Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-28-2021 AgendaClar*wn Planning and Development Committee Post -Meeting Agenda Date: June 28, 2021 Time: 7:00 p.m. Location: Microsoft Teams Inquiries & Accommodations: For inquiries about this agenda, or to make arrangements for accessibility accommodations for persons attending, please contact: Lindsey Patenaude, Committee Coordinator, at 905-623-3379, ext. 2106 or by email at Iatenaude@clarington.net. Alternate Format: If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator, at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131. AudioNideo Record: The Municipality of Clarington makes an audio and/or video record of General Government Committee meetings. If you make a delegation or presentation at a General Government Committee meeting, the Municipality will be recording you and will make the recording public by on the Municipality's website, www.clarington.net/calendar 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/archive *Late Item added or a change to an existing item after the Agenda was published. Pages 1. Call to Order 2. Land Acknowledgment Statement 3. New Business — Introduction As outlined in Corporate Policy F-11 Transparency and Accountability, the Municipality of Clarington is committed to ensuring that it is accountable to the public for its actions, through responsible and transparent behaviours and the manner in which the municipality will try to ensure that its actions are transparent to the public. Accordingly, Members of Council will endeavour to provide New Business resolutions in advance of the meeting. 4. Adopt the Agenda 5. Declaration of Interest 6. Announcements 7. Adoption of Minutes of Previous Meeting 7.1. Minutes of a Regular Meeting of June 7, 2021 5 8. Public Meetings *8.1. Public Meeting for a Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment 14 Applicant: Fairhaven Investments Inc. Location: Blocks 112 and 113 on Plan 40M-2294, Bowmanville Report: PDS-036-21 (Public Meeting Presentation has been Added) 9. Delegations 9.1. Jeff Kelso, Regarding Report PDS-039-21 Recreation Vehicle and Trailer 62 Storage Study 9.2. Jarrett Gagnon, Regarding Report PDS-039-21 Recreation Vehicle and Trailer Storage Study 9.3. Alfred Massardo and Liza Maw, Regarding Report PDS-040-21 Request to Repeal Designation By-law 97-17; 4478 Highway 35/115 Page 2 10 11 12 13 *9.4. Wendy Bracken regarding AMESA Monitoring Reporting for the 66 Incinerator *9.5. Kirk Kemp, regarding PDS-037-21 Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment Applications to Facilitate the Severance of a Surplus Farm Dwelling at 40 Station Street, Orono Communications — Receive for Information 10.1. Garth Frizzell, President, Federation of Canadian Municipalities, and 81 Frank Cownie, President, ICLEI - Local Governments for Sustainability, Regarding Clarington Achieving Milestone 2 for Corporate Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Communications — Direction Presentations 12.1. Mark Murphy, Sr. Director, Capital and Planning, Lakeridge Heath, 83 Regarding an Update on the Lakeridge Health Bowmanville Helipad and Clarington Hospice *12.2. Emma Drake, M.Sc, Land Use Planner and Amanda Dougherty, Senior 87 Land Planner, D.M. Wills Associates Limited, Regarding Report PDS- 039-21 Recreation Vehicle and Trailer Storage Study (Presentation has been Added) Planning and Development Department Reports 13.1. PDS-036-21 Applications by Fairhaven Investments Inc. for Draft Plan 111 of Subdivision and Zoning By-law Amendment to Permit 34 Residential Units Consisting of 8 Single Detached Units and 26 Townhouse Units 13.2. PDS-037-21 Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment Applications 123 to Facilitate the Severance of a Surplus Farm Dwelling at 40 Station Street, Orono 13.3. PDS-038-21 Envision Durham, Proposed Policy Directions 142 *13.4. PDS-039-21 Recreation Vehicle and Trailer Storage Study 167 (Attachment 1 has been Added) *13.5. PDS-040-21 Request to Repeal Designation By-law 97-17; 4478 213 Highway 35/115 (Attachments 1 to 3 have been Added) Page 3 14. New Business — Consideration *14.1. Insurance Issues for Designated Properties (Councillor Hooper) 227 *14.2. Camp30 Adhoc Committee — Summer Developer Meeting (Councillor 229 Neal) 15. Unfinished Business 16. Confidential Reports 17. Adjournment Page 4 Clarington If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Co-ordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 Planning and Development Committee Minutes Date: June 7, 2021 Time: 7:00 p.m. Location: Council Members (in Chambers or MS Teams) I Members of the Public (MS Teams) Members Present: Mayor A. Foster, Councillor G. Anderson, Councillor R. Hooper, Councillor J. Jones, Councillor J. Neal, Councillor C. Traill, Councillor M. Zwart Staff Present: J. Newman, L. Patenaude, R. Windle, F. Langmaid, K. Richardson, T. Pinn Other Staff Present: A. Tapp, C. Salazar, C. Strike, S. Allin 1. Call to Order Councillor Anderson called the meeting to order at 7:07 p.m. 2. Land Acknowledgment Statement Mayor Foster led the meeting in the Land Acknowledgement Statement. 3. New Business — Introduction New business item(s) were added to the New Business — Consideration section of the agenda. 4. Adopt the Agenda Resolution # PD-180-21 Moved by Mayor Foster Seconded by Councillor Jones That the Agenda for the Planning and Development Committee meeting of June 7, 2021, be adopted as presented. Carried 1 Page 5 Planning and Development Committee Minutes of June 7, 2021 5. Declaration of Interest There were no disclosures of interest stated at this meeting. 6. Announcements Members of Committee announced upcoming community events and matters of community interest. 7. Adoption of Minutes of Previous Meeting 7.1 Minutes of a Regular Meeting of May 17, 2021 Resolution # PD-181-21 Moved by Councillor Zwart Seconded by Councillor Traill That the minutes of the regular meeting of the Planning and Development Committee meeting held on May 17, 2021, be adopted. Carried 8. Public Meetings 8.1 Public Meeting for a Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment to Allow Two Mixed Use Buildings Amanda Tapp, Planner II, made a verbal presentation to accompany an electronic presentation. Kim Demonte was called upon and was not present. Ryan Boland spoke in opposition of the application. Mr. Boland expressed his concerns regarding the height of the development. He stated that it directly impacts the neighboring backyards to the south and believes there could have been a better selected area. Mr. Bolan concluded by stating the development will affect the value of his home and answered questions from Members of Committee. Aaron Gillard and John Buckley, 2779471 Ontario Limited, were present regarding 2345-2349 Highway 2, Bowmanville. Mr. Buckley provided the background and history of the application. He explained the current and proposed zoning and outlined what is included in the proposal including the planning process and what they've learned through their virtual public information centers. He outlined the next steps in the process noting they will address all public and Staff comments in their next submission. Mr. Buckley displayed a photo of the proposal and Mr. Gillard answered questions from Members of Committee. 2 Page 6 Planning and Development Committee Minutes of June 7, 2021 8.2 Public Meeting for a Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment to Permit Commercial Uses on a Residential Property within the Hamlet of Newtonville Amanda Tapp, Planner II, made a verbal presentation to accompany an electronic presentation. Danielle Kane spoke in opposition to the application. Ms. Kane explained that she was a victim in the 2018 Toronto shooting and has been paralyzed from the waist down. She expressed her concerns regarding stores in Ontario having no ramps, curb cuts or parking. Ms. Kane added that the proposal does not allow for accessible parking, space for a safe ramp, and does not comply with the accessibility standards. She noted that as the population ages in Ontario, more residents will need accessible parking. Ms. Kane stated that she hopes Committee considers persons with disabilities when considering the application. Ricky Menezes spoke in opposition to the application. Mr. Menezes stated that he is legally blind and is extremely upset with this proposal. He expressed his concerns regarding another store in Ontario being inaccessible and outlined the risks of pedestrians and traffic. Mr. Menezes explained that the proposal is a terrible plan and should be analyzed as it is going to have long term consequences for people with disabilities. He added that poor parking is a big issue for safety especially if someone is using an accessibility device. Mr. Menezes concluded by noting having two stores side by side is poor planning and should be denied. Sean Keane spoke in opposition to the application. Mr. Keane expressed his concerns regarding the municipality being used to settle a business dispute. He provided background of the dispute and noted there should be a proper investigation before any decision is made. Mr. Keane stated that political interference is another concern because a Member of Council signed a petition without speaking to both parties first. He explained that Council should look at how dangerous the site may be and noted rezoning should not be used to settle a dispute. Richard J. Mazar spoke in opposition to the application. Mr. Mazar expressed his concerns regarding the property being an unsuitable commercial property that has incredible risk. He explained the background of the proposal and dispute between the owner and tenant of the existing store. Mr. Mazar expressed his concerns regarding accessibility and parking and answered questions from Members of Committee. Mike Gimblett spoke in support of the application. Mr. Gimblett noted that he is a resident of Newtonville and attends the store several times a week. He explained the importance of supporting local business, especially during the pandemic. Mr. Gimblett explained that the applicant has been part of the community for 30 years and has been involved with the store for five years. 3 Page 7 Planning and Development Committee Minutes of June 7, 2021 He added that he is annoyed to hear concerns from the public who don't reside in Clarington or Newtonville. Mr. Gimblett stated that Newtonville residents have proven their support for the proposal as they want to see it succeed. He noted that the owner of the existing store has not taken any steps to improve the accessibility of the store until now. Mr. Gimblett concluded by requesting Committee to approve the application without delay so Mr. Kerswell can reopen his business to serve the residents of Newtonville. He answered questions from Members of Committee. Sharon Graveron was called upon and was not present. Fay Goveas spoke in opposition to the application. She expressed her concerns regarding parking and the potential for congestion on street because of the lack of parking. She added that she is concerned with the overflow vehicles blocking the driveway. Karen Pais was called upon and was not present. Melodie Minus spoke in opposition to the application. She expressed her concerns regarding two stores being side by side as it is creating unnecessary competition, safety hazards, and increased traffic. Ms. Minus stated that a better option would be to secure an existing store front or create one in a better located area in the community. George Panaioutys was called upon and was not present. Dave Higgins spoke in support of the application. Mr. Higgins thanked Councillor Traill for stopping the conflict resolutions of previous speakers. He stated that his family has lived in Newtonville for six years and added that Mr. Kerswell was the first resident he met. Mr. Higgins explained that the store promotes local businesses by selling vegetables and baked goods from local growers. He stated that he walked through the proposed area and could see the vision of the new store. Mr. Higgins explained that there are parking spots on each side, including one accessible parking spot. He stated that he hopes Mr. Kerswell is given the opportunity to operate his business again and to serve the residents of Newtonville. He stated that the store will be more accessible, provide more parking and a safe entry and exit path. Mr. Higgins requested Committee to approve the application. George Paniaoutys spoke in opposition to the application. Mr. Paniaoutys agrees with Ms. Kane's concerns regarding accessibility. He stated that there are not enough parking spots and is not safe for ambulance access. Virginia Hardy was called upon and was not present. Kristen Taylor was called upon and was not present. 4 Page 8 Planning and Development Committee Minutes of June 7, 2021 Frank Hill spoke in opposition to the application. Mr. Hill stated that they are the new owners of the existing store. He explained that they are eager to open their store to provide accessible parking, fast food, create jobs, keep the historical energy and appearance of the community, and provide charity work. Mr. Hill expressed his concerns regarding having two stores side by side, the proposal not meeting existing commercial requirements and lack of appropriate setbacks. He stated that they have plans to change the accessibility of the store, open a restaurant, charity work and will continue to do what is best for the community. Mr. Hill stated that the application should not be approved and answered questions from Members of Committee. Serena and Justin Rolle spoke in opposition to the application. Ms. Rolle stated that they are the owners of the neighbouring store building and expressed her concerns regarding the potential for pedestrian hazards, two stores being side by side, not keeping the town as a hamlet, parking, and the lack of customer parking. She stated that the proposal is changing the historical fagade and is not in line with the Official Plan. Ms. Rolle noted that they intend to keep the building as a store and continue to do upgrades. She added that the proposal impacts the area and answered questions from Members of Committee. Sara Bachan-Thomas spoke in opposition to the application. Ms. Bachan- Thomas expressed her concerns regarding two stores beside each other and taking away from the historic look of the community. Darryl Kerswell, applicant, stated that the proposal is to benefit the community and not personal to the owners of the Artgrow Corp. Mr. Kerswell explained that he has had a parking analysis completed and submitted to Planning Staff and has been advised it meets all aspects for parking spots necessary for the square footage of the store. He added that the store front will look like a traditional convenience store. Mr. Kerswell stated that he is aware of the setbacks and will build within them. He noted that the parking will be located on his property except the loading zone. He added that the loading times would be before and after business hours. Mr. Kerswell stated that he will have more parking than the existing store if an equal easement agreement is obtained. He explained that he is looking forward to receiving new products and having a restaurant back in town. Mr. Kerswell explained that the parking plan designated parking spots that will not impact traffic and will allow access to the existing commercial property. He added that there will be no issues with crowding at the intersection with the new location. Mr. Kerswell is requesting that Committee approve the application so he can open his store. He explained that the online comments have been stressful, and his proposal is in the best interest of the community. Mr. Kerswell stated that the community wants the business back and answered questions from Members of Committee. 5 Page 9 Planning and Development Committee Minutes of June 7, 2021 Recess Resolution # PD-182-21 Moved by Councillor Jones Seconded by Mayor Foster That the Committee recess for 10 minutes. Carried The meeting reconvened at 9:28 p.m. with Councillor Anderson in the Chair. 8.3 Public Meeting for a Proposed Amendment to the COVID-19 Community Improvement Plan Sarah Allin, Planner II, made a verbal presentation to accompany an electronic presentation. No one spoke in support of or in opposition to the application. 8.4 Public Meeting for a Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment to Implement a Previous Draft Plan of Subdivision Council chose not to hear the staff presentation. Bryce Jordan, Applicant, thanked Staff for bringing forward the correction of the error in the by-law and recommending the adoption of the by-law at the next Council meeting, so the development can proceed. 9. Delegations 10. Communications — Receive for Information 10.1 Gary Muller, MCIP, RPP, Director of Planning, Region of Durham, Regarding 2020 Annual Building Activity Review Resolution # PD-183-21 Moved by Mayor Foster Seconded by Councillor Hooper That Communication Item 10.1, Gary Muller, MCIP, RPP, Director of Planning, Region of Durham, Regarding 2020 Annual Building Activity Review, be received for information. Carried 11. Communications — Direction 12. Presentations n Page 10 Planning and Development Committee Minutes of June 7, 2021 13. Planning and Development Department Reports 13.1 PDS-032-21 Application to Amend the Zoning By-law to Allow Two Mixed Use Buildings at 2345 - 2349 Highway 2, Southwest Corner of Green Road and Regional Highway 2 in Bowmanville Resolution # PD-184-21 Moved by Councillor Neal Seconded by Mayor Foster That Report PDS-032-21 be received for information only; That Staff receive and consider comments from the public and Council with respect to the above referenced applications; and That all interested parties listed in Report PDS-032-21 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. Carried 13.2 PDS-033-21 Rezoning Application to Permit Commercial Uses on a Residential Property at 4504 Highway 2, Newtonville Resolution # PD-185-21 Moved by Mayor Foster Seconded by Councillor Zwart That Report PDS-033-21 be received for information only; That Staff receive and consider comments from the public and Council with respect to the above referenced application; and That all interested parties listed in Report PDS-033-21 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. Carried 13.3 PDS-034-21 Proposed Amendment to the COVID-19 Community Improvement Plan (CIP) Resolution # PD-186-21 Moved by Mayor Foster Seconded by Councillor Zwart That Report PDS-034-21 be received; That Staff receive and consider comments from the public and Council with respect to the Draft Revised COVID-19 Community Improvement Plan; That provided there are no substantial objections from the public, or further substantial modifications required, the Draft Revised COVID-19 Community Improvement Plan be approved, and a by-law to adopt it be passed at the June 14, 2021 Council meeting; 7 Page 11 Planning and Development Committee Minutes of June 7, 2021 That a Program -Specific Criteria be added to the Adaptation to Outdoor Operation Grant to exempt applications for the Seasonal Sidewalk Patio License Fee from the Means Test Criteria; and That all interested parties listed in Report PDS-034-21 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. Carried 13.4 PDS-035-21 An Application by Farsight Investments Limited to Rezone the Subject Lands to Implement a Draft Approved Plan of Subdivision at 1700 Lambs Road, West side of Lambs Road, North of Durham Highway No. 2 and South of Concession Street, Bowmanville Resolution # PD-187-21 Moved by Mayor Foster Seconded by Councillor Hooper That Report PDS-035-21 be received; That provided there are no substantial objections from the public, the proposed application for rezoning be approved and that the Zoning By-law contained in Attachment 1 to Report PDS-035-21 be passed at the June 14, 2021 Council meeting; That once all conditions contained in the Official Plan with respect to the removal of the (H) Holding Symbol are satisfied, the By-law authorizing the removal of the (H) Holding Symbol be approved; That the Durham Regional Planning and Economic Development Department and Municipal Property Assessment Corporation be forwarded a copy of Report PDS-035-21 and Council's decision; and That all interested parties listed in Report PDS-035-21 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. Carried 14. New Business — Consideration 14.1 Potential for Implementation of the "Whitby Green Standard" in Clarington's Existing Green Initiatives (Mayor Foster) Resolution # PD-188-21 Moved by Mayor Foster Seconded by Councillor Zwart That Staff investigate and report back on the potential for implementing the `Whitby Green Standard' within Clarington's existing green initiatives including options for more environmentally friendly roofing. Carried 8 Page 12 Planning and Development Committee Minutes of June 7, 2021 15. Unfinished Business 16. Confidential Reports 17. Adjournment Resolution # PD-189-21 Moved by Councillor Hooper Seconded by Mayor Foster That the meeting adjourn at 10:16 p.m. Carried 9 Page 13 • Clar gton 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 for a proposed Plan of Subdivision and an application for a Zoning By-law Amendment. Fairhaven Investments Inc. has submitted applications for Draft Plan of Subdivision and rezoning to permit a plan of subdivision with a total of 34 residential units consisting of 8 single detached units and 26 townhouse units. The subdivision would extend Nelson Street north and create a new local road. The applications are deemed complete. Blocks 112 and 113 on Plan 40M-2294, north of Nelson Street, south of the former Goodyear lands in Bowmanville. For additional information on the proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision and zoning by-law amendment, and the background studies are available for review on our website at clarington.net/developmentproposals Questions? Please contact Brandon Weiler 905-623-3379, extension 2424. or by email at bweilera-clarinaton.net Our procedures have changed as we continue to adapt to the COVID-19 pandemic. As mandated by Public Health, to maintain physical distancing these meetings will take place electronically. This meeting is live -streamed for public viewing at www.clarington.net/calendar Date: Monday, June 28, 2021 Time: 7:00 pm Place: Electronic Teams meeting by way of on-line device or telephone If you wish to speak at the public meeting, please pre -register and you will be provided with further instructions. Page 14 You can pre -register by completing the online form at www.clarington.net/delegations or contact the Clerk's Department at 905-623-3379 ext. 2109 or clerks(a_clarington.net by Friday, June 25th, 2020 at 3:30 p.m. If you are unable to participate electronically, please contact the Clerk's Department and we will do our utmost to accommodate you. We encourage you to submit your written comments for Committee's consideration to Brandon Weiler at bweiler(@clarington.net or by mail or drop box to 40 Temperance Street, Bowmanville, ON L1 C 3A6 prior to the date of the public meeting File Number: S-C 2021-0001, ZBA 2021-0007 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, in the opinion of the Tribunal, there are reasonable grounds to do so. Ryan Windle, MCIP, RPP Director of Planning Services IAADepartment\Application Files\SC-Subdivision\S-C-2020\S-C-2020-0001 Brookhill Phase 5\Public Notice\SC2020-0001 - Public Meeting Notice.docx Page 15 Application By: Fairhaven Investments Inc. Fairhaven Investments Inc. has submitted applications for Draft Plan of Subdivision and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit 34 residential units consisting of 8 single detached units and 26 townhouse units. Public Meeting: June 28, 2021 Page 16 '1 S-C-202 ■ _0001 0 UL D NEW PUBLIC RDA z � r W-4 Comments and Questions • Timing of the proposed development, should it be approved; • Information regarding studies submitted, specifically the Environmental Site Assessment; • Information on the future development of Special Study Area 3; • Information on previous plans for the Blocks when the subdivision to the south was developed; and • Concerns with the townhouses and access Page 20 1�, lkw Page 21 11. r� M �� I, — — — — — —— I I I I I I + I + � r r Single Detached ® Residential Townhouses Lands to be Dedicated r Page 23 Develop Pronosa Position on Development: The development proposal submitted by Fairhaven Investments Inc. Should not be allowed to proceed as per the current revision of the draft plan for the following reasons: 1) Increased Safety Risk to existing children in the neighborhood due to an unnecessary amount of increased traffic travelling down Albert &Nelson Street as a result of the multi -unit town houses 2) The Environmental Site Assessment does not meet the requirements set out in Ontario Regulation 153/04. The report contains several errors; poor assumptions and Page 24 Risk's Associated with Increased Traffic Flow Proposed Plan Results in the Following: ■ 26 Townhouse Dwelling Units ■ 8 Single Detached Units ■ Two Dead End Roads with single access point at the corner of Albert and Nelson Street. ■ Increased Traffic and Noise. Potential of an additional 68+ Vehicles travelling down Albert / Nelson Street multiple times per day. ■ Increased Safety Risk to Small Children in the existing Neighborhood Recommend Resolutions to Address Concerns: Recommendation 1: 1) Replace the proposed residential townhomes with single detached units. • This would reduce the total number of units from 34 dwellings down to between 18-20 dwellings. • This would reduce traffic volume through Nelson and Albert Street by 50% vs. the current one proposed. • 1 believe this would align with the original plan submitted by the builder when the neighborhood was first constructed. Note: Recommendation 1 and 2 both need to be completed in order to satisfy the concerns. Concerns with Environmental Site Assessment Quality (0 REG 153/04) Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) Summar • The ESA did not identify any Potential Contaminating Activities (PCA's) at the Phase 1 Property • The ESA did identify (3) offsite PCA's • PCA#47 — Rubber Manufacturing and Processing (Goodyear Property) • PCA#46 — Rail Yards, Tracks and Spurs (Goodyear Property) • PCA #28 — Gasoline and Associated Products Storage in Fixed Tanks (Goodyear Property) • In Pinchin's Opinion, The 3 PCA's identified are not considered to result in areas of potential environmental concern (APEC's) • There opinion is driven by two primary factors: 1) Their distance from the Property 2) "Relatively Low Permeability of the inferred native soil" which they indicate in multiple times throughout the report is primarily clay and silt. • As a result of this inference Pinchin believes a Phase Two ESA is not required. Page 28 Incomplete Environmental Site Assessment: • Key Pieces of Information are missing from the ESA report completed by Pinchin Environmental as shown in the disclaimer below. This report nas Deen rsmueo w hout havog receNed res3parasos fromrequeas fay mfornm on seat to die Onta * Whstry Of tf?e F-hV ar1Mff rt Gons&Vatffin aMd Pares anal TeO.OMM Standards and Safety A.ul ,R - Once re.�panse-s fmm these regulatoFy dies are feceoved, the infarmaF�nq vwfl be mcojporefed ana a re0sed verses of this repml_ Our cwc0ijvaqs -and recommendations may L�e amended based on ri&s in�br7T abaa. ifp a+ddatbn, dUa 10 h,rParacy cfdsrrR -Df vomnient repo&;ems, Pkwh n was unabi`a t-D regrew hrstarial a ty dkocloies for thw.Ph One Study Area. • The missing information prevents the ESA from meeting the requirements of Ontario Regulation 153/04 — Records of Site Condition — Part XV.1 of the act. • In addition, the report itself contains both incorrect and/or misleading information, which will be reviewed as part of the upcoming slides. • As a result the conclusions and recommendations resulting from this report should not be considered. Page29 Contradicting, Incorrect or Misleading Information Section 4.1 of the Report: "In General, PCAs that were relatively close to the phase one property and/or were at properties upgradient of the Phase One Property with respect to the inferred groundwater flow direction were considered PCAs resulting in APECs." o In the report, Pinchin indicates that the topography in the area slopes in the "southwestern direction" and the unconfined groundwater flows in that same direction. o All of the PCXs are identified as being "Upgradient/Transgradient" o The map on the following slide shows the location of the PCXs relative to the phase 1 property. o I plotted a shaded area onto the map starting from a point on each of the PCA's in a "southwestern direction" to show where they intersect the phase one property. o 2 out of 3 PCXs Identified are in relatively close proximity to the phase one property and would indicate the potential for contaminates/spills to flow onto/under the phase one property. o Despite this, the environmental site assessment concludes that there is low likelihood that any of the PCXs would have resulted in an area of environmental concern. How is that possible? Page 30 FORMER RAIL `.WUINL BOWMANVILLE CREEK URE 4 PHASE ONE BOUNDARY 1 C1 � S 7 ' ti< � � 5 4 •]•n 1 SQn� nuuN,",v �nl I sra _E Ni 113 SCHOOL 70 INFERRE❑ GR4UNDNtATER FL9Y! �IRECiION I RES RESIDENTIAL PHASE ON E STUDY AREA BOUMOARY RESIDENTIAL USE J PARKLAND USE; INSTITUTIONAL USE MiDUSTR43L USE 1 CCMAERCIAL USE: COMAUNITY USE PGA POTENTIALLY COWAMAINATING ACTIVITIES PCA NUMBER ODNTRIBUTES TO AN+,PEC PCA NUMBER DDES HOT CMTRIBuTE5 I. TG AH APEC h m �lk I (P=INCfilN PRCUECT NMlE PHASE ONE ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT FAIRHAVEN INVESTMENTS INC PREUECT LOCATION BLOCKS 112 AND 113 PART OF LOTS 11 AND 12,CONCESSION 1, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO FGURE NAME POTENTIALLY CONTAMINATING ACTIVITIES SCALE PROJECTNO. AS SHOWN 287038 BATE FIGURE NO. MARCH 2C21 d Page 31 Contradicting, Incorrect or Misleading Information (Contd "Pinchin did not note or observe any significant potentially contaminating properties that should be included as part of this assessment (e.g. landfills, large industrial manufacturers, etc.)" ❑ The Goodyear / Veyance Conveyor plant located < 190m from the phase one property is a "large industrial manufacturers" ❑ This statement is either meant to be intentionally misleading or appears to be a "cut and paste" from another repot. ❑ Another example of copy paste errors, likely from different reports is seen below in section 4.1.1. Where the same sentences are repeated twice *.1. f Phase Orre S7utfy AFm Dele nfr3st�on Based on a FeViaw of the available hisbarical information and observations made during the Site noon naissance for the properties greater than 250 metres (m), but lass than 1 kilometre (krn), from the Phase One Property boundary, Pin -chin did not note or observe any significant potentially contaminating properties that should be in-cluded as part of this assessment e.g., landfills, large industrial manufacturers, etc.). As such, the Phase One Sturdy Area consisted of the Phase One Prop@", as well as all properties situated wholly, or partly, within 2M m from the nearest point of a boundary of the Phase One Property, in order to meet the minimum requirements set forth in O_ Reg. 15 NO 4. As such, the Phase One Study Area consis-ocl of -.-io PLiase One Propert, as well as all properties situated wholly, or partlhr, within 250 m fror-. tr.o nearest point of a boundary of the Phase One Property, to mast ths minimum requirements sot forth in 0. Reg_ 153M4. Page 32 CantradictinR, Incorrect or Misleading Information (Contd TabM 2 - TaGla ad f otarrlWlly CcmUminminng Aollvtbm CnrWRwHno 4o CH ILIWNCi teffl Phut Cr4 art, AM ■ 7ha PCA Leal" ed P&A pros" L"Lc- R&N m W InFerrrrd 3M Mo%j Pawn UAV bmpse&W BkOp r darm PorrrdihW Oalai7 raLkN-q A&&4hY I0eh-8Irr eo UT- hil 600- O Ge oun&mhr Fkr.Orremr, fX"MO Idi'Suhd ti54a w, &A &mRraa4 PCA-Zb 0 FWFhj* AVKMM nd�J �laraq� w �is7 TiYn 7e IDo rKWUN" UV"W4TraWti+ n1 MID W aa{.*D3Ob PCAA F*Fwj} AvnW a CCWUMr� M-V �-n! W �t►W" apad 4'rran ad+e++l N*�k aa{+�[atb PieE i m Ow saw Gourrwtd m PrQA Chris ;e • R j Yrrrry. Tr#4 wd SpLwl 10 rmt J d #Tranr�ti�er+l Flak �pp+oat�e APE*-Auii8rf liiiEr" *Whbmi PrA - Pomr LW 68raamrn" AMft i - Lftuhb • d PCAomhowt Ro aw PI►*ri 0- rn rP''i?.n raffia NI* Orm—.vri4w Aeprambeam ih rho FfF OF&"A� ❑ The Data Provided in Table 2 is Incorrect. If you refer back to the map from slide 9, PCA#28 is located 90 m northwest of the Phase 1 Property. ❑ There is also a second building on the Goodyear Property that isn't referenced as a PCA nor is it discussed at all in the report. This building appears to be less than 10 — 20 meters from the location of the AST Farm. ❑ In the report, Pinchin discredits all PCA's as an APEC despite the fact that they are upgradient of the property, and in the flow path of the groundwater flow as shown in the map on the previous page. Page 33 Incomplete Sections of Report (Spills/Incidents/Offenses' • In Section 4.2.1.7 of the ESA Report, Pinchin states the following: 4. Z 1- 7 EnvkorimontaJ fn denM Order. Offa ces and Sp&s ERI S co mplated a search of tha various provi ncial and federal databases for information regard ing environmental incidents, orders, offences and spills. O- Rego. 153,+44 indicates that information from these databases only needs to be obtained for the Phase One Property and properties adJacent to the Phase One Property. Details regarding the searched databases are provided in the ERIS report in Appendix G- The ERIS database search of records of environmental i ncidents. orders- offences or spills revealed the following for the Phase One Property and properties adjacent to the Phase One Property: + No records were found of errrironrcrantal incidents, orders, offences or spills for the Phase One Property. No recxds were found of environmental incidents, orders, offences or spills for properties adjaoant to the Phase One Property except int the foliomng• • The report only discusses 12 Spills, 11 of with came from the Goodyear plant between 1991 and 2007. • This is only a fraction of what was found in the ERIS Report Date of Spill Spill Type Quantity (L) Contamination possible / Confirmed (ERIS Report) Type Contamination Note: 7-Feb-91 Oil Unknown Possible Soil Oil Sheen Seen in Bowmanville Creek 19-Feb-91 Oil 80 Possible Soil Hydraulic Oil on Ground 14-Mar-91 Oil Unknown Possible Soil Oil Sheen Seen in Bowmanville Creek 8-May-91 Hexane 32 Confirmed Soil Leaked on Ground Due to Leaking Fitting 14-Feb-92 Gas Unknown Confirmed Water Sheen Seen on Bowmanville Creek 22-Apr-92 Natural Gas Unknown Possible Air Equipment Failure 18-Feb-97 Oil Unknown Possible Water Bowmanville Creek - Equipment Failure 18-Feb-97 Oil Unknown Confirmed Water Bowmanville Creek - Equipment Failure 6-Jan-00 Oil Unknown Possible Water Bowmanville Creek 11-Mar-00 Oil Unknown Possible Soil Oil Sheen Seen in Bowmanville Creek 4-Dec-00 Oil 341 Possible Water Reason for Spill Undetermined 3-Mar-07 Oil Unknown Confirmed Water Bowmanville Creek - Reason Undetermined Not Listed Water Solvent HCL (<10%) 601 Possible Soil Page 34 Incomplete Sections of Report (Spills/Incidents/Offenses' Caption 1— ERIS Report SLPL - Ontario Spills A search of the SPL database. dated t9$S-Mar 202Q Jul 2020 - Aug 2020 has round that there are 36 SPL site(s) within approxrmately 0.25 kilometers of the project property, ❑ 34 / 36 of the spills identified were from the good year plant. 70% of these spills were not considered in ESA Report? Why? ❑ There are other Captions from that ERIS Database Search as well that identify records in other databases including, the National Environmental Emergencies System, National Analysis of Trends in Emergencies Systems; Non -Compliance Reports; all of which identified the goodyear property as the primary and/or only contributor to events in those databases. None of which are discussed in the ESA? Why? Other Captions — ERIS Report EM - ERIS Historical Searches A search of the EHS databarm, dated 1M-OaL 31. 2020 has found that there are 6 EHS site(s) within approximalaly 6-25 kilomalars of the pri3tecA property. NEES - National Environmental ErnwgenciaS System (NEES) A search of the NEES database, dated 1974-20G3' has found Mal there are 2 NEES sirelsj within apprcWmabely 0.25 kilomelers of the pro]-' PrepgrtY. MM GD4DYEARCkNADAINC Nt 151 - HenZe mplla rwa RekMrht distance fml Mao Kev sa9.a is M - Ontarlo Regulation 347 Waata Generators Summary h eoarch or tho GIN dotob000, doted 1099 Jul 39, 2020 hoc found that i iom �m 15 GEN eilo(cj within opprcWfrrztoly 0.26 kilomolora of the pfoject property - HATE - National Analysts of Tronds In Emerg"cles Systarn (HATES) A sa h of FhR Nf'Pl rIR1RhnR . riwlw 1 rkr r.'19 . 9DI.4 hR fnLnrl IhRI fhRra arc R ur l h4(R} vilhin wnrrnrimwlRly r5 95 kinmaiarR of A search of the NATE c a'atase. dated 1974-1994 L has found that there are 2 NATE site(a) within apprmimabelyr 0.25 kilornebers of the the project property. Project PrepertY- Page 35 Incomplete Sections of Report(Spills/incidents/Offenses site: GOODYE4R CANADA we. CW F9e NC: L&U?" Crews 41"er Ho, G7 01309070 Rtgfow CENTRAL REGION Court Lvc h— M"iafry dsWct YORK4)URHAM Pubhraaon Cay. AAd-0orr rifle: Act. Adys): hw. Afarter: .S t d Mauer. In :ganen r la V$l4 pen 7, Pe> )Iy n..yosea: OeSCrtAbon: DISCMRGE OF CONTAMINANT CAUSING AOYERSE EFFECT. 8ackg.ound: ORL: CON61 °d❑ This is another caption from the ERIS report that was coxv also alarming as you can see in the highlighted text ❑ Significant Fines were imposed as a result of discharges of contaminates into the environment. A000Qn40 004005 +� ❑ Neither of these dates listed are aligned to dates of CDY.1I, Act. EPA s�dG�an: 14(1) other spills that were discussed in the report and as Ace'Reguladon+5ecuwr: EPA 14 (1) Date of Ofience: Date to" L°�� IW7W3 such are presumed to be other significant spills not Cnarye Dlspnurlon' FINED Fine: s.i.00040 �'�LY investigated in the report. Sly GOODYE4RCANAUAW Dwasha e: ON CONY Fde Na: Lo aon: Crown aDE4 NO: 9D4)411WD68 Regret: CENTRAL REGION Co+ fLpeau6n: ANdraRypt>wgd YORK.DURHAM moruan0P wry: Pubkaaon rack; Act.' Actlsl r Fr Nvatr r Second Manor: Inrestgaaon 7: lrtreslrga8on 1: Fe--Mzy bnposed. aeseupngn: PERMITTED THE DeCNARGE OF FUEL OIL INTO S.O"ANyqLE CREEK CAUSING POASIMS IMPAIRMENT TO THE OuAuTr OF wATER. 8eckg.vund: {1RL: Adnillom) OmsN PuWpad.i n.16 Ca -I; + Act. 04YrtA Regureum- 3ec6- 30r1) ActrRYq�reh'rxVSYrnon: dNPJI-3I1(1} Oat! al Orlon[!: oarc of Cea,dtuen: 0.9. CJ'—PW: V27MI C"QC+apgrbw ; FINED fine - Synapsis: ❑ I could not find anywhere in the ESA report where these incidents were discussed. Page 36 Poor Assumptions Made ❑Pinchin dismissed the potential for any of the spills and/or other PCA's to have had an adverse impact based primarily on the following assumption: "Based on the location and distance relative to the Phase One Property ("X" meters) the inferred groundwater flow direction as well as subsurface soils having relatively low permeability (i.e. silt and clay)". It is Pinchin's opinion that kX Activity) at this property has not resulted in an APEC at the phase one property." ❑ In the early slides, I reviewed the topographical maps and the PCA's that were identified and showed how if you follow a variety of paths in the "southwestern direction" that the ground water flow for those PCA's would have flow into / over / under the Phase 1 Property. ❑ In the following slides I will show how Pinchin's assumption of the permeability of the soil is also incorrect and/or misleading, which is the key basis for why all of the spills did not contaminate the Phase 1 Property. Page 37 Geologic Information 7B'r2 o-n .- .. ... . Unit ID 14a Geological Deposit: River deposits Deposit Age: quaternary Primary Maierial: clay, silt. sand, gravel Secondary Material: Primary General' Tluvlal Primary General Modifier: modern floodplain Veneer: Episode: Hudson Sub Episode: Strata Mother Surface Provenance: Carbon Content Formation: Permeability: Variable Material Description: Gravel. sand. sift, clay, muck-, 1-2m thick: occurs on modem floodplains Unit ID 14b Geological Deposit: River deposits Deposit Age: quaternary Piirrmry Matcrial: day, silt nand, growl Secondary Material: Primary General: fluvial Primary General Modifier: abandoned floodplairi Veneer F rriwrrire• A A — Sub Episode: Stmts Modifier. Surface Provenance: Carbon Content: Formation: Permea billy: Variable Material Description: Gravel, sand, silt. clay: 1-8m thick forms river deltas and terraces of early Unit to 8a Geological Deposit! Glacial lake deposits Deposit rigs: o—mrnory Primary Material: sand Secondary Material: Primary Gene ral, glaciolacustrine Primary General Modifier, foreshorelbasinal Veneer Episode! Wisconsin Sub Episode: Michigan Strata Mod'dier. Surface Provenance: Carbon Content Fonnation, P Rate 38 High Material Description! Sand and silty sand: 1a50m thick occurs in basin lows and nearshore flats Conclusion from Topological Data: • The Phase 1 Area as well as the Goodyear lands where a large number of significant spills occurred are located in sections 10A and 10B • The Data from the ERIS report shows that the material make up is "clay, silt, sand and grave l"........sand and gravel which have relatively high permeability ratings were conveniently ignored when drawing their conclusions as to whether or not the PCA impacted the Phase 1 Property. • It also shows that both of these area's have a "Variable" permeability Rating...... not a "Low permeability rating" as specified in Pinchin's conclusions. • The only area's on the map which have a low permeability, and are made up of primarily clay and silt were section 7 which is outside of the study area and much further south of the phase one property. • As such the conclusions drawn by Pinchin as to whether or not the PCA resulted in an APEC cannot be credited and in my opinion, based on this fact there is a high likelihood that the PCA's did result in APEC's on the Phase 1 Property. Page 39 Hazardous Waste Generation (Goodyear 1986-2018) + 1,7013,496 kilograms (kg) of all skimmings and sludges; + 3,155,180-kg of waste oils and lubricants_ • 242,418-kg of emulsified ails,, + 9,14t}-kg of heavy fuels,, + 3%.741-kg of petroleum distillates; + 151,945-kg of light fuels, + 465-k9 of ha"natod solvents, + 16,852-kg of PCBs; + 14,38&kg of aromatic solvents: + 1.1 124Q of acid waste -heavy metals_ 41,5Mkcg of acid wash -other metals; 87.271- kg of inorganic laboratory chemicals; ■ 674,856-kg of other specified inorganics: + 11,202-kg of organic laboratory chemicals; + 2 kg of painWpigmantscoating residues; and + 3.6" of additional various hazardous wastes including other speclfiad Inorganics, ali phasic solvents_ detergentslsoaps_ phenolic wastes, patholog ical wastes and wash compressed gases from 19M until 2018. "Based on the location and distance relative to the Phase One Property (>190 meters) the inferred groundwater flow direction as well as subsurface soils having relatively low permeability (i.e. silt and clay). It is Pinchin's opinion that hazardous waste generation at this property has not resulted in an APEC at the phase one property. Page 40 Incomplete Sections of Report - Notices and Instruments 4_2.1.1 C? Notfms and fnstuments ERIS cornp6ted a ran crf the provincial Errviranmental Re� ism for records pertain inn to proposals, decisions, and $XCoptiornS regarding poHo _ Acts, instruments, ents, or reg ulations that cook signIf cantly affect tnq grrvirorrme nt. ERI S also searched the Fec:ord of Silo Condlition database for filed RS _ Comments and Questions: C: There is no conclusion or discussion on the findings, just a statement. It appears this section of the report was not completed. Page 41 Incomplete Sections of Report (MOE) 4_2. Z MiniSt.rp of 118 EnVOIC1'lfi? ent, rrSer vafior arO .rks Fn5eaom o� InfarrmVion Search The M ECP Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Office in Toronto, Ontario was contacted to determine if records exist for environmental rnatters such as orders, spills_ previous investigafions, prosecutions, registered PCB waste storage sites, waste generator, waste receivers, Cs -of -A and ECAs associated with the Phase One Property. The search was requested on February 11, 2021 and a respcmse was nGt rec8ived from the MKP at die lime of writing this report. When a formal response is FOCSiV6d, it will he reviewed by Pinchln- If there is any information that represents a potential issue of environmental concern- a copy of the response will to f0FWarded to the Client under separate per. Our conclusions and recommendations. may he amended eased on this information. A copy of Pinch in's request submitted to the MK P is provided in Appendix H of this report. Page 42 Incomplete Sections of Report (TSSA) 4.2..E T"noca? S1aridards and Safety Authonfy Seaech The TSSA is the regulatory body that gOVerr:s the safe handling and storage of fuel in Ontario- All storage of gasoline, diesel and fuel oil is subject to the Technical Standards and Safety t- The Technical Standards and Safety Act and its relevant docu ments and regulations (a_g-- L4ui+d Funds NencMng Code - Ontario Reguilatr 2t I — Fuei W, Ontario Regidatio 217101 — Liquid Fels) require that all fuel storage devices such as ASTs and underground staraga tanks �USTs) be registered with the TSSA. Pinchin contacted the TSSA to establish the status cf the Site with respect to Its files, to identify outstanding instructions, tank registrations, incident reports, fueltil spills or contaminafion records associated with the Site. At the dme cf writing this. report, no response had been received from the TSSA. tiltilhen a formal response is received, rt will be reviewed by Pinchirr_ If there is any information that represents a potential issue of environmental concern, a copy of the response will be Forwarded to the Client under separate ter. Our concluslons and rec rnmendaticns may The amended based on this infUrnattion- A copy of Rinchln's request submitted to the TSSA is provided in Appendix I of this report. Page 43 Incomplete Sections of Report (City Directories) 4_2.5 Ci*, D;re ;es At the time crf writing this Feport, and due to temporary CIOSur S of Pudic UbFaries and the Archives of Cartada, City a irectoriies ,ire not arallahle for Pirrchln"a review. This represents a potential data gap in the hlstoric-al documentation review proms. Page 44 Incomplete Sections of Report (PURs) 4-2.4 Property Urrderwroters' Rests and P&ans Property Underwriters' Reports "Fts) prawide detailed information on a site pecifrc basis, including descriptions cf build ing construction, heating sources, pFDduction processes- and the Presence of any hazardous chemicals Or materials which may have hen historically stored on the Phase One Property_ They also ind icate the presence of enVironmental hazards such as electrical rooms, tra nsformers, boilers and storage tanks- Information Pronrided on Property Underwriters' Plans (PUPs) includes the location - capacity, and contents of ASTs, UST$, chemical story-ge and other forms of environmental hazards- Pinchin contacted Opta to obtain copies of Pugs and PUPLs related to the Phase One Property. A response was received from opta dated February 18- 20-21, which indicated that no PURs or P F's for the Phase Une Property were available. The Upta response is provided in Appendix P. Based on Ariel Photograph it Appears there was a lot of activity going on right up to the edge of the phase one property. Q: What about the remaining properties within the Phase One Study Area? Aerial Pho ftraph - I9CA Page 45 Comparisons Aerial Photograph - 19% Aerial Photograph - 1964 pro Aerial Photograph - 1976 *1 • 14 Page 46 Incomplete Sections of Report (Site Reconnaissance) 6.2 11 Detads of &aiding and Com:kwrr ILIMI ram.rP 8.214 DelMIS of Ground Cover During the Site roconnaessanca_ PMhin visually inspected the Phase One Property ground cover. The enure ground surface at the Site consisted of grassNegetativm. A prle or naR ve topsoil was otrserved on the ground surface an tine northwest pofbw Of tar(d Siia Aocordrng to the Site repr entative, ttrs matamal orrgirmed from the ra cently da yclo$MW ra u ennat propal'IM south of the Site. As such, IN$ rn&UW el does not represent a polenbai emrironmentat aow*m, PCA or APEC at the Site. $_Z T5 De!a9s Off Cfjrr&M arFfvmo R&�ways No current or torrner railway inframuctufo was otmarved on" Phase One Prop". a.2. f6 .arias of sfarnw sod. Vega s on ar4 Pavemerrf DurNN The Srte reconnaissance. Panchln did not observe any areas of stained MW, vegetation or pavement on the Phase One Pro perry. 8.2.17 areas -of Stressed Vegetabw Dururg the Site reconnai %s anm Parrchin dad not observe any areas ei stra&vA regetatian on the Pha 3a One P§rpWW. 6.2. t8 Areas of Fah' anrd Debas MafensIs No obvms areas where frlr matanal or detms tkaVe bey -, the Phasa3One Property. ❑ The following slide shows pictures of the site reconnaissance. ❑ How does a person identify whether or not the soil/vegetation/pavement is stained on the phase one property when it is covered in snow? ❑ Further to that point, how do you see if staining occurred when the client indicated they used all of the fill material from the properties south of it to bury the native soil ❑ 6.2.18 is contradictory to the statement made in 6.2.1.4 Page 47 Photo 1—NorMasl ar the Phase Cme Property, 10e2k - .. -.... .-.. Photo 2—Ncsllr.+esL of the Phase One Property, loaking aa,lhesac Pn.= 3— Southeasl or Pre Phase One Propene_ Icoklrxx mrMt!fs ' Photo# —Central pwbon of the Phase One PFgm ty. IoMng nw0twcst Photo s__Propenry forth 09 M Phaso OheFrapefry Phob 6—Properoes much or the Phase One Property. ME Conclusions and Recommendations to Resolve: • Based on the gaps identified in the ESA Report and the assumptions made based on misleading information. The recommendations from the ESA should not be considered as valid. • It is our opinion, that the PCA's identified in the report including the significant amount of spills which occurred on the goodyear lands directly adjacent to the Phase One Property, did result in several potential APEC's on the Phase 1 Property. • It is our recommendation that no further development occur on the Phase One Property until a Phase 2 Environmental Assessment is Completed and Confirms whether or not there is contaminated soil on the phase one property. Page 49 _ TEMPORARY ! " TURNHJG CIRCLE _ UIOCK 19 i � ➢EVElAFM CHT BLOCK 10 BLOCK9 6 �M 5 UNITS 2 3 rh � TEb}PE7AARY m STREET 6 SLOCK 11 i tCeet M elk NVO Open space Buffers Townhouse Residential Single Family Residential/Future Development Statutory Public Meeting June 28t", 2021 Draft Plan of Subdivision (S-C-2021-0001) Zoning By-law Amendment (ZBA2021-0007) FAIRHAVEN INVESTMENTS INC. Page 50 Legal Description: • BLOCK 113, PLAN 40M2294, CLARINGTON, REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF Is101:\:I_\ l� BLOCK 112, PLAN 40M2294, CLARINGTON, REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF DURHAM. S/T EASEMENT IN GROSS OVER PT 1 ON 40R24030 AS IN DR471684. Site Area: 1.53ha (3.8ac) Description of Subject Site: • Two remnant parcels of registered plan of subdivision 18T-93008 Currently vacant The Subject Site is located on the north side of the existing cul-de-sac on Nelson Street, abutting an existing residential subdivision. The Subject Site is currently accessed by Nelson Street via an existing cul-de-sac. ( - Subject Site) Page 51 North: • A former manufacturing plant (Goodyear Plant) until future redevelopment is proposed. • Bowmanville Creek Barrier Dam South: • Residential subdivision — single detached residential dwellings with lot frontages of 12m along Albert Street. • Nelson Parkette East: • Residential Subdivision - single detached dwelling • Ecole elementaire Viola -Leger — a French immersion elementary school West: • Greenspace composed of Bowmanville Creek with associated natural features, and Bowmanville Valley Recreation Trail ( - Subject Site) Page 52 Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 • The PPS supports the development of housing to meet current and future housing needs. • The Subject Property is located within the Built Boundary of a designated Settlement Area (Bowmanville). • Settlement Areas shall be the focus of growth and development. • Settlement Areas should be planned and developed for a mix of land uses and densities which efficiently utilize infrastructure and public facilities. • The proposed development promotes intensification on an underutilized property by increasing the mix and supply of housing while optimizing existing infrastructure; thus, the proposal is consistent with the policies of the PPS, 2020. Orft O.cd/Pp5 Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 Under the Planning Act Page 53 Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 • The vast majority of growth is directed to settlement areas that have: • a delineated built boundary, • existing or planned municipal servicing, and, • support complete communities. • 'Complete Communities' will feature a diverse mix of land uses, including employment uses and convenient access to local stores and services. • Achieving a range and mix of housing options to serve all sizes, incomes and ages of households is a key component of the Growth Plan. • The proposed development conforms to the policies of the Growth Pan (2020) by optimizing land and resources on an underutilized site within an established community and providing a greater range of housing options in the areas. Page 54 Durham Region Official Plan, 2020 • Durham Region is anticipated to grow by 312,660 residents by the year 2031. • The Subject Property is identified as located within 'Living Areas'. • Living Areas form part of the Regions Urban System and are intend to primarily support housing opportunities including a diverse range of housing sizes, types and tenures • The proposed development will assist in encouraging a mix of housing types in the area by providing 8 single detached dwellings and 26 townhouse dwellings to contribute to satisfying the needs of current and future populations. • The proposed development conforms to the relevant policies of the Durham Region Official Plan by proposing a density that is compatible with the surrounding land uses and providing a more diverse range of housing options. �pF-o � � • .4.. Farrow, a .v.`n awe. rn .., IlRllllu CONCESSION ST o �w KING S7 M.. a.., a•-. .7M. - ni o� * Subject Site Page 55 Municipality of Clarington Official Plan (2018) • The Subject Site is located adjacent to Special Study Area 3 and is designated 'Environmental Protection' and 'Urban Residential' • The development proposal considers the lands located along the westerly portion of the Subject Site, designated "Environmental Protection Area", to be protected by a 15 metre Open Space Buffer measured from the edge of the staked feature. Lands to the west staked on October, 22nd, 2020 • Policies pertaining to the "Urban Residential" designation are provided in Section 9 — Livable Neighbourhoods, of the Official Plan encourage the development of vibrant communities, to enhance the quality of life of residents living throughout the Municipality of Clarington. • The proposed development provides for transition between the existing community, and the medium and high density residential uses anticipated in Special Study Area 3 (Goodyear lands). • The proposed development conforms to the policies of the Municipality of Clarington Official Plan by proposing a mix of housing options which will accommodate the needs of the future and existing residents of the Bowmanville Urban Area. liiIliiii KING STREET SPECIAL STUDY AREA 3 W z W �ryr;::':.: • — � F.S,��i . re�':r l.pkR Orytarfo 0 .a o _ ........ 0 �°�• ° " MAP ■a UND Ise Kwwac�+a., l� Awwa+ws .w.ppµ wOi e.w� OMMAHYRLE URBAN AREA �1.A.�R�x,w eanvpY h�u•AS,i I JwiAb�M R.n w,41iY BASELINE ROAD - a .Lr•.;,u AIUNIC G�IXARiYGTGN ( Subject Site) ( Urban Residential) ( o Environmental Protection) Page 56 Municipality of Clarington Zoning By-law 84-63 • The Subject Property is currently zoned 'General Industrial Exception' (M2-1), 'Urban Residential Type Two' ((H)R2), and 'Urban Residential Type Two Exception' ((H)R2-33) zones. • A Zoning By-law Amendment is required to re -zone the lands to 'Urban Residential Type 3 with site exceptions (R3-XX)' zone. Residential Type Three (R3) Zone Permitted Uses: A. Residential Uses • All uses permitted in the R1 Zone subject to the regulations contained therein; (including single detached dwellings) • A street townhouse dwelling; • A link townhouse dwelling; • A converted dwelling • A boarding house or rooming; and • A duplex dwelling EP Subject Site NIA-1 R1 Page 57 WoopmMm ®Single Family 8 0.54 ha Residential ®Townhouse 26 0.61 ha Residential Future Development 0.02 ha 15m Open Space 0.03 ha Buffers Roads 0.43 ha 34 1.63 ha • Temporary turning circles composed at the terminus of Street 'C' and 'Nelson Street' which provide for future vehicular connection to 'Durham Street' and 'Hunt Street' when the lands to the north redevelop. - - - T _. eel' - _ tC _ TEMPORARY _ 7 I: 1 TURNwG CIRCLE _ 9LOCK14 FUTURE i DEVEiO NT BLOCK 10 BLOCKS ` 6 WI ITS 4 UNITS 2 - Y 7� 3 g rr-ir�aaar rum vG CARCY M STREET "C 4 NIS VVw(C�. - - i 12 - BLOCKII BLOCK a�N1ts 6 UNITS o- - - - - �- �Cee< sae Open space Buffers o Townhouse Development Single Family Detached/Future Development Page 58 Single Family Residential 16 I 0 Townhouse Residential Units 52 0 On -Street Parking 26 0 1 . 94 Single Family Residential (2) 0 Townhouse Residential Units (2) 0 • Residential Units will have two (2) parking spaces provided. One (1) in the driveway and one (1) in the garage. • A visitor parking ratio of 0.76 is provided per unit OPEN SPACE TEMPORARY - TURN1NG CIRCLE OPEN SPAC?4 _ 5 �i--------- -� 7 BLOCK IE 4 1xvoPix4 xn�E E�FFFR {� � BLOCK ',0 �n' , 1 Y In 8 r - BLXK 14 FUTURE OEVELOPMEW 404 1 \ IEAA "Rr 7I R4mvc CNCCE y� \ IIB II�i� 4�NIT Page 59 A number of supporting technical reports, studies and plans have been prepared and submitted in support of the development proposal., Including: • Land Use Compatibility Report (Including Sustainability Analysis) • Draft Zoning By-law Amendment • Functional Servicing & Stormwater Management Report • Environmental Impact Study (Including Landscape Analysis) • Geotechnical Report • Archaeological Assessment • Phase One Environmental Site Assessment • Meander Belt Assessment • Parking Plan • Tree Inventory Preservation Plan • Boulevard Planting Plan Page 60 ThankYou am pleased to answer any questions from Council or the Public Humphries Planning Group Inc. 6/28/2021 Archived - Provincial Policy Statement, 2014: Part V: Policies 2.0 Wise use and management of resources I Ontario.ca Prime agricultural areas are areas where prime agricultural lands predominate. Specialty crop areas shall be given the highest priority for protection, followed by Canada Land Inventory Class 1, 2, and 3 lands, and any associated Class 4 through 7 lands within the prime agricultural area, in this order of priority. 2.3.2 Planning authorities shall designate prime agricultural areas and specialty crop areas in accordance with guidelines developed by the Province, as amended from time to time. 00- C2.3.3 Permitted uses 2.3.3.1 In prime agricultural areas, permitted uses and activities are: agricultural uses, agriculture -related uses and on farm diversified uses. OA Proposed agriculture -related uses and on farm diversified uses shall be compatible with, and shall not hinder, surrounding agricultural operations. Criteria for these uses may be based on guidelines developed by the Province or municipal approaches, as set out in municipal planning documents, which achieve the same objectives. 2.3.3.2 In prime agricultural areas, all types, sizes and intensities of agricultural uses and normal farm practices shall be promoted and protected in accordance with provincial standards. 2.3.3.3 New land uses, including the creation of lots, and new or expanding livestock facilities shall comply with the minimum distance separation formulae. 2.3.4 Lot creation and lot adjustments 2.3.4.1 Lot creation in prime agricultural areas is discouraged and may only be permitted for: a. agricultural uses, provided that the lots are of a size appropriate for the type of agricultural use(s) common in the area and are sufficiently large to maintain flexibility for future changes in the type or size of agricultural operations; b. agriculture -related uses, provided that any new lot will be limited to a minimum size needed to accommodate the use and appropriate sewage and water services; c. a residence surplus to a farming operation as a result of farm consolidation, provided that: 1. the new lot will be limited to a minimum size needed to accommodate the use and appropriate sewage and water services; and 2. the planning authority ensures that new residential dwellings are prohibited on any remnant parcel of farmland created by the severance. The approach used to ensure that no new residential dwellings are permitted on the remnant parcel may be recommended by the Province, or based on municipal approaches which achieve the same objective; and d. infrastructure, where the facility or corridor cannot be accommodated through the use of easements or rights -of -way. 2.3.4.2 Lot adjustments in prime agricultural areas may be permitted for legal or technical reasons. 2.3.4.3 The creation of new residential lots in prime agricultural areas shall not be permitted, except in accordance with policy 2.3.4.1(c). 2.3.5 Removal of land from prime agricultural areas 2.3.5.1 Planning authorities may only exclude land from prime agricultural areas for expansions of or identification of settlement areas in accordance with policy 1.1.3.8. 2.3.6 Non-agricultural uses in prime agricultural areas https://www.ontario.caldocumentlprovincial-policy-statement-2014/part-v-policies-20 / 3/6 Guidelines on Permitted Uses in Ontario's Prime Agricultural Areas Publication 851 r _- t i°t it • i. t s . _ e F: a .t •;,-_ _j sf� '�, $ fit- - Ministry of Agriculture — Food - -- -_ /r and Rural Affairs-" - • " I'/ Ontario 2. PERMITTED USES 2.2.3 Fxampias of Uses tthlat Would Typ;icajiy Net be gricultur-- Related Uses Examples of uses that would typically not be agriculture -related uses because they do not meet PPS definitions or criteria include: • large food processing plants, large wineries and other uses that are high -water -use or effluent generators and are better suited to locations with full municipal services • micro -breweries and distilleries • contractors' yards, construction companies, landscapers, well drillers, excavators, paint or building suppliers • sewage biosolids storage and composting facilities for non-agricultural source material • antique businesses • art or music studios • automobile dealerships, towing companies, mechanics shop or wrecking yards • rural retreats, recreational uses and facilities, campgrounds or fairgrounds • conference centres, hotels, guest houses or restaurants • furniture makers • institutions such as schools or clinics —•—�; seasonal storage of boats, trailers or cars F veterinary clinics • trucking yards While not meeting the criteria for agriculture -related uses, some of these uses may fit under on -farm diversified uses if all criteria for that category of uses are met. - -�--� 2.3 On -Farm Diversified Uses A wide variety of uses may qualify as on -farm diversified uses based on the PPS definition, as long as they meet the criteria described below. On -farm diversified uses should be related to agriculture, supportive of agriculture or able to co -exist with agriculture without conflict. On -farm diversified uses are intended to enable farm operators to diversify and supplement their farm income, as well as to accommodate value-added and agri-tourism uses in prime agricultural areas. = T On -farm diversif ed uses: means uses that are secondary to the principal agricultural use of the property, and are limited in area. On -farm diversified uses include, but are not limited to, home occupations, home industries, agri-tourism uses, and uses that produce value-added agricultural products. PPS, definitions . .PPS CritefiaT r`a arm Diversified Uses All of the following criteria must be met to qualify as on -farm diversified uses, in accordance with the PPS. 1. Located on a farm. (from the label "on -farm" diversified uses and from the definition's requirement that the use be secondary to the principal "agricultural use" of the property) On -farm diversified uses must be located on a farm property that is actively in agricultural use. The on -farm diversified uses provisions in the PPS do not apply to small residential lots in the prime agricultural area. - 17 -_L 2.2.2 Development and site alteration shall be restricted in or near sensitive surface water features and sensitive ground water features such that these features and their related hydrologic functions will be protected, improved or restored. Mitigative measures and/or alternative development approaches may be required in order to protect, improve or restore sensitive surface water features, sensitive ground water features, and their hydrologic functions. 2.3 Agriculture 2.3.1 Prime agricultural areas shall be protected for long-term use for agriculture. Prime agricultural areas are areas where prime agricultural lands predominate. Specialty crop areas shall be given the highest priority for protection, followed by Canada Land Inventory Class 1, 2, and 3 lands, and any associated Class 4 through 7 lands within the prime agricultural area, in this order of priority. 2.3.2 Planning authorities shall designate prime agricultural areas and specialty crop areas in accordance with guidelines developed by the Province, as amended from time to time. Planning authorities are encouraged to use an agricultural system approach to maintain and enhance the geographic continuity of the agricultural land base and the functional and economic connections to the agri food network. 2.3.3 Permitted Uses 2.3.3.1 In prime agricultural areas, permitted uses and activities are: agricultural uses, agriculture -related uses and on farm diversified uses. Proposed agriculture -related uses and on farm diversified uses shall be compatible with, and shall not hinder, surrounding agricultural operations. Criteria for these uses may be based on guidelines developed by the Province or municipal approaches, as set out in municipal planning documents, which achieve the same objectives. 2.3.3.2 In prime agricultural areas, all types, sizes and intensities of agricultural uses and normal farm practices shall be promoted and protected in accordance with provincial standards. 2.3.3.3 New land uses in prime agricultural areas, including the creation of lots and new or expanding livestock facilities, shall comply with the minimum distance separation formulae. Provincial Policy Statement. 2020 J 126 Page 65 Delegation to Planning and Development Committee June 28th, 2021 Dioxin/Furan AMESA Monitoring Reporting CRITICAL INFORMATION WITHHELD/MISSING: - AMESA Monitoring Plan -Ministry Approval -Data Validation Criteria -Independent Qualified Expert Approval -AMESA Data Withheld for Years from 2015 to 2019 -Underlying Reports Withheld for ALL Years 2015 to PRESENT Page 66 Recent History on AMESA Concerns (Concerns have been raised since 2015) • Clarington's April 14 Letter to Durham • Durham's Failure to Response (Durham Report #2019-WR-10) • Critical Information WITHHELD/MISSING • AMESA Monitoring Plan (defining sampling procedures, data validation, etc) • Ministry Approval (See Gasser, Bracken, Meydam June 11t" Correspondence to MECP) • Data Validation Criteria • Independent Qualified Expert Approval On AMESA Monitoring Plan • Independent Qualified Expert Approval Of Monthly Sampling Results • AMESA Data for Years from 2015 to 2019 • Underlying Reports Withheld for ALL Years 2015 to PRESENT Page 67 Clarington April 21stLetter to Region AMESA ReportingRequests The long-term partnership oullined in the H CA is for the ovefabwal I eVan -of the DYEC. It has taken some five years for the calibration between the stack tests and AM ESA cartridge to render reliable monthly data rega rd inq dioxins and furans_ As such. Clarington is formally requesting that the AME A data, which we un-derstand is housed at the DYEC, be made available to the public and said to Clahngton Planning staff_ This world ir~dude, at no oast to the requestor or Clarington, release of: Durham Regional Council's Disposition • all AM ESA data from installation to present and i include un a rlyi ng Rejected/Ignored. lab reports including all documentation regarding the calibration of the Arnesa and stack lest results; • In futur-e_ all AMESA results and underlying report, as they become Rejected/Ignored. available (typically on a 2B-day basis); • The validation checWist referred to in M21-WR-5; and Rejected/Ignored. • In future, data recovery rates and reason for any data that has been invalidated. And further that all of the above be pasted on the DYEC website. Rejected/Ignored. This letter was endorsed by Resolulian # 147- i _ Durham Regional C'ouncil's Disposition Yours trul r Durham Regional Council approved recommendations in Report #2021- R-10 despite information/concerns raised by Clarington, numerous public delegations, and correspondence including formal June 11t" letter to MECP. Mayor and Members of Council furthermore, they EVEN rejected a motion b Clarington Councillor Joe Neal to refer Municipality aF Claringt❑n delegation and c Rpondence concerns back to Durham staff for a written response. AMESA Reporting Omissions are SERIOUS AND MUST BE ADDRESSED Clarington Council Must Act Durham Regional Council Approval of WR-10 is potentially harmful in that it: • is NOT TRACEABLE (no AMESA Monitoring Plan provided to date); • appears NOT to be supported by independent qualified experts -no signed documentation provided and no evidence of Ministry approval was provided • sets up a loose framework where abuse that could thwart AMESA dioxin/furan monitoring objectives is possible. This is monitoring for extremely toxic pollutants — dioxins and furans — that bioaccumulate in our land, water, and bodies (fetuses and children at highest risk). Page 69 Durham Region is Withholding 4+ Years Dioxin/Furan Data All Underlying Reports, Data Validation Protocol. WHY? We only have Durham staff opinion (no expert or Ministry opinion) that "As a result of poor correlation testing there is no confidence in the AMESA data prior to 2020, therefore release of that information will not be useful and may lead to inaccurate conclusions"; Focus on correlation is misleading and a red herring. Lack of correlation cannot be used as an excuse not to provide monitoring results. AMESA primary purpose was to measure dioxin/furan concentrations, not to correlate to stack test. • Dangerous as it makes the AMESA monitoring untraceable. Changes have been made, including to sampling protocols, and it is impossible to determine what changes have been made (no formal plan/documentation of changes/correspondence provided), how they affected results (no data provided during time changes were made) and whether they are appropriate (no signed expert documentation). Durham's "Investigation Checklist" # "Validation Checklist" requested by Clarington; what is provided in Attachment of WR-10 completely inadequate and does not define criteria for invalidation THIS IS CRITICAL — you can do all the monitoring in the world, but if data is invalidated improperly and for the wrong reasons it is not only worthless but dangerous.Could set stage for the AMESA purpose to be thwarted; W&AMESA data only be validated for "stable" operations and not over all actual operations? Essential Information Not Provided To Decision Makers (YOU) and the Public • WHY this AMESA monitoring is needed — d/f monitoring limitations — stack tests less than 0.2% of operating time; ambient air about 4% of time, soil tests only once every three years • WHERE are the consultants' and MECP reports? • WHO did/does what? Independent, external expert oversight essential. • WHAT actions/modifications taken on AMESA sampling, operation procedures document, identification of parties? • HOW was "correlation" achieved? • WHAT do experts say about "correlation"? Focus on correlation may be wrong. • WHAT did MECP sign off on? Page 71 From F01 Request Table 4 November 2018 Workplan Table 4: Summary of Monthly AMESA Data Collected Post 2017 Validation Testing r. Range (Start 7=7 01 Jun 2017 - 30 Jun 2017 Sample Volume 545.5 Unit I r Concentration 12) 0.091 Unit Volume W 512.5 2 Dioxin Concentration W 5.7 30 Jun 2017- 28 Ju1 2017 504.0 0.063 483.3 8.0 28 Jul 2017 - 07 Sep 2017 383.3 0.090 371.7 521 07Sep2017-05Oct 2017 514.9 0.049 500.9 35.5 05 Oct 2017- D2 Nov 2017 516.5 0.0i9 501.6 16.1 02 Nov 2017 -01 Dec 201.7 481.9 0.021 467.5 8.8 01 Dec 2017-29 Dec 2017 515.5 0.025 505.8 6.9 29Dec2017-261an2018 477.6 0.039 462.9 7.0 27 Jan 2018 - 01 Mar 201804 531.5 0.037 27 Jan 2018 - 21 Mar 2018131 454.5 14.1 02 Mar 2018 -24 Apr 2018431 5f10.4 0.023 21 Mar2018-24 Apr 2018131 554.5 162.6 24 Apr 2018 - 22 May 2018 510.6 3-2 516.7 49.1 22May 2018-221un20101 517.6 8.7 22 May 2018 - 3 Jul 201901 558.1 29.9 3 Jul 2018 - 31 Jul 2018 473.4 22.9 476.2 9.3 31JuI2018-28Aug 2018 474.0 12.8 479.2 4.7 Lang Term Average 499.1 4.9 489.81'1 14.51cj Notes: (1) Sample volume presented as cubic meters corrected to 251C and 1 atmosphere. [2) A JI results presented as pgTECVRm3 corrected to 2W and 1 atmosphere, adjusted to using NATO/OCMS (19" toxicity equivalency factors with full detection limit. [3] Sampling times extended/shortened due to boiler outages. Parse 72 (4) Average excludes samples collected between 28 July and 7 September 20171nd 21 March and 24 April 2018 which appears to have been compromised and represent outliers. Table 4: Stimnrary Of 1`001-itIr1y ArJESA Da#.9 C ollectcd post 2017 Validation Testing Ambient Air Eceedance (May 26 2018) Dioxin 545.5 0.091 512.5 Dioxin 5.7 1. r ti 01 Jun 2017 - 30 Jun 2017 30 Jun 2017- 281u1 2017 504.0 0.063 483.3 8.0 28 Jul 2017 - 07 Sep 2017 383.3 0.090 371.7 521 fl7 Se p 2917 - 05 Oct 2017 514.9 0.049 500.4 35.5 05 Oct 2017- 02 Nov 2017 516.5 0.019 501.6 16.1 02 Nov 2017 -01 Dec 2017 481.9 0.021 467.5 8.5 01 Dec 2017 - 29 Dec 2017 515.5 0.025 505.8 L .9 29 De c 2017 - 26 Jan 2018 477.6 0.039 4452.9 7,0 27Jan2D18-D1Mar 201801 531.5 0.037 27Jan 2019-21 Mar201801 454.5 14.1 02Mar2018-24Apr 201841) 500.4 0.023 21 Ma r 2018 - 24 Apr 201803 554.5 1 r 2..5 24 Apr 2018-22 May 2018 510.6 3,2 516.7 49.1 22 May 2018 - 22 J u n 201P] 517.E 8.7 22 May 201B - 3 Jul 2D1801 558.1 29.9 3 Jul 2018- 31 Jul 2019 473.4 22 `AMESA 12A Increased Dioxin Concentrations by 834% 31 Jul 2018 - 28 Aug 2018 474.0 Long Term Average 499.1 4.9 489.8141 14.501 Notes: t1) Sample volume presented as cubic meters corrected to 25°C and 1 atmosphere. (2) All resuhs presented as pgTEQ/Rm3 corrected to 251C and 1 atmosphere, adjusted to 111Y.0z. using NATO/ CMS f1989j toxicityequivalencyfactorswith full detection limit, (3) Sampling times extended/shortened due toboilerautages, (4) Average excludes samples collected between 28 July and 7 September 2017 and 21 Mardh and 24 April F018 which appears to have peen compromised and represent outliers. Page 73 g Table 4: Summary of MpnthFy AMM Dala Collected Post 2017 Val4dation Testing Ambient Air Exc ed nce (May 26 2018) F_ 01 Jun 201.7 - V Jun "I'/ r 0=1 512,5 r 5.7 30 Jun 2017. 28 Jul 2017 504.0 1 0.063 483.3 8,0 215 Jul 2017 — 07 Sep 2017 383.3 1 0.080 371,7 521 07 5eV 2017 -05 Od 201i 514.9 01049 500,9 ,#55 05 Oc# 2017- 02 f4ov M7 516.5 0-019 S01,6 16.1 02 Nov 2017 — 01 Dec 2017 491.9 0_021 467.5 9.9 01 Dec 2017 — 29 Dec 2017 515.5 I 0A2S 505.8 6.9 29 Dec 2017 — 26 Jan 20115 477.6 0.039 462.9 7.0 27 Jan 2018 — 01 Eyler 20201 531.5 0.037 27 Jan 2018 — 21 Mar 2028 M 454,5 14.1 02 Mar 2018 —24 Apr 201$m 5WA 0-023 21 Mar 2018 —24 Apr 20100 SSA,S 16216 24 Apr 2018 — 22 May 2018 510.E 3,2 I 516,7 49.1 22 May 2018 — 22 Jun 201801 17,6 8,7 22 may M8 — 3 Jul 201814 558.1 29 4 + 3Jul 2018— 31 Jul1018 473-_4 474.0 22.iAME 12.# A Dioxin Comcntratious increased by 834% 31 Jul 2018 — 28 Aux 2018 Lang Term Average 499.1 4.9 4gg g1+1 i4l.!; Notes; ill Samplewokrme presented ps cuter "tgrs corrected tq 25% and 1 aftnGSpbGre. {21 A11 results presented as pg TECLMnt-I corrected is 25"C and 1 atmosphere, adjusted to 11% 0, using NATO{{CMS j IMI toxicity equivalency factors with toil detection limit. J31 Sampingtines extendedJslrorlened -due to boiler outages. 14) Av&dge tiuludel Samples a Me€red bm to 26 July hlsA 7 September 2017 fi A 21 March aml 24 A40til 2015whkh Op9eers to here been wmpromiscdene rWcscnt vutlitrs. Greatly Exceeds Stack Limit of 60 s Page 74 Table 4: Summary of MpnthFy AMM Dala Collected Post 2017 Val4dation Testing Ambient Air Exc ed nce (May 26 2018) F_ 01 Jun 201.7 - V Jun "I'/ r 0=1 512.5 r 5.7 30 Jun 2017. 28 Jul 2017 504.0 1 0.063 483.3 8,0 215 Jul 2017 - 07 Sep 2017 383.3 1 0.080 37117 521 07 5eV 2017 -05 Od 201i 514.9 o,0W9 500,9 ,#55 05 Oc# 2017- 02 f4ov M7 516.5 0-019 S01,6 16.1 02 Nov 2017 - 01 Dec 2017 491.9 0_021 467.5 9.9 01 Dec 2017 - 29 Dec 2017 515.5 I 0A2S 505.8 6.9 29 Dec 2017 - 26 Jan 20115 477.6 0.039 462.9 7.0 27 Jan 2018 - 01 Eyler 20201 531.5 0.037 27 Jan 2018 - 21 Mar 2028 M 454,5 14.1 02 Mar 2018 -24 Apr 201$m 5WA 0-023 21 Mar 2018 -24 Apr 20100 510.E 3,2 SSA,S 516,7 It 2.6 49.1 24 Apr 2018 - 22 May 2018 22 May 2018 - 22 Jun 201801 17,6 8,7 22 may 2018 - 3 Jul 201814 558.1 29 4 + 3 Jul 2018 - 31 Jul 1018 473-_4 4474.0 22.iAME 12.# A Dioxin Comcntratious increased by 834% 31 Jul 2018 - 28 Aux 2018 Lang Term Average 499.1 4.9 4gg g1+1 i4l.!; Notes; ill Samplewokrme presented ps cuter "tgrs corrected tq 25% and 1 aftnGSpbGre. {21 A11 results presented as pg TECLMnt-I corrected is 25"C and 1 atmosphere, adjusted to 11% 0, using NATO{{CMS j IMI toxicity equivalency factors with toil detection limit. J31 Sampingtines extendedJslrorlened -due to boiler outages. 14) Av&dge tiuludel Samples a Me€red bm to 20 July hlsA 7 September 2017 fi A 21 March aml 24 A40til 2015whkh Op9eers to here been wmpromiscdene rWcscnt vutlitrs. Greatly Exceeds Stack Limit of 60 s Page 75 Table 4: Summary of MpnthFy AMM Dala Collected Post 2017 Val4dation Testing Ambient Air Exc ed nce (May 26 2018) F_ 01 Jun 201.7 - V Jun "I'/ r 0=1 512.5 r 5.7 30 Jun 2017. 28 Jul 2017 504.0 1 0.063 483.3 8,0 215 Jul 2017 - 07 Sep 2017 383.3 1 0.080 37117 521 07 5eV 2017 -05 Od 201i 514.9 o,0W9 500,9 ,#55 05 Oc# 2017- 02 f4ov M7 516.5 0-019 S01,6 16.1 02 Nov 2017 - 01 Dec 2017 491.9 0_021 467.5 9.9 01 Dec 2017 - 29 Dec 2017 515.5 I 0A2S 505.8 6.9 29 Dec 2017 - 26 Jan 20115 477.6 0.039 462.9 7.0 27 Jan 2018 - 01 Eyler 20201 531.5 0.037 27 Jan 2018 - 21 Mar 2028 M 454,5 14.1 02 Mar 2018 -24 Apr 201$m 5WA 0-023 21 Mar 2018 -24 Apr 20100 510.E 3,2 SSA,S 516,7 It 2.6 49.1 24 Apr 2018 - 22 May 2018 22 May 2018 - 22 Jun 201801 17,6 8,7 22 may 2018 - 3 Jul 201814 558.1 29 4 + 3 Jul 2018 - 31 Jul 1018 473-_4 4474.0 22.iAME 12.# A Dioxin Comcntratious increased by 834% 31 Jul 2018 - 28 Aux 2018 Lang Term Average 499.1 4.9 4gg g1+1 i4l.!; Notes; ill Samplewokrme presented ps cuter "tgrs corrected tq 25% and 1 aftnGSpbGre. {21 A11 results presented as pg TECLMnt-I corrected is 25"C and 1 atmosphere, adjusted to 11% 0, using NATO{{CMS j IMI toxicity equivalency factors with toil detection limit. J31 Sampingtines extendedJslrorlened -due to boiler outages. 14) Av&dge tiuludel Samples a Me€red bm to 20 July hlsA 7 September 2017 fi A 21 March aml 24 A40til 2015whkh Op9eers to here been wmpromiscdene rWcscnt vutlitrs. Greatly Exceeds Stack Limit of 60 s Page 76 ToWe 4: Summary of MpnthFy AMM Da#a Colledi!d Post 2017 Val4d"on Testing 01 Jun 2017 - V Jun 2017 545.5 1 0=1 512.5 5.7 Greatly Exceed 30 Jun 2017. 28 Jul 2017 504.0 j 0.063 483,3 15,4 Stack �` !L Limit Ol i! 28 Jul 2017 — 07 Sep 2017 W3.3 I 0JM0 37117 521 07 5eV 2017 -05 Od 201i 514.9 o,0W9 500,9 #55 05 Da 2017- 02 NOV M7 516.5 0-019 S01,6 16.1 02 Nov 2017 — 01 Dec 2017 491.9 0.021 467.5 9.9 01 Dec 2017 — 29 Dec 2017 515.5 j 0A2S 505.8 6.9 29 Dec 2017 — 26 Jan 20115 477.6 0.039 462.9 7.0 27 Jan 2018 — 01 Eyler 20201 531.5 0.037 27 Jan 2018 - 21 Mar 2028 M 454,5 14.1 02 Mar 2018 -24 Apr 201$m 5WA 0-023 21 Mar 2018 —24 Apr 201:00 554,S It 2.6 24 Apr 2018 — 22 May 2018 510.E 3,2 516,7 49.1 22 May 2418 — 22 Jun 201-001 17,6 8,7 �*xe ed nce Ambient Air L 22 M&V 2018 -.5 Jul 201814 558.1 29 4 'Missing Data June 22nd 2015 to July 3rd 2018 (May 26 2018) 3Jul 2018-31Jul ?p18 473-_4 221AMESA Dioxin Conrcutrati4ns 11 Jul 2018 - 28 Aug 20M 11, Increaser) by 834 finlong Term Average �47141_0 4.9 d89,8�� 1A,51� J1I $,p-pk vi lWrnj prtsentfd ps €Lpbk "tgrs cprrteted tq 25% and I atmpsphtnr . � Long -Terra Averages Do NOT Include {21 Ail results presented as pg TECLMni-I correctedlo 25"C and 1 atmosphere, adjusted to 11%03, using NATOICCMSjIMjtoxicityequivaknryfactorswith Nil detectionlimit. Appopp'00 Suspected "Outliers" {3N Sam Rv&dge tiuludel Senopfes "Aelacd between 26 July and T September 2017 erbd 21 Map ch &A 24 4prr 2015whitheppeers10 Mvt been vXn0romisedand Peprestnt vutlitrs. a Page 77 8 https://www.durhamyorkwaste.ca/en/operations- documents/resources/2020/20210330_RPT_2020_DYEC_ECA_Annual_ ACC. pdf Twelve (12) month rolling averages will be presented in future annual reports to better identify and evaluate trends in facility performance. ;o 40 30 v 20 a 10 0 2020. Boiler 1 and Boiler 2 Monthly AMESA Results Om E_ Om ii Jars Feb Maf Ape May ■ $Oder 1 2.1 3.1 1.8 0.89 1.1 R Baler 2 1.3 0.65 1.4 0.91 11-3 Boiler 1 - anomalous data point did not pass va lidation L..J 110 1 ■ I Jun Jul Aug Sep Oci Nov 2020 41.5 0.55 3.38 2.92 4.31 9.43 1.1 0.89 1.02 0.092 15.0 2-30 1S Page 78 13 Expert Comments Obtained Through FO1 Raise Further Red Flags • Dr. Jahnke on comparing source test to AMESA results (page 25, 26 of Jahnke report): It Because many of the reports found in the literature are written by the instrument manufacturers themselves or researchers serving professional objectives and not regulatory agencies, the method which best presents or best obfuscates the results is used. • MECP Sandra Thomas (May 2 2017 email) raises concern about toxicity factors used by Covanta in calculation of dioxin/furan concentrations, inclusion of dioxin -like PCBs • Region consultant John Chandler cautioned that Fall 2016 d/f source test results are so low the uncertainty is very high, also cautioned about an apples -to -oranges comparison where AMESA sampling method "ignores the material trapped in the probe and nozzle" while RM23 stack source testing method "includes all the materials caught in the sampling train" (see Mar 24 2017 email to L Brasowski of Covanta, G Anello copied) • Very concerning as other document obtained in F01 request give testing results that show 90+% of the dioxins/furans reported were caught in the probe and nozzle • AMESA representative Jurgen Reinmann cautioned the data is the data — the dioxins/furans collected and measured were from the incinerator Page 79 Act Today and Use the Tools at Your Disposal • Our June 11t" letter includes the conditions and sections of the EA and ECA relevant to the public reporting of AMESA data. • Review attachments provided with the June 11t" letter which were received througgh my FOI request (ongoing) to understand the concerns and background on AMESA includin c{ � g g g g work plans. • Write to the MECP and express your concerns and failure of Durham to respond to your requests for AMESA data, validation criteria, underlying data and to request the MECP for a written response as to whether the AMESA Monitoring Plan exists(detailing sampling protocols, analysis and reporting), whether it has been approved b The and to provide all correspondence relate to approvals and/or work pan sign off; • Further, request the MECP to enforce all EA and ECA Conditions around AMESA monitoring and reporting and direct Durham, York and Covanta not to destroy any AMESA data • Review the Host Community Agreement and pursue all relevant options SO that you can take all possible steps to protect Clarington residents. FCMOFEFDCEAATRIONFEDERATION ICLEIR AD N CANADITION DES MUNICIPALITIES MUNICIPALIT95 Local Governments for Sustainability FEDERATION OF I 2021-06-09 CANADIAN MUNICIPALITIES „ i.,_ ,- Municipality of Clarington 40 Temperance Street Bowmanville, Ontario CHIEF EXECUTIVE L1 C 3A6 OFFICER CAROLE SAAe, OTTAWA (CN MAILING ADDRESS 24CE.ARENCE STREET, Mr. Adrian Foster and Members of Council: OTTAWA, ONTARIO KIN 5P3 T. 613-241-5221 F 613-241-7442 On behalf of the FCM-ICLEI Partners for Climate Protection (PCP) program, I n, a wish to congratulate the Municipality of Clarington for achieving Milestone 2 for corporate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Achievement of this milestone signals that your local government has set GHG reduction targets. The Municipality of Clarington has shown bold leadership in addressing these ICLEI—LOCAL I important issues, and we are pleased to share your achievement on the PCP GOVERNMENTS website at fcm.ca/pcp. FOR SUSTAINABILITY PRESIDENT FRANKCOWNIE We look forward to working with you in the development of a local action Ian, MAYOR 9 Y p p DES MOINES, USA implementation of actions, as well as the monitoring of progress and reporting on results for both corporate and community GHG emissions, which form the EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, remaining milestones in the PCP framework. Your efforts, along with those of a OFFICE CANADA OE CAN AN FFIC growing number of PCP participants, are making a significant contribution to MEGTORONTC (CN) reducing Canada's GHG emissions. CANADA OFFICE 204-401 RICHMOND Cost-effective, community -based projects offer significant opportunities for STREET W. TORONTO, ONTARIO M5V taking action on climate change. In 2018, PCP member municipalities 3A8 voluntarily reported over 160 projects to reduce GHG emissions, representing T 647ad org over 720,000 tonnes in annual GHG reductions. Alongwith reducing the impacts elelcanada org g p of climate change, municipalities saw other community benefits and savings, including $2.88 million in annual cost savings generated by reducing emissions from streetlights, municipally -owned vehicles and buildings. Page 81 FC ATO -LE-I OFCANADIAN CANA�IENNE DES OI MUNICIPALITIESFEDERATION MUNICFEDERIPAIOLINTES ].,O[dl Governments for Sustainability PCP members benefit from one-on-one support from the PCP Secretariat. Visit the program's online networking platform at pcphub.fcm.ca to connect with FCM and ICLEI staff and receive support to achieve your next milestone. Should you have any questions about PCP, our program officer can be reached by telephone at (613) 907-6392 or by e-mail at pcp(aD-fcm.ca. Yours sincerely, Garth Frizzell Councillor, City of Prince George President, Federation of Canadian Municipalities Frank Cownie Mayor, Des Moines, USA President, ICLEI—Local Governments for Sustainability cc. Doran Hoge, Climate Change Response Coordinator 2 Page 82 Clarington Planning and Development Committee June 28, 2021 w AR A 4 Lakeridge Health Page 83 Confidential Draft For Discussion Purposes Only Bowmanville Hospital Redevelopment • Overview • $5m support from the Municipality and support for up to $37.5m from the Region. THANK YOU! • $2.5m Ministry of Health Planning Grant for Stage 2 — Functional Programming • Regional Council support for up to $37.5M for redevelopment • Assessment of Stage 1 Submission Design review Co • Stage 2 planning for stakeholder engagement underway • Amazing community support for the Foundation and continued advancement of fund raising support • Tracking to 2025/26 construction 0 Lakeridge Health One System. Best Health. Bowmanville Hospital Interim Helipad • THANK YOU! Municipality generously donating land for helipad use ($1/yr) • Ministry of Health capital grant approved • Community consultation complete • Design work finalized • Bowmanville Foundation supporting local share component of Interim Helipad • Expect to tender for construction work Summer 2021 • Completion and Transport Canada Certification Fall 2021 0 Lakeridge Health I -.Celebration Fireworks v 4 5yE= King St E Bc,,rn—ille Bowmanville hospital© �Howmanville Home Herdw_`iie:: Veterinary Clinic r Cowan Buick Limited _-- Bowmanville Metro® Q Bowmanville Mall H awck dealer � a� imoi' Handmade _ -" - Sourdoughh Piizaq �� QBeer Store 2107 � Bowmanville Cem N66"setery Lakeridge Hea1th e.xn / Bowmanville Crematorium Sope Bowmanville Allotment y,�,Pss KagbsPr �Cree Trail Parking La I Community Garden® ale elementaire� Vicla-Leger r AccessStorage - 2 Bowmanville Haines Elevate Body,t O Price Distr rEOEND ..,..H ,..:. ❑ e—uoms I.H.) wwwoc� — i essTwenexr�eeeueHT ® POWERPMT U —I R.1 CHPN HEL One System. Best Health. Page 85 Durham Hospice - Clarington THANK YOU! Municipality generously donated land for 9 bed Residential Hospice! Site Plan Agreement and Land Title transfer completed Ministry of Health approval of design and Tender issuance Building Permit drawings finalized • Incredible community capital funding support for Residential Hospice • Expect to tender for construction work Fall 2021 • Construction expected early 2022 Lakeridge Health One System. Best Health. RV and Trailer Parking 8 Storage Study Monday, June 28t", 2021 Presentation Outline 1. Project Introduction 2. Public Consultation Summary 3. Research and Policy Review 4. Key Findings Project Timeline • Project Initiation i . Background Review • Jurisdictional Scan • Background Reporting • Public Surveys i • Public Surveys • Public Open House • Consultation Reporting i • Detailed Analysis • Final Report and Recommendations Presentation to Planning and Development Committee - We Are Here Project Goals • Using policy research, jurisdictional scans of similar and surrounding municipalities and public consultation: 1. Determine whether existing provisions for the parking and storage of RVs and trailers in the countryside area are appropriate, specifically as they pertain to commercial operations; and 2. Identify further policy options, as may be appropriate, to address and amend existing policies and provisions regulating commercial RV and trailer parking and storage facilities. Existing Planning Context • Generally, provisions for parking and storage of RVs and trailers are as follows: - Urban Residential Areas - Personal Storage • One (1) RV or trailer permitted on a private property, subject to height, length and setback requirements - Rural Areas - Personal Storage • Three (3) RVs or trailers permitted on a private property - Commercial • Indoor storage permitted in Light Industrial (Ml) and Genera Industrial (M2) Zones • Outdoor storage only permitted in M2 Zone Public Consultation Mechanisms • Public Surveys 4 April to Virtual Public Open House May 2021 4 May 12, 2021 — General Public: 287 — >60 Attendees responses — Storage Operator: 20 responses Public 0nen House Date: Wednesday, May 12, 2021 1' Time: 610 to 8 p.m. [ Recreational Vehicle and Trailer Storage Study Place: Virtual meeting using an online device or phone. The Municipality has initiated a Recreational Vohicle (RVj and Trailer Parking To register, please contact Mitch Morawatz atmmorawetz@clarington.net and Storage Study encompassing Clarington's rural areas. The purpose of or 905-623-3379 exi. 2411 no later Than 4 p.m. on Tuesday, May 11, 2D21. the Study is to analyze whether the existing provisions for the parking and Online surveys storage of RVs and trailers in the rural areas are appropriate and whether We're looking for feedback from residents who are using or seeking RV or further policy options are needed for RV and trailer parking and storage. The trailer storage and businesses that currently provide RV and trailer storage as Study will also identify land use designations and zoned areas where RV a service to others. Visit www.clarington.neVRVStorageStudy to fill out the and trailer parking and storage may be appropriate. surveys. Public Open House For more information about the project, please We invite you to present your comments and Ideas on RV and trailer visit www.clarington.net/RVStorageStudy. parking and storage at the virtual Public Open House. The purpose of the virtual Public Open House is to gather public Input on the challenges and opportunities for RV and trailer parking and storage in the Municipality. Public Consultation Highlights Key Messages Heard from Surveys 1. The demand for RV and trailer storage is high. - 86.4% of respondents indicated they store at least one (1) RV or trailer at a location that is not their personal property. - Average number of RVs or trailers owned was 2.07, which is greater than what is currently permitted to be stored outside in the urban area. - 69% of the general public and 75% of storage operators indicated storage is hard to come by. 2. Outdoor storage is the primary demand, especially in the countryside area. - Indoor storage generally not listed as a priority. - 85.41 % Agree or Strongly Agree more options are needed in the countryside area. 3. Desired storage levels of operators are highly varied. - Mean indicated by operators = 1 1 1 - Median indicated by operators = 25 Public Consultation Highlights Key Messages Heard from Virtual Open House 1. Demand is exceeding supply. — Challenges in finding affordable storage space. 2. RV Storage is part of a larger economic industry. — Contributes economically to related and supporting businesses. 3. Equity amongst businesses may need to be considered. — "Even playing field" for urban area versus countryside businesses. 4. Aesthetics need to be addressed in urban and rural areas. — Should be well kept and properly buffered or screened. 5. Storage on agricultural land should be permitted. — Strong desire expressed by attendees to allow storage on rural lands, but also specifically agricultural lands. Research Methods • Jurisdictional Scan - 1 1 municipalities across Durham Region, Kawartha Lakes, Northumberland County, Peterborough County, York Region, Belleville and Quinte West • Policy Review - Provincial Policy Statement (2020) - Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2020) - Greenbelt Plan (2017) - Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (2017) - Durham Region Official Plan - Municipality of Clarington Official Plan Pr"mlal Polky ' 'C Slatament, 2020 4 Place 4 O': r ^ME Jurisdictional Scan Highlights Key Insights from Jurisdictional Scan 1. Commercial storage generally only permitted industrial zones. - Most municipalities however did not provide a separate definition for RV storage. 2. Varying approaches applied to regulating personal storage. - Number of RVs and trailers - Size of Lot - Lot Coverage 3. Number of RVs and trailers permitted for personal storage varied. - Urban Area: 1 to 2 - Countryside Areas: 2 to 6 Policy Review Highlights Key Conclusions from Policy Review 1. Governing planning documents do not contemplate outdoor storage on prime agricultural lands. — Such a use may only be permitted as an on -farm diversified use, subject to fulfilling criteria as outlined by the province. Additional considerations are also set out in the Durham Region Official Plan. 2. Governing planning documents do not contemplate outdoor storage on employment lands. — These lands are to be protected for employment -intensive uses. The Clarington Official Plan requires a minimum of 30jobs per gross hectare. Key Findings - Option 1 Five Key Findings from Consultation and Research 1. Amendments to Existing Urban Provisions to Enhance Clarity and Function — Provide clarity on what is included in the definition of an RV and trailer; — Ensure consistent use of definitions throughout and across both zoning by-laws; — Clarify that personal storage indoors is not subject to the existing limits on RV and trailer numbers; and — Amend existing provision limited oversized trailers to 120 hours to a seasonal timeframe (e.g. May to October) Key Findings - Option 2 Five Key Findings from Consultation and Research 2. Develop and Implement RV Storage Provisions by Lot Size for Personal Storage in the Countryside Area. — On Rural Residential or Agricultural Zoned Lots between 0.69 and 5 acres: Maximum of Three (3) — On Rural Residential or Agricultural Zoned Lots greater than 5 acres: Maximum of Six (6) —Building Envelope— — — — �I 1 f a Traveled Road DA.9nn]uroe Um d iw° —❑- ftt °m°���°"rt° Example: 1.0 Acre Property F. M.74.994 E wilAtlmxih.c°m Scale: 1:500m f— — — I _a I I � 1 I I0 I o.m.wie n.odorev umaea Example: 5.1 Acre Property Cor�atla KP1069 P. M.7QMP7 F.]0.571 WM Scale: 1:1000m Page 101 CL ,W,MGB9 Example: 10 Acre Pqnp 102 Property Scale: 1:1400m M,rikdW �ft#w PuWc W D�. I Key Findings - Option 3 Five Key Findings from Consultation and Research 3. Develop and Implement Policy Framework for On -Farm Diversified Uses - Should reflect Provincial criteria, as follows, but may be more prescriptive: • Located on a farm • Secondary to the principal agricultural use • Use must be limited in area • May include, but is not limited to, home occupations, home industries, agri-tourism uses and uses that produce value added agricultural products • Shall be compatible with and shall not hinder surrounding agricultura operations Key Findings - Option 4 Five Key Findings from Consultation and Research 4. Enhance Existing Policy Framework for RV Storage in Employment Areas. — Recognize storage as a secondary use to higher -employment generating and related uses, such as RV Sales and Service — Amendment to the Clarington Official Plan and Zoning By-law — No site -specific approvals then necessary Key Findings - Option 5 Five Key Findings from Consultation and Research 5. Develop Local Policy Framework to Permit RV Storage on Agricultural Lands Located within the Urban Boundary — Agricultural lands within settlement areas provide an opportunity for RV storage which does not conflict with agricultural or employment policies — These lands would be subject to a "future development", "fringe" or similar designation — As an interim use, are appropriate, as it is close to settlement areas without interfering with the long-term planned development — Amendment to Clarington Official Plan to recognize such — Permission on a site -specific basis through a temporary use by- law Concluding Remarks • RV and trailer parking and storage is a complex land use planning issue • Conformity with provincial and regional policy is difficult, given competing policies for agricultural land preservation and employment land protection • No immediate solution, however interim approaches may mitigate some demand in the countryside area, while larger scale, long-term approaches are implemented Thank You We will now take any questions. Public Consultation Highlights Key Statistics from Surveys Public Survey At least 1 RV Not 86.4Stored on Personal Property At least 1 RV at 78.8 Private Storage Facility 8 Using Indoor Storage Most Important 69.33 Feature: Proximity to Home Second Most _ 34.65 Important Feature: Cost 69 Opinion: Storage is Hard to Come By Storage Provider Survey 94Pr7ovide Outdoor Storage 63.2 Year -Round Operation 50 More Indoor Storage Needed More Storage Options 85 in Countryside Needed More Storage Options - 45 in Urban Area Needed 75 Opinion: Storage is Hard to Come By 0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100 W I L L S Municipality of Clarington - RV and Trailer Parking and Storage Study Key Findings - Option 3 Five Key Findings from Consultation and Research 3. Develop and Implement Policy Framework for On -Farm Diversified Uses - Amendment to Clarington Official Plan and Zoning By-law - Large policy project with considerations outside of RV and trailer storage • May be appropriate through the Official Plan Update and Zone Clarington - Should be accompanied by internal evaluation criteria to ensure goals and intent of OFDUs are satisfied - Can also implement Site Plan Control (scoped or full) Clarington 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: June 28, 2021 Report Number: PDS-036-21 Submitted By: Ryan Windle, Director of Planning and Development Services File Number: S-C-2021-0001 and ZBA2021-0007 Resolution#: Report Subject: Applications by Fairhaven Investments Inc. for Draft Plan of Subdivision and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit 34 residential units consisting of 8 single detached units and 26 townhouse units. Purpose of Report: The purpose of this report is to provide information to the public and Council. It does not constitute, imply or request any degree of approval. Recommendations: 1. That Report PDS-036-21 be received for information only; 2. That staff receive and consider comments from the public and Council with respect to the Draft Plan of Subdivision and Zoning By-law Amendment applications; and 3. That all interested parties listed in Report PDS-036-21 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. Page111 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-036-21 Page 2 Report Overview The Municipality is seeking the public's input on applications for a proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision and Zoning By-law Amendment, submitted by Fairhaven Investments Inc. to permit 34 residential units consisting of 8 single detached units and 26 townhouse units. The subdivision would extend Nelson Street north and create a new local road internal to the site. 1. Application Details 1.1 Owner/Applicant 1.2 Agent: 1.3 Proposal: 1.4 Area: Fairhaven Investments Inc. Humphries Planning Group Inc. Draft Plan of Subdivision The proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision would permit 34 residential units consisting of 8 single detached units and 26 townhouse units. The subdivision would extend Nelson Street north and create a new local road internal to the site. Zoning By-law Amendment To rezone the lands from "Holding — Urban Residential Type 2 ((H)R2)", "Holding — Urban Residential Exception ((H)R2-33)", and "General Industrial Exception (M2-1)" to appropriate zones that would permit single detached and townhouse dwelling units with the proposed lot sizes and provisions. 1.63 Hectares (4.03 acres) 1.5 Location: Blocks 112 and 113 on Plan 40M-2294, north of Albert Street, south of the former Goodyear lands in Bowmanville. See Figure 1. 1.6 Roll Number: 1.7 Within Built Boundary: 181702010018048 181702010018098 Yes Page112 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-036-21 2. Background Page 3 2.1 The subject lands are two blocks remaining from the previous subdivision approvals, Plan 40M-2294, which included the lands to the south, along Nelson Street, Albert Street and Alfred Shrub Lane. 2.2 The original subdivision was draft approved in 1995 with amendments to draft approval in 2002 and 2004. The original application and two amendments included significantly different proposals with different building forms including single detached, semi-detached and townhouse dwellings. The 2004 approval had the least number of total units consisting of 106 single detached lots on 12 metre frontages. 2.3 When the subdivision was approved the industrial lands to the north were still in operation, with licences to operate from the provincial government. To ensure compliance with provincial licences, Block 113 was not able to develop for residential purposes as the required setback from the industrial use to the north, specifically the reclaimed rubber plant, could not be met. Block 112 was intended for residential uses in the future should the industrial uses to the north cease to exist. Figure 1: Subject lands shown as Blocks 112 and 113 in Plan 40M-2294. Page 113 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-036-21 Page 4 2.4 The industrial use is no longer in operation and the environmental compliance permits with the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks were revoked in 2017. The current Official Plan designates the former industrial lands and some surrounding residential lands as Special Study Area 3. Special Study Area 3 envisions the area to be redeveloped as a mixed -use residential area, taking advantage of its location to downtown Bowmanville and the Bowmanville Creek valley. See Figure 2. Prior to any redevelopment a comprehensive plan shall be prepared and adopted as an amendment to the Bowmanville East Town Centre Secondary Plan. The Secondary Plan review process is currently underway. 2.5 The subject lands are not included in Special Study Area 3; however, they are adjacent to the special study area and will need to provide flexibility and the ability to integrate with the future mixed -use residential development. Former 1 Goodyear +' Site #'1, V_.'60 is -if h STREET }d 4 7 o*'w Special Study Area 3 W , Subject Lands 1-22 Figure 2: Aerial of subject lands, surrounding land uses including the previous subdivision approval, former industrial lands and Special Study Area 3. Page114 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-036-21 Page 5 2.6 On April 28, 2021 Fairhaven Investments Inc. submitted applications for Draft Plan of Subdivision and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit 34 residential units consisting of 8 single detached units and 26 townhouse units. See Figure 3. The applications were circulated for comments on May 17, 2021 to applicable departments and agencies. Figure 3: Proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision 2.6 The applicant has submitted the following studies in support of the applications: • Functional Servicing and Stormwater Management Report; • Landuse Compatability Study; • Environmental Impact Study; • Environmental Noise Assessment; • Phase One Environmental Site Assessment; and • Tree Preservation Plan; 2.7 The studies are being reviewed by departments and agencies and will be summarized in a future report. Page115 Municipality of Clarington Page 6 Report PDS-036-21 3. Land Characteristics and Surrounding Uses 3.1 The subject lands are located at the north end of Nelson Street, west of Duke Street and east of Bowmanville Creek. The site is currently vacant with a significant mound in the middle of the site which appears to be left over fill from the previous development to the south. See Figure 4. The site currently slopes to towards Bowmanville Creek to the west. Figure 4: Subject lands looking east from Nelson Street. 3.2 The surrounding uses are as follows: North - Unoccupied industrial lands, formerly Goodyear South - Single detached dwellings East - Single detached dwellings West - Bowmanville Creek 4. Provincial Policy Provincial Policy Statement 4.1 The Provincial Policy Statement identifies settlement areas as the focus of growth. Land use patterns shall be based on densities and a mix of land uses that efficiently use land, resources and infrastructure. Page116 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-036-21 Page 7 4.2 Opportunities for redevelopment and intensification are to be promoted where it can be accommodated. Municipalities must provide a variety of housing types and densities, efficiently utilizing existing infrastructure and public transit facilities. Provincial Growth Plan 4.2 The subject lands are within the defined Built Boundary and within the Urban Boundary of Bowmanville. 4.3 Growth is to be accommodated by directing a significant portion of new growth to the built up areas through intensification and efficient use of existing services and infrastructure. A minimum of 40 percent of all residential development occurring annually within each upper tier municipality will be within the built up area. 4.4 The development of complete communities is encouraged by promoting a diverse mix of land uses, a mix of employment and housing types, high quality public open space and easy access to local stores and services. 5. Official Plans Durham Regional Official Plan 5.1 The Durham Region Official Plan designates the subject lands Living Areas. Living Areas permit the development of communities incorporating the widest possible variety of housing types, sizes and tenure to provide living accommodations that address various socio-economic factors. 5.2 Living Areas shall be developed in a compact form through higher densities and by intensifying and redeveloping existing areas. 5.3 The Region of Durham Official Plan identifies Key Natural Heritage and Hydrologic Features to the west of the subject lands. Development or site alteration is not permitted in Key Natural Heritage and Hydrologic Features, including any associated vegetation protection zone, as determined through an Environmental Impact Study. Clarington Official Plan 5.4 The Clarington Official Plan designates the lands Urban Residential and Environmental Protection. The Urban Residential designation is predominately intended for housing purposes. A variety of densities, tenure and housing types are encouraged, generally up to 3 storeys in height. Page117 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-036-21 Page 8 5.5 Natural Heritage Features are also identified and mapped on the west side of the subject lands and adjacent to the subject lands. This area is designated Environmental Protection Area. The natural heritage system is to be protected and enhanced for the long term to promote responsible stewardship and provide sustainable environmental, economic and social benefits. Studies will determine the appropriate development limit and buffers in accordance with the Official Plan. The policies require an Environmental Impact Study to be submitted in support of development, to determine the extent of the feature and appropriate buffer limits, with a minimum of 15 metres to waterways and valleylands. 5.6 The lands directly to the north of the subject lands are former industrial lands that are now subject to Special Study Area 3 within the Official Plan. The outcomes of Special Study Area 3 will determine how the lands to the north of the proposed subdivision will develop and integrate with the proposed subdivision. 6. Zoning By-law 6.1 Zoning By-law 84-63 zones the subject lands "Holding — Urban Residential Type 2 ((H)R2)", "Holding — Urban Residential Exception ((H)R2-33)", and "General Industrial Exception (M2-1)". A Zoning By-law Amendment is required to permit the proposed single detached and townhouse dwelling units with the proposed lot sizes and provisions. 7. Public Notice and Submissions 7.1 Public notice was mailed to each landowner within 120 metres of the subject lands on June 1, 2021. and a Public Meeting Sign installed at the north end of Nelson Street on June 2, 2021. See Figure 5. Page118 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-036-21 I �-7 Page 9 Figure 5: Public notice sign on subject lands at the end of Nelson Street looking north. Staff have received inquiries and questions from residents, as follows: • Timing regarding the proposed development, should it be approved; • Requesting information regarding studies submitted, specifically the Environmental Site Assessment and potential impact from the former industrial lands to the north; • Requesting information on the future development of the former industrial lands north of the subject lands, Special Study Area 3; and • Requesting information on previous plans for the Blocks when the subdivision to the south was developed and setbacks from the industrial use. 8. Agency Comments Regional Municipality of Durham 8.1 Comments from Durham Region Planning, Works and Transit Departments have not been received at the time of finalizing this report but will be included in a subsequent report. Page119 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-036-21 Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority Page 10 8.2 Comments from the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority have not been received at the time of finalizing this report but will be included in a subsequent report. Other 8.3 Enbridge, Bell Canada, the school boards, and Canada Post have no concerns with the applications. 9. Departmental Comments Public Works Department 9.1 The Public Works Department has no objections, in principle, to the applications. 9.2 Public Works has identified concerns with the two proposed temporary cul-de-sacs. The concerns include ensuring they are located within the limits of the subdivision and meet the requirements for waste trucks and snow plows. The on -street parking plan submitted does not meet Public Works standards and will need to be revised. 9.3 The applicant will also need to address additional preliminary stormwater drainage and grading comments in a revised submission. Emergency and Fire Services 9.4 The Emergency and Fire Services Department has no objection to the applications. 10. Discussion 10.1 The Bowmanville East Town Centre Secondary Plan is currently under review, which includes Special Study Area 3, to the north of the subject lands. The development of the lands are not dependant on the study being completed but the plan must allow for integration options and flexibility with the future development between the two sites and privately owned lands remnant lands abutting both sites. Page120 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-036-21 Page 11 Figure 6: Excerpt from Block Plan submitted by Humphries Planning Group Inc. 10.2 Consideration must be given to the broader surrounding context of how the development integrates with the existing neighbourhood and future development. This includes future road and pedestrian connections and the future lot layout with the remnant blocks within the proposed draft plan and the development potential of privately owned smaller parcels immediately adjacent to the draft plan. Staff required the applicant to submit a block plan showing how the plan and remnant blocks within the plan can integrate with the surrounding lands in the future. This is done to ensure all lands, within the proposed plan and to the north, can be used for development in the future and excluded due to their size or configuration. See Figure 6. 10.3 Particular attention must be given to the future road connections, Hunt Street and Durham Street. There will be lands within the proposed subdivision and on adjacent lands that will need to be combined to complete street patterns. This may impact the lot configuration on the east side of the site. Furthermore, if Durham Street is extended as shown in the proposed block plan the result would be the townhouses on the north side of the new local road backlotting onto that extension. This is discouraged by the Official Plan policies. 10.4 The draft plan must also allow for proper cul-de-sacs within the limits of the draft plan. Page 121 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-036-21 Page 12 10.5 The Block Plan needs to demonstrate an efficient use of land within the draft plan and the surrounding lands. Further discussion and refinement of the Block Plan is required. 10.6 The subject lands include natural heritage features identified in the Clarington Official Plan associated with the Bowmanville Creek Valley. The applicants have submitted an Environmental Impact Study, Meander Belt Study, and Geotechnical Report that municipal staff and conservation authority staff are currently reviewing. The results of these studies may redefine the lot depth on the west side of the site. 10.7 The purpose of the Public Meeting is to provide an opportunity for further public input. These public comments will be compiled, discussed with the applicant and addressed in a subsequent staff recommendation report. 11. Concurrence 11.1 Not Applicable. 12. Conclusion 12.1 The purpose of this report is to provide background information on the Draft Plan of Subdivision and Zoning By-law Amendment applications submitted by Fairhaven Investments Inc. for the Public Meeting under the Planning Act. Staff will continue processing the applications including the preparation of a subsequent report upon receipt of all agency and department comments and the resolution of identified issues. Staff Contact: Brandon Weiler, Planner, 905-623-3379 ext. 2424 or bweiler@clarington.net. Interested Parties: List of Interested Parties available from Department. Page122 Clarington Staff 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: June 28, 2021 Report Number: PDS-037-21 Submitted By: Ryan Windle, Director of Planning and Development Services Reviewed By: Andrew C. Allison, CAO Resolution#: File Number: ZBA2021-0003 & OPA2021-0002 By-law Number: Report Subject: Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications to facilitate the severance of a surplus farm dwelling Recommendations: 1. That Report PDS-037-21 be received; 2. That the Municipality of Clarington has no objections to the approval of ROPA 2021-001 3. That Amendment No. 128 to the Clarington Official Plan as contained in Attachment 1 of Report PDS-037-21 be adopted; 4. That the By-law to amend Zoning By-law 84-63 attached to Report PDS-037-21, as Attachment 2, be approved; 5. That with regard to Heritage Designation of 40 Station Street, Orono: (i) the draft updated Designation By-law (Attachment 3) be endorsed; (ii) the enactment of the updated Designation By-law be required as a condition of approval of any future Land Division application on the subject lands; and (iii) the Clerk be authorized to issue the required Notice under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act to initiate the process to amend the designation on the subject lands. 6. That all interested parties listed in Report PDS-037-21 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. Page123 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-037-21 Report Overview Page 2 172596 Ontario Ltd. has submitted applications for an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to facilitate the severance of a surplus farm dwelling at 40 Station Street in Orono to accommodate a farm consolidation with non -abutting farmlands. The Clarington Official Plan Amendment would permit a farm parcel less than 40 hectares and a residential parcel slightly larger than 0.6 hectares. The Zoning By-law Amendment would prohibit future residential development on the retained parcel, prohibit the housing of livestock in the existing farm buildings as required by the Minimum Distance Separation (MDS) formulae and reduce the interior side yard setback from the proposed property line to two existing farm buildings. The purpose of this report is to recommend that Council adopt the Clarington Official Plan Amendment, approve the Zoning By-law Amendment, and endorse the draft updated Heritage Designation By-law as contained in Attachments 1 — 3 of Report PDS-037-21. Additionally, it is recommended that Council advise the Region of Durham Planning and Economic Development Department that they have no objection to the approval of the Regional Official Plan (ROPA 2021 -00 1) required to accommodate the severance of a farm dwelling rendered surplus as a result of a non -abutting farm consolidation. 1. Application Details 1.1 Owner/Applicant: 172596 Ontario Ltd. 1.2 Agent: Clark Consulting Services 1.3 Proposal: General To facilitate the severance of a surplus farm dwelling at 40 Station Street in Orono. The retained farm parcel would consolidate with non -abutting farmlands owned by 172596 Ontario Ltd. and Algoma Orchards Ltd. C�>i�MMUF IT-17 L�1 R171 M, To permit a farm parcel less than 40 hectares and a residential parcel larger than 0.6 hectares. The retained farm parcel would be 35.18 hectares and the severed residential parcel would be 0.62 hectares. Zoning By-law Amendment To prohibit future residential development on the retained farm parcel, prohibit the housing of livestock in the existing farm buildings as required by the Minimum Distance Separation (MDS) formulae Page124 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-037-21 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 Page 3 and reduce the southerly interior side yard setback for non- residential buildings existing prior to July 5, 2021 to 8.3 metres. Area: 35.8 ha Location: 40 Station Street, Orono (See Figure 1) Roll Number: 181703005012401 Within the Built Boundary: No Subject Property I Proposed severance Figure 1 Proposed Severed and Retained Parcels Page125 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-037-21 2. Background Page 4 2.1 On February 11, 2021, 172596 Ontario Ltd. submitted applications for an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to facilitate the severance of a surplus farm dwelling at 40 Station Street in Orono. An application for the associated Regional Official Plan Amendment (ROPA 2021-001) has been submitted to the Region of Durham. 2.2 The Regional Official Plan Amendment is required to permit the severance of a farm dwelling rendered surplus as a result of acquiring a non -abutting farm and severing the surplus dwelling. The Region of Durham's Planning and Economic Development Committee held a Public Meeting on June 1, 2021. 2.3 Should these applications be approved, a future Land Division would be required to permit the severance of a surplus farm dwelling. The applicant is proposing a shared driveway access. An easement would be required over the existing driveway in favour of the severed residential parcel as part of the Land Division application. 2.4 As part of a surplus farm dwelling severance, the Clarington Official Plan requires the retained farm parcel maintain a minimum of 40 hectares and the severed residential parcel a maximum of 0.6 hectares. An Official Plan Amendment was submitted to permit the retained farm parcel with an area of 35.18 hectares and the severed residential parcel with an area of 0.62 hectares. The retained parcel would consolidate with non - abutting farmlands owned by 172596 Ontario Ltd. and Algoma Orchards Ltd. (See Figure 2). 2.5 A Zoning By-law Amendment is required to prohibit future residential development on the retained parcel, prohibit the housing of livestock in the existing farm buildings as required by the Minimum Distance Separation (MDS) formulae and reduce the interior side yard setback from the proposed property line to two existing farm buildings. 2.6 The applicant has submitted the following reports in support of the applications: • Planning Justification Report prepared by Clark Consulting; and • Site Screening Questionnaire (SSQ) prepared by GHD Page126 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-037-21 CLTANVEn rw� i CR SZ :e SnWminwIla �CY[Y�n } u • r.r i AL i y 1. vr"' *, ;ray,. 1 SS 4131 r..... Figure 2: 172596 Ontario Ltd. and Algoma Orchards Ltd. Land Holdings 3. Land Use Characteristics and Surroundings Uses Page 5 3.1 The subject lands are 35.8 hectares in size with an existing detached dwelling on the southwest side of the property, fronting Station Street. There are five farm buildings also located on the southwest portion of the property. These buildings are used to store farm equipment. The residential dwelling and the farm buildings are accessed by a shared driveway. Most of the property is an apple orchard. Orono Creek traverses the southern portion of the property. 3.2 The detached dwelling on the property is on the Municipal Register as it is designated under the Part IV Ontario Heritage Act and is known as the John Cobbledick House. The detached dwelling was built in the 1860s. 3.3 The surrounding land uses are as follows: North Agricultural lands South Rural residential and agricultural lands East Agricultural lands West Highway 115/35 and Orono Page127 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-037-21 4. Provincial Policy Provincial Policy Statement Page 6 4.1 The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) protects prime agricultural areas for long-term agricultural uses. The PPS permits lot creation in prime agricultural areas for the severance of a surplus farm dwelling as a result of farm consolidation subject to the criteria outlined in Policy 2.3.4.1 (c). Greenbelt Plan 4.2 The policies of the Greenbelt Plan are intended to protect prime agricultural areas for long-term agricultural uses. Within the Protected Countryside designation of the Greenbelt Plan, lot creation is permitted for the severance of a surplus farm dwelling as a result of farm consolidation, provided that the surplus farm dwelling area is limited in size and no new residential dwellings are constructed on the retained parcel of farmland. 4.3 The southwest corner of the property is within the Natural Heritage System of the Greenbelt Plan. The proposed surplus farm dwelling severance does not propose any land use change or development in this area. 5. Official Plans Durham Regional Official Plan 5.1 The Durham Region Official Plan designates the subject property as "Prime Agricultural Areas." Within Prime Agricultural Areas the severance of a farm dwelling rendered surplus as a result of a non -abutting farm consolidation is permitted by amendment to the Regional Official Plan. 5.2 The applicant has applied for a Regional Official Plan Amendment (ROPA 2021-001). The Region of Durham's Planning and Economic Development Committee held a Public Meeting on June 1, 2021. Clarington Official Plan 5.3 The Clarington Official Plan designates the lands to be severed "Rural" and the retained lands "Prime Agricultural," "Rural" and "Environmental Protection". The severance of a farm dwelling rendered surplus as a result of the consolidation of non -abutting farms is permitted provided that the farm is a minimum of 40 hectares, the land area of the parcel on which the surplus dwelling would be located is a maximum of 0.6 hectares and that the farm parcel is rezoned to prohibit the establishment of any new residential uses. Page128 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-037-21 Page 7 5.4 The retained farm parcel would be 35.18 hectares in size and the surplus farm dwelling would be 0.62 hectares. The applicant has submitted an application for an amendment to the Clarington Official Plan for the farm parcel to be less than the minimum required 40 hectares and for the residential parcel to be more than the maximum 0.6 hectares. 6. Zoning By-law 6.1 Zoning By-law 84-63 zones the subject property as Agricultural Exception (A-1) and Environmental Protection (EP). The 0.62-hectare residential parcel to be severed is entirely within the Agricultural Exception (A-1) Zone. The proposed Zoning By-law Amendment would prohibit future residential development on the retained parcel, prohibit the housing of livestock in the existing farm buildings as required by the Minimum Distance Separation (MDS) formulae and reduce the southerly interior side yard setback for non-residential buildings existing prior to July 5, 2021, to 8.3 metres. 7. Summary of Background Studies 7.1 A Planning Justification Report prepared by Clark Consulting was submitted in support of the applications. The Report concludes that the applications to sever a surplus farm dwelling meet the objectives and requirements of the Provincial Policy Statement, Region of Durham Official Plan policies and the intent of the Clarington Official Plan policies. A total of 19 land holdings, including the subject lands, make up the 172596 Ontario Ltd. and Algoma Orchards Ltd. farming operation as shown on Figure 2. 7.2 An Addendum Report was submitted to acknowledge the heritage designation on the property. 7.3 The Report also addresses the Minimum Distance Separation formulae. The Report concludes that there is no livestock facility on the retained farm parcel and that the housing of livestock in the existing accessory farm structures should be prohibited. The Report indicates that the proposed applications comply with the MDS formulae guidelines. 7.4 A Site Screening Questionnaire was submitted by GHD. The Report concludes that the present land use at 40 Station Street has a low level of concern from an environmental assessment perspective and is suitable for the proposed severance. No further environmental assessment was recommended. 8. Public Notice 8.1 Public notice was mailed to each landowner within 300 metres of the subject lands on April 1, 2021. 8.2 On April 6, 2021, public meeting signs were installed on the property, fronting Station Street, Highway 115/35 and Concession Road 5. A Public Meeting was held on April 26, 2021. There were no members of the public that spoke on the applications. Page129 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-037-21 Page 8 8.3 A notice of Recommendation Report scheduled for the Planning and Development Committee Meeting on June 28, 2021, was mailed to the interested parties on June 16, 2021. 9. Agency Comments Durham Region 9.1 Durham Region Planning notes that the proposal is also the subject of an application to amend the Durham Region Official Plan. A decision has not been made on the Regional Official Plan Amendment. A Public Meeting was held on June 1, 2021. No one spoke in opposition to the applications. Ministry of Transportation (MTO) 9.2 The Ministry of Transportation has no concerns with the proposal. Any redevelopment would require MTO permits. The retained parcel is not permitted access to Highway 115/35. Access would only be permitted via Station Street. Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority (GRCA) 9.3 The Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority (GRCA) has no objection to the applications as the severed parcel does not fall within the GRCA's Regulation limits. 10. Departmental Comments 10.1 The applications were circulated to the Infrastructure Division of Public Works and the Emergency and Fire Services Department. Neither department has concerns with the applications. 11. Discussion 11.1 The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) encourages the long-term viability of agricultural areas and limits opportunities to create new parcels in rural and agricultural areas. The PPS encourages farm consolidations and recognizes that farmers may not be interested in acting as landlords when acquiring additional farmland. The Durham Region and Clarington Official Plans allow farm consolidation where possible to ensure the long- term viability of agricultural operations. The Regional and Clarington Official Plans set out regulations for the severance of a surplus farm dwelling as a result of farm consolidation. When a surplus farm dwelling is severed, no new residential dwellings are permitted on the agricultural parcel. 11.2 The severance of a dwelling rendered surplus as a result of a non -abutting farm consolidation is permitted by amendment to the Regional Official Plan. The applicant has submitted a Regional Official Plan Amendment (ROPA 2021-001) to allow for a surplus farm dwelling severance as a result of non -abutting farm consolidation. Page130 Municipality of Clarington Page 9 Report PDS-037-21 11.3 The Clarington Official Plan policies require that when a surplus farm dwelling is severed from a farm parcel that is non -abutting, the farm parcel must have a minimum lot area of 40 hectares. The purpose of this policy is to ensure that the lands are viable for a farm operation upon severing. In this case, the existing farm parcel is considered smaller than a typical agricultural parcel, as it is 35.8 hectares, however the subject lands have been successfully farmed as an apple orchard. The Official Plan also requires that the severed surplus dwelling be a maximum of 0.6 hectares. The application proposes an amendment to the Clarington Official Plan to permit a 35.18- hectare farm parcel to and a 0.62-hectare residential parcel. 11.4 When a surplus farm dwelling is severed, the Regional and Clarington Official Plans in conformity with Provincial policy, require that the retained farm parcel be rezoned to prohibit future residential development. The 0.62 hectare residential parcel to be severed is entirely within the Agricultural Exception (A-1) Zone. The application for a Zoning By-law Amendment would prohibit future residential development on the retained farm parcel, prohibit the housing of livestock in the existing farm buildings as required by the Minimum Distance Separation (MDS) formulae and reduce the interior side yard setback from the proposed property line to two existing farm buildings. Two farm buildings would require a reduction in the interior side yard setback. The southerly side yard setback requirement would be reduced from 15 metres to 8.3 metres. The reduction is to accommodate two existing structure and, in Staff's opinion would not result in any negative impacts. 11.5 The subject property is on the Municipal Register as it is designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act by By-law 90-22. Generally, development on or adjacent to a cultural heritage resource may be permitted where the proposed development has been evaluated through a Heritage Impact Assessment and it has been demonstrated that the heritage attributes of the protected heritage property will be conserved. 11.6 The Clarington Heritage Committee (CHC) was consulted on the subject applications at its April 20, 2021, meeting. The CHC recommended the current Designation By-law 90- 22 be updated to address the contextual significance of the proposed severed lands, including the position of the dwelling on the hill, and the driveway access that winds to avoid crossing in front of the dwelling. An amendment to the By-law 90-22 would also be required to update the legal description to reflect the extent of the future severed lands. The draft designation by-law (Attachment 3) was informed by an `Evaluation of 40 Station Street According to Ontario Regulation 9/06 (criteria for establishing cultural heritage value or interest)', prepared by Archaeological Research Associates Ltd., and presented to the CHC on June 15th. The CHC and Staff recommend the enactment of the updated Designation By-law be required, pursuant to the requirements of the Ontario Heritage Act, as a condition of approval of any subsequent Land Division application to sever the designated heritage dwelling to ensure the continued conservation of this cultural heritage resource. Page 131 Municipality of Clarington Page 10 Report PDS-037-21 12. Concurrence Not Applicable. 13. Conclusion It is respectfully recommended that Council: adopt the amendment to the Clarington Official Plan (see Attachment 1), approve the amendment to Zoning By-law 84-63 (See Attachment 2), endorse the draft updated Designation By-law (See Attachment 3) and advise the Region of Durham that the Municipality of Clarington has no objection to the approval of ROPA 2021-001. Staff Contact: Toni Rubino, Planner, (905) 623-3379 ext. 2431 or trubino@clarington.net. Attachments: Attachment 1 — Official Plan Amendment Attachment 2 — Zoning By-law Amendment Attachment 3 — Draft Updated Designation By-law Interested Parties: The following interested parties will be notified of Council's decision: 172596 Ontario Ltd. Bob Clark, Clark Consulting Page132 Attachment 1 to Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-037-21 Amendment Number 128 To The Municipality of Clarington Official Plan Purpose: To permit the severance of a non -abutting surplus farm dwelling of 0.62 hectares with a retained farm parcel of 35.18 hectares. The Official Plan Amendment will permit the severed parcel to be greater than 0.60 hectares and the retained parcel to be less than 40 hectares. Basis: This amendment is based on an application submitted by 172596 Ontario Ltd. to permit the severance of a surplus farm dwelling as a result of the consolidation of non -abutting farm parcels. This application was supported by a Planning Justification Report and Minimum Distance Separation Review and has been reviewed by public agencies and municipal staff. Consideration has also been given to Provincial Policy and the current Durham Regional Official Plan. Actual Amendment: The Clarington Official Plan is hereby amended as follows: In Section 23.19.4. iii), Table 23-1 "Surplus Farm Dwelling Lot Exceptions" by adding the following exception: Table 23-1 Surplus Farm Dwelling Lot Exceptions Exception Assessment No. Legal Description Area of Area of No. Surplus Remainder Dwelling of Land Lot ha ha 1110 030-050-12401 Part Lot 27, 0.62 35.18" (2021) Conc. 5 former Twp. of Clarke Implementation: The provisions set forth in the Municipality of Clarington Official Plan, regarding the implementation of the Plan, shall apply in regard to this Amendment. Interpretation: The provisions set forth in the Municipality of Clarington Official Plan, regarding the interpretation of the Plan, shall apply in regard to this Amendment. Page133 Attachment 2 to Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-037-21 Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington By-law Number 2021-. 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 for ZBA2021-0003; Now Therefore Be It Resolved That, the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington enacts as follows: 1. Schedule `2' to By-law 84-63, as amended, is hereby further amended by changing the zone designation from "Agricultural (A-1) Zone" to Agricultural Exception (A-94) Zone" as illustrated on the attached Schedule 'A' hereto. 3. Notwithstanding Section 6.1 and 6.3 c iii), the lands zoned A-94 on the Schedules to this By-law may only be used for the Non -Residential Uses set out in Section 6.4.1 b. in accordance with the following regulations: a. Non-residential buildings existing prior to July 5, 2021 may not house livestock. b. Southerly interior side yard setback (minimum) for non-residential buildings existing prior to July 5, 2021 8.3 meters C. Interior side yard setback (minimum) for non-residential buildings constructed after July 5, 2021 15 meters 4. Schedule `A' attached hereto shall form a part of this By-law. Page 134 5. This By-law shall come into effect on the date of the passing hereof, subject to the provisions of Section 34 of the Planning Act. By -Law passed in open session this day of 12021. Adrian Foster, Mayor June Gallagher, Municipal Clerk Page135 This is Schedule "A" to By-law 2021- , passed this day of 2021 A.D. J ,h V J� V CENTREVIEW-STREET G� PARK°STREET = a 4 W COBBGEDICK STREET s� qTi O j AFT hi CON CE55iON-ROAD-S Zoning Change From 'A-l' To 'A-94' Zoning To Remain'A-1' - Zoning To Remain'EP' N Clarke • ZBA 2021-0003 • Schedule 2 Page136 Municipality of Clarington Attachment 3 to Report PDS-037-21 The Corporation of the Municipality Of Clarington By -Law No. 2021 — XXX Being a by-law to designate the property known for municipal purposes as 40 Station Street (Orono), Municipality of Clarington as a property of historic or architectural value or interest under the Ontario Heritage Act, R. S. O. 1990, Chapter 0.18; Whereas the Ontario Heritage Act, R. S. O., 1990, c.O. 18 authorizes the Council of the Municipality to enact by- laws to designate properties to be of historic or architectural value or interest for the purposes of the Act; and AND WHEREAS the subject lands are currently designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act by By-law 90-22, and have been severed (File No. LD XXX/20XX); AND WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington has caused to be served upon the owner of the property known for municipal purposes as 40 Station Street and upon the Ontario Heritage Foundation, Notice of Intention to Designate the aforesaid real property and has caused such Notice of Intention to be published in the Clarington This Week, a newspaper having general circulation in the area of the designation on ; and AND WHEREAS the reasons for the designation of the aforesaid property under the Ontario Heritage Act are contained in Schedule "A" attached to and forming part of this by-law; and AND WHEREAS the Clarington Heritage Committee has recommended that the property known for municipal purposes as 40 Station Street Orono, be designated as a property of historic or architectural value or interest under the Ontario Heritage Act; and ANDWHEREAS no notice of objection to the proposed designation was served upon the Municipal Clerk within the period prescribed by the Ontario Heritage Act; Now Therefore the Council of the Corporation of The Municipality of Clarington hereby enacts as follows: The property known for municipal purposes as 40 Station Street, Orono, which is more particularly described in Schedule "B" which is attached to and forms part of this by- law, is hereby designated as a property which has historic or architectural value or interest under Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, R. S. O. 1990, c., 0.18. 2. The Solicitor for the Municipality of Clarington is hereby authorized to cause a copy of this by-law to be registered against the title to the property described in Schedule "B" hereto. 3. The Municipal Clerk is hereby authorized to cause a copy of this by-law to be served upon the owner of the property described in Schedule "B" hereto and on the Ontario Heritage Foundation. The Municipal Clerk also is authorized to cause Page137 notice of the passing of this by-law to be published in the Clarington This Week, a newspaper having general circulation in the area of the designation. 4. That By-law 90-22 be Repealed By-law passed in open session this day of , 2021 June Gallagher, Municipal Clerk Adrian Foster, Mayor Page138 Schedule 'A' To By-law 2021- XXX Statement of Significance and list of character defining features. Description of Proaert 40 Station Street, Orono is known as the "John Cobbledick House", and is located on Lot 27, Concession 4 in the Township of Clarke, Municipality of Clarington. The property consists of a one -and -a -half storey, fieldstone residential structure that dates to 1853. Statement of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest 40 Station Street is a representative example of a Georgian style residence built in the mid-19th century. The one -and -a -half storey structure with course fieldstone and uncoursed masonry displays historic masonry styles and techniques. Elements typical of the Georgian Style include the symmetrical three -bay fagade, the central doorway and rectangular window openings, the refined wooden molded cornice, and prominent wooden molded door surrounds at the entrance and boxed eave return. Contextual Value 40 Station Street is a visual landmark. It is positioned at the crest of a slight hill and is prominent when viewed from Station Street. The property's historical architectural style and massing contributes to the building's status as a visual landmark. Description of Heritage Attributes 40 Station Street is a representative example of a Georgian style residence built in the mid-19th century. The property contains the following heritage attributes that reflect these values: • One -and -a -half storey Georgian style residence • Side gable roof • Symmetrical, three -bay fagade • Coursed fieldstone masonry on fagade with beaded mortar profile • Uncoursed fieldstone masonry on north and south elevation • Rectangular window openings with jack arch and finished with stone voussoirs • Decorative wooden molded roof cornice • Central entryway with rectangular transom and sidelights • Wooden door surround around entry door with moulded entablature and architrave framed by pilasters • Stone chimney on north elevation • Remaining wood windows casements and sills 40 Station Street is a visual landmark. It is positioned at the crest of a slight hill and is prominent when viewed from Station Street. The property contains the following heritage attributes that reflect these values: Page139 • One -and -a -half storey Georgian style residence • Location on a slight rise above Station Street • View from Station Street across the rising topography to the fagade of the stone residence • Mature trees that frame the residence Page140 Schedule 'B' To By-law 2021- XXX Legal Description: Part Lot 27, Concession 5 Part 11, Part 1, Part 4, Plan 1 OR919 Municipality of Clarington Regional Municipality of Durham PIN 26680-0006 (LT) Note: the legal description is subject to change upon the approval of a related Land Division application. Page 141 Clarington Staff 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: June 28, 2021 Report Number: PDS-038-21 Submitted By: Ryan Windle, Director of Planning and Development Services Reviewed By: Andrew C. Allison, CAO Resolution#: File Number: PLN.2.12 By-law Number: Report Subject: Envision Durham, Proposed Policy Directions Recommendations: 1. That Report PDS-038-21 be received; 2. That the proposed policy directions as outlined in Tables 1 through 7 of Report PDS- 038-21, be supported; 3. That the Region of Durham Planning and Economic Development Department be forwarded a copy of Report PDS-038-21 and Council's decision; and 4. That all interested parties listed in Report PDS-038-21 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. Page142 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-038-21 Report Overview Page 2 Through Envision Durham, the Municipal Comprehensive Review (MCR) of the Regional Official Plan (ROP), Durham Region has provided the opportunity for the public and local municipalities to provide comments on the proposed policy directions. The comments submitted to the Region by the public and local municipalities have the potential to create changes to land use planning policies at the Regional level. The MCR is an opportunity to plan for fundamental change, by replacing the current ROP and establishing a progressive and forward -looking planning horizon for the Region until 2051. The Region has requested public and agency comments on the proposed policy directions for the Region's MCR. This report will provide an overview of Clarington's analysis and recommendations on the proposed policy directions to Council. 1. Purpose of this Report 1.1 The purpose of this staff report is to present staff comments to Council regarding the Durham Region Proposed Policy Directions. The recommendations are as a result of a Regional request to the public and municipalities. This Report and any additional Council resolutions will be forwarded to the Region to inform the Envision Durham Process. The Proposed Policy Directions report can be found at the following Report #2021-P-7. 2. Background Envision Durham to date 2.1 The Region of Durham began a Municipal Comprehensive Review (MCR) of the Regional Official Plan (ROP) under the name "Envision Durham, 2041 — Our Region. Our Plan. Our Future" in 2018. 2.2 The ROP is Durham Council's core planning document that guides Regional decision - making on long term growth and development. The MCR process will update existing ROP policies and initiatives, review relevant emerging land use planning and development issues, and will constitute the Region's Provincial Plan conformity exercise. The MCR is a mandated responsibility of all upper tier municipalities through the current provincial Growth Plan. 2.3 The Region is required to review and update the ROP to conform to the amended Provincial Plans by July 2022. The local municipalities deadline for conformity with Provincial Plans and the Region's Official Plan is July 2023.In Clarington, Staff are commencing the review of the Clarington OP (2018) this year, beginning with the procurement of a consultant as approved by Clarington Council as part of the 2021 Budget. Page143 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-038-21 Page 3 2.4 The Region's Proposed Policy Directions were developed and informed based on best practice reviews, research, public engagement and feedback received during the first two stages of the Envision Durham process. 2.5 Currently, Envision Durham is in the "Direct Stage" of the process. Following the release of the Proposed Policy Directions the Regional staff will begin to draft the Plan, during this time the Region will hold the necessary Statutory Public meetings and Open houses and present the Draft Plan to Regional Council for adoption. By 2022 the Region intends to finalize the Plan and submit it to the Ministry for approval. 2.6 As part of the Envision Durham process, Clarington Council was previously consulted during the MCR process to provide their position on the nine submissions for Employment Conversion requests within Clarington (PSD-009-21). Staff have also previously reported to Council regarding the Major Transit Station Areas (PSD-015-19; PSD-027-19). Proposed Policy Directions 2.7 Based on the framework endorsed by Regional Council in November 2020, the proposed policy directions provide an indication of how the new ROP will be structured around chapters that represent seven balanced, aspirational and outcome -oriented Strategic Directions: a. Prosperous Economy; b. Healthy Communities; c. Supportive Infrastructure; d. Vibrant Urban System; e. Thriving Rural System; f. Protected Greenlands System; and g. Connected Transportation System. 2.8 Each Strategic Direction describes a series of policy topics, discusses comments received and introduces proposed policy direction(s). 2.9 The Proposed Policy Directions present potential additions and changes to land use planning policies. The seven proposed strategic directions are not intended to be exhaustive but introduce certain directions where further input is being sought before draft Regional Official Plan policies are introduced. 3. Staff Comments 3.1 Generally, Staff are satisfied with the Proposed Policy Directions. To prepare comments: Staff canvased internally throughout the organization and through an inter -department survey, reviewed previous comments sent to the Region through the Envision Durham process to date, and conducted a preliminary analysis of each policy direction compared to the current Clarington Official Plan policies to identify any areas of suggested improvement. Page144 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-038-21 Page 4 3.2 Generally speaking, Staff request that the Region keep their proposed policies broad to allow local municipalities to maintain and establish their policies in a more specific way to suit the needs of the individual local area. 3.3 Below, Staff have provided comments on the Proposed Policy Directions that Staff believe require modifications, improvements, clarifications and/or adjustments. All Proposed Policy Directions not included in the table are generally supported by Staff. Prosperous Economy Goals for a `Prosperous Economy' 3.4 Staff concur with the following Goal proposed for the `Prosperous Economy' section of the ROP: Support the development of a strong, resilient and prosperous economy that maximizes opportunities for business and employment growth (jobs), innovation, and partnerships, to develop the region to its fullest economic potential. Summary of `Prosperous Economy' Strategic Direction 3.5 Over time, economic development objectives evolve to align with broader economic trends, regional growth, and as a response to changing local priorities and issues. Reviewing economic development policies will assist in strengthening the interrelationship between key infrastructure and development, support and foster innovation and develop targeted strategies and action plans. `Prosperous Economy' Proposed Policy Directions 3.6 Proposed policy directions that are intended to support a prosperous economy include: a) Implementing an appropriate supply of Employment Areas with access to municipal water and wastewater services; b) Supporting a balanced population and employment growth, and the diversification of the Regional employment base; c) Recognizing the importance of, and encouraging the expansion of leading -edge technologies, including high-speed broadband infrastructure; d) Supporting collaboration with educational institutions and the business community in programs that create and maintain a highly skilled regional labour force; and e) Supporting the agricultural and agri-food sector, including new opportunities for agri-tourism, on farm diversified uses and the diversification of agricultural operations. Page145 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-038-21 Staff Comments Page 5 3.7 Clarington staff have analyzed and reviewed the proposed policy directions for the MCR and have the following comments for the Prosperous Economy Strategic Direction: Table 1 — Staff Review of `Prosperous Economy' Proposed Policy Directions Proposed Section Staff Comments Policy Number Direction 2 Ensure that the Employment Lands provided are strategically linked with appropriate active transportation infrastructure to reduce commuting. The Municipality of Clarington has submitted two settlement area expansion requests for Employment Lands through Envision Durham, east of Courtice and in Orono. • Ensure strategic growth areas are within Major Transit Station Areas (MTSAs). Clarington has two proposed MTSA's in Economic Courtice and Bowmanville where the GO Stations will be Development located. Policies . Include diversification of employment options as a key principle. • Request that the Regions proposed policies support local economic development projects with financial and planning tools. • Support for a balanced approach to development in Downtowns which proposes to balance intensification with local heritage. 3 . Highlight the essential need for Broadband infrastructure Broadband through stronger policies. Infrastructure . Encourage the Region and lower tier municipalities to provide access to their infrastructure for co -location. Healthy Communities Goals for `Healthy Communities' 3.8 Staff concur with the following Goals proposed for the `Healthy Communities' section of the ROP: Prepare built and natural environments to be low -carbon and climate -resilient. Plan complete communities that improve the quality of life for residents. Enhance community health, safety and well-being by planning for sufficient community services. Page146 Municipality of Clarington Page 6 Report PDS-038-21 Summary of `Healthy Communities' Strategic Direction 3.9 One of the primary functions of an official plan is to implement policies that shape the development of healthy communities as our built environment has a direct effect on our health. The policies that shape our built communities should; address quality of life, health, safety, convenience and well-being of present and future residents. `Healthy Communities' Proposed Policy Directions 3.10 Proposed policy directions intended to foster healthy communities include: a) Creating a greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction target to achieve net -zero as an aspirational objective; b) Developing age -friendly design guidelines with area municipalities; c) Encouraging community hubs in transit -supportive locations, especially in Strategic Growth Areas and areas where existing cultural and community services and facilities exist; d) Creating a Regional Housing Assessment Report to enable area municipalities to undertake Inclusionary Zoning within their respective jurisdictions; e) Encouraging community hubs in transit -supportive locations, especially in Strategic Growth Areas and areas where existing cultural and community services and facilities exist; and f) Establishing a new affordable housing target of at least 35 per cent of new housing within Strategic Growth Areas. Staff Comments 3.11 Clarington staff have analyzed and reviewed the proposed policy directions for the MCR and have the following comments for the Healthy Communities Strategic Direction: Table 2 - Staff Review of `Healthy Communities' Proposed Policy Directions Proposed Section Policy Number Direction Staff Comments • Ensure that sustainability needs are considered and Sustainability 5 integrated into the entire Regional Official Plan and not just one section. Page147 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-038-21 Page 7 Table 2 - Staff Review of `Healthy Communities' Proposed Policy Directions Proposed Section Policy Number Direction Staff Comments 6 • That the Region request that the Province prioritize tax incentives for green development projects. 6(9) • For closer alignment to Policy 6(1), it is recommended that water conservation be incorporated into this policy. Greenhouse . Many local area municipalities have invested in the Gas Reduction Durham Community Energy Plan. The establishment of 6(11) community GHG reduction plans at both the local and Regional levels may result in duplication of efforts. Ensure the policies are updated to ensure one does not outweigh the other in significance. • If this refers to local GHG reduction targets it could be 6(13) incorporated into policy 6(10), and policy 6(2) should similarly speak to monitoring progress. • This policy direction, as currently proposed, may be Climate redundant, given the GHG reduction policy section. In Resilient 7 addition, there is duplication and redundancy amongst Development polices in policy direction (6) and (7) relating to encouraging green development practices. • Include an additional policy to direct Durham Region 8 Public Health to work with the MECP to regularly Air assess and report on regional air quality. Quality "improved • Define air quality" and use a targeted statistic 8(1) to explain what the Regional Official Plan is expecting from local municipalities. • Include policies to allow local municipalities to determine when an Air Quality Study should be 8(2) submitted as part of an application. • Region should be responsible for reviewing this report as The Municipalities do not have staff with the technical expertise. Complete 10 . Ensure integration of Complete Communities policies Communities into the Major Transit Station Area (MTSA) directions. Page148 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-038-21 Page 8 Table 2 - Staff Review of `Healthy Communities' Proposed Policy Directions Proposed Section Policy Number Direction Staff Comments • Clarington Staff are in support of this policy direction. Public Realm Policy 19.2.5 in the current Clarington Official Plan and Urban 12 which states that we will "integrate infrastructure and Design utilities into the public realm with a high priority for aesthetics." • Proposed policies should support local municipalities to Downtowns 13 reduce vehicular dependency and focus more on pedestrian friendly designs. Age -Friendly 15 . Incorporate age -friendly planning into "complete Planning communities." Community • Clarington Staff are in support of these policy directions. Safety and 15-sub The current Clarington Official Plan states in policy Well -Being 5.4.14 that we will "ensure community safety while Planning minimizing negative impacts [... ]." • Clarington staff are in support of this policy direction. The current Clarington Official Plan states in policy Diverse 15-sub 6.3.1 that "the Municipality, in co-operation with other Housing levels of government, shall encourage the provision of a diverse housing stock in terms of type, size, tenure, and cost [...]." • Clarington staff are in support of this policy direction. Supply of Land Policy 23.17.7 in the current Clarington Official Plan "a for Housing 16 states that minimum of a 2-year supply of land zoned for medium and high -density housing throughout all the urban areas [... ]." • Clarington staff are in support of this policy direction. Housing Policy 7.3.13 in the current Clarington Official Plan "increase Options 17 states that it will look to housing options to meet the needs of all residents throughout all stages of their lives." • Create better affordable housing opportunities within MTSAs. • Re -define "affordable housing" in the ROP, current Affordable 18-20 definition is dated. Housing . Encourage affordable housing in strategic growth areas. • Create incentives for developers to supply permanent affordable housing units. • Define "affordable ownership." Page149 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-038-21 Page 9 Table 2 - Staff Review of `Healthy Communities' Proposed Policy Directions Proposed Section Policy Number Direction Staff Comments • The Region should recognize that MTSA's are not the only areas within municipalities where affordable housing may be appropriate. Further information is required on how proposed Regional affordable housing targets would be implemented and measured at the local level. • Clarington staff are in support of this policy direction. The current Clarington Official Plan states in policy Adaptive Re- 25 5.5.1 that it will "promote the reduction, reuse and use recycling of waste, with particular attention to multi - residential housing forms, which meets applicable Provincial standards [... ]." Condominium • Encourage local municipalities to enact/develop a Conversion and 26 demolition control by-law. Demolition Control • Encourage a similar threshold for short-term rentals as Short -Term 27 seen in policy 26(1). The Region should also explore Rentals stronger supports and directions to local municipalities to regulate short-term rentals. • Clarington staff are in support of this policy direction. Special Needs Policy 6.3.10 in the current Clarington Official Plan "special Housing 28 states that needs housing is an important element of meeting the accommodation needs of Clarington residents." Supportive Infrastructure Goals for `Supportive Infrastructure' 3.12 Staff concur with the following Goals proposed for the `Supportive Infrastructure' section of the ROP: Maintain the long-term financial sustainability of the Region by managing its financial resources in a fiscally responsible and prudent manner. Provide the necessary Regional municipal services to meet current and projected needs for orderly growth in the region in an environmentally and financially sustainable manner. Enable the efficient delivery, location and effective use of energy and utilities. Page 150 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-038-21 Summary of `Supportive Infrastructure' Strategic Direction Page 10 3.13 The planning, financing and provision of adequate municipal services is a principal role of the Region. As a growing, economically competitive region, ensuring supportive municipal infrastructure is in place (or will be in place for future needs) and maintained on a regular basis is essential. `Supportive Infrastructure' Proposed Policy Directions 3.14 Proposed policy directions intended for supportive infrastructure include: a) Encouraging sustainable urban design within the public realm and stormwater management practices that support low impact development (LID); b) Recognizing that to reduce greenhouse gas emissions energy conservation, efficiency measures, and renewable and alternative energy sources need to be improved; c) Adapting and building resiliency to the impacts of climate change; and permitting and promoting alternative energy systems and renewable energy systems in accordance with provincial and federal requirements; and d) Permitting and promoting alternative energy systems and renewable energy systems in accordance with provincial and federal requirements, while prohibiting large-scale commercial renewable energy facilities in Prime Agricultural Areas and critical environmental areas. Staff Comments 3.15 Clarington staff have analyzed and reviewed the proposed policy directions for the MCR and have the following comments for the Supportive Infrastructure Strategic Direction: Table 3 - Staff Review of `Supportive Infrastructure' Proposed Policy Directions Proposed Policy Section Staff Comments Direction Number • Encourage developing a green infrastructure strategy to mitigate climate change in cooperation 30 with area municipalities. • Develop more specific requirements for Green Infrastructure development applications regarding LIDs. • Where a Municipality has a reporting requirement 30(2) as part of a local green development program, integrate requirement into the local GDP to streamline and minimize redundancy. Page 151 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-038-21 Page 11 Table 3 - Staff Review of `Supportive Infrastructure' Proposed Policy Directions Proposed Policy Section Staff Comments Direction Number Waste Management 31 (5) • Strengthen this suggested policy by speaking to the evaluation of cumulative impacts on air quality. Telecommunications • Ensure the policies acknowledge the significant Infrastructure 32 need for improved rural internet (see Broadband under the Prosperous Economy Section). • Ensure policies encourage the Region to work with the provincial government to upgrade the existing Energy 33 infrastructure to support renewable and alternative energy projects. Vibrant Urban Systems Goals for `Vibrant Urban Systems' 3.16 Staff concur with the following Goals proposed for the `Vibrant Urban Systems' section of the ROP: • Establish a vibrant Urban System that supports the development of compact, efficient, and complete communities; • Balance employment and population growth by ensuring an adequate supply of Employment Areas; • Value the diversity of areas and places that comprise the Urban System by protecting and integrating natural and cultural heritage resources; • Advance the development of Strategic Growth Areas as focal points for intensification, economic activity, and significant employment; and • Manage growth within the Urban System by promoting intensification and development that optimizes infrastructure and public service facilities. Summary of `Vibrant Urban Systems' Strategic Direction 3.17 Lands within the Region's Urban Area Boundary create an Urban System that is designed to accommodate most of the region's forecasted population and employment growth. An Urban System is intended to encompass distinct Urban Areas that are guided by policies that aim to separate incompatible uses, provide for focal points, create concentrations of urban activities and essential connections and function as a healthy, complete community. Page152 Municipality of Clarington Page 12 Report PDS-038-21 `Vibrant Urban Systems' Proposed Policy Directions 3.18 The policies directions for Urban Systems are subject to change, additional policy directions and finalization of the proposed policies will be released as the various phases of the Growth Management Study are completed. Some of the draft proposed policy directions that would foster a vibrant Urban System include: a) In consultation with area municipalities, Regional Centre policies need to be reviewed and refined against the density targets and planned function as described in ROP policy; b) Designating Highway 2 from the Toronto/Durham border easterly to Highway 418 in Clarington, and Simcoe Street from Gibb Street in downtown Oshawa to Highway 407 as "Rapid Transit Spine Intensification Corridors", signaling their status as Strategic Growth Areas with densities, built form and a mix of uses that will support Light Rail Transit in the long term; c) Allowing Places of Worship within Employment Areas subject to meeting criteria including land use compatibility; and d) Encouraging the redevelopment of brownfield sites and greyfield sites and prioritize the redevelopment of brownfield and greyfield sites within Strategic Growth Areas and other intensification areas. 3.19 If required, settlement area boundary expansions will be considered for area municipalities through the Growth Management Study (Phase 2), after the completion of the Land Needs Analysis (phase 1). Phase 1 will assist in determining the amount of urban land required to accommodate the 2051 growth forecasts. Staff Comments 3.20 Clarington staff have analyzed and reviewed the proposed policy directions for the MCR and have the following comments for the Vibrant Urban Systems Strategic Direction: Table 4 — Staff Review of `Vibrant Urban Systems' Proposed Policy Directions Proposed Policy Section Staff Comments Direction Number • Clarington staff are in support of this policy Delineated Built -Up direction. To support this policy direction policy Areas and 37 4.5.1 in the current Clarington Official Plan states Designated that "the municipality will support the achievement Greenfield Areas of a density of 50 residents and jobs combined per gross hectare [... ]." Page153 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-038-21 Page 13 Table 4 — Staff Review of `Vibrant Urban Systems' Proposed Policy Directions Proposed Policy Section Staff Comments Direction Number Centres and • Clarington staff do not support the potential Corridors 38 & 40 removal of either the Corridor or Centre designations in Clarington's Urban Areas. • Currently the Municipality is preparing Secondary Plans for both the Courtice and Bowmanville MTSAs. Clarington Council has provided direction on three occasions regarding the MTSA boundaries and related urban boundary expansion via Staff Reports PSD-015-19, PSD- 027-19 and most recently in PDS-009-21. • The delineation of MTSA's should be conceptual, Major Transit Station 39 similar to the current policies for Regional Areas Centres. The detailed delineation and boundary should be left to local Official Plans, Secondary Plans and/or Master Block Plans. This approach will respect the local council/municipality in guiding development through local planning tools, and reduce unnecessary ROPA's for minor changes, plus add certainty as developers will continue to deal with municipalities as the one window for development applications. • The designation of Highway 2 as a "Rapid Transit Spine Intensification Corridor" should extend to Corridors 40 (1) Bowmanville to ensure connectivity to the Bowmanville MTSA and future GO Station and not just to Highway 418. • That the Region support appropriate land Supporting Strategic 42 development through a range of servicing options Growth Areas including pre -servicing agreements (Early Payment Agreements) with the private sector. • Ensure the importance of a range of employment uses permitted within employment areas, compatible with prestige employment as well as general and light industrial. Employment Areas 46 • Expand the Courtice Urban Area Boundary eastward on lands generally bounded by Regional Highway 2, Courtice Road, and Highway 418 for Employment Uses and Major Transit Station Area. The expansion would serve to reinforce Clarington Council's resolution (#GPA-235-09) and will also Page154 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-038-21 Page 14 Table 4 — Staff Review of `Vibrant Urban Systems' Proposed Policy Directions Proposed Policy Section Staff Comments Direction Number provide strategically located employment lands with easy access to the 401 and 418 highways. • Expand the Orono Settlement Boundary eastward to incorporate 10 hectares of land for employment land uses (approved by the LPAT). • Clarington staff are not in support of places of worship within employment areas. As places of Employment Areas 46 (10) worship do not generate employment opportunities and would conflict with policy 4.5.1 of the Clarington Official Plan. Employment Area • That Regional Council support the Employment Conversions 50 Lands Conversion Requests as outlined in Clarington Staff Report PDS-009-21. • Clarington Staff are in support of this policy direction. Policy 23.15.2 in the current Clarington Official Plan states that "the Municipality may Brownfields and Site 51 investigate the development of a Community Contamination Planning Permit System for use in specific geographic areas of the municipality such as revitalization areas, brownfields, or intensification areas." • Expand the Courtice Urban Area Boundary eastward on lands generally bounded by Regional Highway 2, Courtice Road, and Highway 418 for Employment Uses and Major Transit Station Area. The expansion would serve to reinforce Clarington Council's resolution (#GPA-235-09) and will also provide strategically located employment lands with easy access to the 401 and 418 highways. Settlement Area . Expand the Orono Settlement Boundary eastward Boundary 52 to incorporate 10 hectares of land for employment Expansions land uses (approved by the LPAT and westward to incorporate 40 hectares of land for residential land uses (supported by Clarington Council, Adoption OPA 107). • The Municipality of Clarington reserves the opportunity to request additional Settlement Boundary Expansions, if needed based on our own Lands Needs Analysis and the Region's MCR process. Page155 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-038-21 Page 15 Table 4 — Staff Review of `Vibrant Urban Systems' Proposed Policy Directions Proposed Policy Section Staff Comments Direction Number • The policies should be clear that a municipality may proceed for with an urban boundary as per the policies of the Provincial Growth Plan. o Policy 2.2.8.4 of the Growth Plan states: "Municipalities may adjust settlement area boundaries outside of a municipal comprehensive review [... ]." Clarington Staff are in support of this policy direction. To Secondary Plan 53 support this policy direction the current Clarington Considerations Official Plan outlines the general policies and 9 specific secondary plan areas. Thriving Rural System Goals for `Thriving Rural Systems' 3.21 Staff concur with the following Goals proposed for the `Thriving Rural Systems' section of the ROP: • Establish a thriving Rural System that supports rural businesses including agriculture, aggregate extraction and tourism; • Support the health and vitality of existing Rural Settlements which serve the needs of rural residents and area businesses; • Support a sustainable, diversified, and productive Agricultural System; • Champion the wise -use and management of resources; and • Encourage land stewardship to enhance natural heritage, protect drinking water and support climate resiliency. Summary of `Thriving Rural System' Strategic Direction 3.22 Currently, Rural Systems cover 84% of the Region's land base, and houses approximately 8% of Durham's population (54,000 residents). Agriculture is one of the largest primary goods producing sectors within the Region, with approximately 300,000 acres being used for production. Most of the rural area is planned for agricultural and open space uses, interspersed with rural settlements. `Thriving Rural System' Proposed Policy Directions 3.23 Proposed policy directions to support a thriving Rural System include: Page156 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-038-21 Page 16 a) Permitting a range of agricultural, agriculture -related and on -farm diversified uses in accordance with the provincial Guidelines on Permitted Uses in Ontario's Prime Agricultural Areas; b) Maintaining that the creation of parcels of land for agricultural uses cannot be less than 40 hectares; and c) Requiring the rehabilitation of Aggregate Resource Extraction Areas back to an agricultural condition for sites in Prime Agricultural Areas and incorporating relevant Greenbelt Plan rehabilitation policies. 3.24 The Region is currently reviewing the provincial Agricultural System, comprised of the agricultural land base and agri-food network. Systems -based ROP mapping will be developed and refined through 2021 for inclusion in the draft ROP. Staff Comments 3.25 Clarington staff have analyzed and reviewed the proposed policy directions for the MCR and have the following comments for the Thriving Rural Systems Strategic Direction: Table 5 — Staff Review of `Thriving Rural Systems' Proposed Policy Directions Proposed Policy Section Staff Comments Direction Number • Remove the policy dictating the percentage that on - farm diversified uses can occupy of a property, leave that to area municipalities. Rural System 55 • Clarify how the cumulative impact of on -farm diversified uses will be monitored throughout the Region. • Do not require area municipal OPs to limit the scale of on -farm diversified uses. • Clarington Staff are in support of this policy direction. Policy 18.6.5 in the current Clarington Cemeteries 56 Official Plan states that our Community Facilities include uses such as post offices, places of worship, cemeteries [... ]." Minimum Distance 57 • Continue to let area municipalities control this in Separation (MDS) local Official Plans. • Clarington Staff are in support of this policy direction. Policy 4.3.2 in the current Clarington Rural Settlements 57 Official Plan states "the Municipality's rural population forecast will be accommodated within the established boundaries of rural settlements identified on Map A." Page157 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-038-21 Page 17 Table 5 — Staff Review of `Thriving Rural Systems' Proposed Policy Directions Proposed Policy Section Staff Comments Direction Number Edge Planning 57 • Ensure edge planning policies are incorporated into Settlement Area Boundary Expansion work. • In alignment with Policy 16.2.4 of the Clarington Official Plan, it is recommended that the Region encourage the Government of Canada to Specific Policy 58(3) rehabilitate the waste sites at Port Granby in a Areas manner that will complement the nature reserve and to dedicate the surplus lands to the Municipality and/or an appropriate public agency for the long term management of the nature reserve. • Strengthen policies by providing each designation Rural Lot Creation 58 (e.g. Prime Agriculture, Rural/Major Open Space, Hamlets etc.) with its own lot creation framework which is directly related to the permitted uses. • Clarington Staff are in support of this policy direction. To support this policy direction policy On -Farm 60 13.4.1 in the current Clarington Official Plan states Diversifies Uses "Prime Agricultural Areas shall predominantly be used for agricultural uses, agriculture -related uses and on -farm diversified uses." Non -Abutting . Clearly clarify whether a ROPA will be required for Surplus Farm 63 these proposals. And if so, in what circumstances? Dwellings • Clarington staff encourages the Region to keep the Regional Nodes currently within Clarington with the Regional Nodes 64 revised names of Brimacombe Ski Area and Canadian Tire Motorsport Park, as discussed with Regional Staff on October 15, 2020. • Clarington Staff are in support of this policy Aggregate direction. Policy 15.3.2 in the current Clarington "Aggregate Resource 65 Official Plan states Extraction Areas Extraction Areas shall only be permitted within the Potential Aggregate Resource Areas identified on Map G I ... ].,, Protected Greenland Systems Goals for `Protected Greenland Systems' 3.26 Staff concur with the following Goals proposed for the `Protected Greenland Systems' section of the ROP: Page158 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-038-21 Page 18 Establish a protected Greenlands System that conserves, protects and enhances water and land resources for present and future generations. Protect, restore and enhance an interconnected Natural Heritage System and Water Resources System across the region. Summary of `Protected Greenland Systems' Strategic Direction 3.27 Greenland systems comprises approximately 40% of the region's land base — covering areas throughout both Urban and Rural Systems. Greenland systems contain areas with the highest concentrations of sensitive and/or significant natural features and functions, agricultural and rural lands. `Protected Greenland Systems' Proposed Policy Directions 3.28 Examples of proposed policy directions that would support a protected Greenlands System include: a) Recognizing Traditional Ecological Knowledge (Indigenous knowledge and values which have been acquired through experience, observation) in understanding sites and ecological features and in assessing cumulative impacts; b) Ensuring conservation authorities, area municipalities and other stakeholders consider climate change and the effects of severe weather events and cross - watershed impacts while preparing and updating watershed plans; and c) Requiring new development and redevelopment to incorporate native and drought tolerant vegetation. 3.29 The Provincial Policy Statement (2020) requires Natural Heritage System (NHS) are established and include key natural heritage features and areas, and the connections between them. In addition to satisfying provincial conformity requirements, a systems - based approach reflects best practices in natural heritage planning because it recognizes the critical role that linkages between features play in establishing and maintaining ecological integrity. 3.30 Staff are currently developing a Regional NHS, in consultation with the Envision Durham Conservation Authority and Area Municipal Working Groups. Systems -based ROP mapping will be developed and refined through 2021 for inclusion in the draft ROP. Staff Comments 3.31 Clarington staff have analyzed and reviewed the proposed policy directions for the MCR and have the following comments for the Protected Greenland Systems Strategic Direction: Page159 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-038-21 Page 19 Table 6 — Staff Review of `Protected Greenland System' Proposed Policy Directions Proposed Policy Section Staff Comments Direction Number • Clarington staff are in support of this policy direction. Policy 2.2.3 in the current Clarington Official Plan states "the natural heritage system Natural Heritage 68 will be protected. Where there is a conflict System (NHS) between a proposed land use and the protection of the natural heritage system, the latter will prevail." • Staff agree the Woodlands Study may assist with the creation of an overall Woodland target for the Region. The concern is that a Regional target (example 30%) may not assist local efforts to increase woodland cover when the Watershed Key Natural Heritage (e.g. Bowmanville/Soper) already surpasses that and Key 69 target on the ORM, but not within the Urban Area. Hydrological • Clarington staff are in support of this policy Features direction. Policy 15.3.20 in the current Clarington Official Plan states "The extraction of mineral aggregates from the area within the key natural heritage feature will be completed and the area will be rehabilitated, as early as possible in the life of the operation [... ]." 0 Clarington staff are in support of the policy direction that Vegetation Protection Zones (VPZ) policies be established by the local municipalities. Vegetation • Staff recommend that Region revise the policy Protection Zones 70 direction so that local municipalities can determine their own VPZ criteria including the establishment of minimum VPZs. Policy Section 3.4 of the current Official Plan including Table 3-1 which establishes minimum VPZs for features. • Clarington staff recommend policy direction such that formerly `piped or buried' watercourses on agricultural lands that are brought into the Urban Identifying a Water 71 Area are encouraged/required to be restored at Resources System the surface. • Clarington staff are very much in support of the policy directions regarding the former Lake Iroquois Shoreline. Policies 3.4.32 and 3.4.33 in Page160 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-038-21 Page 20 Table 6 — Staff Review of `Protected Greenland System' Proposed Policy Directions Proposed Policy Section Staff Comments Direction Number the current Clarington Official Plan support this direction. • Clarington staff are in support of this policy direction. Watershed Plans and the more detailed Subwatershed Plans should continue to inform Watershed Planning 72 land use planning and servicing decision making. The municipality of Clarington is currently undertaking two Subwatershed Studies in support of the Secondary Plan planning program. • Clarington Staff are in support of this policy direction. Policy 3.7.4 of the current Official Plan Natural Hazards 75 states "[... ] the Municipality shall consider the potential impacts of climate change that may increase the risk associated with natural hazards." • Clarington Staff are in support of this policy Wildland Fire 77 direction however recommend the inclusion of where appropriate' as these policies may not apply to every local Municipality. • Clarington staff are in support of this policy Open Space Areas direction. and Greenbelt 78 • To further support Provincial directions related to Urban River Valleys Urban River Valleys, add setback policies that would protect lands as if they were already designated Urban River Valleys. • Clarington Staff are in support of this policy direction. Policy 3.2.7 in the current Clarington Waterfront Areas 79 Official Plan aims to "recognize the Lake Ontario Waterfront as a dynamic and distinctive element of the Municipality's natural environment." • Clarington Staff are in support of the policy Tourist direction. Policy 10.9.1 in the current Clarington Activity/Recreation 80 Official Plan states "the Municipality has identified Nodes Gateway Commercial Centres intended to serve the specialized needs of residents and attract tourists and visitors to the Municipality." • Clarington staff suggest that the ROP not include Ecosystem 82 a policy regarding compensation relating to the Compensation development process. This issue should be left to the local municipality to address. Page 161 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-038-21 Page 21 Table 6 — Staff Review of `Protected Greenland System' Proposed Policy Directions Proposed Policy Section Staff Comments Direction Number • Clarington staff are in support of ROP including policies requiring compensation should features be removed without prior written consent from the appropriate agency. • Require that excess soil placement at receiving sites be required to demonstrate that the activity will have a limited impact rather then no impact at all. • Incorporate a policy statement to ensure that development proponents, including the Region when undertaking Regional infrastructure projects, are responsible for the management of their own excess soil generation (including disposal), and discourage site grading and drainage pattern changes unless it is absolutely necessary. • Identify locational criteria for excess soil receipt or Excess Soil 84 storage in consultation with the development Management industry, area municipalities and Conservation Authorities. • Provide area municipalities with more guidance to help manage excess soil issues within their jurisdictional boundaries, including quality of life issues for residents (hours of operation, truck traffic, noise, dust, etc.), quality of the fill (e.g. contaminated soil) and the financial implications for the municipality. • Provide area municipalities with a consistent region -wide policy framework to regulate receiving sites to help effectively manage excess soil in the future. Connected Transportation System Goals for `Connected Transportation Systems' 3.32 Staff concur with the following Goals proposed for the `Connected Transportation Systems' section of the ROP: Provide a connected Transportation System that is integrated, safe, efficient, reliable and fiscally sustainable to meet existing and future needs of the region's residents and businesses. Page162 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-038-21 Page 22 Strategically invest in the Transportation System by providing a variety of low carbon mobility choices for residents of all ages and abilities. Design and construct transportation infrastructure to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the Transportation System and avoid, minimize or mitigate negative impacts on the natural environment. Facilitate the movement of people and goods through a complete streets approach to accommodate all modes of transportation and strengthen the interdependency between transportation and land use. Summary of `Connected Transportation System' Strategic Direction 3.33 In the current ROP, the Transportation System is structured around several designations applicable to roads, transit and goods movement. These designations are supported by various policies in the Transportation System chapter that describe road networks and applicable design to move people and goods. `Connected Transportation System' Proposed Policy Directions 3.34 Proposed policy directions for a connected Transportation System include: a) Incorporating Transit Oriented Development (TOD) strategies as part of the development approvals process within Strategic Growth Areas connected by Higher Order Transit corridors; b) Ensuring that the transportation network is designed and planned to support sustainable and multi -modal transportation options of walking, cycling and the use of transit and supports mixed -use development; c) Providing for transit -supportive urban design and an improved active transportation network, so that 80 per cent of residents and workers in the urban area are within 400 metres or a five-minute walk to the nearest transit stop; d) Including the Primary Cycling Network and Regional Trail Network as part of the Regional Transportation System; and e) Leveraging the Vision Zero Strategic Road Safety Action Plan through the design of facilities to support active transportation, control traffic speeds and promote safe and attractive environments for pedestrians and cyclists. 3.35 The new ROP will also establish a new schedule showing the future right-of-way (ROW) width requirements for all arterial roads under regional and area municipal jurisdiction; and ensuring the transportation and road network is designed and planned to support sustainable and multi -modal transportation options of walking, cycling and use of transit. Page163 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-038-21 Staff Comments Page 23 3.36 Clarington staff have analyzed and reviewed the proposed policy directions for the MCR and have the following comments for the Connected Transportation Systems Strategic Direction: Table 7 - Staff Review of `Connected Transportation System' Proposed Policy Directions Proposed Policy Section Staff Comments Direction Number • Ensure policies are written to recognize the need Transit -Supportive 89 to develop stronger, broader policies that link Development development and transportation at a Regional and Local level. • Policies should be updated to clarify the Active Transportation 91-96 appropriateness of trails within and adjacent to the Natural Heritage System (NHS). • Clarington Staff are in support of the policy direction. Policy 19.8.8 in the current Clarington Transportation 97 Official Plan states "Transportation Demand Demand Management Management is a means to promote a more efficient use of existing transportation [... ]." • Clarington Staff are in support of the policy direction. Policy 19.2.6 in the current Clarington Multi -Modal Level of 99 Official Plan states looks to "encourage multi - Service modal transportation options to and within Employment Areas." • Clarington Staff are in support of the policy direction. Policy 19.3.2 in the current Clarington Official Plan state "the Municipality, in co - Additional Provincial operation with other authorities and senior levels Conformity 100 of governments, will plan for and protect for Considerations future Regional and Provincial transportation corridors and facilities that support the future growth of the Municipality." General Comment - Clarington plans for'transit supportive' communities (compact, mixed - use, grid network), but the Region provides very little public transit. Aside from the MTSAs, there do not appear to be any policies about improving local public transit. GO and Metrolinx are discussed, but Durham Region Transit's role appears to be limited to getting people to a Page164 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-038-21 Page 24 Table 7 - Staff Review of `Connected Transportation System' Proposed Policy Directions Proposed Policy Section Staff Comments Direction Number GO station, and there does not appear to be any mention of a strategy to provide local transit service linking neighborhoods and urban centres. Supporting Sections Summary of `Supporting Sections' Strategic Direction 3.37 The new ROP will be based on an entirely new framework and will build on the strengths of the existing ROP by bolstering those components that remain relevant, while establishing new policies and approaches for a compelling, user-friendly Plan. 3.38 The introductory components of the new ROP will establish the context and assist readers to navigate the: a) Historical context of the Region, and how this shapes our future (Prologue); b) Purpose of a Regional Official Plan; c) Preparation of the Plan; d) How to read the Plan; and e) Framework of the Plan, outlining a strong regional vision that is supported by broad strategic directions, ambitious goals, pragmatic objectives and action -based policies. Staff Comments 3.39 Clarington staff have analyzed and reviewed the proposed policy directions for the MCR and have no specific comments for the Supporting Sections of the new ROP. 4. Concurrence 4.1 Not Applicable. Page165 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-038-21 5. Conclusion Page 25 5.1 The Region developed the Envision Durham — Proposed Policy Directions (Report #2021-P-7) for public and area municipality comment. As detailed throughout this report Clarington staff are generally supportive of the proposed policy directions but have noted recommendations where applicable throughout Section 3 of this report. 5.2 It is respectfully recommended that Council endorse Staffs comments as the Municipality's formal comments on the Regions Proposed policy Directions, as outlined in Tables 1 to 7 in Section 3 of this report. Staff Contacts: Sarah Parish Planner II, 905-623-3379 ext. 2432 or ssparish ja�clarington.net, or Lisa Backus, Principal Planner, 905-623-3379 ext. 2413 or Ibackus clarington.net. Interested Parties: List of Interested Parties available from Department. Page 166 Clarington Staff 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: June 28, 2021 Report Number: PDS-039-21 Submitted By: Ryan Windle, Director of Planning and Development Services Reviewed By: Andrew C. Allison, CAO Resolution#: File Number: PLN 23.8.2 By-law Number: Report Subject: Recreation Vehicle and Trailer Storage Study Recommendations: 1. That Report PDS-039-21 be received; 2. That the Study and options outlined by D.M. Wills be referred to staff for inclusion in the Zone Clarington recommendations and upcoming Official Plan Review; 3. That the topic of On -Farm Diversified Uses and guidelines for such uses be referred to the Agricultural Advisory Committee of Clarington for their input; and 4. That all interested parties listed in Report PDS-039-21 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. Page167 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-039-21 Report Overview Page 2 Planning and Development Services Staff were to report back to Council with a summary of what is currently permitted by the Clarington's Official Plan and Zoning By-laws with respect to recreational vehicle storage, and to identify any additional land use categories with the potential for this use; and information on how recreational vehicle storage has been addressed in similar municipalities. D. W. Mills, the consultant engaged to carryout this work, are reporting their findings, the comments from public consultation to date, and options. 1. Background 1.1 In January, Clarington Council approved funding to hire an outside planning consultant to provide options for recreational vehicle storage in Clarington. The consultant was to identify land use designations and policy options with the potential to allow storage of RV's, trailers and boats as a commercial enterprise and report on how the issue of RV storage has been addressed in similar municipalities. 1.2 The Municipality retained a consultant, D. W. Mills in early April to prepare a Recreational Vehicle (RV) and Trailer Parking and Storage Study. The purpose of the Study is to analyze whether the existing provisions for the parking and storage of RVs and trailers in rural areas are appropriate and determine whether further policy options are warranted and allowable for RV and trailer parking and storage. The Study was to also identify land use designations and zoned areas where RV and trailer parking and storage may be appropriate. In addition, a scan of other similar municipalities was to be included. For more information on the study process to date, please visit the Municipality's website, https://www.clarington.net/en/do-business/rv-and-trailer-parking- and-storage-study.asp 1.3 The Consultant is to provide options on how Clarington could make policy and regulatory adjustments to address RV Trailer Parking and Storage Study. Attachment 1 to this report is the Consultant's Report. 1.4 The topic of Commercial Recreational Vehicle Storage was last studied in 2008 as outlined in Addendum Report PSD-099-08 and PSD-007-09. These two reports resulted in changes to the Zoning By-law in both the urban and rural areas of the Municipality and amendments to Official Plan policies to allow for site specific zoning amendments in Urban Residential and Green Space Area designations of the Official Plan. Page168 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-039-21 Page 3 1.5 As outlined in the consultant's report and PSD-007-09, any Official Plan policy amendments to permit commercial outdoor storage areas or recreational vehicles would have to comply with Provincial and Regional policies. 1.6 The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) was updated in 2017 and 2020. The 2017 update included a change from secondary uses to agricultural related and on -farm diversified uses for agricultural lands. The Region's Municipal Comprehensive Review of their Official Plan to bring it into conformity with the PPS is underway. Clarington's Official Plan Review to bring our policies into conformity with the Region's will begin later this year. 1.7 In 2016 Guidelines on Permitted Uses in Ontario's Prime Agricultural Areas Publication 851 was issued by the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs. These guidelines set out criteria to restrict agricultural related and on -farm diversified uses while protecting the primary resource (the soil). 2. Next Steps Consultant's Report 2.1 The key findings, Section 5.0 of the Consultant's study are: • Amendments to Existing Urban Provisions to Enhance Clarity and Function, this pertains to the zoning by-laws and can be addressed as part of the Zone Clarington process that is underway; • Develop and Implement RV Storage Provisions by Lot Size in the Countryside Area (for personal storage), this could be included within the Zone Clarington process; • Develop and Implement Policy Framework for On -Farm Diversified Uses, this should be addressed in consultation with the Agricultural Advisory Committee of Clarington, Regional and OMAFRA Staff; • Enhance Existing Policy Framework for RV Storage in Employment Areas, this will have to be reviewed in the context of the Provincial targets for jobs/hectare and as a secondary use in general industrial areas under specific criteria; • Develop Local Policy Framework to Permit RV Storage on Agricultural Lands Located within the Urban Boundary, this could apply to "fringe" areas where agricultural lands have been incorporated into the urban boundary but are un- serviced and held as "future development". Page169 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-039-21 2.2 To address the key findings of the study, it should Region's Official Plan Page 4 2.3 The last time Clarington Staff studied recreational vehicle storage as a land use was 2008/9. Since then, changes have occurred to the PPS and the Guidelines on Permitted Uses in Ontario's Prime Agricultural Areas which address agricultural related and on -farm diversified uses. In PSD-007-09, there was a recommendation to seek an amendment to the Region's Official Plan to allow for commercial outdoor storage of recreational vehicles subject to criteria in the Major Open Space designation of the Region's Official Plan. Additional work would have been required to provide the justification requested by the Region; however, given the Provincial Policy in place at that time, this option was not pursued. 2.4 Staff have initiated a discussion with Durham Region Staff to ensure that commercial RV Storage will be a consideration as part of the Region's Municipal Comprehensive Review currently underway. The dialogue on where commercial RV storage would be allowed has included what is referred to as "edge planning" in the Region's discussion paper. This is the area on the urban fringe that is un-serviced and awaiting development in the future. On -farm Diversified Uses 2.5 Commercial outdoor storage of recreational vehicles is not related to agriculture; however, compatible non-agricultural uses, which meet the Guidelines on Permitted Uses in Ontario's Prime Agricultural can be considered providing they meet the criteria spelled out in the guidelines. The consultant has suggested a framework be developed to regulate and permit on -farm diversified uses, which goes beyond recreational vehicle storage. To outline an acceptable local planning framework a set of evaluation criteria including required site alteration, traffic generation, required servicing, agricultural rehabilitation potential, provision of screening and site design will have to be determined. 2.6 Staff are recommending that the Agricultural Advisory Committee of Clarington be consulted on compatible on -farm diversified uses and the evaluation criteria to be used as part of such a framework. 3. Concurrence Not Applicable. Page170 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-039-21 4. Conclusion Page 5 4.1 It is respectfully recommended that the Study be referred back to Staff to be implemented, where possible, as part of the Zone Clarington project which will see a draft by-law before Council late this year. 4.2 Any contemplated changes to Official Plan policies to allow for increased storage on prime agricultural or rural designated lands will require a Durham Region Official Plan policy change. The Region is currently reviewing their Official Plan and the options outlined in the consultant's study will be reviewed with Regional Staff. Through discussion, Staff will be able to determine if this could be addressed through the Region's Municipal Comprehensive Review. If changes occur in the Regional Official Plan, any required Clarington Official Plan policy update would be included as part of our OP Review, set to begin later this year. 4.3 The topic of On -Farm Diversified Uses should be referred to the Agricultural Advisory Committee of Clarington for their input on what guidelines should be put in place to protect the resource (the soil) while allowing for additional uses on prime agriculture and rural designated lands. Staff Contact: Faye Langmaid, Manager of Special Projects, 905-623-3379 x2407 or fangmaid@clarington.net. Attachments: Attachment 1 — RV and Trailer Parking and Storage Study Final Report, D.M. Wills Project Number 21-85154, June 2021 Interested Parties: List of Interested Parties available from Department. Page 171 Attachment 1 to Report PDS-039-21 CiffftwIR RV and Trailer Parking and Storage Study Final Report D.M. Wills Project Number 21-85154 D.M. Wills Associates Limited Partners in Engineering, Planning and Environmental Services Peterborough June 2021 Prepared for: Municipality of Clarington Page 172 RV and Trailer Parkin and Storage Stud Final Report W g g Y p Municipality of Clarington W i L L s Submissions Summary Submission No. Submission Title Date of Release Submissions Summary 1 Draft for Review June 17, 2021 Submitted for Municipal Staff Review 2 Final Submission June 22, 2021 Submitted for Planning and Development Committee This report / proposal has been formatted considering the requirements of the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act. D.M. Wills Associates Limited Page i Project Number 21-85154 Page 173 RV and Trailer Parkin and Storage Stud Final Report W g g Y p Municipality of Clarington w i L L s Table of Contents 1.0 Executive Summary...................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Introduction................................................................................................................... 1 2.1 Project Background....................................................................................................... 1 2.2 Terminology.................................................................................................................... 2 2.3 Existing Local Policy....................................................................................................... 3 2.3.1 Municipality of Clarington Official Plan............................................................... 3 2.3.2 Municipality of Clarington Zoning By-laws.......................................................... 3 3.0 Research Background.................................................................................................. 9 3.1 Policy Review.................................................................................................................. 9 3.2 Jurisdictional Scan....................................................................................................... 14 3.3 Public Consultation Findings....................................................................................... 15 4.0 Identified Options........................................................................................................ 17 5.0 Key Findings................................................................................................................. 23 6.0 Conclusions................................................................................................................. 27 Tables Table 1 Existing Official Plan Policies Having Implications for RV Parking and Storage...... 4 Table 2 Existing Zoning Provisions for Indoor and Outdoor Storage of RVs and Trailers...... 7 Table 3 Provincial, Regional and Local Policy Having Implications for RV and Trailer Parking and Storage by Land Category................................................................................. 10 Table 4 Key Insights from Public Survey................................................................................... 15 Table 5 Evaluation of Proposed Policy Options...................................................................... 18 Appendices Appendix A - Jurisdictional Scan D.M. Wills Associates Limited Page ii Project Number 21-85154 Page 174 RV and Trailer Parkin and Storage Stud Final Report W g g Y p Municipality of Clarington w i L L s 1.0 Executive Summary The Municipality of Clarington (Municipality) has retained D.M. Wills Associates Limited (Wills) to undertake a Recreational Vehicle (RV) and Trailer Parking and Storage Study (Study). The Study has been initiated by the Municipality in response to an increased demand for and establishment of commercial RV and trailer parking and storage facilities within the countryside areas of the Municipality. Key components of the Study included extensive policy research, jurisdictional scans of similar and surrounding municipalities and community consultation, including public surveys and a virtual open house. The information ascertained through the research and public consultation process highlighted the need for enhanced clarity in local planning documents with respect to RV and trailer parking and storage; as well as emphasized the demand for outdoor storage options by residents of the Municipality. The insights gained from the Study have been utilized to develop a series of findings for addressing RV and trailer parking and storage in the Municipality. While the focus of the Study was on commercial storage facilities in the countryside area, what was most evident throughout the Study is that due to the current prevailing planning policy, immediate solutions to address such are limited. Therefore, certain of the findings presented in this report include options for amending personal storage on private property, in both the urban and countryside areas. Although these options would not serve to directly address commercial storage of RVs and trailers in the countryside area, they may in the interim alleviate some of the storage demand until long-term solutions can be implemented. The options also include long-range and comprehensive planning items that may serve to address commercial RV and trailer parking and storage as part of a larger planning exercise. Of the various options assessed, those identified as having potential for implementation, and for further examination and consideration by the Municipality include: 1. Amendments to Existing Urban Zoning Provisions to Enhance Clarity and Function. 2. Develop and Implement RV Storage Provisions by Lot Size for Personal Storage in the Countryside Areas. 3. Develop and Implement Local Policy Framework for On -Farm Diversified Uses. 4. Enhance Existing Policy Framework for RV Storage in Employment Areas. 5. Develop Local Policy Framework to Permit RV Storage on Agricultural Lands Located within the Urban Boundary. This Report summarizes the key findings from the background research, community consultation process, and highlights the identified policy options for addressing RV and trailer parking and storage in the Municipality. D.M. Wills Associates Limited Page 1 Project Number 21-85154 Page175 RV and Trailer Parkin and Storage Stud Final Report W g g Y p Municipality of Clarington w i L L s 2.0 Introduction 2.1 Project Background The use of recreational vehicles is on the rise in Canada. According to a report released for the Recreational Vehicle Dealers Association of Canada and the Canadian Recreational Vehicle Association, RV industry retail sales have been on the rise since 2014; with an estimated $3.8 billion in sales across Canada in 2019.1 Approximately 14% of all Canadian households own or have access to a recreational vehicle and together the industry provides over $4.8 billion in value added economic activity to the Canadian economy. The growth in the industry across Canada appears to also be realized within the Municipality of Clarington. As the industry as a whole continues to grow, so to does the requirement for storage by the residents of the Municipality and surrounding area. Recognizing this demand, several commercial parking and storage operations have been established on private property within the Municipality, particularly within the countryside areas. At present, commercial parking and storage facilities within the countryside areas are not permitted, save and except through site -specific planning approvals. Personal storage of RVs and trailers within the countryside areas is allowed; however at a commercial scale this is not contemplated or permitted. In recognition of the convergence of these issues, in January of 2021, the Council of the Municipality passed the following resolutions: "That pre -budgetary approval of up to $15,000 to hire an outside planning consultant to provide options for recreational vehicle storage in Clarington; and That Planning Staff report back with a summary of what is currently permitted by the Clarington's Official Plan and Zoning By-laws with respect to recreational vehicle storage, and to identify any additional land use categories with the potential for the use; and information on how recreational vehicle storage has been addressed in similar municipalities." In April 2021, D.M. Wills Associates Limited (Wills) was retained to consult on the RV and Trailer Parking and Storage Study (Study) on behalf of the Municipality. The purpose of the Study is to analyze whether existing provisions for the parking and storage of recreational vehicles (RVs) and trailers in the Municipality as they apply in the countryside are appropriate; and through a comparison with surrounding municipalities, I The Portage Group & UrbanMetrics Inc. (2020). Economic Impact of the Canadian Recreation Vehicle Industry. https://www.rvda.ca/files/RVDA%20Economic%201mr)act/2020%20RVDA%2OEconomic%201mpa ct%20Update%20%20-%20FI NAL.pdf D.M. Wills Associates Limited Page 1 Project Number 21-85154 Page 176 RV and Trailer Parkin and Storage Stud Final Report W g g Y p Municipality of Clarington w i L L s whether further policy and regulatory amendments and provisions could be implemented locally to address the identified issue. Extensive background research has been conducted as part of the Study in order to establish an understanding of the topic of RV storage as a whole, how it is impacted by governing planning policies and how it has been addressed in other municipalities. The background research also included a review of existing policies and provisions for RV parking and storage in the Municipality, which are summarized in Section 2.2 below. Consultation with interested parties has also been a key component to the Study. Public surveys and a virtual open house, together with on -going communication with Municipal Staff, residents and storage facility operators have been integral to defining the concerns and desires of interested stakeholders. Section 3.0 of this report provides a summary of the background research and public consultation process. The policy and background research was used to identify options for consideration by the Municipality in addressing commercial RV parking and storage in the countryside area. The series of options, together with those identified as being key findings are provided in Sections 4.0 and 5.0. 2.2 Terminology For the purposes of this Report, the following provides definitions for key terms: • Recreational Vehicle (RV): any vehicle that is predominantly used for recreational purposes, which may include recreational / camping trailers, motorhomes, snowmobiles, boats and all -terrain vehicles (ATVs). • Trailer: any vehicle that is designed to be drawn by a motor vehicle, and may include recreational trailers, utility trailers and flatbed trailers, but does not include truck -transport trailers. • Countryside Area: those lands within the Municipality which are located outside of settlement areas, including lands designated Rural and Prime Agricultural in the Municipality's Official Plan. • Rural Lands: lands considered to be less productive for agricultural use, typically class 4-7 soils, including lands designated Rural in the Municipality's Official Plan. • Prime Agricultural Lands: lands considered to be the most productive for agricultural use, typically class 1-3 soils, including lands designated Prime Agricultural Area in the Municipality's Official Plan. • Urban Area: those lands within the Municipality which are located within settlement areas, including rural settlement areas, and include those lands designated for residential, commercial and employment use in the Municipality's Official Plan. D.M. Wills Associates Limited Page 2 Project Number 21-85154 Page 177 RV and Trailer Parkin and Storage Stud Final Report W g g Y p Municipality of Clarington w i L L s 2.3 Existing Local Policy The parking and storage of RVs and trailers in the Municipality is governed at a municipal level by three planning documents: the Municipality of Clarington Official Plan, Zoning By-law 84-63 and Zoning By-law 2005-109. The Municipality of Clarington Official Plan (COP) provides the policy framework and overall vision for land use and development in the Municipality. In general, the policies of the COP promote complete communities, with people -oriented development, together with the protection and creation of jobs and preservation of environmental and agricultural lands. The two zoning by-laws (ZBL) in effect for the Municipality are applied in conjunction with the COP, and provide the specific standards that govern development. Zoning By- law 2005-109 applies to lands that are located on the Oak Ridges Moraine (ORM). Zoning By-law 84-63 applies to all lands within the Municipality that are located outside of the ORM. The policies and provisions of the COP and zoning by-laws as they affect both the commercial and personal storage of RVs and trailers, are provided in the below sections. It is noted that the COP underwent a complete review and update in 2017. However, exercises to bring the two zoning by-laws into conformity with the updated COP have not yet been completed. As such, the zoning by-laws may currently provide for regulation which is not consistent with the updated land use vision for the Municipality. 2.3.1 Municipality of Clarington Official Plan Policies of the COP as they affect the parking and storage of RVs and trailers in the countryside areas as well as open spaces areas are provided in Table 1. While not the direct focus of this Study, policies affecting storage options on the employment designated lands of the urban areas are also included to provide a complete policy background, as the impacts of the countryside and urban policies are interconnected. 2.3.2 Municipality of Clarington Zoning By-laws Current regulatory provisions in the Municipality's Comprehensive Zoning Bylaws (84-63 and 2005-109) provide varying provisions for the storage of RVs and trailers in the urban and countryside areas based on land use zones. These provisions are summarized in Table 2 below. D.M. Wills Associates Limited Page 3 Project Number 21-85154 Page 178 RV and Trailer Parkin and Storage Stud Final Report W g g Y p Municipality of Clarington W i L L s Table 1 Existing Official Plan Policies Having Implications for RV Parking and Storage Official Plan Storage Policies Notes Designation Countryside Area Prime Agricultural May be used for agricultural, agriculture -related and on -farm diversified These policies are provided in Section 13.4 and 13.3.2 of the uses. On -farm diversified uses must be secondary to an agricultural use, COP and reflect provincial policy (see Table 3) for permitted limited in area, compatible with surrounding land uses and not conflict uses on prime agricultural lands. with, detract from or hinder agricultural operations. Rural May be used for agricultural, agriculture -related and on -farm diversified These policies are provided in Section 13.5 and 13.3.2 of the uses. On -farm diversified uses must be secondary to an agricultural use, COP and reflect the provincial policy (see Table 3) for limited in area, compatible with surrounding land uses and not conflict permitted uses on rural lands. with, detract from or hinder agricultural operations. Non-agricultural uses only permitted on rural designated lands May be developed as a non-agricultural use where compatible, do not which are not considered to be prime agricultural, and are require large scale modifications of terrain, conform to MDS, are subject to a site -specific zoning by-law amendment. appropriate with lot size, and do not conflict, detract or hinder agricultural operations. Open Space System Environmental Development is not permitted in the Environmental Protection Areas, with These policies are provided in Section 14.4. and 3.4.8 of the Protection certain exceptions for forest, fish and wildlife management; conservation COP. and flood or erosion control; transportation, infrastructure and utilities and low intensity recreation. Environmental Protection areas include natural heritage features and hydrologically sensitive features and a 30-metre vegetative protection zone. D.M. Wills Associates Limited Page 4 Project Number 21-85154 Page 179 RV and Trailer Parking and Storage Study Final Report Municipality of Clarington w i L L s Official Plan StoragePolicies Notes Designation Natural Core Area, Development is not permitted in the Natural Core Area of the ORM, with These policies are provided in Section 14.5 of the COP. Oak Ridges certain exceptions for agricultural uses, low intensity recreation, unserviced Moraine parks and uses related to fish, wildlife and forest management conservation projects, and flood and erosion control projects. Natural Linkage Development is not permitted in the Natural Linkage Area of the ORM with These policies are provided in Section 14.6 of the COP. Area, Oak Ridges exceptions for agricultural uses, home -based occupations, home Moraine industries, bed and breakfast establishments, farm vacation homes, low- While home industries are permitted, the definition of home intensity recreational uses, unserviced parks, and uses related to fish, industries in the COP does not include commercial storage. wildlife and forest management, conservation projects, and flood and erosion control projects. Green Space Development is only permitted for conservation and recreational uses. These policies are provided in Section 14.7 of the COP. Major recreational uses are only permitted by site -specific amendment to the Official Plan. Waterfront Development is only permitted for recreation, tourism, conservation and These policies are provided in Section 14.8 of the COP. Greenway agriculture. Marinas and major recreational uses are only permitted by site -specific amendment to the Official Plan. D.M. Wills Associates Limited Page 5 Project Number 21-85154 Page 180 RV and Trailer Parking and Storage Study Final Report Municipality of Clarington w i L L s Official Plan StoragePolicies Notes Designation Employment Areas Business Parks Development is intended for employment intensive uses with a high These policies are provided in Section 11.4 of the COP and standard of building design and landscaping. A minimum of 30 jobs per are consistent with provincial and regional direction (see gross hectare is required. Table 3). Prestige Development is intended for employment intensive uses with a high These policies are provided in Section 11.5 of the COP and Employment Areas standard of building design and landscaping, specifically offices, research are consistent with provincial and regional direction (see buildings, commercial and technical schools and light industrial uses. A Table 3). minimum of 30 jobs per gross hectare is required. Light Industrial Development is intended for manufacturing, assembling, processing of These policies are provided in Section 11.6 of the COP. Areas raw materials, fabricating, repairing, research and development and warehousing. Outdoor storage is permitted only as an ancillary use to a Outdoor storage is limited to a size 25% of the main building. main building. A minimum of 30 jobs per gross hectare is required. General Industrial Development is intended for manufacturing, assembling, processing of These policies are provided in Section 11.7 of the COP. Areas raw materials, fabricating, warehousing, repair and servicing operations. Outdoor storage is permitted only as ancillary use to a main building. Outdoor storage may be to a size 100% of the main building. D.M. Wills Associates Limited Page 6 Project Number 21-85154 Page 181 RV and Trailer Parkin and Storage Stud Final Report W g g Y p Municipality of Clarington w i L L s Table 2 Existing Zoning Provisions for Indoor and Outdoor Storage of RVs and Trailers Zone Category Storage Provisions Notes Zoning By-law 84-63 Urban A maximum of one (1) RV or trailer may be parked on a property. These provisions are outlined in Section Residential Zones 3.16 of the ZBL (Parking Area Regulations), (R 1, R2, R3, R4) RVs or trailers less than 5.5 metres in length or 2.4 metres in height may be parked on a driveway. subsection (m) and are intended to apply to personal storage/parking of RVs andtrailers RVs or trailers less than 6 metres in length or 2.9 metres in height may be parked in a side or rear on private property. yard, subject to setback requirements. RVs or trailers greater than 5.5 metres in length or 2.4 metres in height may only be parked on a driveway for a period not exceeding 120 hours in one calendar month, and must be 0.5 metres from the street line. Indoor storage is permitted within a garage, carport or other permitted accessory structure and is not limited by number of RVs and trailers. Rural Residential A maximum of three (3) RVs or trailers may be parked on a property. These provisions are outlined in Section (RC, RE, RH, RM, 3.16 of the ZBL (Parking Area Regulations), IRS) and RVs or trailers may be parked on a driveway or within a side or rear yard, subject to setback subsection (m) and are intended to apply Agricultural requirements. to personal storage/parking of RVs and Zones (A) trailers on private property. Provisions for Indoor storage is permitted within a garage, carport or other permitted accessory structure and is permitted uses are provided in Sections 6, not limited by number of RVs and trailers. 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11. Commercial storage is not contemplated as a permitted use. D.M. Wills Associates Limited Page 7 Project Number 21-85154 Page 182 RV and Trailer Parkin and Storage Stud Final Report W g g Y p Municipality of Clarington w i L L s ,ine Cntennry Stnrnn - Prnvisinns Nc Commercial and I Outdoor RV and trailer storage is only permitted as a right in the General Industrial (M2) Zone, I These provisions are provided in Section Industrial Zones provided it is located in a rear or interior side yard and appropriately screened from adjacent 24.1 and 24.3 of the ZBL and are intended (C 1, MU, C2, C3, residential uses and public streets. to provide direction for commercial C4, C5, C6, CT storage operations. Permitted uses for C8, C9, OC, M1, Indoor RV and trailer storage is only permitted as a right in the Light Industrial (M1) and General commercial and industrial zones are MO I, MO2, MU, Industrial (M2) Zones as a warehouse. provided in Sections 16 through 25. ML2, M-1, M-2, MP3, MP4, M2, M3) Zoning By-law 2005-109 Rural Settlement A maximum of three (3) RVs or trailers may be parked on a driveway, side or rear yard. These provisions are outlined in Section 6.7 (RS1) and of the ZBL and are intended to apply to Agricultural personal storage/parking of RVs and Zones (A) trailers on private property. D.M. Wills Associates Limited Page 8 Project Number 21-85154 Page 183 RV and Trailer Parkin and Storage Stud Final Report W g g Y p Municipality of Clarington w i L L s 3.0 Research Background The background research for the Study included a detailed policy review, as well as a jurisdictional scan of similar and surrounding municipalities. A summary of the policy review and findings from the jurisdictional scan are provided in the proceeding sections. The background research was also supplemented by public consultation, to identify what the particular concerns, wants and needs are of the residents of the Municipality, including those who may currently operate storage facilities. Key insights provided from the public consultation process, including a description of mechanisms employed, are also provided in the following sections of this Report. 3.1 Policy Review Land use planning decisions are required to be consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 (PPS) and conform, or not conflict, with A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 (Growth Plan), the Greenbelt Plan, 2017 (GBP), the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, 2017 (ORMPC), the Region of Durham Official Plan (DROP) and the COP. Each of these governing documents provides different policies which impact how lands may be utilized. The policies and their implications for RV and trailer parking and storage are summarized in Table 3 below. In general, these documents outline a policy framework which promotes the protection of employment lands for high -intensity employment uses and the preservation of resources of value, including prime agricultural lands and natural heritage features. As noted in the table below, with respect to prime agricultural lands, the policies of these planning documents only permit development of such for agriculture, agriculture - related and on -farm diversified uses. Commercial development is not recognized as permitted on prime agricultural lands. Similarly, the policies of these planning documents restrict development in and adjacent to natural heritage features, so as to protect the feature and their ecological function. The policies of these planning documents also promote building complete communities, which includes providing employment opportunities in urban areas. As such, these policies promote the establishment of high -employment generating uses on employment lands, including commercial and industrial designated lands. As per the COP, employment uses are to achieve a minimum of 30 jobs per gross hectare, especially on lands within the Prestige Employment, Business Park and Light Industrial designations. Storage facilities, typically being of low -employment generation, are likewise not contemplated or promoted for establishment on employment lands. These policies, when applied together, limit the options for establishing commercial storage facilities in a manner which respects and conforms to the governing planning legislation; and restricts the options for permitting such in accordance with provincial, regional and local direction. D.M. Wills Associates Limited Page 9 Project Number 21-85154 Page 184 RV and Trailer Parkin and Storage Stud Final Report W g g Y p Municipality of Clarington w i L L s Table 3 Provincial, Regional and Local Policy Having Implications for RV and Trailer Parking and Storage by Land Category Category Prime To be protected To be May be used for May be used for May be used for May be used for May only be Agricultural for long term protected for agriculture, agriculture, agriculture- agriculture, agriculture- agriculture, used for Lands use for long term use agriculture- related and on -farm related and secondary agriculture -related agriculture, agriculture. May for agriculture. related and on- diversified uses. uses', however such and on -farm agriculture - be used for May be used farm diversified secondary uses are diversified uses. related and agriculture, for agriculture, uses, including Outside of Natural Core limited to home On -farm on -farm agriculture- agriculture- home industries. areas, may be used for occupations/businesses, diversified uses are diversified related and on- related and On -farm home industries, which bed and breakfast only permitted uses, including farm diversified on -farm diversified uses include RV storage where establishments and provided it is home uses. Non- diversified are to be in it is located on a farm farm vacation homes secondary to an industries, and agricultural uses uses. Where accordance (see definition of home unless the area agricultural use, must be permitted agricultural with provincial industry, Section 3 of municipal Official Plan limited in area, compatible subject to uses and non- guidelines ORMCP). has been amended. compatible with with the meeting certain agricultural (Publication surrounding land agricultural criteria as uses, 851). Land uses Non-agricultural uses uses and does not landscape. outlined in interface, are to comply are limited to forest, fish conflict with, Section 2.3.6.1. compatibility is with MDS and and wildlife detract from or to be avoid, minimize management, hinder agricultural achieved by and mitigate conservation, operations. avoiding, impacts on the infrastructure, minimizing Agricultural aggregate extraction and mitigating System. and existing uses. adverse impacts on the Agricultural System. D.M. Wills Associates Limited Page 10 Project Number 21-85154 Page185 RV and Trailer Parkin and Storage Stud Final Report W g g Y p Municipality of Clarington w i L L s Land PPS Growth Plan GBP ORMCP DROP COP Overall Category Rural Lands May be used for May be used May be used for Outside of Natural Core May be used for May be May only be a permitted on- for resource- on -farm areas, including within agriculture, agriculture- developed as an developed as farm diversified based diversified uses in Natural Linkage areas, related and secondary on -farm diversified an on -farm use, home recreational accordance may be used for home uses', however such use, provided it is diversified use industry, uses or other with provincial industries, which include secondary uses are secondary to an / home resource based rural land uses guidelines RV storage where it is limited to home agricultural use, industry; or as recreational where (Publication located on a farm (see occupations/businesses, limited in area, a non - uses or other compatible 851). Non- definition of home bed and breakfast compatible with agricultural rural land uses. with the rural agricultural uses industry, Section 3 of establishments and surrounding land use where However, rural landscape may be ORMCP). farm vacation homes uses and does not large scale settlements are and permitted where unless the area conflict, detract or modifications the preferred surrounding appropriate and Outside of Natural Core municipal Official Plan hinder agricultural of terrain or location for land uses and where there are and Natural Linkage has been amended. operations. buildings are growth in the will be no impacts to areas, may be used for not required. overall rural sustained by natural heritage on -farm diversified uses. Non-agricultural uses May be Must be area. rural service features or are limited to forest, fish developed as a compatible Diversification of levels. functions. Land Outside of Natural Core and wildlife non-agricultural with the rural uses are to and Natural Linkage management, use where agricultural economy is comply with areas, may be used for conservation, compatible, do operations. promoted. MDS and avoid, small scale -commercial infrastructure, not require large minimize and and industrial uses where aggregate extraction scale Home mitigate impacts supportive of surrounding and existing uses. modifications of industries must on the land uses and do not terrain, conforms demonstrate Agricultural require large-scale to MDS, be that they System.comply modification of terrain or appropriate with com I with large-scale buildings and lot size, do not the provisions structures. conflict, detract or for such in the hinder agricultural DROP and operations. COP. D.M. Wills Associates Limited Page 11 Project Number 21-85154 Page 186 RV and Trailer Parkin and Storage Stud Final Report W g g Y p Municipality of Clarington w i L L s Land PPS Growth Plan GBP ORMCP DROP COP Overall Category Environmental Development Development Development Development and site Development and site Development and Development Features and site and site and site alteration is not permitted alteration is not site alteration is and site alteration is not alteration is alteration is not in key natural heritage permitted in key natural not permitted in alteration is permitted in not permitted permitted in key features and key heritage features and the Environmental not permitted significant in key natural hydrologic hydrologic features. hydrologic features. Protection Areas, within key wetlands and heritage features or in key or natural heritage features. significant features or key natural heritage features and coastal hydrologic features within hydrologically wetlands. features.2 the Natural sensitive features.3 Development Heritage System. may only be Development is permitted in not permitted in certain other the Natural Core significant Area of the ORM. features where it has been Development and demonstrated site alteration is there will be no not permitted in negative the Natural impact. Linkage Area of the ORM. D.M. Wills Associates Limited Page 12 Project Number 21-85154 Page 187 RV and Trailer Parkin and Storage Stud Final Report W g g Y p Municipality of Clarington w i L L s Land PPS Growth Plan GBP ORMCP DROP COP Overall Category Buffer Zones Development Development Development Development and site Development and site Development is Development (to and site and site and site alteration is not permitted alteration is not not permitted in is not Environmental alteration is only alteration is alteration is not in any associated permitted in any the Environmental permitted in Features) permitted not permitted permitted in any vegetative protection associated vegetative Protection Areas, the vegetative adjacent to in vegetative associated zone. protection zone. including the protection significant protection vegetative vegetation zone features where zone, with protection zone. protection zone3. associated it has been exceptions for with demonstrated expansions of environmental there will be no on -farm features. negative diversified impact. uses.2 Employment To be protected To be NA NA To maximize To actively May be Lands for current and protected for employment potential. achieve higher developed for future uses. appropriate employment a variety of employment densities employment use with focus (minimum 30 jobs uses but are on increasing per gross typically employment hectares), promoted for densities. especially in use by high Business Parks and employment Prestige densities. Employment Areas. 1. Durham Region is currently completing a Municipal Comprehensive Review (MCR). Through the MCR, it is currently proposed that the provisions for secondary uses be updated to on -farm diversified uses 2. Policies pertaining to key natural heritage features are not yet in effect. These policies will come into effect once the Natural Heritage System is implemented in the Region of Durham Official Plan. 3. Policy currently under appeal in the Municipality of Clarington Official Plan. D.M. Wills Associates Limited Page 13 Project Number 21-85154 Page 188 RV and Trailer Parkin and Storage Stud Final Report W g g Y p Municipality of Clarington w i L L s 3.2 Jurisdictional Scan Eleven (1 1) municipalities were included in the jurisdictional scan for the Study, including the following: • Durham Region o Ajax o Brock o Oshawa o Scugog o Whitby • Town of Lindsay (Kawartha Lakes) • Port Hope (Northumberland County) • Cavan -Monaghan (Peterborough County) • Georgina (York Region) • City of Belleville • City of Quinte West Provisions for outdoor storage varied across all municipalities assessed. Most municipalities (10/11) recognized outdoor storage as a permitted use in either an industrial or commercial zone; save and except the Town of Lindsay, where outside storage is prohibited. Outdoor storage was largely recognized as a general use, and not specifically defined for RV and trailer storage. Where permitted in industrial and commercial zones, outside storage was required across all municipalities to be accessory to the main use. Specific setback, buffering and lot coverage regulations were also introduced in many municipalities, to varying degrees. Most municipalities (9/11) also recognized outdoor storage as permitted on a private residential property, subject to certain restrictions. Restrictions varied across municipalities, but generally included restrictions on: • Number of RVs and trailers; • Size of RVs and trailers; and • Location (side or rear yard). The number of RVs and trailers permitted by the municipalities also varied. Between 1 and 2 were generally permitted in the urban area, with between 2 and 6 permitted in countryside areas. Other approaches, as an alternative to specifying the number of RVs D.M. Wills Associates Limited Page 14 Project Number 21-85154 Page 189 RV and Trailer Parkin and Storage Stud Final Report W g g Y p Municipality of Clarington w i L L s permitted, included restricting RVs and trailers based on lot coverage. A summary of the jurisdictional scan is provided in Appendix A. 3.3 Public Consultation Findings As part of the Study, a landing page was created on the Municipality's website to provide a dedicated resource page for those interested in the Study to gather information. The landing page was published in early April, and was updated to provide links to the online surveys, discussed further below. Information on the virtual public open house, also detailed below, was likewise published on the landing page. Notice of the Study, surveys and virtual public open house was also provided on the Municipality's online newsfeed. Updates on the Study and public feedback and consultation opportunities were also provided through the Municipality's Planning Updates. Two online surveys were released to gather input on RV and trailer parking and storage. These surveys were published on the Municipality's website in April, and closed in May 17, 2021. Notice of the surveys was provided via the Municipality's online newsfeed, Planning Updates and in the local newspaper. Direct mailings were also issued to a list of interested parties, as informed by the Municipality. The first survey was designed to collect general public feedback on the demands and challenges for RV and trailer parking and storage in the Municipality. The survey received 287 responses. Key insights from the survey for the general public are outlined in Table 4 below. Table 4 Key Insights from Public Survey SurveyInsights from - Average Number of RVs or Trailers Owned D.. Indicator 2.07 Storage of at least one (1) RV or trailer on Personal Property 48.1 Storage of at least one (1) RV or trailer at Storage Facility (commercial and non-commercial) 86.4% Storing at Private (non-commercial) Facility 78.8% Using Indoor Storage 8% D.M. Wills Associates Limited Page 15 Project Number 21-85154 Page 190 RV and Trailer Parkin and Storage Stud Final Report W g g Y p Municipality of Clarington w i L L s Those survey takers who live in an urban area were more likely to store their RV or trailer elsewhere; versus those who lived in the countryside area. Proximity to the home location, as well as cost, were noted as the two most important factors in RV and trailer storage, with outdoor storage being the most prevalent storage type utilized, as indicated by survey participants. Majority of participants in the survey (69%) indicated storage was hard to come by within the Municipality. The second survey was designed to collect feedback specifically from the operators of RV and trailer storage facilities. The survey received 20 responses. Accounting for anomalies in the data, the information gathered indicated that upwards of 670 RVs and trailers were stored by the 20 respondents; with mean and media storage numbers being 35 and 12, respectively. Most respondents to this survey also indicated a desire to increase storage capacity, with a cumulative total of 2,103 desired storage spaces. The mean and median desired storage numbers as indicated by the respondents were 111 and 25, respectively. These numbers were specific to outdoor storage, and did not capture indoor storage provided or desired by operators. Similar to the general public, respondents to the operator survey generally agreed (75%) that storage in the Municipality was hard to come by. A virtual open house was also held on May 12, 2021, and was advertised using the same mechanisms as described above. The open house had over 60 participants, generally identifying as members of the public with a few RV storage providers also in attendance. The commentary from those participating in the open house generally echoed that which was received through the surveys. Key concerns expressed at the open house included the following: 1. Storage demand is exceeding supply. 2. RV Storage is part of a larger economic industry that helps support local businesses. 3. Some equity amongst businesses in the urban versus the countryside areas may need to be considered. 4. Aesthetics are a required consideration in both the urban and countryside areas. 5. Storage on agricultural land is desired. Polls issued at the conclusion of the open house also indicated that of those participating, 90% believed the existing provisions in the countryside area were too strict, with 61 % indicating the same for the urban area. Approximately 89% also indicated that they either agree or strongly agree that the Municipality needs more parking and storage opportunities for RVs and trailers. D.M. Wills Associates Limited Page 16 Project Number 21-85154 Page 191 RV and Trailer Parkin and Storage Stud Final Report W g g Y p Municipality of Clarington w i L L s 4.0 Identified Options Based on the background review and comments received during public consultation, several options for amending the existing policy framework were identified for consideration. While it is recognized that the focus of the Study was to identify options to address commercial storage in the countryside areas, the background review confirmed that immediate solutions that maintain conformity with prevailing policy are highly limited. Therefore, in order to provide more readily achievable policy options for addressing or otherwise alleviating RV and trailer parking and storage in the countryside areas, options regarding personal storage and enhancements to storage opportunities in the urban area were also identified for consideration. These options are intended to complement the longer -term options that would address commercial storage in the countryside areas. All policy options reasonably considered throughout the course of the Study are presented in Table 5 below, which outlines the benefits, drawbacks, implementation mechanism and potential timing for each. Policy options are generally intended to address outdoor storage, as indoor storage has not been identified as an item of concern to the Municipality, and was likewise deemed a low priority during the public consultation process. The summary table also indicates which key conclusions are preferred for further evaluation and consideration by the Municipality. The key conclusions are further discussed in Section 5.0. D.M. Wills Associates Limited Page 17 Project Number 21-85154 Page 192 Background Review and Best Practices Report W g p Municipality of Clarington W i L L s Table 5 Evaluation of Proposed Policy Options Feasible for Im. - - 1. Maintain Status No additional resources required. Does not address existing land use concerns. None. Maintain No - does not Quo. existing policies and resolve existing No additional information sharing Does not address comments received from public provisions. conditions. required for Staff and public to consultation. understand new provisions. 2. Increase Enables owners to utilize their own May negatively impact aesthetics of urban areas. Zoning By-law No. However, Permitted property for storage. May alleviate Amendment amendments to Number of RVs some demand for commercial Does not address comments received from public Immediate/Short- other provisions and Trailers storage in the countryside area. consultation indicating that storage on personal term. could be Stored Outdoors property in the urban areas is not overly desired considered. in Urban Areas given aesthetic and functional concerns. (Personal). See Section 5.0 - Would be expected to have minimal overall impact Recommendation to addressing the demand for storage facilities. 1 _ D.M. Wills Associates Limited Page 18 Project Number 21-85154 Page 193 Background Review and Best Practices Report W g p Municipality of Clarington w i L L s Policy Option Benefits Drawbacks Implementation Considered Feasible for Im. - - 3. Increased Enables owners to utilize own May negatively impact aesthetics depending on Zoning By-law Yes - subject to Permitted property for storage. May alleviate number permitted and property size. Amendment - provisions. Number of RVs some demand for commercial Immediate/Short- and Trailers storage in the countryside area. Potential for impact to agricultural resources, term. See Section 5.0 - Stored Outdoors depending on scale. Also potential for impact to Recommendation in Countryside Addresses public comments natural heritage resources if not otherwise identified 2. Area (Personal). received that outdoor storage is and protected in the COP and Zoning By-laws. needed and should be permitted in the countryside area. While anticipated to alleviate some level of demand for storage facilities, would not serve to address the long-term use of countryside properties for commercial storage. 4. Permit Addresses public comments May negatively impact aesthetics. Official Plan Yes - subject to Commercial received that outdoor storage is Amendment - provisions and Storage in the needed and should be permitted in Potential for impact to agricultural resources, through Official Plan only as an on - Countryside the countryside area. depending on scale. Also potential for impact to Update. farm diversified Area. natural heritage resources if not otherwise identified use. and protected in the COP and Zoning By-laws. Zoning By-law Amendment - See Section 5.0 - Potential to conflict with provincial and regional through Zone Recommendation policy as per Section 3.0 if not established as an on- Clarington. 3. farm diversified use recognized by the DROP. D.M. Wills Associates Limited Page 19 Project Number 21-85154 Page 194 Background Review and Best Practices Report W g p Municipality of Clarington w i L L s Policy Option Benefits Drawbacks Implementation Considered Feasible for Im. - - 5. Permit Addresses public comments May negatively impact aesthetics and create other Official Plan No - policy only Commercial received that outdoor storage is land use incompatibility concerns. Amendment - permits such use Storage on small needed and should be permitted in through Official Plan to be established Countryside Lots the countryside area. Potential for impact to agricultural resources, Update. as an OFDU, used primarily for depending on scale. Also potential for impact to which is not likely residential Provides an alternative land use for natural heritage resources if not otherwise identified Zoning By-law to be feasible on purposes. small lots (e.g. less than 5 acres) that and protected in the COP and Zoning By-laws. Amendment - smaller lots, as the may not be functional for Immediate or primary agriculture. Potential to conflict with provincial and regional through Zone agricultural use is policy as per Section 3.0 if not established as an on- Clarington. likely not existent. farm diversified use recognized by the DROP. May lead to increased fragmentation of the agricultural land base. 6. Implement a Addresses public comments May negatively impact aesthetics. Official Plan No - potential for Rural Zone that received that outdoor storage is Amendment - fragmentation of reflects the Rural needed and should be permitted in Potential for impact to agricultural resources, through Official Plan land base Lands the Countryside Area. depending on scale. Also potential for impact to Update. presents obstacle designation and natural heritage resources if not otherwise identified to policy Permits Provides an alternative land use on and protected in the COP and Zoning By-laws. Zoning By-law conformity. Commercial lands that may not be prime Amendment - Storage. agricultural. Potential to conflict with provincial and regional through Zone policy as per Section 3.0 by fragmentation of the Clarington. greater agricultural area. D.M. Wills Associates Limited Page 20 Project Number 21-85154 Page195 Background Review and Best Practices Report W g p Municipality of Clarington w i L L s Policy Option Benefits Drawbacks Implementation Considered Feasible for Im. - - 7. Expand Addresses public comments that Does not address public comments that outdoor Official Plan Yes - subject to Employment additional outdoor storage is storage is needed and should be permitted in the Amendment - provisions to Zones where needed. countryside area. Immediate or ensure minimum Commercial through Official Plan employment Storage would be Preserves agricultural and natural Potential to conflict with provincial, regional and Update. densities can be Permitted, heritage resources and lessens local planning policy as per Section 3.0 if met. including opportunity for conflict and impacts established on lands intended for higher Zoning By-law Commercial on these resources. employment densities. Amendment - See Section 5.0 - Storage as a Immediate or Recommendation secondary use. Directs development to settlement Potential to result in higher storage costs which was through Zone 4. areas in accordance with the indicated by the public as a primary factor in Clarington. provincial, regional and local choosing storage facilities. planning policy of Section 3.0. Temporary Use By- law. 8. Permit Addresses public comments that Does not address public comments that outdoor Official Plan No -would not Commercial additional outdoor storage is storage is needed and should be permitted in the Amendment - be consistent with Storage as a needed. countryside area. Immediate or provincial and Temporary Use in through Official Plan regional planning Employment Preserves agricultural and natural Potential to conflict with provincial, regional and Update. policy. Area. heritage resources and lessens local planning policy as per Section 3.0 if opportunity for conflict and impacts established on lands intended for higher Zoning By-law on these resources. employment densities. Although intended to be Amendment - temporary, the actual temporary nature of the use Immediate or Directs development to settlement may be difficult to enforce and monitor, and may through Zone areas in accordance with the establish over time as a more permanent use in Clarington. contrast to the land use intended. D.M. Wills Associates Limited Page 21 Project Number 21-85154 Page 196 Background Review and Best Practices Report W g p Municipality of Clarington w i L L 5 Policy Option Benefits Drawbacks Implementation Considered Feasible for Im. - - provincial, regional and local Potential to result in higher storage costs which was Temporary Use By - planning policy of Section 3.0. indicated by the public as a primary factor in law. choosing storage facilities. May provide an interim use on lands that would otherwise be underutilized. 9. Permit Addresses public comments that Potential to conflict with provincial, regional and Official Plan Yes. Commercial additional outdoor storage is local planning policy as per Section 3.0 if Amendment - Storage on needed. established on lands designated for higher through Official Plan See Section 5.0 - Agricultural Lands employment densities. Update. Recommendation within the Urban Directs development to settlement 5. Boundary. areas in accordance with the Potential to present land use compatibility issues as Zoning By-law provincial, regional and local urban development expands into these areas. Amendment - planning policy of Section 3.0. through Zone Clarington. D.M. Wills Associates Limited Page 22 Project Number 21-85154 Page 197 Background Review and Best Practices Report W g p Municipality of Clarington W i L L s 5.0 Key Findings As noted herein, prevailing provincial, regional and local planning policy contribute to the complexity of establishing options to address commercial RV and trailer parking and storage in the countryside area. There are several competing land use planning interests, including the protection of employment areas and preservation of agricultural lands, which must be considered in developing appropriate policy options. Several of the policy options as outlined in Section 4.0 have not been identified as having potential for implementation, given the associated negative impacts and lack of conformity to governing planning policy. However, subject to further refinement to reflect the local context of the Municipality, there are policy options which the Municipality can pursue in the short and long term that can make a substantive impact on RV and trailer parking and storage across the Municipality, including within the countryside areas. These policy options are described in further detail below. It is noted however that each of these may still have limitations due to prevailing provincial policy, and as such any proposed amendments would need to be careful considered in that context. 1. Amendments to Existing Urban Provisions to Enhance Clarity and Function. Through the consultation process it was suggested that the provisions for RV and trailer storage in the urban area are not easily interpreted by members of the general public. Based on public feedback, it is recommended that consideration be given to the following minor amendments to the Zoning By-law in order to enhance clarity by the public: Provide clarity on what is included in the definition of an RV and trailer; • Ensure consistent use of definitions throughout and across both Zoning By- law 84-63 and Zoning By-law 2005-109; and • Clarify that personal (i.e. non-commercial) storage indoors on a private property is not subject to the existing limits on RV and trailer numbers. Through the consultation process it was also brought to attention that existing provisions in the urban area provide increased difficulty in function and enforcement for oversized trailers. While not specifically subject to the scope of this Study, it is also recommended that the existing provision on the number of hours (i.e. 120 hours per calendar month) an oversized RV or trailer may be parked on a driveway in the urban area be replaced with a policy which permits parking of such trailers during the active season (i.e. April 1 to October 31), similar to an approach taken by the Town of Georgina. The Municipality should evaluate this option in the context of local character. 2. Develop and Implement RV Storage Provisions by Lot Size for Personal Storage in the Countryside Area. As currently in effect, existing provisions for RV and trailer parking and storage permit a maximum of three (3) RVs and trailers on a lot in the Rural Residential (RC, RE, RH, RM, IRS) and Agricultural Zones (A) of Zoning By-law 84-63 and Rural D.M. Wills Associates Limited Page 23 Project Number 21-85154 Page 198 Background Review and Best Practices Report W g p Municipality of Clarington w i L L s Settlement (RS 1) and Agricultural Zones (A) of Zoning By-law 2005-109, regardless of the lot size. In order to provide increased flexibility, and permit a greater number of RVs and trailers to be stored in the countryside areas, it is recommended that the provisions be amended to permit a greater number of RVs and trailers to be stored on lots of greater sizes. These provisions are not intended to facilitate commercial storage in the countryside area, but rather provide increased limits for personal storage on properties of certain sizes, which may help to alleviate the requirement for large-scale commercial facilities in the countryside areas and particularly on prime agricultural lands. This approach also has the potential to bring some properties into conformity with the Zoning By-law. Certain of the sites assessed via aerial imagery during the background review were noted to provide storage in excess of the Zoning By- law provisions, while actual storage numbers on the properties were low (i.e. less than ten). A tiered system is suggested should the Municipality decide to implement this approach. While the lot sizes and number of RVs can be further defined through the Zoning By-law Amendment process, the following is recommended for consideration: • Rural Residential or Agricultural zoned lot between 0.69 acres and 5 acres: Maximum three (3). Rural residential or Agricultural zoned lot greater than 5 acres: Maximum six (6). These provisions would be enforced with the existing and/or amended provisions regarding location in the side and rear yards to ensure compatibility continues to be maintained with adjacent land uses and that storage is sensitive to the aesthetics of the area and local character. 3. Develop and Implement Policy Framework for On -Farm Diversified Uses. Feedback from the public consultation process emphasized that there is an appetite by the public for RV storage facilities in the countryside area; and that this is desired given the overall limited availability of storage facilities in the Municipality. However, as detailed in Section 3.1, existing provincial, regional and local planning policy highly restricts development on prime agricultural lands in the countryside area. Non-agricultural development is generally only permitted as an on -farm diversified use (OFDU), or otherwise requires site -specific planning approvals to be permitted in the Municipality. ODFUs are guided by documentation from the Province, specifically Publication 851: Guidelines on Permitted Uses in Ontario's Prime Agricultural Areas. This publication outlines five (5) key criteria for OFDUs which are to be considered when determining if a use may be permitted on prime agricultural lands. These criteria include: D.M. Wills Associates Limited Page 24 Project Number 21-85154 Page 199 Background Review and Best Practices Report W g p Municipality of Clarington W i L L s • The use must be located on a farm. • The use must be secondary to the principal agricultural use of the farm. • The use must be limited in area. • The use may include, but is not limited to, home occupations, home industries, agri-tourism uses and uses that produce value-added agricultural products. • Shall be compatible with, and shall not hinder, surrounding agricultural operations. While the Province outlines guidelines to evaluate OFDU's, each local municipality is able to establish their own criteria, which may be more stringent that the Provincial guidelines. The existing COP permits OFDUs and builds further upon the policies of Publication 851. However, the implementation of these policies is required to conform to the DROP, which only contemplates OFDUs where they are directly related or devoted to the farm operation. As such, OFDU's which are not intrinsically tied to agriculture are not currently contemplated. That being the case, while considering RV and trailer storage as an OFDU may be an option warranting further consideration, this would require consultation with the Region in order to ensure that policies developed in this respect maintain conformity to the DROP. It is also noted that provisions for allowing OFDUs in Agricultural zoned areas have not been established. Therefore, in developing a local policy framework for OFDUs it is recommended that the Municipality consider and implement provisions in both the Official Plan and Zoning By-law to address such. In generating these policies, it is further noted that OFDUs form part of a much larger and more complex land use planning consideration, and may be applicable to a variety of uses, beyond RV and trailer parking and storage. As such, it is suggested that in preparing a local policy framework for OFDUs the Municipality consider all possibilities, not just RV and trailer storage, and develop criteria in light of such. This being the case, it is anticipated that development of such a framework may be appropriate through the comprehensive Official Plan Update, to follow the Region of Durham's Municipal Comprehensive Review. In consideration of this suggested framework, it is also advised that the Municipality consider a two -prong approach to regulating and permitting OFDU's, guided by a set of evaluation criteria including an required site alteration, traffic generation, required servicing, agricultural rehabilitation potential, provision of screening and site design. Point systems can be assigned to the evaluation criteria. For those proposals which are seen as most compatible with the agricultural system and intent of the OFDUs policies, the Municipality may consider subjecting such only to a site plan approval or scoped site plan approval process. However, for more complex proposals, these may be subject to a site -specific rezoning and site plan approval process. These criteria would need to be incorporated into the Official Plan policies to be developed. D.M. Wills Associates Limited Page 25 Project Number 21-85154 Page 200 Background Review and Best Practices Report W g p Municipality of Clarington w i L L s 4. Enhance Existing Policy Framework for RV Storage in Employment Areas. In conjunction with developing the OFDU framework, it is recommended that the Municipality consider enhancing the existing policy framework for RV Storage in employment areas. As existing, outdoor storage in the Municipality is permitted in the General Industrial (M2) Zone. Outdoor storage is not permitted in the other employment zones; which reflects the provincial, regional and local policy that states that employment lands are to be preserved for more employment intensive uses (minimum 30 jobs per gross hectare as per COP). Given the provincial, regional and local policy direction for employment uses, the current provisions for outdoor storage being only permitted in the M2 Zone are considered appropriate. Likewise, it is not recommended that outdoor storage be permitted as a main use in the commercial, office park and prestige employment areas of the Municipality where higher density employment is directed. However, to further enhance the existing policy framework and provide additional opportunity for RV storage in employment areas it is recommended that the Municipality consider permitting outdoor storage as a secondary use. However, in order to ensure consistency with provincial, regional and local policy, storage should only be considered as a secondary use to specific associated uses, including RV sales and services establishments, permitted in the Special Purpose Commercial (C4 and C5) Zone. In this case, the outdoor storage would not be subject to accessory outdoor storage provisions; but rather new provisions for outdoor storage as a secondary use would be established. An additional and important component of any new provisions would be to include limits to the scale of the secondary use, which could be implemented through provisions such as lot coverage. This approach, while not applying specifically to the countryside areas, would enhance the potential for commercial RV and trailer storage in the Municipality. As storage would be required to be secondary to another commercial use, this approach provides an option for the Municipality to increase available storage while not offending either the employment or agricultural policies of the governing planning documents. Another component of this approach could be to allow commercial RV and trailer storage through a temporary use by-law on employment lands. However, as temporary use by-laws are required to conform to the Official Plan, an amendment would also be required to the COP to recognize the potential for this temporary use. Utilizing a temporary use by-law would provide for commercial establishment of storage facilities on a site -specific basis. 5. Develop Local Policy Framework to Permit RV Storage on Agricultural Lands Located within the Urban Boundary. As mentioned throughout this Report, the prevailing policies which direct the preservation of agricultural lands and the protection of employment lands for high -employment uses present a challenge as it pertains to commercial storage D.M. Wills Associates Limited Page 26 Project Number 21-85154 Page 201 Background Review and Best Practices Report W g p Municipality of Clarington w i L L s as it represents a potentially incompatible land use, whether it is located within the urban or the countryside areas. However, within the Municipality, there may be vacant lands which previously formed part of the countryside area and have since been incorporated within the urban boundary. That being the case, although these lands often continue to support agricultural uses until development extends to those areas, being within the settlement boundary they are not required to adhere to stringent agricultural planning policies. Further, although they are ultimately intended for higher density uses, the provision of a "future development" designation on these lands can provide flexibility in the interim, before being designated for a specific urban use, be it residential or employment. As such, these vacant urban lands present an opportunity for interim uses which may not otherwise be considered consistent with either urban or countryside planning policy. As such, the Municipality may consider developing Official Plan policy that would identify that on such lands, certain interim uses may be allowed, such as RV and trailer storage. These uses may not be compatible with long-term urban development, but may present a logical option at present, as they would be proximal to the existing built up area, without utilizing employment lands. To note, as development expands and the vision for the lands is refined, the use would cease through the required re -designation or rezoning of the lands. Accompanying Zoning By-law provisions could be introduced which permit RV and trailer storage (or other interim uses) to only those lands identified appropriately in the Municipality's Official Plan. Further Official Plan policy could be incorporated to ensure that appropriate urban or employment uses would take precedent over established interim uses. To ensure the use is temporary in nature, site -specific temporary use by-laws could be applied for commercial RV and trailer storage facilities proposed on these lands. 6.0 Conclusions The parking and storage of RVs and trailers is a complex land use planning issue, guided by various planning policies. In order to be effective, the local policy framework for RV parking and storage needs to conform to the applicable governing planning documents, while ensuring the concerns and needs of the public are satisfied. Conflicting land use planning policies for employment and agricultural lands present a challenge for uses such as commercial storage; and immediate solutions to resolving such are largely not feasibly from a policy conformity perspective. This report has summarized the planning policies applicable to RV and trailer parking and storage in the Municipality, while providing an overview of public priorities as heard through the consultation process. Based on a review of policy and public feedback, several options were identified and which were further assessed, resulting in five (5) key findings for further consideration and potential implementation. These findings are intended to present the Municipality with short-term options to alleviate demand in the countryside area, while addressing commercial RV storage through larger planning processes in the long-term. The findings D.M. Wills Associates Limited Page 27 Project Number 21-85154 Page 202 Background Review and Best Practices Report W g p Municipality of Clarington w i L L s provided herein are intended to provide greater flexibility for RV and trailer parking and storage in the urban and countryside areas, while ensuring that the provincial, regional and local planning objectives as they pertain to employment, agricultural and natural resources are upheld. D.M. Wills Associates Limited Page 28 Project Number 21-85154 Page 203 Appendix A Jurisdictional Scan Page 204 Appendix A Jurisdictional Scan w i L L s Municipality RV and Trailer Definitions RV Storage Definitions Indoor Storage Provisions Outdoor Storage Provisions Clarington Recreational Vehicle A motorized or non- Recreational Vehicle Storage A • Permitted as "warehouse" in M1 Urban Zoning By-law motorized vehicle that is used commercial establishment for the storage and M2 Zones. 84-63 predominantly for recreational purposes, of licensed recreational vehicles and their • One (1) RV or trailer not exceeding 5.5 m length including, but not limited to, mobile trailers. or 2.4 m height on driveway recreational trailers, snowmobiles, boats, o If of greater size, only for 120 hours per personal watercraft and all -terrain vehicles. calendar month Trailer Shall mean any vehicle that is • Or, One (1) RV or trailer not exceeding 6 m designed to be drawn upon a highway by length or 2.9 m height in side or rear yard a motor vehicle, except an implement of husbandry, another motor vehicle or any Rural device or apparatus not designed to Maximum three (3) RVs or trailers in any side or transport persons or property temporarily rear yard drawn, propelled or moved upon such highway. A trailer shall be considered a Industrial separate vehicle and not part of the motor vehicle by which it is drawn, and, from the Permitted where accessory to permitted use in purposes of this By-law does not include a M2 Zone mobile home as defined herein. • Permitted under storage area for boats and trailers in M2 Zone Clarington Recreational Motor Vehicle A motor Recreational Vehicle Storage A Not specifically contemplated. Rural Zoning By-law vehicle constructed as a self-propelled and commercial establishment for the storage 2005-109 self-contained unit that is capable of being of licensed recreational vehicles and their Maximum three (3) RVs or trailers in any side or utilized for the sleeping, eating and living trailers. rear yard. To be setback 5 metres. If within 15 accommodation of one or more persons metres of a Rural Settlement Zone or a lot with a on a temporary basis. dwelling, to be setback 10 metres. Recreational Vehicle A vehicle that is used predominantly for recreational purposes, including recreational trailers, snowmobiles, motorized and non -motorized boats, personal watercraft, all -terrain vehicles and recreational motor vehicles. Recreational Trailer A trailer constructed as a self-contained unit, capable of being utilized for the temporary living, sleeping, or eating accommodations of one or more persons. D.M. Wills Associates Limited Page 1 Project Number 21-85154 Page 205 Appendix A Jurisdictional Scan W W I L L S Municipality RV and Trailer Definitions RV Storage Definitions Indoor Storage Provisions Outdoor Storage Provisions Ajax Zoning Not defined Not explicitly defined Public storage facility permitted in Industrial By-law 95- Prestige Employment and General 2003 Employment Zones Permitted in General Employment and Heavy Employment Zones where: o accessory to main use o not more than 50% of site o not visible from street; enclosed by 1.8 m fence and storage not higher than 1.8 m o in rear yard 0 9 m setback to street 0 15 m setback to Residential Zone Brock Zoning Motorized mobile home: any motor vehicle Not explicitly defined May be permitted in M1 and M2 as In conjunction with single-family or seasonal By-law 287- so constructed as to be self-contained, self- a warehouse dwelling: 78-PL propelled, capable for the living, sleeping or eating accommodation of persons • Maximum two 2 of boat, tourist trailer, motorized mobile home, truck camper or similar • Side or rear yard • Boats < 7.3 m • Others < 10.6 m • Not used for habitation Industrial: • Permitted in Ml and M2 Zones provided: • Accessory to industrial use • Not more than 50% lot area or 2X building area • Planting strip between residential zone • 3 m side and rear yard setback • Gravel and hard surface • Subject to site plan agreement D.M. Wills Associates Limited Page 2 Project Number 21-85154 Page 206 Appendix A Jurisdictional Scan w i L L s Municipality RV and Trailer Definitions RV Storage Definitions Indoor Storage Provisions Outdoor Storage Provisions Oshawa Recreational Vehicle means a vehicle Not explicitly defined Industrial: Residential Zone: Zoning By-law designed to be towed behind a motor 60-94 vehicle or self-propelled, and includes such • Self serve storage permitted in PI Permitted for RVs, boats, snowmobiles, etc. vehicles commonly known as travel trailers, Zone provided: camper trailers, pick-up coaches, • Recreational vehicle storage (not o No greater than 6 m in length, 2.6 m in motorized campers, motorized homes and defined) permitted in GI Zone height other similar vehicles, which provide sleeping and other facilities for persons o Side or rear yard while travelling or vacationing. Industrial: • Permitted as accessory use in PSC-A, SPC-A, SI, GI, SPI, HI Zone o Side or rear yard 0 9 m setback from street with 3 m landscaped open space 0 6 m setback from Residential or Open Space Zone 0 3 m setback from all other zones o Maximum height 4 m in Commercial Zone o Not more than 60% surface area in Select Industrial Zone • Recreational vehicle storage (not defined) permitted in GI Zone Scugog Motor vehicle, recreation - A Motor Vehicle Not explicitly defined Permitted as "self storage facility" in Residential, where dwelling in existence: Zoning By-law used primarily for recreational purposes Ml , M2, M3 Zones 14-14 including a snowmobile, ATV, motorcycle, Permitted on owner's lot, provided: but excluding other Vehicles defined o Rear or interior side yard herein. o Meets yard and setback requirements for Motor home vehicle - A non -Commercial accessory buildings Vehicle used primarily for recreational or o Included in maximum lot coverage vacation purposes and capable of being restrictions for accessory buildings used for the temporary vacation living accommodation of one or more Persons Rural: including any self propelled Vehicle, bus or Trailer attached to a Vehicle. Permitted in AG, RE, ORM-AG Zone where accessory to a permitted non-residential use D.M. Wills Associates Limited Page 3 Project Number 21-85154 Page 207 Appendix A Jurisdictional Scan W W I L L S Municipality RV and Trailer Definitions RV Storage Definitions Indoor Storage Provisions Outdoor Storage Provisions Trailer, Travel or Tent - Any Trailer which is o In ORM-AG, only where use existed as of designed to be temporarily utilized for date of passing of Zoning By-law living, shelter and sleeping accommodation, with or without cooking Industrial: facilities and which has running gear and towing equipment permanently attached Permitted in M2, M3, M4 zones where accessory and a current license and is not to anon -residential use, provided: permanently affixed to the ground. o Rear yard Vehicle, recreational - Any Vehicle and o Does not exceed 50% lot area associated Trailers used primarily for off - road recreational purposes including but not limited to boats, all terrain Vehicles, unlicensed motorcycles and snowmobiles. Whitby Zoning Trailer means a vehicle so constructed that Not explicitly defined Permitted in M 1, M 1 A, M 1 A-LS as Residential Zone: By-law 1784 it is suitable for being attached to a motor warehouse vehicle for the purpose of being drawn or Permitted on a lot with a ground oriented propelled by the motor vehicle and is dwelling unit provided: capable of being used for the transport of o Owner or RV or trailer shall be occupant persons or goods, equipment or livestock of lot notwithstanding that such vehicle is jacked up or that its running gear is removed. o Maximum one (1) in open o Unrestricted in a wholly enclosed building Vehicle, Recreational means any vehicle or recreational equipment that provides for o Any yard, provided 1.0 m setback short term occupancy and is used for o Maximum 7 m length, 2 m height in front recreation, travel or vacationing which is or exterior side yard designed to be towed or propelled by a motor vehicle or self-propelled and 0 If exceeds, must be in interior or includes such vehicles as an all -terrain r read yard vehicle, boat, motor home, pop-up ■ Maximum 11 m length, 4 m height camper, snowmobile, tent trailer, travel trailer, truck camper and water craft but Agricultural Zone: does not include a mobile home. • Permitted on a residential lot unrelated to farming in the Agricultural Zone, provided: o Owner occupies lot o Maximum of two (2) in open ■ Max one (1) in front or exterior yard and must be on driveway D.M. Wills Associates Limited Page 4 Project Number 21-85154 Page 208 Appendix A Jurisdictional Scan W W I L L S Municipality RV and Trailer Definitions RV Storage Definitions Indoor Storage Provisions Outdoor Storage Provisions o Unrestricted in wholly enclosed building o Associated main building 0 3 m yard setbacks • Permitted on agricultural lot, if accessory to principle or main use and located to the rear of the main buildings Industrial: • Permitted where accessory to industrial use in M1 Zones • Permitted in M2 Zone Port Hope Recreational Trailer, Vehicle or Boat means: Not explicitly defined. Not specifically contemplated. Residential: Zoning By-law Any vehicle that is suitable for being 20/2010 attached to a motor vehicle for the Permitted on the same lot where the owner purpose of being drawn or is self-propelled, resides in Residential and Countryside zones, and may be capable of being used on a provided: short term recreational basis for living, o Maximum of one (1) sleeping or eating accommodation of human beings and includes a travel trailer, o Rear or side yard pick-up camper, motorized camper, boat o Meets setbacks for accessory buildings trailer, or tent trailer. o If in front yard, meets minimum front yard Trailer, Tourist means: A trailer capable of for zone being used for the temporary living, sleeping or eating accommodation of Other: persons notwithstanding that its running Permitted in EMP1, EMP2, EMPR, EMPX, EMPG gear is or may be removed. Zones where accessory to a use: o Rear or interior side yard o Minimum 18 m street setback o Maximum 4.5 m height • 2.75 m fence height o Not permitted adjoining a residential zone boundary o Maximum 30% lot area or 2x ground floor area of main building D.M. Wills Associates Limited Page 5 Project Number 21-85154 Page 209 Appendix A Jurisdictional Scan W W I L L S Municipality Kawartha Lakes - Town of Lindsay 2000-75 RV and Trailer Definitions Not explicitly defined. RV Storage Definitions Not explicitly defined. Indoor Storage Provisions Permitted in Prestige Employment Zone as mini storage warehouse. Outdoor Storage Provisions Residential Zones: • Permitted, provided that: o Not more than 30% lot area to be occupied by open parking or storage of RVS, trailers, boats etc. o Not in front yard Georgina Recreational Vehicle - means a portable Not explicitly defined. Permitted in Business Park -1, -2 , -3 On lands zoned to permit a single-family dwelling: structure intended as a temporary and 2G Zone as a warehouse and accommodation for travel, vacation or public storage and in M1, as public Permitted on lots greater than 4000 m2 recreational use. Such structure shall storage o Maximum six (6), or which maximum two include park model trailers, travel trailers, Permitted in Business Park 2 (2) on driveway in front yard or exterior motorized homes, slide -in campers, chassis- Gateway BP-2G Zone and BP-3 as side yard mounted campers, and tent trailers. public storage and warehouse 0 6 m front yard setback, 1.2m interior side yard setback ■ May be within 6 m setback from April 1 to Oct 31 ■ Winter vehicles - may be within 6 m setback from Nov 1 to March 31 o Maximum height 4 m, length 13 m o Exceptions for larger vehicles around holiday dates • Permitted on lots between 270 and 4000 m2 o Maximum three (3) with maximum one (1) in front yard or exterior side yard driveway o Same provisions as above • Permitted on lots less than 270 m2 zoned to permit a single, semi or townhouse o Maximum three (3) all of which to be in rear yard o Max 3 m height, 7 m length o Min side yard of 1.2 m Commercial: D.M. Wills Associates Limited Page 6 Project Number 21-85154 Page 210 Appendix A Jurisdictional Scan W W I L L S Municipality RV and Trailer Definitions RV Storage Definitions Indoor Storage Provisions Outdoor Storage Provisions • Only permitted in Recreational Commercial (C6) Zone, except if accessory to a leisure vehicle sales area Cavan- Recreational vehicle: a motor vehicle that Not explicitly defined. • Permitted in CMU 1 and CMU3 as Residential Zone: Monaghan is primarily designed to provide temporary warehouse only if existing on living quarters for recreational camping, effective date of by-law Where lot is in Residential Zone and less than 0.4 travel or seasonal use, whether it has its • Permitted in M1 and M2 as hectares in size: own motor power or is mounted on or commercial self -storage facility, o Maximum two (2) RVs or two (2) boats or towed by another vehicle, and includes and permitted in M2 as warehouse one (1) RV and one (1) boat motor homes, travel trailers, fifth wheel travel trailers, tent trailers and campers o Interior or rear yard whether or not the camper is or is not Industrial: attached to a truck or other motor vehicle and does not include a mobile home or a Permitted in M1, and in M2 provided: manufactured home. 0 20 m setback to front and exterior lot line 0 2 m setback to all other setback o No greater than 25% of total lot area or total ground floor area of principal building 0 1.8 m fence or hedgerow requirement o Storage not to exceed 6 m in height o Not permitted abutting residential zone or floodplain City of Recreational vehicle: shall mean a Not explicitly defined. 9 Permitted in M1, M4, MCP as Residential Zone: Belleville BL portable structure, intended as a warehousing 10245 temporary accommodation for travel, • Permitted in M2, M3 as bulk storage Recreational vehicle permitted to be parked in recreation and/or vacational use. Such yard any yard, provided the vehicle is not used for structures include motorized snow vehicles, living or sleeping accommodation for more than travel trailers, automobile trailers, motorized Permitted in M3 as warehousing or 30 consecutive days; and in no case shall such homes, slide -in campers, chassis -mounted storage building accommodation be leased or rented campers, tent trailers and/or boats, but in no event shall be deemed to include Industrial Zone: "mobile homes". • Permitted in M2, M3 as bulk storage yard o Interior or rear yard o Enclosed by 1.8 m screening where abutting residential zone D.M. Wills Associates Limited Page 7 Project Number 21-85154 Page 211 Appendix A Jurisdictional Scan w i L L s Municipality RV and Trailer Definitions RV Storage Definitions Indoor Storage Provisions Outdoor Storage Provisions City of Quince Recreational Trailer, Vehicle or Boat: Means Recreational Trailer, Vehicle or Boat Sale Pe SM CRas d in CC Permitted , , Residential: West #20-123 any vehicle that is suitable for being Establishment: means a premises used for commercial self -storage facility attached to a motor vehicle for the the sale or recreational trailers, vehicles or . Permitted in LM, GM, SM as Permitted on lots zoned to permit residential purpose of being drawn or is self-propelled, boats and may include, as an accessory warehouse uses, subject to the following; and may be capable of being used on a use, the repair and storage of recreational • Permitted in SM as accessory to RV o Not to be used for human habitation short term recreational basis for living, sleeping or eating accommodation of trailers, vehicles or boats. sales, rental and service o Driveway, interior side yard or rear yard human beings and includes a travel trailer, establishment with 1 m setback from a public street pickup camper, motorized camper, boat o If height 1.8 m or more, 1.2 metres side or trailer, or tent trailer. rear yard setback Tourist Trailer: means a trailer capable of o Maximum one (1) per lot being used for the temporary living, o Maximum 3.2 m height and maximum sleeping or eating accommodation of length 6 m persons notwithstanding that its running gear is or may be removed Agricultural and Rural: Tourist Vehicle: means any self-propelled Larger RVs, trailers and boats may be parked vehicle including a bus, motor home, truck and stored on areas other than a driveway, or van, which is equipped for the subject to the setbacks of the zone temporary living, sleeping or eating accommodation of persons. For the Industrial: purposes of this By-law, "Tourist Vehicle" shall include a Tourist Trailer. Permitted in SM as accessory to RV sales, rental and service establishment Trailer: means any vehicle so constructed o Rear or interior side yard that it is suitable for being attached to a motor vehicle for the purpose of being o 18 m street line setback drawn or propelled by the motor vehicle o 4.5 maximum height and is capable of being used for the transport of goods, materials, equipment or o Minimum 2.75 m opaque fencing livestock notwithstanding that such vehicle Maximum area lesser of 30% lot area or 2x ground is jacked up or that its running gear is floor area of main building removed. D.M. Wills Associates Limited Page 8 Project Number 21-85154 Page 212 Clarington Staff 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: June 28, 2021 Report Number: PDS-040-21 Submitted By: Ryan Windle, Director of Planning and Development Services Reviewed By: Andrew C. Allison, CAO Resolution#: File Number: PLN34.5.2.13; HPA2021-001 By-law Number: Report Subject: Request to Repeal Designation By-law; 4478 Highway 35/115 Recommendations: 1. That Report PDS-040-21 be received; 2. That Council refuse the application to repeal the heritage designation By-law 97-17 for the property located at 4478 Highway 35/115-1 3. That a copy of Council's resolution be sent to the Ministry of Heritage, Sport, Tourism, and Culture Industries, the Association of Municipalities of Ontario, the Insurance Bureau of Canada, and Ontario Heritage Trust; and 4. That all interested parties listed in Report PDS-040-21 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. Page 213 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-040-21 Report Overview Page 2 The Planning and Development Services Department received a request from the property owner of 4478 Highway 35/115 requesting to repeal the heritage designation By-law 97-17 on their property as a result of insurance premium costs attributed to the designation, and implications for resale value. In accordance with the provisions of the Ontario Heritage Act, the Municipality has 90 days to make a decision on this request. The Clarington Heritage Committee (CHC) was consulted on the request, and the property owner was invited to attend the June 15 CHC meeting to speak to the request to repeal the heritage designation. Planning and Development Services staff has also reached out to different sources to better understand the insurance matters. Notwithstanding the owner's rationale for repeal, property devaluation and insurance issues, the owner has not provided any challenges to the cultural heritage value of the property. Planning and Development Services staff and the CHC recommend Council refuse the owner's request to repeal the designation on the property as the attributes that account for the property's cultural heritage value or interest as detailed in the designation By-law continue to warrant designation under the Ontario Heritage Act and the property remains significant to Clarington's cultural heritage fabric. 1. Background Ontario Heritage Act Process 1.1 The Planning and Development Services Department received a request from the owner of the property at 4478 Highway 35/115 to repeal the heritage designation By-law 97-17 as a result of insurance premiums related premium costs attributed to the designation, and the potential affect of the heritage designation on the potential resale value of the property. 1.2 The subject property is designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act (OHA). In accordance with Subsection 32(1) of the OHA, an owner may apply to Council to repeal a designating by-law. Council has up to 90 days to render a decision on the application. 1.3 Specifically, the OHA provides for a Decision of Council in Subsection 32(2) stating after consultation with its municipal heritage committee, where one is established, the Council shall consider an application under subsection (1) and within 90 days of receipt thereof shall (a) refuse the application and cause notice of its decision to be given to the owner of the property and the Trust; or (b) consent to the application, and cause notice of the intention to be served on the owner and the Trust. 1.4 The OHA does provide for an extension of the 90-day timeframe to make a decision on the application where it is agreed upon by the applicant and Council. Page 214 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-040-21 Page 3 1.5 The Ontario Heritaae Toolkit for Desianatina Heritaae Properties under the OHA addresses situations in which the owner has applied to repeal a designation by-law. As properties are designated to protect and conserve them for future generations, the repeal of a designation by-law is a serious matter that should be given careful consideration. Bill 108 Changes to the Ontario Heritage Act 1.6 The Bill 108 changes to the OHA, and accompanying regulations, are scheduled to be proclaimed and come into effect on July 1, 2021. As this application was submitted prior to July 1, 2021, the transition provisions provide for the request to be considered under the existing process established under Subsection 32 of the OHA, as noted above. However, as of June 1, 2021 the Conservation Review Board (CRB) which traditionally heard objections for OHA matters has been incorporated into the newly created Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT), along with the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal. As such, any objections related to on -going current applications under the OHA would be heard by the Ontario Land Tribunal. However, it is Staffs understanding that any appeal of current in process applications would follow the existing process whereby the OLT (acting as the CRB) would provide a non -binding recommendation to local Council. Designation and History of 4478 Highway 35/115 1.7 The current owner of the property requested the property be designated in 1997. The process to determine the cultural heritage value and interest of the property was undertaken to ensure it met the requirements for designation under the OHA. At that time, the CHC was known as the LACAC (Local Architectural Conservation Advisory Committee). It was LACAC's practice to work closely with the property owners, undertaking consultation beyond what was required by the OHA at the time. 1.8 By-law 97-17 (Attachment 2) describes the heritage home at 4478 Highway 35/115 as an Italianate house dating to 1880, built for G.M. Long, who ran a General Store in Orono and served on the Orono Town Council. The Italianate composition is characterized by its low-pitched hipped roof, wide overhanging eaves, buff -brick hood mouldings, and heavily carved wooden brackets. The By-law identifies several exterior and interior architectural features as attributes that contribute to the property's cultural heritage value or interest in support of the designation. 1.9 In 2008, the property owners approached the Municipality about issues they were experiencing in insuring the home. After undertaking research and providing the insurance companies additional information through correspondence with the owner, staff understands a policy was secured that met the property owner's needs. Planning and Development Services files indicate it was determined at that time that the age of the home, rather than the designation, was the factor in determining the cost of the insurance. Page 215 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-040-21 Page 4 1.10 The owner has not provided any information disputing the Reasons for Designation of the cultural heritage value of the property. Figure 1: Photo of 4478 Highway 35/115 2. Discussion Ontario Heritage Act 2.1 Subsection 32(1) of the OHA provides that an owner of property designated under Part IV may apply to the Council of the municipality to repeal the By-law or part thereof. Repeal of the designation, or a portion of the designation By-law, would not be in keeping with the overall conservation intent of the Ontario Heritage Act as there have been no alterations or other changes to the property that have diminished or otherwise impaired the cultural heritage value of the property or the attributes specified in the Reasons for Designation. The subject property meets the criteria of Ontario Regulation 9106 — Criteria for Determining Cultural Heritage Value or Interest. Insuring Heritage Homes 2.2 The property owner contacted Planning and Development Services staff in 2020 to inquire about removing the heritage designation from their home, again due to rising insurance costs and a struggle to secure a suitable policy. Page 216 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-040-21 Page 5 2.3 Staff provided information to the homeowner regarding insuring heritage homes available from the Ministry of Heritage, Sport, Tourism and Cultural Industries and the Insurance Bureau of Canada to clarify the insurance requirements for designated dwellings. 2.4 Information from the Ministry (Attachment 3) indicates the heritage designation does not require the homeowner to restore the building to its original appearance. It further states the premiums should not go up as a result of a heritage designation; and identifies other reasons that may cause an increase in insurance premiums for older buildings where there is a high level of risk (e.g. out -dated wiring, old heating systems). It is noted some companies do not insure buildings over a certain age whether the building is designated or not. 2.5 The Insurance Bureau of Canada's website acknowledges owning a heritage property is an investment in Canada's history and community stewardship, and provides tips for insuring a heritage or designated property which include: • Shop around: Find an insurer to who understands the specific risks associated with a heritage property; • Consider the claims settlement process and the deductible options for the property; • Reduce risk: Take steps to protect the property and reduce the chance of making a claim. The cost of insurance is directly related to risk; by reducing risk, you may be able to lower your premiums; • Keep accurate records: Current maintenance and renovation records help insurers make informed decisions; • Document unique characteristics: Record and photograph 2.6 The Insurance Bureau of Canada also provides information that would apply in the event a heritage property is damaged. The insurer determines the replacement cost of the home (i.e. what it would cost to rebuild). Factors that may affect replacement costs are identified and include Planning approvals, by-laws, distinctive features and superior craftsmanship associated with heritage homes, as well as potential contaminants that may be in historic building materials. It is important the homeowner understands property insurance options and knows what they want their coverage to do. 2.7 In May 2021, Planning and Development Services staff provided a letter to the property owner to send to insurance companies to clarify that in the event of the loss of a listed or designated building, the owner is not required to rebuild or replicate the original building. While insurance companies may provide insurance to replace homes in "like kind and quality", this is not enforced through the Ontario Heritage Act, and not a requirement of the Municipality. Page 217 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-040-21 Page 6 2.8 The owner of 4478 Highway 35/115 advised staff they provided the letter to their insurance company. However, they have not yet been able to secure a suitable quote to renew their policy once it expires in September. As such, they have opted to pursue the request to repeal the designation and submitted a formal request on May 5, 2021. Property Value 2.9 The owner has indicated that real estate agents have informed them that due to the designation the resale value of the property could be adversely affected. However, various studies have shown that the resale value of properties is not adversely impacted by heritage designation. A study of almost 3,000 properties in 24 Ontario communities, published in 2000, by Dr. Robert Shipley, concluded that "heritage designation could not be shown to have a negative impact [on property value]", and heritage properties "generally perform well in the market, with 74% doing average or better than average". 2.9 There has been no decrease in the subject property's value since designation in 1997. In fact, Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) records, indicate that the property's value has increased as the same rate as surrounding properties. Clarington Heritage Committee 2.10 In accordance with the provisions of the OHA, the CHC was consulted on the subject repeal request. Staff advised the CHC of the receipt of the request at its May 2021 meeting as part of new business. The matter was considered at the CHC's June 15, 2021 meeting. The property owner attended on June 15 to speak to their application. 2.11 The property owner explained to the CHC the reasons for their request to de -designate their home due to challenges they have encountered securing reasonable insurance coverage. This has been the case despite contacting several insurance companies and providing them with the information about insuring heritage homes provided by staff. Specifically, the CHC heard quotes for policies would increase substantially once the home was identified as heritage, and in some cases, the property owner was advised the providers no longer insure heritage homes at all. Although not their primary concern, the owners also noted they had been advised by a real estate agent that a heritage designation on a home may adversely affect resale value. 2.12 CHC members asked the property owner questions relating to any improvements they have undertaken to upkeep their home, inquired as to whether the home had been used for anything other than a residence, and provided information relating to such matters that may assist the owner with obtaining suitable coverage. The property owner advised they have routinely undertaken maintenance and improvements as recommended by their insurance provider. Page 218 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-040-21 Page 7 2.13 Planning and Development Services staff requested ARA, the Municipality's cultural heritage consultant, to conduct a street view site visit of the property as part of the review of the request to repeal. An ARA representative attended the CHC meeting and was able to confirm the home appears to retain its exterior cultural heritage attributes as outlined in the designation by-law. 2.14 CHC members indicated at the time of designation of the property in 1997, the proper process was followed, and the Municipality and LACAC members worked closely with the homeowner to designate the home. The historical attributes identified by the designation by-law are still intact, and the CHC considers the property to retain its cultural heritage value. As such, the property should remain designated by by-law. 2.15 While CHC members acknowledged there is an issue with insuring heritage homes, and expressed empathy towards the homeowner and their experience, Committee members recognized the CHC's mandate to ensure Clarington's cultural heritage value is conserved. They noted any recommendation from the CHC in a case such as this should be based upon whether the home retains its cultural heritage significance and should continue to be protected. Consideration of economic components is outside the scope of the CHC. 2.16 Taking into consideration the discussion and dialogue with the owners, the CHC passed the following Motion 21.28 at its June 15, 2021 meeting: "That the CHC has reviewed the designation By-law 90-17 for 4478 Highway 35/115 and finds it to be still valid, and therefore recommends to Council that the property should remain designated. However, the CHC also requests that in the event Council decides to approve the request to repeal the designation by-law for 4478 Highway 35/115, that the property remain on the Municipal Register as a non -designated property." The meeting minutes are draft until ratified by the CHC at their next meeting. As per Council protocol the draft minutes will be submitted for the Council agenda on July 5. Planning and Development Services Staff Comments 2.17 A request to repeal a heritage designation by-law to de -designate a property is not common in Clarington. As noted in subsection 1.5 above, such a request is serious and must be considered carefully. To staff's knowledge, the only designation by-laws that have been repealed to date, include the former Rickaby's building in downtown Bowmanville after the building was destroyed by fire in 2008, and two properties along the Highway 407 corridor that were subject to the Environmental Assessment and had Cultural Heritage Evaluation Reports fully documenting their attributes prior to demolition by the Province. Page 219 Municipality of Clarington Page 8 Report PDS-040-21 2.18 As part of the review of the request, staff undertook research to better understand this matter. The challenge obtaining insurance for a heritage home is not unique to Clarington, nor is it new. The issue has been the topic of recent news articles that identify the high cost of building materials caused by the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic as a factor exacerbating the challenges heritage homeowners encounter securing suitable property insurance. In certain instances, insurance companies are changing their corporate policies to no longer insure heritage homes. 2.19 Staff reached out to several owners of designated heritage properties on this matter, and generally found they have not had issues obtaining reasonable insurance policies. However, it is noted in all cases the owners had a long history with their provider and had not made a claim. As part of their consideration of the request, a CHC member also contacted a major insurance provider, and was advised the company no longer offered insurance on designated heritage homes due to government agency approvals associated with repairs. 2.20 Staff also spoke with an insurance broker who indicated while there are options, it is becoming more difficult to insure old or heritage homes. This can become an issue when homeowners switch insurance companies. Further, some insurance companies have advised they are no longer insuring heritage homes, as was noted above. 2.21 The information uncovered through the research indicates the matter of insuring older homes, including designated heritage homes, is complex and dependent upon consideration of myriad of factors that are unique to each property. While it appears there exists insurance providers willing to offer suitable policies for heritage homes, it seems to take a great deal of effort on the part of the homeowner to research and shop around for a policy that is suitable at a reasonable cost. This is a matter that should be considered by the Province. 2.22 Planning and Development Services staff appreciates the difficulty the homeowner has experienced as there does appear to be misalignment between the requirements of the OHA, and laws and regulations by which insurance providers must abide. This issue appears to be centered upon the replacement cost of heritage homes and attributes with materials of like kind and quality. However, staff must review the request to repeal a designation by-law in the context of the Province's direction pursuant to the OHA, and the prescribed criteria for establishing cultural heritage value or interest. 2.23 Planning and Development Services staff has reviewed the property owner's request to de -designate the property by repeal of By-law 97-17, and recommends that the request for repeal of the designation be refused based upon the following considerations: (i) The Municipality encourages the conservation and protection of significant historic resources through the Clarington Official Plan; Page 220 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-040-21 Page 9 (ii) The cultural heritage attributes identified in the designation by-law are still intact. The subject property retains its cultural heritage value and remains significant to the community. The designation by-law is still valid; (iii) The designation of a property under the Ontario Heritage Act is based upon the heritage merit of the property. The criteria for establishing cultural heritage value or interest does not include consideration of insurance and/or financial/economic factors; (iv) The de -designation of a heritage property based on the cost of insurance and potential resale value would undermine and erode the efforts of the CHC and the Municipality to conserve and protect Clarington's cultural heritage resources for the long-term. Further, such action could establish a precedent for using such costs to justify de -designation of other heritage properties. Next Steps 2.24 As part of its discussion, CHC identified this matter as a topic of interest for its Public Education and Outreach subcommittee. Staff will encourage the CHC to explore opportunities to provide relevant information to heritage property owners, and to better inform insurance providers about the requirements of insuring a heritage home. Also, real estate representatives will be provided with links to the research carried out on the property values of heritage homes. 2.25 The Ministry of Heritage, Sport, Tourism and Culture Industries is currently undertaking consultation through the Environmental Registry of Ontario (ERO) on updates to the OHA Toolkit following the amendments to the OHA made under Bill 108. Staff is undertaking a review of the proposed updates and will take the opportunity to bring the matter of insurance and property values to the attention of the Province as part of staff's comments. The ERO posting for consultation on the updates to the Toolkit closes on July 1st. 2.26 Following a decision by Council, notice of the decision will be sent to interested parties, and staff would carry out the process prescribed under the OHA. Staff also recommends providing a copy of this report to the Ministry, and the Insurance Bureau of Canada. 3. Concurrence Not Applicable. Page 221 Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-040-21 4. Conclusion Page 10 4.1 Staff conclude that the property located at 4478 Highway 35/115 satisfies the criteria categories of Design or Physical Value and Contextual Value, and has some associative cultural history value. It continues to be of cultural heritage value, sufficient for the property to remain designated under the Ontario Heritage Act. 4.2 The owner of the property known as 4478 Highway 35/115 submitted a request to repeal designation By-law 97-17 applicable to the property. The CHC considered the matter at its June 15, 2021 meeting, at which the owner attended to speak to the request. 4.3 In accordance with the OHA, the designation of a property is based upon cultural heritage value or interest. The de -designation of a property due to insurance and resale considerations does not fulfill the intent of the OHA and has the potential to establish a precarious precedent for the Municipality. 4.4 It is respectfully recommended that Council refuse the application to repeal the heritage designation By-law 97-17 for the property located at 4478 Highway 35/115 and that interested parties be notified as required. Staff Contact: Sarah Allin, Planner II, 905-623-3379 x 2419 or sallin@clarington.net. Attachments: Attachment 1 — Location Map and Aerial Photo of 4478 Highway 35/115 Attachment 2 — Designation By-law 97-017 for 4478 Highway 35/115 Attachment 3 — Information Sheet from Ministry Re: Insuring Heritage Homes Interested Parties: List of Interested Parties available from Department. Page 222 .t Attachment 2 to Report PDS-040-21 s� THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BY-LAW #97-17 being a by-law to designate the property known for municipal purposes as 4478 Highway 35/115, Part Lot 29, Concession 4, former Township of Clarke, now in the Municipality of Clarington as a property of historic or architectural value or interest under the Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter 0.18 WHEREAS the Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O. 1990, C.0.18 authorizes the council of the municipality to enact by-laws to designate properties to be of historic or architectural value or interest for the purposes of the Act; and WHEREAS the Council of The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington has caused to be served upon the owner of the property known for municipal purposes as 4478 Highway 35/115, Orono and upon the Ontario Heritage Foundation, Notice of Intention to Designate the aforesaid real property and has caused such Notice of Intention to be published in the Orono Times, a newspaper having general circulation in the area of the designation on December 4, 1996; and WHEREAS the reasons for the designation of the aforesaid property under the Ontario Heritage Act are contained in Schedule "A" attached to and forming part of this by-law; and WHEREAS the Local Architectural Conservation Advisory Committee of the Municipality of Clarington has recommended that the property known for municipal purposes as 4478 Highway 35/115, Orono be designated as a property of historic or architectural value or interest under the Ontario Heritage Act; and WHEREAS no notice of objection to the proposed designation was served upon the Clerk within the period prescribed by the Ontario Heritage Act; NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: The property known for municipal purposes as 4478 Highway 35/115, Orono which is more particularly described in Schedule "B" which is attached to and forms part of this by-law, is hereby designated as a property which has historic or architectural value or interest under Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O. 1990, C.0.18. 2. The Solicitor for the Municipality of Clarington is hereby authorized to cause a copy of this by-law to be registered against the title to the property described in Schedule "B" hereto. 3. The Clerk is hereby authorized to cause a copy of this by-law to be served upon the owner of the property described in Schedule "B" hereto and on the Ontario Heritage Foundation. The Clerk also is authorized to cause notice of the passing of this by-law to be published in the Orono Times, a newspaper having general circulation in the area of the designation. By-law read a first and second time this 27th day of January 1997. By-law read a third time and finally passed this 27th day of January 1997. Page 224 SCHEDULE "A" TO BY-LAW #97-17 This Italianate house was built in 1880 for G.M. Long. Long ran a general store in Orono, was a leader of the Methodist choir and served on the Orono Town Council. Its Italianate composition is evident through its low-pitched hipped roof, wide overhanging eaves, buff -brick hood mouldings and heavily carved wooden brackets. It is recommended for designation under the Ontario Heritage Act for the following architectural features: Exterior • the original brick facade • the buff -brick hood -moulding and window trim • the heavily carved eave brackets • the paired window brackets • the original front verandah Interior • the wooden baseboards, wainscotting, door and window trim • the pine floors • the living room plaster cornicing and medallion • the staircase with its newel post, railing and decorative scrolls • the double front door with its arched windows and transom Page 225 r� • Ontario Insurance and Heritage Properties Will heritage designation make my property insurance premiums go up? Your premiums should not go up as a result of a heritage designation. A variety of other reasons cause insurance companies to increase premiums for older buildings if there is a higher level of risk, such as services (out -dated wiring, old heating systems, etc.). In fact, some companies do not insure buildings over a certain age. Designation itself, however, does not place additional requirements on the insurer and therefore should not affect your premiums. What happens if a building is destroyed by fire, or some other accident? Would it have to be rebuilt as it was? The intent of designation is to preserve the historic, physical, contextual or other community heritage value of a property. If a building on a heritage property is completely or partially destroyed, the designation by-law does not oblige the owner to replicate any lost heritage attributes. A replacement building, for example, can be of a different design. What if I want the original features of my property to be replicated in case of damage? If this is what you want, make sure you're properly covered. Insurance coverage for this depends on the degree of risk you and your insurance company are prepared to share. The age, quality and condition of your building will affect what coverage is available and the premium charged. "Replacement cost" coverage requires prior insurance appraisal of the building. It generally provides for the property to be repaired or replaced with like kind and quality up to the amount stated in the policy. If available, guaranteed replacement cost coverage can provide for replication of original historical detailing and other important features that have been lost or damaged — whether or not a property is designated. Some insurance companies even offer a special type of "by-law endorsement" coverage. If you have a designated property, it is advisable to share your designation by-law with your insurer in order to be certain that heritage attributes are properly covered by your policy. You can also obtain coverage for "actual cash value" (ACV). The ACV is the calculated cost of replacing the property with something of like kind after taking depreciation into account. When you arrange the insurance, be sure to speak with your insurance representative about the basis of your claims settlement. It is important to understand what you can expect if the building were to be completely or partially destroyed by an insured peril. As with any insurance plan, it's best to research the various insurance providers in order to find the most competitive rate and best service from your insurer. If you have further questions, you can contact the Insurance Bureau of Canada Consumer Information Centre at 416-362-9528 or 1-800-387- 2880 (Direct Lines) Consumer Officer(s) available Mon. to Fri. 8:00 am to 6:00 pm. Voice mail is available 24hr. Attachment 3 to Report PDS-040-21 August 2012 What is heritage designation? Designation is a way for owners to express pride in the heritage value of their property, and for the community to protect and promote awareness of its local history. The Ontario Heritage Act enables municipalities to designate properties of cultural heritage value or interest through a by-law. Designation can apply to individual properties or to a whole neighbourhood or district. If a property or district is designated, it gains public recognition as well as protection from demolition or unsympathetic alteration so that the heritage attributes of the property can be conserved. If my property is designated, do I have to restore the property to its original design or appearance? Heritage designation does not require you to restore your building to its original appearance. The designation by-law identifies the heritage attributes that are considered important, and council approval is required for changes that will affect those attributes. If you want to restore any lost or missing features, you should discuss your project first with the Municipal Heritage Committee or appointed municipal staff person. They can best advise on the proposed work and its likely impact on your property — especially if this involves the removal of any important feature from a later period. Do I need permission for general maintenance? General maintenance work, such as repainting of exterior trim, replacement or repairs to an existing asphalt roof, or alterations and repairs to property features that are not covered by the designation by-law do not usually require heritage approvals. However, you may still need a building permit. Check with your local building department. Who decides whether the work is acceptable or not? Council is responsible for deciding on applications for a heritage permit, unless this power has been delegated to municipal staff. Normally the Municipal Heritage Committee will review applications for changes to the property and provides advice to staff and council. Staff and committee members can advise you on how to ensure that the changes you want to make won't detract from the property's heritage attributes. Page 226 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE RESOLUTION #: DATE June 28, 2021 MOVED BY Councillor Hooper SECONDED BY Whereas the Province of Ontario identifies the conservation of features of significant cultural and historical value as a matter of Provincial interest, and Provincial policy directs municipalities to conserve significant cultural heritage resources; And Whereas the Ontario Heritage Act governs the processes by which cultural heritage resources are protected for the long-term, requires municipalities to maintain a Municipal Register, and empowers municipalities to designate by by-law properties having cultural heritage value or interest to fulfill the intent of the Province's mandate; And Whereas the Insurance Bureau of Canada recognizes the value of owning and preserving cultural heritage resources as part of Canada's history; And Whereas there appears to be misalignment and misconception between the requirements of designated heritage property owners under the Ontario Heritage Act, regulations governing insurance providers, and the policies and practices thereof as they relate to the replacement cost of designated heritage homes with materials and craftsmanship of like kind and quality; And Whereas this potential misalignment or misconception of such replacement requirements by insurance providers creates a situation where some homeowners of designated heritage properties have indicated they have difficulty obtaining suitable property insurance coverage at a reasonable cost in order to continue as stewards of our communities' significant cultural heritage resources, which often are private residences; And Whereas the Insurance Bureau of Canada and the Minister of Finance through the Financial Services Regulatory Authority of Ontario administers rules and regulations governing property insurance matters; Page 227 Now therefore be it resolved: That the Municipality of Clarington requests the Minister of Heritage, Tourism, Sport, and Cultural Industries to engage in meaningful dialogue with the Minister of Finance and the Insurance Bureau of Canada to initiate a review to address and ensure alignment between the requirements of the Ontario Heritage Act, the regulations governing insurance providers, and the policies and practices thereof, in order to better support, rather than penalize, owners of designated heritage properties, who act as stewards of the Province's significant cultural heritage resources throughout communities across Ontario; and That as a part of the Province's actions to address this matter, municipal heritage committees be invited to engage as stakeholders; and That a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Honourable Doug Ford, Premier of Ontario, Lindsey Park, MPP (Durham), David Piccini, MPP (Northumberland - Peterborough South); and That a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Association of Municipalities of Ontario. Page 228 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE RESOLUTION #: DATE June 28, 2021 MOVED BY Councillor Neal SECONDED BY Be it resolved that the ad hoc committee for the resolution of Camp 30 meet with the developer over the summer 2021 to attempt to resolve the matter by August 31, 2021. Page 229