regulations;
f. Economic growth in the housing sector relies on municipal investment in
infrastructure required to service land. Any discount or waiver of
municipal development charges may defer these municipal investments
in infrastructure needed to accommodate future development;
g. Municipal investment in infrastructure contributes to economic growth
and job creation via the purchase of material and utilization of
contractors to improve the road, water supply, sanitary sewerage, police,
paramedic and transit infrastructure;
h. Any discount or waiver of municipal development charges would
undermine the concept of "growth -pays -for -growth" and would continue
to impact housing affordability, as one-time growth -related costs would
be passed on to existing and future homeowners and businesses through
higher property taxes and user rates on an ongoing basis to fund the
municipal revenue shortfall, as well as delay servicing; and
L There is no mechanism to ensure that any reduction in development
charges will be reflected in lower housing prices.
7. Theme 4 — Rent
7.1 The consultation document indicates that it is difficult for tenants to find rental
housing that is affordable and meets their needs. It states that many landlords find
that the Residential Tenancies Act (RTA) make it challenging to be a landlord and
cites this as a barrier to new housing supply.
7.2 In 1997, rent control was eliminated for units built after 1991 to increase the rental
housing supply. This exemption did not result in increased rental development. In
Durham, rental development has been in steady decline since the 1980s.
SE
Report #2019 -COW -1
Figure 7
Rental Housing Construction
g,000
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000 , ■
0
y�P� y��1 yg1'ti y��ti y��ti �q°ti �oyti
Paae 21 of 24
7.3 In 2017, the Province extended rent control to post -1991 development projects. At
that time, almost 80% of the current rental housing stock in Durham was already
subject to rent controls (consistent with Ontario at 80%).
7.4 The government is now proposing to exempt rental units built after November 2018,
similar circumstances to the 1997 changes that did not result in increased
development.
7.5 Rent control provides protection against economic evictions and unreasonable rent
increases aimed at removing tenants without due process. There is a need to
balance this with the ability of landlords to raise enough revenue to support
maintenance and repair.
7.6 Landlords need to be able to increase revenue (rents) in line with increased
operating costs. The current alignment of rent control guidelines with the Consumer
Price Index (CPI) is too broad to be effective.
7.7 Vacancy decontrol (the ability to increase rents at turnover) should be maintained to
support capital improvements and rental housing stock regeneration.
7.8 It is recommended that the Province maintain rent control and vacancy
decontrol for all rental housing units, but review rent control guidelines and
caps to be more reflective of actual operating costs such as maintenance,
property taxes, heat and electricity rates.
7.9 The Landlord and Tenant Board (LTB) was introduced in 1997 to adjudicate landlord
and tenant disputes. The LTB is currently under -resourced, resulting in long delays.
Report #2019 -COW -1 Page 22 of 24
A better resourced LTB would improve the system for both landlords and tenants.
7.10 It is recommended that the Province increase resources at the LTB and make
further process improvements, including:
a. Allowing landlords to pursue unpaid utility arrears and related costs at
the LTB;
b. Encouraging mediation as a first step in LTB action;
c. Providing for dedicated mediation resources at the LTB to support
smaller landlords;
d. Requiring tenants to disclose to the landlord any issues they intend to
raise at rental arrears eviction hearings and provide reasonable time for
the landlord to address these issues;
e. Allowing a stay of eviction only if all arrears have been paid;
f. Simplifying LTB forms so landlords and tenants can better understand
rights, responsibilities and LTB processes.
8. Theme 5 — Innovation
8.1 The consultation document invites creative ideas to make better use of existing
homes, buildings and neighbourhoods to increase the supply of housing.
8.2 The Affordable and Seniors' Housing Task Force Recommendation 2.11
encourages innovative forms of housing, including pocket housing, garden suites,
secondary units, as well as innovative forms of tenure, including co -ownership and
life -lease housing.
8.3 It is recommended that the Province consider the following when evaluating
innovative housing options:
a. Shared ownership - Government investment in shared ownership will not
increase the housing supply or otherwise contribute to a social benefit.
Shared ownership has always been permissible.
b. Shared equity models, such as Trillium Housing, have a second mortgage
tied to appreciation which is repayable when the property is sold, or when
the mortgage is refinanced.
C. Shared rental — roommate matching services should be operated outside
of landlord or municipal government environment.
d. Investing in the non-profit housing sector will provide affordable units in
SE
Report #2019 -COW -1 Page 23 of 24
perpetuity through funding of financial incentives to offset development
costs, regeneration initiatives, and operational subsides to support
reduced rents.
9. Conclusion
9.1 The Province has issued a consultation document to inform the development of an
action plan to increase housing supply and make housing more affordable in
Ontario.
9.2 The consultation document is principally concerned with increasing housing supply
to address affordability. It addresses development approvals, housing supply,
development costs, landlord and tenant rights, and innovative housing.
9.3 Supply is not the only factor impacting housing affordability. As noted in this report,
a myriad of factors, including interest rates, economic conditions and market
speculation can affect housing prices and demand. The Province should take
additional measures to address demand and provide further support for low to
moderate income households to make housing more affordable.
9.4 Any measures taken to increase supply should address local housing needs.
Furthermore, municipalities should determine if any changes are needed to increase
housing supply in their communities.
9.5 Municipalities should not be expected to shoulder the cost of increased housing
supply, and any government investment should ensure a social benefit (e.g.
affordability) over the long term.
9.6 Regional staff will be fully engaged in any provincially -led housing initiatives,
including all opportunities to provide input through the various stages of provincial
consultation. Staff will report back to Committee and Council as consultations and
implementation of provincial initiatives progress.
9.7 This report was reviewed by Works Department staff.
10. Attachments
Attachment #1: Increasing Housing Supply in Ontario Consultation Document
EP
Report #2019 -COW -1
Respectfully submitted,
Paae 24 of 24
Original signed by
Nancy Taylor, BBA, CPA, CA
Commissioner of Finance and Treasurer
Original signed by
Dr. Hugh Drouin
Commissioner of Social Services
Original signed by
Brian Bridgeman, MCIP, RPP
Commissioner of Planning and
Economic Development
Recommended for Presentation to Committee
Original signed by
Elaine C. Baxter-Trahair
Chief Administrative Officer
SE
Attachment 1
INCREASING
HOUSING
SUPPLY IN
ONTARIO
r�
Ontario
Find out more at:
www.ontario.ca/housingsupply
45
About this consultation
A strong demand for housing and limited supply in Ontario has resulted in rapidly
rising housing costs over the last few years. in high-growth urban areas, high prices
and rents have made it too hard for people to afford the housing they need. High
prices also affect other parts of Ontario, including northern and rural communities,
where a lack of supply has made ownership more difficult and quality rental housing
hard to find.
To help increase the supply of housing
in Ontario, the government is
developing a Housing Supply Action
Plan that will address the barriers
getting in the way of new ownership and
rental housing.
To inform the Action Plan, the
government wants to hear the views of
all Ontarians on how to expand the
housing supply in Ontario. Your input
will provide important information about
how we can make it easier for
Ontarians to find an affordable place to
call home.
Share your ideas by visiting ontario.calhousingsuppi or emailing
housingsuppl Ca.ontario.ca by January 25, 2079.
MONO
rte.
��" Ontario
Introduction
Housing is one of the largest cost burdens for households in Ontario, and an
imbalance between strong demand for housing and limited supply means
these costs have risen dramatically over the last few years. Across Ontario —
in both urban and rural communities — high prices and rents have made it hard
for people to afford the
housing they need.
Creating more housing, of the
types and sizes people need,
will help make home
ownership and renting more
affordable and give people
more choice.
The government is
developing a Housing Supply
Action Plan to address the
barriers to creating more
housing. It will include
measures that the Province
can take to increase the
supply of new ownership and
rental housing in Ontario. The
Housing Supply Action Plan will support the government's commitment to
reduce red tape and make it easier to live and do business in Ontario.
This consultation does not cover initiatives specifically related to community
housing (e.g., social and supportive housing). However, the barriers and
potential solutions being explored may have a positive impact on community
housing providers, such as by either making it easier to develop new housing,
or by easing some of the pressure on waitlists.
Increasing Housing Supply in Ontario
ontario.calhousingsupply
47
Barriers to new housing supply
The government has heard from many individuals and groups that it has become too
complicated and expensive to build new housing in Ontario. There are five broad
themes:
1. Speed: It takes too long for development projects to get approved.
To get a new home from the drawing board to the market, a number of different
planning, building and site-specific approvals and permits are needed. These may
be required by municipalities, provincial ministries, agencies, utilities, and
occasionally federal authorities.
A single housing project may require approvals from many of these entities.
Duplication, lack of coordination and delays add burden to the development
process and increase costs for builders and homebuyers. Potential appeals of
these decisions can add further delays and uncertainty.
The various regulatory requirements and approvals were established to serve
specific public interests, policy objectives or government goals. For example, rules
and processes exist to ensure the health and safety of residents, protect
environmentally and culturally sensitive areas, and support economic development
and a vibrant agricultural sector. Efforts to streamline these requirements need to
balance these multiple goals.
How can we streamline development approval processes, while balancing
competing interests and the broader public interest?
Increasing Housing Supply in Ontario
ontario.calhousingsupply
2. Mix: There are too many restrictions on what can be built to get the
right mix of housing where it is needed.
Many people have pointed out that the mix of housing types being built does not
fully reflect what people are looking for, and certain types of housing are not being
built where demand is greatest. For example, the government has heard that not
enough housing appropriate for families and seniors wishing to downsize is being
built near transit, schools, workplaces and amenities.
Market conditions, provincial policies and plans, local planning priorities, and
municipal zoning by-laws can all affect the type and location of housing.
Promoting "gentle" density and a mix of housing, and creative re -use of heritage
properties and building design ideas can result in more housing, as well as
economic and environmental benefits.
The character of some existing neighbourhoods will begin to change as new types
of housing are built. The government has heard that plans to make more room for
housing also need to respect the existing qualities of these neighbourhoods.
In recent years, there has been increasing public discussion about the lack of "missing middle"
housing. This typically includes low -to -mid -rises, as well as ground -related housing types such as
row/townhouses and semi-detached homes, located close to the services and amenities required for
daily living (e.g., workplaces, schools and transit). "Missing middle" housing has also been used to
refer to family -sized condo and apartment units and housing that is affordable to middle-income
households, including non -luxury rental housing.
MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING
IMIM
ETALKEO T(WJ4HMSE TOWN OLCE
OVFIEX- SEM 0ETACHEO OETAQkEO
Figure 1 - Examples of different types of homes. `Missing Middle' housing can come in the form of mid -rise buildings,
stacked townhouses, townhouses, and semi-detached houses, and can be for sale or for rent.
Increasing Housing Supply in Ontario
ontario.calhousingsupply
• How can we make the planning and development system more effective to
build the kind of housing people want, and can afford, in the right places with
the right supports (e.g., schools, transit and other amenities)?
• How can we bring new types of housing to existing neighbourhoods while
maintaining the qualities that make these communities desirable places to live?
How can we balance the need for more housing with the need for employment
and industrial lands?
3. Cost: Development costs are too high because of high land prices and
government -imposed fees and
charges.
New housing development requires
access to serviced land (land that
has critical infrastructure like water
and sewer lines in place). Some
people have raised concerns that
land prices are driven up because
there is a lack of serviced land
available for development in
locations where people want to live.
There have also been debates
about how best to pay for that
servicing and how to ensure it is
done in the most cost-effective
manner.
Under the Development Charges Act, 1997,
municipalities are permitted to levy certain charges
on new developments, including housing and
commercial developments. These funds are
designed to assist municipalities in paying a portion
of the costs for growth related services, such as
roads, water services, and police and fire services.
Under the Education Act, school boards may also
levy education development charges. Education
development charges are primarily levied by school
boards that cannot accommodate new students in
their existing schools and may only be used to
purchase and prepare land for future school sites.
Government -imposed costs also make it more difficult and expensive to develop
new housing. Examples include municipal and education development charges,
planning and building approval fees and federal and provincial taxes.
Rental housing developers have noted that the challenges created by high land
prices and government -imposed costs make some of their projects financially
unfeasible due to the inability to attract investment capital.
Many of the investments in public infrastructure (e.g., sewer and water services,
roads, etc.) needed to support housing development are funded by these fees and
charges. There is a need to balance efforts to lower the costs of development with
building and maintaining vital public infrastructure.
aG5 Increasing Housing Supply in Ontario
ontario.calhousingsupply
ac
• How can we lower the cost of developing new housing while ensuring that
funds are available for growth -related infrastructure (e.g., water and sewer
systems, fire and police services, schools, roads and transit)?
• How can we make sure that serviced land is available in the right places for
housing?
4. Rent: It is too hard to be a landlord in Ontario, and tenants need to be
protected.
It is hard for Ontarlans to find rental
housing that is affordable and meets
their needs. In many urban areas,
vacancy rates have fallen to historic
lows. In northern and rural communities,
a long-term shortage of suitable rental
units has made it difficult for renters to
find a home in their communities.
A rental unit can be an apartment, a
house, a condominium unit, a unit in a
retirement or care home, or a home in a
mobile home park or land lease
community.
The Landlord and Tenant Board (LTB) is an
adjudicative tribunal that is accountable to
Ontario's Ministry of the Attorney General, and
makes decisions independent of government.
The LTB adjudicates disputes and also
provides information to landlords and tenants
about their rights and responsibilities under the
Residential Tenancies Act, 2006.
Over the past few years, wait times for
hearings and orders have increased at the
LTB.
In Ontario, rental housing is regulated by the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006. This
Act establishes rules for landlords and tenants, including rent increase rules. It also
establishes the Landlord and Tenant Board, which helps landlords and tenants
resolve disputes.
Many small landlords say the Act makes it difficult to be a landlord. On the other
hand, tenants have said they need stronger protections against unlawful evictions
and poorly maintained rental housing.
Second units, such as basement apartments, are an important part of the rental
market and can make better use of existing homes. Yet creating new legal second
units is difficult because of government requirements, such as the Building Code
and local bylaws/restrictions.
Increasing Housing Supply in Ontario
ontario,ca/housingsupply
91
How can we make the current system work better for landlords?
What additional protections should be provided for tenants?
• How do we encourage homeowners to create legal second units and new
rental supply?
5. Innovation: Other concerns, opportunities and innovations to
increase housing supply.
The government is interested in other creative ideas to help increase the supply of
housing. Some examples include:
• Innovative forms of homeownership
• State-of-the-art building designs and materials.
• Creative building design ideas to improve the quality of the community.
The government is also interested in hearing your input about other issues that
people face when trying to find or afford a home, including issues that new home
buyers face.
• How do we encourage innovation in the building industry while maintaining
high standards of safety and efficiency?
• Are there any innovative forms of homeownership (e.g., shared ownership or
rent -to -own models) that you feel could help make housing more attainable?
• Do you have any creative ideas to make better use of existing homes,
buildings and neighbourhoods to increase the supply of housing?
• What other creative solutions could help increase the supply of housing?
• What type of protections would help new home buyers?
ml�
.52
Increasing Housing Supply in Ontario
ontario.calhousingsupply
Your privacy matters
Your privacy is important to us. By participating in this consultation through the online
survey or sending your submission, you may be sharing some personal information with
the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Any personal information collected will be
handled according to our Privacy Statement and used only for research and housing
policy development purposes. This information is collected pursuant to section 4 of the
Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing Act. Questions about the collection of
personal information may be directed to:
Director, Market Housing Branch
Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing
777 Bay Street, 14th Floor
Toronto, Ontario M5G 2E5
Phone: 416-585-6872
Email: housingsupply{@_ontario.ca
r�
8nIncreasing Housing Supply in Ontario }
ontario.calhousingsupply �r Ontario
PNI
Clarftwn
Planning Services
Public Meeting Report
If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the Accessibility
Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131.
Report To: Planning and Development Committee
Date of Meeting: February 19, 2019
Report Number: PSD -011-19 Resolution:
File Number: ZBA2018-0029 By-law Number:
Report Subject: An application by 2411 Baseline Limited to amend the Zoning By-law
to permit the development of a commercial property for a variety of
uses
Recommendations:
That Report PSD -011-19 be received;
2. That the proposed application for Zoning By-law Amendment ZBA 2018-0029 continue
to be processed including the preparation of a subsequent recommendation report;
3. That staff consider the public comments received in the further processing of the Zoning
By-law Amendment application submitted by 2411 Baseline Limited to permit the
commercial development; and
4. That all interested parties listed in Report PSD -011-19 and any delegations be advised
of Council's decision by the Department.
54
Municipality of Clarington
Report PSD -011-19
Report Overview
Page 2
The Municipality is seeking public input on a proposed commercial development at 2411 and
2415 Baseline Road. The owner, 2411 Baseline Limited, has submitted an application for
rezoning to allow the development, which comprises 3,643 square metres of commercial
floor area for uses including restaurants, retail, offices and a daycare. The application also
seeks reduced parking standards for this development.
The purpose of this report is to provide information on the proposal and receive public
comments at the Public Meeting. The proposed Zoning By-law amendment would replace
the "Holding — Light Industrial ((H)M1) Zone" and "Environmental Protection (EP Zone" with
an appropriate zone to permit the development.
1. Application Details
1.1 Owner/Applicant
1.2 Agent:
1.3 Proposal:
1.4 Area:
1.5 Location:
1.6 Roll Numbers:
1.7 Within Built Boundary
2. Background
2411 Baseline Limited
D.G. Biddle & Associates Limited
To permit a commercial development comprising:
x 23 commercial units (4 restaurant units, 10 retail units, 9
office units)
x 1 day care
x 126 parking spaces
1.43 ha
2411 and 2415 Baseline Road, Bowmanville
181701002007220 and 181701002007100
Yes
2.1 On November 19, 2018, the Municipality received a Zoning By-law amendment
application from 2411 Baseline Limited. The application was deemed complete on
November 21, 2018.
2.2 The Municipality received the following reports in support of the application:
x Planning Justification Report
x Traffic Impact Study
x Functional Servicing and Storm Water Management Report
x Phase One and Two Environment Site Assessment
55
Municipality of Clarington Page 3
Resort PSD -011-19
x Environmental Impact Study
x Stage One and Two Archeological Report
3. Land Characteristics and Surrounding Uses
3.1 The subject site (Figure 1) is generally flat, with a gentle slope from Baseline Road south
and east to the stormwater management pond and Westside Creek. There is a detached
dwelling at 2415 Baseline Road (Figures 2 and 3), which would be demolished to allow
the development. A row of trees are located on the south and east sides of 2415 Baseline
Road.
[=Subject Property
Bottrell Street ,? J
n o,
5
m a Roser Crescent
S � i• a �
Proposed
0 a+
N
1 Storey
mMBuilding
Baseline Road
Baseline Road
Laneway �
• and �
Parking �
Proposed
2 Storey 5pice_r_Squ_are
Building
\ a- W ...
R
34
I C,
ZBA 2031$-0029 }_ ��►"-- ore
Figure 1: The subject site and the surrounding area
56
Municipality of Clarington
Resort PSD -011-19
3.2 The surrounding uses are as follows:
Page 4
North - Municipal open space across Baseline Road and single family homes.
South - Storm water management pond
East - Residential property and Westside Creek.
West - Storm water management pond and the Clarington Fields Facility
Figure 2: View of subject site looking southeast
Figure 3: View of 2411 Baseline Road looking southwest
57
Municipality of Clarington Page 5
Resort PSD -011-19
4. Provincial Policy
Provincial Policy Statement (2014)
4.1 The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) identifies settlement areas such as Bowmanville to
be the focus of growth. Within settlement areas, the PPS states that planning authorities
shall promote the development of vacant or underutilized sites where feasible,
considering the availability of existing infrastructure. The PPS encourages municipalities
to promote long-term economic prosperity and support opportunities for economic
development. The PPS requires sensitive land uses such as day cares to ensure they are
appropriated designed, buffered and/or separated from major facilities.
Provincial Growth Plan (2017)
4.2 The Provincial Growth Plan directs development to settlement areas and promotes
development within the Built Boundary, which the subject site is. The Growth Plan
encourages the development of underutilized land and efficient use of existing services
and infrastructure in built-up areas. The Growth Plan directs retail and office uses to
locations that support active transportation and have existing or planned transit. The
proposed commercial development proposes development of underutilized and vacant
land where the necessary infrastructure for active transportation and transit are already
available.
5. Official Plans
Durham Region Official Plan
5.1 The subject site is located within the "Living Area" designation of the Durham Official
Plan. Limited office development and limited retailing of goods and services is permitted
in this designation.
Clarington Official Plan
5.2 The Clarington Official Plan (COP) designates the subject lands as Gateway Commercial
and Environmental Protection Area. Gateway Commercial areas are intended to serve
the specialized needs of residents and attract visitors to the Municipality.
Permitted uses can include:
x Retail and service commercial uses including hotels, warehouse -style stores
(excluding department stores and grocery stores) and home furnishing uses
x Financial institutions
x Business, professional and medical offices
x Restaurants
Municipality of Clarington Page 6
Resort PSD -011-19
x Limited small retail and personal services
• Community facilities.
5.3 Environmental Protection Areas include the natural heritage and hydrologically sensitive
features that comprise the natural heritage system as well as those lands within the
regulatory flood plain of a watercourse. The Westside Creek watercourse, its floodplain
and associated natural heritage system is located immediately east of this property.
Mitigations measures may be incorporated into a development to protect adjacent
Environmental Protections Areas from adverse impacts. Recommended measures come
from studies completed to support a development application.
6. Zoning By-law
6.1 The subject lands are zones as follows:
x 2411 Baseline Road: "Holding - Light Industrial ((H)M1) Zone" and "Environmental
Protection (EP) Zone"
2415 Baseline Road: "Environmental Protection (EP) Zone"
6.2 A zoning by-law amendment is required to bring into conformity the "Holding - Light
Industrial ((H)M1) Zone" exception of the zoning by-law with the Gateway Commercial
designation and to permit the proposed development and refine the location of the
"Environmental Protection (EP) Zone".
7. Summary of Background Studies
The applicant submitted the following studies in support of the rezoning application:
Planning Justification Report (October, 2018)
7.1 The Planning Justification Report identifies the site as being suitable for the proposed
commercial development. Some of the potential benefits identified by the applicant
include:
x Development of an underutilized site within the existing built-up area, consistent with
the Municipality's objectives for growth;
x Use of existing municipal services;
x Compatible with and complementary to nearby recreational and residential uses; and,
Supports both active and public transportation to and from the site by locating directly
across the road from a bus stop, bike lanes on Baseline Road and direct connection to
existing sidewalk and trail network to the north and west.
59
Municipality of Clarington
Resort PSD -011-19
Page 7
7.2 The Planning Justification Report provides a broad overview of the development proposal
and its general conformity with the Clarington Official Plan. However, more information is
still required to justify the requested Zoning By-law amendments. For example, the
Planning Justification Report has not yet provided a rationale for reduced parking
requirements, building location and location of a sensitive land use (e.g. daycare) from a
major facility.
Traffic Impact Study (October, 2018)
7.3 The Traffic Impact Study ("TIS") recommends:
x Monitoring traffic patterns at the Baseline Road and Green Road intersection to adjust
traffic signal timing to accommodate peak hour directional traffic volumes.
x A westbound left turn lane on Baseline Road at the site entrance across from
Westside Drive.
x Monitoring traffic patterns at the site entrance at West Side Drive and Baseline Road
for improvements which may be required to mitigate the length of delay for outbound
turning vehicles onto Baseline Road from the site and Westside Drive.
Planning for future signalization of the West Side Drive/Baseline Road and the site
entrance should be built into the design of the entrance driveway.
7.4 The Functional Servicing Report identifies how the development can be serviced. The
report has the follow recommendations:
x Sanitary sewer and watermain on Baseline Road will be used to service the
development.
x On-site storm sewers to be sized as per Clarington standards.
The proposed stormwater quantity control ensures that post -development peak flow
does not exceed pre -development peak flow from the site to Westside Creek.
Stormwater quality control is proposed to be via use of an oil/grit separator.
Phase One and Two Environmental Site Assessment (August, 2012)
7.5 The Phase One Environmental Site Assessment (`ESA") identified risk of contamination
from the historical use of the site as an orchard where certain pesticides could have been
used. The consultant conducted a Phase Two ESA on August 22, 2012, as
recommended in the Phase One ESA report. Shallow soil samples were collected and
analyzed for arsenic and lead contamination. Concentrations were found to be below the
Ontario threshold standard. Based on these findings, the consultant did not recommend
any additional testing.
Municipality of Clarington Page 8
Resort PSD -011-19
Environmental Impact Study (September, 2018)
7.6 The Environmental Impact Study ("EIS") states that there will be no net loss of natural
heritage features as a result of the development. The study report provides
recommendations to address potential impacts to adjacent natural heritage features
and/or their functions during the site preparation, construction and post -construction
periods. Recommended mitigation measures will be implemented through Site Plan
Approval for the proposed development.
Stage One and Two Archeological Report (October, 2018)
7.7 The Stage One research indicated high archaeological potential at the site due to
proximity to water sources, archaeological sites, and historic roadways. Stage Two
testing on this property therefore took place at a high potential (5 meter) interval. This
assessment did not result in the discovery of any material of cultural significance and no
further assessment is required.
8. Public Notice and Submissions
8.1 Public notice was given by mail to each landowner within 120 metres of the subject site
and one notice sign was installed on the site facing Baseline Road (Figure 4). Public
notice was also posted on the Clarington website and published in the Planning Services
Department e -update newsletter.
DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL
aVF�a[�m
5%G LO(=bmm�.d
I ewm.miu. erne
s
7
Figure 4: Public Notice sign
61
Municipality of Clarington
Resort PSD -011-19
Page 9
8.2 As of the writing of this report, one resident inquired about the possibility of traffic lights at
the Baseline Road and West Side Drive intersection if this project is built. This will be
reviewed as part of the Traffic Impact Study.
9. Agency Comment
Regional Municipality of Durham
9.1 The Durham Planning Department state the proposed use is consistent with Provincial
planning policies and conforms to the Durham Official Plan.
9.2 The Region has reviewed the Stage One and Two Archaeological Report, which states
that no further site assessment is required. The applicant must submit the Report to the
Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sports (MTCS) for their clearance letter, which must be
forwarded to the Region once received. No soil disturbance can take place until the
clearance letter is issued by MTCS.
9.3 The Region has reviewed the Phase One and Two ESA reports submitted in support of
the application. The Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP) Brownfield
Regulation and the Region of Durham Council adopted Site Contamination Protocol,
require that all ESA reports be Record of Site Condition (RSC) compliant and are valid for
up to 18 months from completion. Since the report was prepared in 2012 and is not RSC
compliant, the Region requires a current Phase One ESA that is RCS compliant to be
completed. An RSC compliant Phase Two ESA may be required depending on the
results of the Phase One ESA.
9.4 A Noise Impact Study is required to determine impact from traffic noise on Baseline Road
to the proposed daycare, which is identified as a noise -sensitive use by the MECP.
Attenuation measures and warning clauses for the development may be required.
9.5 The Durham Works Department states that water supply and sanitary sewer are available
at the site. Some changes to the site servicing plan are required in order to satisfy the
Works Department. Existing water and sewer connections at 2415 Baseline Road must
be shown on the plan to be disconnected and abandoned.
9.6 Based on the Region's right -turn lane guidance for a 2 -lane Type A arterial road
(Baselined Road), the Region would expect an eastbound right -turn taper lane to be
provided west of the site entrance. The TIS provides no analysis of the need for auxiliary
turn lanes at Baseline Road and the site access / West Side Drive intersection. The
Region would also expect the need for a westbound left -turn lane to be discussed in the
TIS.
62
Municipality of Clarington Page 10
Resort PSD -011-19
9.7 Although it may not be warranted, the Region strongly recommends that a westbound left -
turn lane be provided as part of this development. This would enable westbound and
eastbound left -turns to be centred rather than off -set at the Westside Drive intersection.
The taper length and deceleration lane should be planned based on the design speed of
Baseline Road.
9.8 While the TIS concludes that signalization of Baseline Road and West Side Drive would
not be warranted within the 5 -year horizon, it may be prudent to plan for future
signalization at the time of development. Durham Works and Transit recommend that
the intersection of Westside Drive and Baseline Road include a marked pedestrian
crosswalk connecting the development to the bus stop across Baseline Road.
Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority
9.9 CLOCA has reviewed the application at a high level and has no objection in principle to
the proposed rezoning, however detailed comments pertaining to the Stormwater
Management Report and the EIS are in progress. The detailed comments will address
whether the proposed limits of development are acceptable, which will establish the
Environmental Protection Zone boundary between the development and the most
extensive feature and its associated setback or buffer.
10. Departmental Comments
Clarington Engineering Services Department
10.1 The Engineering Services Department has reviewed the application and object to the
proposal as submitted. They do not endorse a zoning change to allow 126 parking spaces
instead of the required 145 parking spaces. A lack of on-site parking will lead to parking
offsite in the vicinity of the development. Parking on Baseline Road is not permitted.
Some on -street parking is available on West Side Drive adjacent to West Side Park,
however this would require pedestrians to cross Baseline Road.
10.2 The Department has reviewed the TIS. The traffic count used for the intersection of West
Side Drive and Baseline Road was completed adjacent to a holiday and is not accepted
as a reliable data source. The TIS indicates that a traffic signalization warrant will be
realized for the intersection of Baseline Road and West Side Drive in the near future post
development, however specific timing must be provided. The study must make
recommendations on all intersection improvements or modifications required to install
traffic signals at this intersection. Further, the proposed main entrance driveway on the
site is too short in length to be compatible with either a signalized intersection or an
unsignalized intersection. The TIS must be amended to make a specific recommendation
regarding the minimum length for the main entrance driveway to ensure compatibility with
a signalized intersection. Further discussion regarding all aspects of the TIS is required
between the Municipality and the applicant.
63
Municipality of Clarington Page 11
Report PSD -011-19
10.3 The Engineering Services Department has reviewed the Grading Plan, Servicing Plan
and Stormwater Management Report in support of this application. The proposed
retaining wall located along the east boundary of the site is undesirable. The wall is
located on the higher side of the property line and perpetual maintenance will be
extremely difficult. An engineering design and detail must be provided for the proposed
wall. The applicant must provide cross sections which clearly illustrate that the proposed
wall can be constructed clear of the property line. The Grading Plan must be amended to
illustrate any areas that are subject to ponding under the 100 year storm condition. The
storm water drainage works and facilities necessary for this development must be
constructed in accordance with the West Side Creek Master Drainage Study.
10.4 There are several existing utility conflicts with the proposed site plan concept including
the emergency warning siren for Darlington OPG. The applicant will be required to
resolve all utility conflicts, in principle, prior to development approval.
10.5 The applicant proposes to purchase property from the Municipality to accommodate the
site entrance directly opposed to West Side Drive. It may be necessary for the applicant
to acquire more land than is currently depicted on the site plan to accommodate the
entrance. The property acquisition must take place prior to approval of the subject
application.
10.6 The proposed easterly site entrance is unsuitable. The entrance radius projects across
the east property line of the subject site. The entrance must be modified to a standard
symmetrical configuration. Future submissions will not be accepted if this issue is not
resolved. The suitability of locating a second entrance to the site in proximity to a
signalized intersection will be subject to further review and discussion.
10.7 An 8 metre road widening across the frontage is required to be dedicated to the
Municipality.
Clarington Emergency and Fire Services
10.8 The Emergency and Fire Services Department has no objection to the approval of this
application, provided their comments are implemented at the site plan approval stage
should the rezoning application be approved.
Clarington Operations Department
10.9 The Operations Department is not satisfied with the proposed merger of the existing
access to the stormwater pond south of this site with access to proposed development.
The Operations Department also provided comments that can be implemented at the site
plan approval stage should the rezoning be approved.
ID
Municipality of Clarington Page 12
Resort PSD -011-19
Clarington Building Division
10.10 The Building Division has no objections.
11. Discussion
Proposed Commercial Development
11.1 The proposal represents a form of development encouraged for the most part by
Provincial, Regional and Municipal policies. It will add 3,643 square metres of commercial
floor space in Bowmanville, increasing job opportunities for the community and spurring
economic development. Figure 5 illustrates that solar panels would be included as a
sustainable design feature of this site, reducing electricity demand from outside sources
to serve this site.
Figure 5: Proposed development looking southwest from Baseline Road.
Parking Provisions
11.2 Policies of the Official Plan direct development to minimize land consumption and limit the
number of parking spaces based on available public transit and opportunities for shared
parking. The Planning Justification Report states that the development would include 126
parking spaces whereas 145 spaces are required by the Zoning By-law. The report fails
to justify the proposed decrease. Further discussion is required with the applicant to
determine an appropriate number of parking spaces.
65
Municipality of Clarington Page 13
Report PSD -011-19
Urban Design
11.3 This proposal is being reviewed against the urban design policies of the Official Plan,
which provide direction for development located within a Gateway Commercial Centre
and can be summarized within the following themes:
11.3.1 Building Design and Streetscape
x Proposed buildings will enhance the built environment with attention to massing,
building articulation, exterior cladding, architectural detail, the use of local
materials and styles;
x Have buildings sited near the street line to contribute to a sense of enclosure and
a strong street edge;
x Enhance the pedestrian environment with awnings, pedestrian scale lighting,
landscaping, benches and other street amenities;
x Create a consistent building setback from the road and a harmonious
architectural style; and
Provide safe, well-defined pedestrian walkways from the street to the store
entrance and between buildings.
11.3.2 Parking Areas and Landscaping Treatment
x Provide sufficient and convenient parking, screened through the use of effective
buffer planting;
x Mitigate the heat island effect of development by ensuring an appropriate use of
material and landscaping to provide shading; and
• Provide street trees and other landscaping as part of the development proposal
within the public right-of-way.
Sustainable Design
11.4 The Clarington Official Plan requires all new development to include sustainable design
features. The use of appropriate materials and landscaping to conserve energy and
water must be incorporated into the site design. While the proposal includes solar panels
to minimize the consumption of energy from the grid, additional green building design and
green infrastructure features must be included to comply with Official Plan. These
features can include pavements that infiltrate, native species plantings and additional
vegetated parking islands. Further, Low Impact Development measures must be used to
assist with on-site water infiltration, water quality treatment and energy savings.
. •
Municipality of Clarington
Resort PSD -011-19
Traffic and the Pedestrian/Cyclist
Page 14
11.5 Policies of the Clarington Official Plan direct that new development must integrate access
to transit and active transportation modes. The site design must make it easy for
pedestrians and cyclists to access the sidewalk, road and transit network available at the
site. The design of the intersection of West Side Drive and Baseline Road must
contemplate a marked crosswalk connecting the development to the sidewalk, trail
network and bus stop across Baseline Road. The revised plan will also need to provide
clear connections through the site and incorporate bicycle racks in highly visible and
convenient locations.
11.6 Staff will continue to work with the applicant on site design to better align the proposed
development with Clarington's urban design and sustainable design policies, while
addressing the comments from various departments and agencies. The current proposal
does not address all of the relevant policies of the Clarington Official Plan.
12. Concurrence
Not Applicable.
13. Conclusion
The purpose of this report is to provide background information on the development
proposal submitted by 2411 Baseline Limited for the Public Meeting under the Planning
Act. Staff will continue processing the application including the preparation of a
subsequent report upon resolution of identified issues and receipt of the outstanding
items to be submitted by the applicant.
G �.r
Submitted by: Reviewed
Faye Langmaid, RPP, FCSLA
Acting Director of Planning Services
by:
Andrew C. Allison, B. Comm, LL.B
CAO
Staff Contact: Ruth Porras, Senior Planner/ Urban Designer, 905-623-3379 ext. 2412 or
rporras@clarington.net
List of interested parties to be notified of Council's decision is on file in the Planning Services
Department.
Ken Pasricha, 2411 Baseline Limited
Michael Fry, D.G.Biddle & Associates Limited
67
Clarftwn
Planning Services
Report
If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the Accessibility
Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131.
Report To: Planning and Development Committee
Date of Meeting: February 19, 2019
Report Number: PSD -012-19 Resolution:
File Number: ZBA2019-0001 XRef: LD2018/025 By-law Number:
Report Subject: An Application by Gerald Sherk
Removal of Holding — 2406 Prestonvale Road, Courtice
Recommendations:
1. That Report PSD -012-19 be received;
2. That the application submitted by Gerald Sherk to remove the Holding (H) symbol be
approved, and that the by-law contained in Attachment 1 to Report PSD -012-19, to remove
the (H) Holding Symbol, be passed;
3. That Council's decision and a copy of Report PSD -012-19 be forwarded to the Region of
Durham and the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation; and
4. That all interested parties listed in Report PSD -012-19 and any delegations be advised of
Council's decision.
Municipality of Clarington
Report PSD -012-19
Report Overview
Page 2
The purpose of this report is to recommend approval of the application to remove the (H)
Holding Symbol to permit the development of a single detached dwelling on a new lot created
as part of a land severance application for 2406 Prestonvale Road. The existing single
detached dwelling on the retained lot will remain.
1. Application Details
1.1 Owner/Applicant: Gerald Sherk
1.2 Proposal: Removal of Holding (H) Symbol from "Holding -Urban
Residential ((H)R1) Zone" to "Urban Residential (R1) Zone"
1.3 Area: 0.45 acres
1.4 Location: 2406 Prestonvale Road, Courtice
1.5 Roll Number: 1817-010-060-16800
1.6 Within Build Boundary: Yes
Municipality of Clarington
Report PSD -012-19
2. Background
Page 3
2.1 On January 11, 2019 an application was submitted requesting that the Holding (H)
Symbol be removed from the property located at 2406 Prestonvale Road in Courtice.
2.2 Through the drafting of Zoning By-law 84-63 a holding Symbol was placed on many
properties in Courtice that were on private services, including the subject lands. It was
used as a mechanism to limit development until municipal services were available in the
urban area.
3. Staff Comments
3.1 The Holding (H) symbol is a provision enabled by the Official Plan to ensure that certain
obligations have been considered prior to development and redevelopment of the lands.
This includes: servicing, access, protection of natural areas, measures to mitigate the
impact of development, submission of required studies, execution of agreements and any
other requirements as may be deemed necessary by Council including the
implementation of the policies of this plan.
3.2 The Subject property is zoned "Holding -Urban Residential Type One ((H)R1) Zone". The
proposed and retained lot are part of a land severance application LD2018/025. The
application was approved by the Region of Durham on March 19, 2018, subject to a
number of conditions, including the removal of the Holding Symbol.
3.3 The "R1" Zone permits single detached dwellings on lots with a minimum area of 460
square metres and a minimum frontage of 15 metres. The severed lot has a proposed
frontage of 13.5 metres and a lot area of 897 square metres. The retained lot has a
proposed frontage of 13.5 metres and a lot area of 922 square metres. The proposed and
retained lots comply with the minimum required lot area provisions of the "R1" Zone.
3.4 On December 14, 2017, the Committee of Adjustment approved applications A2017-0079
and A2017-0080 to reduce the minimum required lot frontage for both the retained and
severed parcels, from the required 15 metres to 13.5 metres. The applications were
approved and received no appeals. The proposed 13.5 metre frontages are permitted
based on the approved variances.
3.5 The proposed infill lot is consistent with the surrounding context. The subject lots have
similar frontages to the majority of the lots in the area, including the lots across the street
along the east side of Prestonvale Road. The severance supports the intensification
objectives of the Clarington Official Plan. In order to ensure the design of the dwelling on
the severed lot is in keeping with the character of the neighbourhood, as a condition of
the consent the applicant is required to have the building drawings submitted for approval
by the Municipality's Control Architect. This is agreed to by the Owner of the property and
is part of the Land Division Agreement.
70
Municipality of Clarington
Report PSD -012-19
Page 4
3.5 Council must be satisfied that the provisions of the Official Plan are met prior to removing
the Holding Symbol, otherwise no building permits can be issued. The applicant has been
working to fulfil the conditions of approval for the consent application, including payment
of parkland dedication. The applicant has also entered into a land division agreement with
the Municipality and there are no concerns with lifting the `H' symbol.
3.6 At the time of writing this report, property taxes have been paid in full on the subject
lands.
4. Concurrence
Not applicable.
5. Conclusion
In consideration of the comments noted above, approval of the removal of the "Holding
H)" symbol for the property located at 2406 Prestonvale Road, as shown on the attached
By-law and schedule (Attachment 1) is recommended.
Submitted by.
Faye Langmaid, RPP, FCSLA
Acting Director of Planning Services
Reviewed by:
Andrew C. Allison, B.Comm, LL.B
Chief Administrative Officer
Staff Contact: Nicole Zambri, Planner, 905-623-3379 ext. 2422 or nzambri(a-),clarington.net
FL/NZ/nl
Attachments:
Attachment 1 - Zoning By-law Amendment to Remove `H' Symbol
The following is a list of the interested parties to be notified of Council's decision:
Gerald Sherk
Deborah Cahill-Pendrigh
Vladimir Bulakh
I:\^Department\Application Files\ZBA-Zoning\2019\ZaaBA2019-0001 2406 Prestonvale Road (RofH)\Staff Report\PSD-012-19.docx
71
Attachment 1 to
PSD -012-19
The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington
By-law Number 2019 -
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 Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington to permit
the development of a single detached dwelling on the subject lands (ZBA2019-0001);
Now Therefore Be It Resolved That the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of
Clarington enacts as follows:
1. Schedule "4" (Courtice)" to By-law 84-63, as amended, is hereby further amended by
changing the zone designation from:
"Holding — Urban Residential Type One ((H)R1) Zone" to "Urban Residential Type
One (R1) Zone";
as illustrated on the attached Schedule "A" hereto.
2. Schedule "A" attached hereto shall form part of the By-law.
3. This By-law shall come into effect on the date of passing hereof, subject to the
provisions of Sections 34 and 36 of the Planning Act.
By -Law passed in open session this day of , 2019
Adrian Foster, Mayor
C. Anne Greentree, Municipal Clerk
72
J:\REPORTS TO CLERKS\Electronic Reports\1 - Reports Awaiting CAO's Signature\P&D February 19\PSD-012-19\Attachment 1 - PSD-
012-19.docx
73
Clarftwn
Planning Services
Report
If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the Accessibility
Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131.
Report To: Planning and Development Committee
Date of Meeting: February 19, 2019
Report Number:
File Number:
Report Subject:
PSD -013-19
S -C-2011-0002
Resolution:
By-law Number:
Extension to Draft Approval by 1977057 Ontario Limited in Brookhill
Neiahbourhood in Bowmanville
Recommendations:
That Report PSD -013-19 be received;
2. That the extension to Draft Approval for S -C-2011-0002 be supported subject to the
Conditions as contained in Attachment 1 to PSD -013-19;
3. That the Durham Regional Planning and Economic Development Department and
Municipal Property Assessment Corporation be forwarded a copy of Report
PSD -013-19 and Council's decision; and
4. That all interested parties listed in Report PSD -013-19 and any delegations be advised
of Council's decision.
74
Municipality of Clarington
Report PSD -013-19
Report Overview
Page 2
The report recommends an extension to Draft Approval for S -C 2011-0002 in the Brookhill
Neighbourhood of Bowmanville for a period of six years.
Application Details
Owner:
Proposal
1.3 Area:
1.4 Location
1.5 Roll Numbers
1977057 Ontario Limited
Proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision:
Extension of a Draft Approved Plan of Subdivision consisting of 47
single detached dwellings, 32 semi-detached dwellings, 62
townhouse units, two mixed use blocks containing between 98-162
multi -residential units for a total of 237 to 301 residential units, a
park and a landscape strip adjacent to Bowmanville Avenue.
11.98 hectares
2278, 2318, 2360 Bowmanville Avenue, Part Lot 15, Concession 2,
former Township of Darlington (see Figure 1)
18-17-010-030-01000
18-17-010-030-01100
18-17-010-030-01200
75
Municipality of Clarington
Report PSD -013-19
Page 3
Figure 1: Site Location
2. Background
2.1 On April 15, 2011 Dunbury Developments (Regional) Ltd. submitted applications for a
Draft Plan of Subdivision and Zoning By-law amendment. Since the original
submission, several changes were made to the draft plan. Most notably was the
alignment adjustment to the south for the future extension of Longworth Avenue after
the completion of an Environmental Impact Study and the Environmental Assessment in
2012. On November 25, 2015, the Municipality received a Notice of Appeal submitted
by the solicitor for Dunbury Developments (Regional) Ltd., regarding the proposed Draft
Plan of Subdivision and a Zoning By-law amendment. The appeals were filed under
Sections 51(34) and 34(l 1) of the Planning Act, for failure of Council to make a decision
in respect of these development applications.
76
Municipality of Clarington
Report PSD -013-19
Page 4
2.2 Staff and the applicant worked through the various issues related to the draft plan and
an agreeable solution was reached. At the June 25, 2012 General Purpose and
Administration Committee meeting, Report PSD -034-12 was approved which requested
the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) approve the draft plan and the corresponding
rezoning application. The conditions of draft approval provided an expiry date of three
years from the date approvals were given. The OMB issued its decision on July 14,
2016, approving all applications.
2.3 Shortly following the approval of the applications, the site was sold to 1977057 Ontario
Limited.
2.4 At the time of draft approval, it was understood that the subject lands could not proceed
until services were extended and development of roads and stormwater ponds were
coordinated with adjacent landowners. Figure 2 illustrates the necessary works required
to advance development.
Figure 2: Proposed Draft Plan and required road and servicing infrastructure
77
Municipality of Clarington
Report PSD -013-19
Clarington Boulevard
Page 5
2.5 The west side of the proposed alignment of Clarington Boulevard is partially located on
lands owned by DG Group (S -C 2012-0003) who received draft approval in 2015. The
timing of the subject draft plan will be contingent on the owner securing the balance of
the lands for the extension of Clarington Boulevard and/or cost sharing arrangements
with DG Group.
Longworth Avenue
2.6 An Environmental Assessment and Environmental Impact Study confirmed the location
of the alignment of Longworth Avenue from the urban area boundary in the west to
Bowmanville Avenue in the east. It also determined the location of the crossing of the
Brookhill tributary.
2.7 The development of the subject draft plan will require the construction of Longworth
Avenue through the site. Since the Region of Durham controls intersections at regional
roads, construction of the west side of Longworth Avenue cannot proceed until the
alignment east of Bowmanville Avenue has been constructed. The timing of the portion
of the Longworth Avenue east will require the cooperation of development interests on
the north and south sides of Longworth Avenue east of Bowmanville Avenue.
Stormwater Management Pond
2.8 The stormwater management pond to service this draft plan is located on lands to the
south for which a draft Plan of Subdivision has been submitted by Tonno (18T-95027),
but is not yet draft approved. The timing of the development for the subject draft plan
will depend on the timing of development of the Tonno lands or the developer must
make arrangements with Tonno to secure land through easements for the pond prior to
development proceeding.
Sanitary Sewer Trunk
2.9 The development of this site is reliant on the extension of 375 mm trunk sanitary sewer
which is located south of the CP Railway and east of Bowmanville Avenue. The sewer
will have to be brought under the railway and through the recently approved project by
YYZ at the south east corner of Durham Highway 2 and Bowmanville Avenue. The trunk
will then have to extend northward to service the lands along Bowmanville Avenue in
the Brookhill Neighbourhood, being Tonno and the subject draft plan.
2.10 Specific conditions were added into the conditions of draft approval to ensure the
appropriate cost share agreements are in place, specifically endeavours to collect and
front ending agreements to and from benefitting landowners.
9V
Municipality of Clarington
Report PSD -013-19
3. Discussion
Page 6
3.1 The proposed development is currently "landlocked" in terms of road connections, and
there are no services extending to the subdivision. Development of these lands is
premature until roads and services are constructed including the requisite stormwater
management pond.
3.2 The stormwater management pond and much of the Clarington Boulevard and
Longworth Avenue road allowances are proposed to be constructed on lands owned by
others. The applicant must co-ordinate the construction of Clarington Boulevard from its
existing north terminus to Longworth Avenue, Longworth Avenue from Bowmanville
Avenue to Clarington Boulevard to a full urban standard as well as all services and the
stormwater management pond with the adjacent landowners.
3.3 The owner has met with the adjacent land owners to discuss cost sharing arrangements
and has met with Regional representative to discuss the timing for services, however,
the timing of the development of this site remains contingent on other parties moving
forward with their particular proposals.
4. Recommendation
Given the road and infrastructure improvements necessary to advance development,
Staff have no objection to the request for the extension to draft approval of S -C 2011-
0002 for a period of six years.
5. Strategic Plan Application
Not applicable.
79
Municipality of Clarington
Report PSD -013-19
Page 7
Submitted by: Reviewed by:
Faye Langmaid, RPP, FCSLA, Andrew C. Allison, B. Comm, LL.B
Acting Director of Planning Services CAO
Staff Contact: Cynthia Strike, Principal Planner, 905-623-3379 ext. 2410 or
cstrike@clarington.net
Attachments:
Attachment 1 — Amendment to Conditions of Draft Approval
List of interested parties to be notified of Council's decision:
Michael Domovitch, 1977057 Ontario Limited
Paolo Sacilotto, DG Group
Cora Tonno, William Tonno Construction
CS/FL/nl
I:\ADepartment\Application Files\SC-Subdivision\S-C 2011\S -C-2011-0002 Dun bury-Brookhill\Extension to DA\Staff Reports\PSD-013-19\PSD-013-19.docx
Attachment 1 to
Report PSD -013-19
AMENDMENT TO THE CONDITIONS OF DRAFT APPROVAL
DRAFT PLAN OF SUBDIVISION S -C 2011-0002
Notice of Decision:
Amendment Approved:
The Notes to Draft Approval are amended, as shown below,
NOTES OF DRAFT APPROVAL
If final approval is not given by February 19, 2025, and no extensions have been granted,
draft approval shall lapse and the file shall be CLOSED. Extensions may be granted
provided valid reason is given and is submitted to the Director of Planning Services for
the Municipality of Clarington well in advance of the lapsing date.
W
Clarftwn
Planning Services
Report
If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the Accessibility
Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131.
Report To: Planning and Development Committee
Date of Meeting: February 19, 2019
Report Number: PSD -014-19 Resolution:
File Number: 18T-89059 By-law Number:
Report Subject: Extension to Draft approval for Lindvest Properties (Clarington) Inc.
in Newcastle
Recommendations:
That Report PSD -014-19 be received;
2. That the extension to Draft Approval for 18T-89059 be supported subject to the
Amended Conditions as contained in Attachment 1 to PSD -014-19;
3. That the Durham Regional Planning and Economic Development Department and
Municipal Property Assessment Corporation be forwarded a copy of Report PSD -014-19
and Council's decision; and
4. That all interested parties listed in Report PSD -014-19 and any delegations be advised
of Council's decision.
Municipality of Clarington
Report PSD -014-19
Page 2
Report Overview
This report recommends an extension to Draft Approved Plans Of Subdivision 18T-89059 in
Foster Creek Neighbourhood of Newcastle Village for a period of six years.
1. Application Details
1.1 Owner: Lindvest Properties (Clarington) Limited
1.2 Proposal: 140 residential units
1.3 Area: 9 hectares
1.4 Location: Part Lots 27 & 28, Concession 2, Township of Clarke (see Figure 1)
1.5 Roll Number: 18-17-030-130-15302
Figure 1: Site Locations
Municipality of Clarington
Resort PSD -014-19
2. Background
Page 3
2.1 In March 2004 approval was granted for the Foster Creek North Neighbourhood Design
Plan and two draft plans of Subdivision for a total of 540 residential units (18T-89059
and S -C-2000-001). An amendment was approved in October 2006 to increase the
number of units to 665.
2.2 Three phases of the subdivisions have been registered and are fully occupied. The
remaining phase to be developed of Draft Approved Plan of Subdivision 18T-89059,
Phase 4, and the former school block lands Draft Approved Plan of Subdivision S -C
2017-0001 are in the northwest quadrant of the Foster Creek North neighbourhood.
2.3 An upgrade to Zone 1 Water Reservoir and a new Zone 2 pumping station are required
to increase the water pressure to develop Phase 4 and a portion of the former school
block. The Region's timetable in the advancing the design and construction of the
necessary infrastructure is noted in Table 1 below.
Upgrade Zone 1 Water Reservoir and Feedermain
Design 2019, Construct 2021-23
New Zone 2 Water Pump Station and Feedermain
Design 2019, Construct 2021-23
Table 1: Region of Durham
2017 Forecast for Infrastructure Improvements in Newcastle Village
2.4 On January 18, 2019, a letter from Lindvest was received requesting an extension to
Draft Approval for draft plans of subdivision 18T-89059 and S -C-2000-0001 for an
additional six years. Plan of Subdivision S -C 2017-0001 was Draft Approved in
February 2018 for five years and therefore was not included in the request.
3. Discussion
3.1 The Region's timetable for the design and construction of the necessary infrastructure
has had an impact on the final phases of development. The earliest opportunity to
commence house construction is 2023. The developers are requesting an extension to
2025.
3.2 Infrastructure improvements are not necessary for the Tornat development to proceed
in the south portion of the neighbourhood.
Municipality of Clarington
Resort PSD -014-19
4. Recommendations
Page 4
4.1 Given the delay of infrastructure improvements to support this development, Staff have
no objection to the request for extension to Draft Approval of 18T-89059 for a six year
period. The lands within Draft Approved Plan of Subdivision S -C-2017-0001 have all
received Final Approval and do not require an extension.
5. Strategic Plan Application
Not applicable.
h\4 .�
Submitted by.
Reviewed by:
Faye Langmaid, RPP, FCSLA, Andrew C. Allison, B. Comm, LLB
Acting Director of Planning Services CAO
Staff Contact: Cynthia Strike, Principal Planner, 905-623-3379 ext. 2410 or
cstrike@clarington.net
Attachment:
Attachment 1 — Amendment to Conditions of Draft Approval 18T-89059
List of interested parties to be notified of Council's decision:
Darren Morita, Lindvest Properties Inc.
CS/FL/nl
I:\^Department\Application Files\SC-Subdivision\18Ts\18T-89059 - Lindvest\Extension to DA 2019\Staff Report\PSD-014-19.docx
Attachment 1 to
Report PSD -014-19
AMENDMENT TO THE CONDITIONS OF DRAFT APPROVAL
DRAFT PLAN OF SUBDIVISION
Notice of Decision:
Amendment Approved:
18T-89059
The Notes to Draft Approval are amended, as shown below,
NOTES OF DRAFT APPROVAL
If final approval is not given by February 19, 2025, and no extensions have been granted,
draft approval shall lapse and the file shall be CLOSED. Extensions may be granted
provided valid reason is given and is submitted to the Director of Planning Services for
the Municipality of Clarington well in advance of the lapsing date.
Clarftwn
Planning Services
Report
If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the Accessibility
Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131.
Report To: Planning and Development Committee
Date of Meeting: February 19, 2019
Report Number: PSD -015-19 Resolution:
File Number: PLN 1.1.12 By-law Number:
Report Subject: Proposed Changes to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden
Horseshoe
Recommendations:
1. That Report PSD -015-19 be endorsed;
2. That the proposed changes to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe are
generally supported. However, the following recommendations and the comments
contained in report PSD -015-19 be endorsed as Clarington's formal submission to the
Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing:
x The proposed Provincially Significant Employment Zones be removed from the
area identified as the Courtice Major Transit Station Area as shown in Attachment
2;
x Provincially Significant Employment Zones be added to the lands between
Courtice Road and Highway 418, south of Bloor Street as shown in Attachment 2;
x The proposed Provincially Significant Employment Zones be removed from the
areas where they overlap with the Southeast Courtice Secondary Plan and the
Southwest Courtice Secondary Plan areas as shown in Attachment 2;
x The lands between Durham Highway 2 and Bloor Street, east of Courtice Road
to the future Highway 418 be added as employment area to the Courtice urban
area; and
x Me long-term goal of net -zero communities be maintained as a guiding principle
of the Growth Plan.
3. That a copy of report PSD -015-19, be forwarded to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and
Housing, Metrolinx, the Durham Regional Planning and Economic Development
Department and any interested parties.
87
Municipality of Clarington
Report PSD -015-19
Report Overview
Page 2
The Province has proposed changes to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe.
These changes are intended to increase the autonomy of local governments in certain land
use decisions and address development barriers to housing and job creation.
Staff are generally supportive of the proposed changes and offer recommendations for the
Province's consideration. Staff's comments and recommendations are intended to ensure
that the Employment Areas in Courtice and the area surrounding the future GO Station in
Courtice and Bowmanville are positioned to become catalysts for job creation.
1. Introduction
1.1 The Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (Growth Plan) provides Provincial
direction for growth and development in the area surrounding Toronto and Hamilton
known as the Greater Golden Horseshoe. It integrates land use planning, infrastructure
planning as well as demographic, economic growth and health considerations. The
intent of the plan is to help municipalities plan the growth of their communities in a way
that supports economic prosperity, protects the environment, and helps achieve a high
quality of life. The current version of the Growth Plan came into effect on July 1, 2017.
1.2 In the Fall of 2018, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (Ministry) hosted a
number of workshops with municipalities and other stakeholders on proposed changes
to the Growth Plan. Planning Services staff participated in those meetings.
1.3 On January 15, 2019, the Ministry released proposed changes to the Growth Plan to
address potential barriers to new housing, job creation and business attraction as well
as streamline the process for transit growth.
1.4 The proposed changes are grouped into the following themes:
x Settlement Area Boundary Expansions
x Small Rural Settlements
x Natural Heritage and Agricultural Systems
x Intensification and Density Targets
x Employment Planning
x Major Transit Station Areas
1.5 The Ministry has indicated that the driving force of these amendments is to provide local
governments more autonomy in the decision-making process. The contents of the
proposed changes are summarized in this report together with staff recommendations.
The Ministry will be receiving feedback on the proposed changes until February 28,
2019.
Municipality of Clarington Page 3
Resort PSD -015-19
2. Proposed Changes to the Growth Plan
Settlement Area Boundary Expansions
2.1 Local municipalities will be able to make reasonable changes to urban settlement area
boundaries before a municipal comprehensive review. This will allow municipalities to
fast-track residential and commercial development in select areas.
2.2 Municipalities will be able to adjust settlement area boundaries outside the municipal
comprehensive review provided that:
x There is no net increase in land within settlement areas, subject to criteria;
x The affected settlement areas are not rural settlements or located within the
Greenbelt; and
x The settlement area is serviced.
2.3 Municipalities will also be able to undertake settlement area boundary expansions
outside the municipal comprehensive review provided that:
x The expansions are no larger than 40 hectares;
x The affected settlement areas are not rural settlements or located within the
Greenbelt; and
x The settlement area is serviced.
Staff Comments
2.4 In 2010, the Region of Durham implemented the Growth Plan, 2005 into their Official
Plan. At that time, Clarington requested that the lands south of Durham Highway 2,
between Courtice Road and the future Highway 418 (approximately 238 hectares), be
added to the Courtice urban area (PSD -067-10). A portion of those lands
(approximately 109 hectares) were added to the Courtice urban area for residential use.
However, the lands proposed for employment use were rejected.
2.5 Staff support these proposed changes to the Growth Plan as they would help the
Municipality achieve expansions previously sought for the Courtice Urban Area.
Small Rural Settlements
2.6 Small rural settlements are areas that are not expected to face significant growth
pressures. Minor rounding out of rural settlements, that are not located in the Green
Belt, will be permitted outside of a municipal comprehensive review. Municipalities will
have the ability to adjust boundaries, if:
x The available water and wastewater infrastructure is appropriate to service the
change; and
x The rounding out exercise would not impact the rural character of the area.
Municipality of Clarington
Resort PSD -015-19
Staff Comments
Page 4
2.7 Based on the criteria set by the Province, the only area in Clarington that could be
considered would be the south end of the hamlet of Maple Grove (south of Durham
Highway 2).
2.8 Staff support these proposed change to the Growth Plan as the Official Plan already
contemplates an expansion of Maple Grove to add approximately 12 ha of Municipal
and Regional land into the hamlet. These lands include the East Detachment of the
Durham Regional Police Service.
Natural Heritage and Agricultural Systems
2.9 Regional Municipalities will have the ability to refine Provincial mapping during the
implementation phase of their official plans. Subsequent to these refinements, changes
to the Natural Heritage System and agricultural land base mapping will occur through a
municipal comprehensive review. This will lead to Regional mapping systems that
reflect the local mapping realities, while providing for the appropriate level of protections
for our natural resources and our agri-food industry.
2.10 The proposed changes also remove the Growth Plan's long-term goal of net -zero
communities. Instead, the Growth Plan policies have been changed to a commitment to
working towards the goal of "environmentally sustainable communities".
Staff Comments
2.11 Staff support the ability to refine Provincial mapping based on our local context. The
natural environment and the agricultural sector are two of Clarington's major resources.
Clarington staff will work with the Region of Durham during their municipal
comprehensive review to ensure that Clarington's mapping is accurately reflected in the
Regional Official Plan.
2.12 Staff do not support the removal of the long-term goal of net -zero communities from the
Growth Plan. The Clarington Official Plan includes policies and direction that
development within new and updated Secondary Plans should move towards net zero
communities. The goal of net zero communities is certainly ambitious but it is the type
of goal that is appropriate in a Provincial policy document. Its removal dilutes the
Province's commitment to true environmental sustainability in the long term.
ac
Municipality of Clarington Page 5
Report PSD -015-19
Intensification and Density Targets
2.13 When it comes to intensification and density the proposed changes attempt to recognize
"one -size does not fit all". The intent of the changes is to make it easier to understand
and measure the impacts of growth.
2.14 The current Growth Plan requires the Region of Durham to increase their minimum
intensification target from 40% to 50% at their next municipal comprehensive review. In
2031, the current Growth Plan requires that target to increase from 50% to 60% (see
Table 1 below). The proposed changes to the Growth Plan will not increase the
minimum intensification target.
Table 1: Changes to the Minimum Intensification Target
CURRENT GROWTH PLAN
Today
After Municipal
Comprehensive Review
In 2031
40%
50%
Today
PROPOSED GROWTH PLAN
Today
After Municipal
Comprehensive Review
In 2031
40%
50%
2.15 The current Growth Plan requires the Region of Durham to increase their designated
greenfield area density target from 50 to 60 residents and jobs combined per hectare at
their next municipal comprehensive review (see Table 2 below). The proposed changes
to the Growth Plan will maintain the density target for the Region of Durham at 50
residents and jobs combined per hectare at the next municipal comprehensive review.
Table 2: Changes to the Designated Greenfield Area Density Target
CURRENT GROWTH PLAN
Today
After Municipal Comprehensive Review
50 residents and jobs combined per
hectare
residents and jobs combined per
hectare
PROPOSED GROWTH PLAN
Today
After Municipal Comprehensive Review
50 residents and jobs combined per
hectare
residents and jobs combined per
hectare
91
Municipality of Clarington
Resort PSD -015-19
Staff Comment
Page 6
2.16 Staff support these proposed changes to the Growth Plan. The minimum intensification
target of 50% and the density target of 50 residents and jobs are ambitious but
potentially achievable goals for Durham Region and Clarington. Staff supports the
revised intensification and designated greenfield area targets as they better reflect the
Durham and Clarington context.
Employment Planning
2.17 Some industrial lands in the Greater Golden Horseshoe's employment areas are facing
pressures from encroachment and conversion to residential uses. The proposed
changes to the Growth Plan will ensure that lands designated for employment are
appropriately protected while other lands may be considered for conversion to
residential development. The proposed changes include:
x Introduction of a new Provincially Significant Employment Zones (PSEZ). The
Ministry will identify lands to be protected which cannot be converted for another
land use outside of a municipal comprehensive review;
x A one-time opportunity to allow municipalities to undertake some conversions of
non-significant employment areas before the next municipal comprehensive
review;
x Removal of the Provincial "prime employment area" designation;
x Requiring municipalities to set multiple density targets for employment areas
rather than a single target;
x Locating and preserving employment areas adjacent to major goods movement
facilities and corridors;
x Upper -tier municipalities, such as Durham, can designate employment areas at
any time before the next municipal comprehensive review, including adding
existing lower -tier municipal designations;
x Require municipalities to retain space for a similar number of jobs when
redeveloping employment areas;
x Within existing office parks, secondary uses (such as convenience retail and
restaurants) should be limited; and
x Require municipalities to maintain land use compatibility between employment
areas and adjacent non -employment areas.
2.18 Provincially Significant Employment Zones (PSEZ) are large sites, designated for
employment use that are located near major transportation. PSEZs, as identified by the
Growth Plan, are crucial to the Province's economy and cannot be converted to another
land use without a more comprehensive assessment of employment land need, and the
implications for economic development. Any conversions of employment areas in
PSEZ's would only be considered as part of the next municipal comprehensive review.
92
Municipality of Clarington
Resort PSD -015-19
Page 7
2.19 The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing is seeking feedback on whether the
proposed PSEZ's have adequately identified employment areas in each community.
2.20 PSEZ's will be employment areas that:
x Are located inside existing settlement area boundaries (i.e. no Greenbelt lands);
x Are already designated employment areas:
x May be vulnerable to pressure to convert to residential use;
x May be facing encroachment by sensitive land uses that could threaten the
existing employment uses; or
x Are needed in the region to attract new investment and retain existing industries.
2.21 Additional criteria considered for identifying PSEZs are:
x Located near highways, railways, transit and/or other major transportation
infrastructure such as major transit station areas;
x High concentration of employment and/or economic output; or
x Large, contiguous and constraint -free lands (i.e. greater than 4 hectares / 10
acres).
2.22 Portions of south Courtice have been identified as part of the "Durham South (Oshawa
East and Clarington) Provincially Significant Employment Zone". This area includes the
Courtice Employment Lands and the Clarington Energy Business Park but it also
includes portions of the Southeast Courtice Secondary Plan and the Southwest Courtice
Secondary Plan which are designated for residential and mixed use development (See
Attachment 1).
2.23 The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing is seeking feedback on:
x The zones identified;
x The need for additional zones; and/or
x Changes to the boundaries for any of the proposed zones.
Staff Comments
2.24 Staff supports the proposed changes to employment planning and the creation of the
PSEZs provided that the designation of PSEZs in Courtice reflect the Official Plan which
is Council's position, presented in Section 2.27 below.
2.25 The ongoing update of the Clarington Energy Business Park Secondary Plan will
include limits on secondary uses. The Clarington Technology Park already includes
limits on secondary uses.
93
Municipality of Clarington
Resort PSD -015-19
Page 8
2.26 In addition to identifying appropriate land uses it is also important to identify appropriate
constraints within employment areas. The employment areas in south Courtice and
Bowmanville contain a number of natural heritage features that are identified in the
Official Plan. These features are being further investigated through the Robinson /
Tooley Creeks and the Soper Creek Subwatershed Studies currently underway.
2.27 Staff support the inclusion of the Courtice Employment Lands and the Clarington
Energy Business Park within the PSEZ. In addition, staff would offer the following
recommendations:
2.27.1 The area around the future GO Station site, as identified in Attachment 2, should
be removed from the PSEZ. Rather, these lands should be identified for mixed-
use development as part of the major transit station area. This will support the
market-driven strategy proposed by Metrolinx for GO Station development. This
recommendation also reflects the 800 metres radius proposed by the Growth
Plan changes for station areas.
2.27.2 In order to ensure no net loss of employment areas from the PSEZ, it is
recommended that the lands between Courtice Road and Highway 418 be
included in the PSEZ (see Attachment 2). The re -designation of these lands
would reflect the previous position of Council (PSD -067-10) requesting these
lands be added to the Courtice Urban Area and be designated for employment
use. These lands meet the criteria for PSEZ as they are:
x Jrge parcels that can accommodate employment intensive uses;
x Available to be serviced by the extension of the Courtice Sewer trunk;
and
x t8ategically located adjacent to Highway 418 and near the Highway 401
corridor.
2.27.3 The boundaries of the PSEZ should be further amended to reflect Clarington's
Official Plan by taking out the areas where they overlap with the Southeast
Courtice Secondary Plan and the Southwest Courtice Secondary Plan areas (see
Attachment 2). These areas are designated Urban Residential and Regional
Corridor in the Clarington Official Plan.
2.28 As part of the Growth Plan conformity exercise in 2010 Clarington requested that a
portion of the lands between Durham Highway 2 and Bloor Street, east of Courtice
Road to the future Highway 418 be added as employment area to the Courtice urban
area. At that time, the lands proposed for employment use were rejected. Clarington
requests the Ministry add these lands to the Courtice Urban Area.
Municipality of Clarington
Resort PSD -015-19
Page 9
2.29 The recommended changes will more accurately match the existing lands currently
designated for employment use in south Courtice. It will complete the planning for
employment areas that Clarington Council has previously identified. The recommended
mixed use area will support Metrolinx's direction that the lands around GO Station sites
be planned for higher densities and a mix of uses in order to support the business case
for rail service (See Attachment 3).
Major Transit Station Areas
2.30 The proposed PSEZs in Courtice include parts of major transit station areas around the
future Courtice GO Station. These major transit station areas are benefiting from
substantial investments in transit service and represent an opportunity for mixed use
development. At the same time, there is a need to consider preserving existing
industrial uses in these major transit station areas.
2.31 The province is seeking feedback on whether employment areas that overlap with major
transit station areas should be included in the PSEZs (in which case conversions could
only happen at the time of the next municipal comprehensive review) or whether they
should be excluded from the PSEZs (in which case they would be eligible for conversion
in advance of the municipal comprehensive review).
2.32 The proposed amendment to the Growth Plan will streamline the approach for defining
major transit station areas. This will allow the corresponding zoning and development
around these stations to occur sooner.
2.33 Part of the proposed changes gives municipalities the ability to increase the area that
can be included in the major transit station areas from 500 to an 800 -metre radius
around the station site.
2.34 Municipalities will be able to set density targets for these areas now, as part of our
ongoing Secondary Plan work, rather than waiting for a municipal comprehensive
review.
Staff Comments
2.35 In December, 2018, Metrolinx unveiled a "Market Driven Strategy" for the development
of future GO Station sites. Metrolinx is looking for higher density, mixed-use
development around future stations. This is otherwise known as "transit oriented
development".
2.36 To support the business case for the extension of all day train service to Courtice and
Bowmanville, it is necessary to provide higher densities and a mix of uses around these
station sites. Staff recommend that major transit station areas, such as the Courtice GO
Station, be excluded from provincially significant employment zones (see Attachment 2).
95
Municipality of Clarington
Resort PSD -015-19
Page 10
2.37 Staff support expanding the major transit station area by increasing from a radius of 500
to 800 metres. This will provide a greater amount of land for development to contribute
to the increased densities that are necessary to achieve transit oriented development.
2.38 Staff also support setting density targets for these areas now, rather than after the
municipal comprehensive review, to allow the investment and development process to
begin sooner.
3. Concurrence
Not Applicable.
4. Conclusion
4.1 Municipalities are required to plan for a diverse mix and range of housing types, in line
with the objectives of the Growth Plan. The proposed changes to the Growth Plan are
intended to increase the autonomy of local governments in certain land use decisions and
address development barriers to housing and job creation.
4.2 Staff comments, in particular those related to employment zones and the area for the
Courtice GO Station area, will position Clarington for job creation and transit supportive
mixed use.
4.3 The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing is accepting feedback on the proposed
changes to the Growth Plan until February 28, 2019.
4.4 The purpose of this report is to provide background on the proposed changes to the
Growth Plan and request that Council endorse staff comments as Clarington's response
to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing.
Municipality of Clarington
Resort PSD -015-19
Page 11
7
Submitted by: Reviewed by:
Faye Langmaid, RPP, FCSLA Andrew C. Allison, B. Comm, LL.B
Acting Director of Planning Services CAO
Staff Contact: Paul Wirch, Senior Planner, 905-623-3379 x2418 or pwirch@clarington.net
Carlos Salazar, Manager of Community Planning & Design, csalazar@clarington.net
Attachments
Attachment 1: PROPOSED by the Province — Provincially Significant Employment Zones
Attachment 2: RECOMMENDED CHANGES to the Provincially Significant Employment Zones
Attachment 3: Clarington's Vision for Provincially Significant Employment Zones in Courtice
There are no interested parties to be notified of Council's decision.
\\Netapp5\Group\Planning\^Department\PLN Files\PLN 1 Planning Legislation\PLN 1.1.12 Places To Grow\Growth Plan (Jan. 2019)\PSD-015-19 V.5 (AA).Docx
97
Municipality of Clarington
Attachment 1 — PROPOSED by the Province — Provincially Significant Employment Zones
Municipality of Clarington
Resort PSD -015-19
Page 13
Attachment 2 — RECOMMENDED CHANGES to the Provincially Significant Employment Zones
Municipality of Clarington
Resort PSD -015-19
Page 14
Attachment 3 — Clarington's Vision for Provincially Significant Employment Zones in Courtice
0
O
4a
tA
Cm
B.IOOr St
w
0
U
M
a■
■%I _ _ __ f 1__— —1
ergy=Drive
n erg
r---
❑ Proposed PSEZ ® Recommended Major Transit Station Area %■ ■ ` Courtice Urban Boundary 800 Metres From Future GO Station
100
Presentations and Handouts
Heritage Property
elebrat*ions 2019
February 19, 2019
Peter Vogel - Vice Chair Heritage Committee
Katherine Warren - Education and Outreach Chair
04
�u
glI NG�rw'
�15pold KNOWLEDGE AND rr, M
_ iR`[''- '„'F-• - 'x. t moi' _ � .`�,•,,..7.."' �.f .
a:.f
� • • :��` �� ..'�r Nom'
F- ai
ME
', •per' ... ..F
.'
i. �•
w
�
'_
'rFRP
elm-��. iFM• ..:: _
2020 Lambs
Road, Bowmanville
Building 1 -Gymnasium
Building 2 - Triple Dorm
ruild
ing 3 - Kiwanis House
ing 4 - Infirmary
Building 5 - Cafeteria
Building 6 -Jury Lodge
r
1
I �®
Destroyed by
fire (2009)
L ®�
Area of Designation
t Q
1 O
m
2
� a
Flood Plain L r
36.42 Acres f
I �
I
r
I
L
I
I �
CONCESSION STREET EAST
ti
14
www Ll
t3,
J1111 .7 -.-
.BW
LANA
"FN Fr:' R A 5 7 !1 1 1 1 1
r—IIIv 1 ri lfk, 1 L-% E
44
IIFIVI FJ IWO 70
i"A
dm 110,
I r
Tl
CAI
i"A
dm 110,
4
- Wo -T
Aft7r,
`s a' # s g:
am 6
° . w ' ?,•¢
"M441
JIM
- - .s�► r
• � ti
7.
•r
i
13 +` _
- r
+'b ,
,�� f� 7, _ � ,�• I�' icy • `
- t .
ktop
airs •�'� �..:I' 9f'
��_ -'tet 'FI'"f - X �. •-
t
RIC.
L 4f
!
!tt
a s-
'tG"'_ .�•.� �.+`t1.S••�i'i.'-R �� �} ���{�.' �4
1•�� '!'�i Y�tsy t 4- ['• � i �i I �i ►�, �F: �� �; � fr' 1
jmf k[
'L' ?°+.rte 4. ��r.�;1=wea. k'!S t..• •-:.�� ' /• 5 7 r. .�? ,?�'_ �„Lb {y� ��s�. ` �'y,
+•�'��.., ��` ,da,,v '�•� �, .�G k.i,m,. — � iL"�i ..Je � ,�— � � � ��� � �•�� + .�R �;�y�� s�;; L' 1 �ltf�� �� �~ I ..
t�hm' e ��-�_ - _'MS~�'�rlorNF+�s�r. �-�r�wr.o�•.. - � r.�Si l � � ' 1 r._ y � r � iia _
�LI
- - "ire••-w� J �Ja _
ir
.layy�, -� i ,. ..... ..uy ". ur •. .,.wr rt �.-���-y-t�Gt���L`iFfilr ^ � • •+ ' ' � � - ,m°•-' �--r
-yi1LLT1„� -T4, mill[,�qr ,���s� ��f����issi�� 'r {�• ,f T ��
' L •.�.u':.': `�� �;15tC r.r S►� 1 141 S�.r;�.��fi�.`�';',��. ` •� .rj,• � - - C h , �,� ' � a � .r � r;:;-.,
SS• .L,�'� th.�7�a���if.�ry�y�.�;v �w � d,}r�4. �JN��+:?�! d t�•+4Y � - - J �-. � y' +aFP � �+yC d2g�rAE �'� 3 �,� Y „r"ti ri.
j 1 ��l -.�C' �. ��'.L����y,y{{'!moi/Nii3.•�� Y^ -f p.�� -aF'. �f4.,y'. F�� L s.
J� ���i �\ 3 lAOMN�d�°°��• .. � - �� � - _ � 4PLl:k* `�. i��%` +'p_.- ,}Tye►+- a �._�. f;�e�,
t titi..
'T::-F'�1 �.-•. _ _ � : � . x.51 :-. e�� . i u
r•
��, .kms' ' F;
jdA-
ag
rr
w
^•: .�". `i .'a �; -.7 ;� �-rte.. .� ,
=.!acm
• ". ,yam,.+'''' � _!'�. -" _' t ,� ^c-�k_ 1 yh'• . � - --> ti ""
' _. .•-+ _ ,.;�� ;'� is A �
LIT
- i C
ap
h
I
s � . a w ■ -
0
.'
0n
• •�,• t
r 10
•
•
r -
' r r =`:.
• '' ��9� � � wry -
AR EA 2
dpe
Ke iew Cm,® AREA 3
f • (. r. �c�;o4
--%\ �• • Terra
y --
t
s m
j � �
e dr0� 4s. ca eg RB 7�d
1 - Water Foo
Q�
L SrGq �Garden C,ardBn
E Lambs Rd
L
Mi
lk 1e%nT1 1
Walbridge House (circa 1819)
348 King Avenue East, Newcastle
Photo from 1899
l3unMsyliomes�C:�auera:n'i �N.
1990's - 2000's the building
was the contractor's office
(or Dunbury Homes.
} �Y. i �'�Y' 'j•3� j
■ k
Honoured this
evening as the
oldest home on its
ANN& �11
original foundation
in Durham County
at 200 years old.
—Apo,
Alp
rr--
oNl
SII
Moe
Refurbished Exterior
ICA
OL
40
�I .r
• : i _ _.. Fes. _
I f
_ _ • _ - ,wy.• •.s fir.. � y�r-. 0...S-•
{:i.
�R! yn Y _..tL,t+'f-.a+....
-�.4e
•
•:
-'! .
T
ICA
OL
40
�I .r
• : i _ _.. Fes. _
Lw
_ _ • _ - ,wy.• •.s fir.. � y�r-. 0...S-•
{:i.
�R! yn Y _..tL,t+'f-.a+....
-�.4e
v.
Lw
Doors
Open
June
2016
..
Presentation of the heritage plaque to the owners
Application By: 2411 Baseline Limited
An application by 2411 Baseline Limited to amend the
Zoning By-law to permit the development of a
commercial property for a variety of uses.
Public Meeting: February 19, 2019
Q Subject Property
a
.y .
d
m
Proposed
,n
1 Story
Building
•,
Baseline Road
a
Spicer SquarAse
t,
I ,{1
R
h�aa+1
Proposed Development
Building 'B'
NV,
of
Building
P
&45 IN -ROAS
tl
Road Widening
Building 'B'
NV,
of
Building
P
Policy Direction
Dt*
4PA
A,
NOTICE
i;
U
Comments
• Site Plan/Building Design
• Parking Reduction
• Traffic
• Grading
a" e
w
ay
and
Parking
Proposed
2 Storey
Building
2
Subject Property
QJ
Proposed 'P'5ed
1St"Y
Building
A
Baseline Road
41