HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/24/2016Final
clffftwn
Planning and Development
Committee
Agenda
Date: October 24, 2016
Time: 7:00 PM
Place: Council Chambers, 2nd Floor
Municipal Administrative Centre
40 Temperance Street
Bowmanville, Ontario
Inquiries & Accommodations: For inquiries about this agenda, or to
make arrangements for accessibility accommodations for persons attending, please
contact: Michelle Chambers, Committee Coordinator, at 905-623-3379, ext. 2106 or by
email at mchambers(o)_clarington.net.
Alternate Format: If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact
the Accessibility Coordinator, at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131.
Audio Record: The Municipality of Clarington makes an audio record of General
Government Committee meetings. If you make a delegation or presentation at a
General Government Committee meeting, the Municipality will be audio recording you
and will make the recording public by publishing the recording on the Municipality's
website.
Noon Recess: Please be advised that, as per the Municipality of Clarington's
Procedural By-law, this meeting will recess at 12:00 noon, for a one hour lunch break,
unless otherwise determined by the Committee.
Cell Phones: Please ensure all cell phones, mobile and other electronic devices are
turned off or placed on non -audible mode during the meeting.
Copies of Reports are available at www.clarington.net
CIarifl#oII Planning and Development Committee Agenda
1 Call to Order
2 New Business — Introduction
3 Adopt the Agenda
4 Declaration of Interest
5 Announcements
6 Adoption of Minutes of Previous Meeting
6.1 Minutes of a Regular Meeting of October 3, 2016
6.2 Minutes of a Special Meeting of October 4, 2016
7 Public Meetings
No Public Meetings
8 Delegations
Date: October 24, 2016
Time: 7:00 PM
Place: Council Chambers
Page 4
Page 15
8.1 Libby Racansky Regarding Report PSD -059-16, Municipal Comments on the
Co-ordinated Review of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, the
Greenbelt Plan, and the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan
8.2 Eleanor von Gunten Regarding Addendum to Report PSD 038-16, Municipally -Initiated
Zoning By-law Amendment for Properties Fronting on Tooley Road in Courtice
8.3 Warren Hung Regarding Report PSD -059-16, Municipal Comments on the
Co-ordinated Review of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, the
Greenbelt Plan, and the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan
9 Communications - Receive for Information
9.1 Co-ordinated Debi A. Wilcox, Regional Clerk/Director of Legislative Page 19
Review Services, The Regional Municipality of Durham —
Response Durham Region's Response to the Co-ordinated Review
of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe,
Greenbelt Plan and Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation
Plan
Page 2
CIarifl#oII Planning and Development Committee Agenda
Date: October 24, 2016
Time: 7:00 PM
Place: Council Chambers
10 Communications — Direction
10.1 Extension for Andrew Gumbinger — Request to Extend the Use of
Use of Temporary Living Quarters at 2830 Solina Road,
Temporary Darlington
Living Quarters
(Motion to approve the six month
extension for the use of temporary living
quarters at 2830 Solina Road, subject to
signing a further Letter of Undertaking.)
11 Presentations
No Presentations
12 Planning Services Department Reports
Page 49
12.1 PSD -059-16 Municipal Comments on the Co-ordinated Review of the Page 51
Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, the
Greenbelt Plan, and the Oak Ridges Moraine
Conservation Plan
12.2 PSD -061-16 An application for Removal of (H) Holding Symbol for 6 Page 62
Residential Lots
13 New Business — Consideration
14 Unfinished Business
14.1 Addendum to Municipally -Initiated Zoning By-law Amendment for
Report Properties Fronting on Tooley Road in Courtice
PSD -038-16 [Tabled from the May 24, 2106 Council Meeting]
15 Confidential Reports
No Reports
16 Adjournment
Page 3
Clarftwn
Planning and Development Committee
Minutes
October 3, 2016
Minutes of a meeting of the Planning and Development Committee held on Monday,
October 3, 2016 at 7:00 PM in the Council Chambers.
Present Were: Mayor A. Foster, Councillor S. Cooke, Councillor R. Hooper, Councillor
J. Neal, Councillor W. Partner, Councillor C. Traill, Councillor W. Woo
Staff Present: C. Clifford, D. Crome, L. Benson, C. Salazar, C. Pellarin, J. Gallagher,
M. Chambers
1 Call to Order
Councillor Woo called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM.
2 New Business — Introduction
Councillor Neal added a new business item, regarding notification to property owners
who will have an environmentally protected (EP) designation placed on their property, to
the New Business — Consideration section of the agenda.
3 Adopt the Agenda
Resolution #PD -135-16
Moved by Councillor Partner, seconded by Councillor Cooke
That the Agenda for the Planning and Development Committee meeting of October 6,
2016 be adopted with the addition of a New Business item regarding notification to
property owners who will have an environmentally protected (EP) designation placed on
their property.
Carried
4 Declarations of Interest
Councillor Neal declared an interest in Report PSD -057-16 regarding the Implementation
of the Courtice Main Street Secondary Plan — Draft Zoning By-law.
Councillor Partner declared an interest in the delegation and Communication Item 10.2
from Sandra Harrop regarding a request for an amendment to the zoning by-law to
permit a dog daycare.
Later in the meeting, Councillor Hooper declared an interest in the delegation of Lynn
Stillwell, Byron Faretis and James Grimley, Wilmot Creek Homeowners Association,
Regarding the Status of the Petition, Proposed Resolution, and the Ontario Municipal
Board Appeal.
-1-
0
Clarftwn Planning and Development Committee
Minutes
October 3, 2016
5 Announcements
Members of Committee announced upcoming community events and matters of
community interest.
6 Adoption of Minutes of Previous Meeting
Resolution #PD -136-16
Moved by Councillor Hooper, seconded by Councillor Traill
That the minutes of the regular meeting of the Planning and Development Committee,
held on September 12, 2016, be approved.
Carried
7 Public Meetings
7.1 Application for a Proposed Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment and
for a Proposed Plan of Subdivision
Applicant: 2399263 Ontario Limited (Matanda Homes)
Report: PSD -056-16
Anne Taylor Scott, Senior Planner, made a verbal and electronic presentation to the
Committee regarding the application.
No one spoke in opposition to the application.
No one spoke in support of the application.
Michael Paradisi, KLM Planning Partners Inc., was present on behalf of the applicant.
Mr. Paradisi advised the Committee that they are in agreement with the
recommendations contained in the Staff Report and offered to answer any questions
from the Committee.
7.2 Application for a Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment for the Courtice Main
Street Secondary Plan
Report: PSD -057-16
Councillor Neal declared an interest in Report PSD -057-16 regarding the Implementation
of the Courtice Main Street Secondary Plan — Draft Zoning By-law as it relates to his law
practice. Councillor Neal left the room and refrained from discussion and voting on this
matter.
Paul Wirch, Planner II, made a verbal and electronic presentation to the Committee
regarding the application.
-2-
5
Cladwwn Planning and Development Committee
Minutes
October 3, 2016
Beth Kelly, Halloway Holdings Ltd., spoke to the application. Ms. Kelly explained to the
Committee that Halloway Holdings Ltd. owns 15 acres in the area. She added that they
have been working with Staff and a potential purchaser for approximately a year. Ms.
Kelly noted that they are close to having a site plan agreement in place and they are
concerned that there will be new regulations placed on their property as a result of the
Courtice Main Street Secondary Plan. She added that Bryce Jordan from GHD has
submitted correspondence to the Planning Department and Members of Council outlining
their concerns. Ms. Kelly concluded by asking to be permitted continue working with
Staff and offered to answer any questions.
There were no other speakers to the application, either in support or in opposition.
Councillor Neal returned to the meeting.
Recess
Resolution #PD -137-16
Moved by Councillor Partner, seconded by Councillor Cooke
That the Committee recess for five minutes.
Carried
The meeting reconvened at 7:40 PM.
8 Delegations
8.1 Peter Thorne Regarding a Request to Waive the 5% Cash -In -Lieu of Parkland
for a Consent Application
Peter Thorne was present regarding a request to waive the 5% cash -in -lieu of parkland
for a consent application. He made a verbal presentation to accompany an electronic
presentation. Mr. Thorne advised the Committee that he owns the property located at
210 King Avenue West in Newcastle and provided a description of the property and the
surrounding lands. He explained that, when he applied for the land severance, he was
advised that a requirement would be to dedicate a portion of land to be valley lands. Mr.
Thorne explained that he originally intended to develop the land to the west of their home
and with the severance they are required to give up a portion of their land to be used to
continue the Lions Trail. He added that if his neighbours to the west decided to sever
their land they would not be required to donate any portion to the Municipality. Mr.
Thorne noted that he has accepted the dedication of lands however he is still concerned
with the 5% cash -in -lieu of parkland. He stated that the dedication of land will affect the
value of his home as potential purchasers do not want to purchase a home so close to a
trail or parkland. Mr. Thorne continued by advising Committee in addition to donating
close to 25% of his property, they are responsible for paying for a surveyor and for the
5% for cash -in -lieu of parkland for the severed lot. He explained that his property was
dedicated as a heritage property in 1995 and he was happy to restore the home to keep
-3-
A•
Clarftwn Planning and Development Committee
Minutes
October 3, 2016
with the designation. Mr. Thorne continued by explaining that this land will connect to
the valley and a future trail that will run near his home and this may lead to abuse of the
trail and potential trespassing. He added that once this land is severed and assessed he
could be responsible for paying approximately $15,000 for the cash -in -lieu of parkland.
Mr. Thorne concluded by asking for the 5% cash -in -lieu of parkland be waived and
offered to answer questions from the Committee.
Suspend the Rules
Resolution #PD -138-16
Moved by Councillor Partner, seconded by Councillor Traill
That the Rules of Procedure be suspended to allow the delegation of Peter Thorne to be
extended for an additional minute.
Carried
Mr. Thorne summarized his delegation, thanked the members of Committee, and offered
to answer any questions.
Resolution #PD -139-16
Moved by Councillor Partner, seconded by Councillor Neal
That the request from Peter Thorne to waive the 5% cash -in -lieu of parkland for a
consent application for 210 King Avenue West, Newcastle, be approved.
Motion Lost
Resolution #PD -140-16
Moved by Councillor Neal, seconded by Councillor Hooper
That the Municipality of Clarington pay a portion for the surveying cost for the proposed
trail and the creation of a new lot at 210 King Street West, Newcastle, to a maximum of
$2000.00, including HST.
Carried
8.2 Sandra Harrop Regarding a Request for an Amendment to the Zoning By-law
to Permit a Dog Daycare
Councillor Partner declared an interest in delegation of Sandra Harrop regarding a
request for an amendment to the Zoning By-law to permit a dog daycare as she runs a
similar business. Councillor Partner left the room and refrained from discussion and
voting on this matter.
Sandra Harrop was present regarding a request for an amendment to the Zoning By-law
to permit a dog daycare. Ms. Harrop advised the Committee that she currently has a
dog walking business and she is looking to open a dog daycare out of her home but this
-4-
Clarftwn Planning and Development Committee
Minutes
October 3, 2016
is not a permitted home business under the Zoning By-law. She explained that she is
looking a purchasing a new home in rural Clarington where she could run a small dog
daycare of 10 dogs or less. Ms. Harrop added that this daycare would have restricted
hours, limited numbers of dogs and limited length of stay. She noted that having this
type of business would allow for proper care, daily disinfection, less illness and provide a
safe environment for the dogs. Ms. Harrop requested that these types of businesses
should be licensed to ensure the standards are met and that the owners must live on
site. She added that several municipalities permit and license these this type of
business, including King Township. Ms. Harrop concluded by asking the Committee for
the Zoning By-law to be amended to permit a dog daycare as a home occupation.
Resolution #PD -141-16
Moved by Mayor Foster, seconded by Councillor Neal
That the delegation of Sandra Harrop, regarding a request for an amendment to the
Zoning By-law to permit a dog daycare, be referred to Staff to provide a report to a future
Planning and Development Committee meeting.
Carried
8.3 Lynn Stillwell and Byron Faretis, Wilmot Creek Homeowners Association,
Regarding the Status of the Petition, Proposed Resolution, and the Ontario
Municipal Board Appeal
Councillor Hooper declared an interest in delegation of Lynn Stillwell and Byron Faretis,
Wilmot Creek Homeowners Association (WCHA), Regarding the Status of the Petition,
Proposed Resolution, and the Ontario Municipal Board Appeal as his mother in law lives
in Wilmot Creek. Councillor Hooper left the room and refrained from discussion and
voting on this matter.
Lynn Stilwell, WCHA, was present regarding the status of the petition, proposed
resolution, and the Ontario Municipal Board Appeal. Ms. Stilwell advised the Committee
that the Homeowners Association is not opposed to development, but would like it to be
well-planned, strategic in focus, rational and reasonable. She explained that the WCHA
made a submission on September 12, 2016 and noted that they support the majority of
the changes to the Draft Official Plan Amendment and only have a few concerns. Ms.
Stilwell provided a description of the Wilmot Creek Adult Lifestyle Community and noted
that many of the activities are sponsored by the Association and run by volunteers. She
noted that the Homeowners Association has three main concerns with the Phase 8
Development of Wilmot Creek. Ms. Stillwell explained that they are concerned with the
size of the community and noted that there are approximately 560 existing units and Rice
Development is proposing an additional 300 units for Phase 8 and 327 units for Wilmot
Landing. She continued by stating that they are concerned with the safety of the bridge
that goes over the railway tracks and is asking for the municipality to review the
engineering study that was done earlier this year by CAPREIT prior to approving any
further development. Ms. Stilwell stated that the bridge will not be able to handle the
increased usage with the expanding population. She noted that their final concern is
-5-
0
Cladwwn Planning and Development Committee
Minutes
October 3, 2016
with the noise resulting from the 401 Highway and train whistle from the CN Railway.
Ms. Stilwell explained that Wilmot Creek supported the Draft Official Plan due to the fact
that it required a Secondary Plan. She continued by adding that they are concerned that
Rice Development has appealed the original application to the Ontario Municipal Board
and are looking for a commitment from Rice Development that they will include a
Secondary Plan in the approval process. Ms. Stilwell stating that they will obtain legal
representation at the pre -hearing if required. She concluded by stating that the majority
of the residents at Wilmot Creek do not support expansion. Ms. Stilwell offered to
answer questions from the Committee.
Councillor Partner returned to the meeting at 8:41 PM.
8.4 David Rice, Rice Developments, Regarding Wilmot Creek Phase 8 and the
Draft Amendment No. 107 to the Clarington Official Plan
Councillor Hooper declared an interest in delegation of David Rice, Rice Development,
regarding Wilmot Creek Phase 8 and the Draft Amendment No. 107 to the Clarington
Official Plan, as his mother in law lives in Wilmot Creek. Councillor Hooper left the room
and refrained from discussion and voting on this matter.
David Rice, Rice Developments, was present Regarding Wilmot Creek Phase 8 and the
Draft Amendment No. 107 to the Clarington Official Plan. Mr. Rice explained to the
Committee that he was present to clarify a few matters and answer any questions. He
noted that they have had many meetings with the Homeowners Association and feel that
progress has been made. Mr. Rice stated that they have applied for an Official Plan
Amendment, that has been appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board and the pre -hearing
is scheduled for October 18, 2016. He added that the pre -hearing will assist with
determining a date and potentially a settlement. Mr. Rice explained that they are hoping
to move forward on this development and they are willing to discuss a solution or
compromise that will satisfy all parties involved. He confirmed that a letter sent out to the
residents contained a reference to the old plan and he confirm that they will be going
forward with the new plan. Mr. Rice explained that they have committed to address
issues with the bridge and that the safety will not be compromised. He added that they
have also committed to conduct an engineering study on the bridge every two years. Mr.
Rice explained that with the existing application there is no requirement for a Secondary
Plan. He added that they do not have an issue with a Secondary Plan and noted that the
issues are not at the Official Plan level. Mr. Rice stated that they are willing to address
the Secondary Plan and the bridge issues prior to the October 18, 2016 pre -hearing. He
advised the Committee that their concern with committing to a Secondary Plan is that
there will be further delay. Mr. Rice stating that they are willing to agree to a Secondary
Plan if the Municipality agrees to give the plan priority for approval. He concluded by
offering to answer any questions.
E
Clarftwn Planning and Development Committee
Minutes
October 3, 2016
Resolution #PD -142-16
Moved by Councillor Neal, seconded by Councillor Traill
That the information received from the delegations regarding Wilmot Creek Phase 8, be
referred to the Municipal Solicitor to provide a report to the October 11, 2016 Council
meeting regarding the Municipality of Clarington strategy at the related OMB hearing.
Carried
Recess
Resolution #PD -143-16
Moved by Mayor Foster, seconded by Councillor Neal
That the Committee recess for 10 minutes.
Carried
The meeting reconvened at 9:53 PM.
Councillor Hooper returned to the meeting.
9 Communications - Receive for Information
10.1 Minutes of St. Marys Cement Community Relations Committee dated June 7,
2016
Resolution #PD -144-16
Moved by Councillor Partner, seconded by Councillor Hooper
That Communication Item 10.1, the minutes of St. Marys Cement Community Relations
Committee dated June 7, 2016 be received for information.
Carried
-7-
10
Clarftwn Planning and Development Committee
Minutes
October 3, 2016
10 Communications— Direction
10.1 Lisa Lyons, Town Clerk, The Corporation of the Town of Aurora —Ontario
Municipal Board (OMB) Reform Update
Resolution #PD -145-16
Moved by Councillor Partner, seconded by Councillor Traill
That the following Corporation of the Town of Aurora resolution, regarding the Ontario
Municipal Board (OMB) Reform Update, be endorsed by the Municipality of Clarington:
1. That Report No. CS16-020, and the attached Municipal Summit OMB Reform:
Process & Powers Recommendations, be received; and
2. That Council endorse the recommendation contained in Attachment 1 to Report
No. CS16-020, being:
a) That the jurisdiction of the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) be limited to
questions of law or process and, specifically, when considering appeals, that the
OMB be required to uphold any planning decision(s) of municipal councils unless
said decision(s) is contrary to the processes and rules set out in legislation; and
3. That a copy of the recommendation be sent to the Honourable Kathleen
Wynne, Premier of Ontario, the Honourable Bill Mauro, Minister of Municipal
Affairs, Mr. Patrick Brown, Leader of the Progressive Conservative Party, Ms.
Andrea Horwath, Leader of the New Democratic Party, and all Members of
Provincial Parliament in the Province of Ontario; and
4. That a copy of the recommendation be sent to the Association of Municipalities
of Ontario (AMO), all Ontario municipalities, and the York Regional Chair for their
consideration.
Carried
11
Clarftwn Planning and Development Committee
Minutes
October 3, 2016
10.2 Sandra Harrop Regarding a Request for an Amendment to the Zoning By-
law to Permit a Dog Daycare
Councillor Partner declared an interest in delegation of Sandra Harrop regarding a
request for an amendment to the Zoning By-law to permit a dog daycare as she runs a
similar business. Councillor Partner left the room and refrained from discussion and
voting on this matter.
Resolution #PD -146-16
Moved by Councillor Traill, seconded by Councillor Hooper
That Communication Item 10.2 from Sandra Harrop, regarding a request for an
amendment to the Zoning By-law to permit a dog daycare, be referred to the report
referenced in Agenda Item 8.2.
Carried
Councillor Partner returned to the meeting.
Councillor Neal left the meeting at 10:02 PM.
11 Planning Services Department Reports
11.1 PSD -056-16 Applications by 2399263 Ontario Limited (Matanda Homes) for
a 21 -unit Draft Plan of Subdivision in Courtice
Resolution #PD -147-16
Moved by Mayor Foster, seconded by Councillor Cooke
That Report PSD -056-16 be received;
That the proposed applications for Clarington Official Plan Amendment
(COPA2016-0002), Zoning By-law Amendment (ZBA2016-0013) and proposed Draft
Plan of Subdivision (S -C-2016-0002) submitted by 2399263 Ontario Limited (Matanda
Homes) continue to be processed including the preparation of a subsequent report; and
That all interested parties listed in Report PSD -056-16 and any delegations be advised
of Council's decision.
Carried
11.2 PSD -057-16 Implementation of the Courtice Main Street Secondary Plan —
Draft Zoning By-law
Councillor Neal declared an interest in Report PSD -057-16 regarding the Implementation
of the Courtice Main Street Secondary Plan — Draft Zoning By-law as it relates to his law
practice. Councillor Neal left the room and refrained from discussion and voting on this
matter.
-9-
12
Clarftwn Planning and Development Committee
Minutes
October 3, 2016
Resolution #PD -148-16
Moved by Councillor Cooke, seconded by Councillor Hooper
That Report PSD -057-16 be received;
That Staff consider the comments received at the Public Meeting in the further
processing of the Zoning By-law Amendment to implement the Courtice Main Street
Secondary Plan; and
That all interested parties listed in Report PSD -057-16 and any delegations be advised
of Council's decision.
Carried
Councillor Neal returned to the meeting at 10:21 PM.
11.3 PSD -058-16 Delegation of Site Plan Approval Authority for Applications in
the Oak Ridges Moraine to the Manager of Development Review
and Other Administrative Improvements
Resolution #PD -149-16
Moved by Mayor Foster, seconded by Councillor Neal
That Report PSD -058-16 be received; and
That the amendment to Site Plan Control By-law 2010-139 contained in Attachment 1 to
PSD -058-16, be approved.
Carried
12 New Business — Consideration
12.1 Notification of Environmentally Protected Land Designation Being Placed on
Property
Resolution #PD -150-16
Moved by Councillor Neal, seconded by Councillor Hooper
That all property owners, whose property will be receiving an Environmentally Protected
(EP) designation as a result of the Official Plan Amendment No. 107 on any part of their
property, be notified prior to the next meeting where the Official Plan Amendment is
being considered by Council or Committee.
Motion Lost
-10-
13
Clarftwn
13 Unfinished Business
None
14 Confidential Reports
Planning and Development Committee
Minutes
October 3, 2016
There were no Confidential Reports scheduled under this Section of the Agenda.
15 Adjournment
Resolution #PD -151-16
Moved by Councillor Partner, seconded by Councillor Cooke
That the meeting adjourn at 10:37 PM.
Chair
Carried
-11-
14
Deputy Clerk
Clarftwn Special Planning and Development Committee
Education Workshop Minutes
October 4, 2016
Minutes of a meeting of the Special Planning and Development Committee Education
Workshop held on Tuesday, October 4, 2016 at 9:00 AM in the Council Chambers.
Present Were: Mayor A. Foster, Councillor S. Cooke, Councillor R. Hooper,
Councillor J. Neal, Councillor W. Partner, Councillor C. Traill, Councillor W. Woo
Staff Present: A. Allison, L. Backus, T. Cannella, C. Clifford, D. Crome, C. Salazar,
N. Taylor, N. Zambri, J. Gallagher
1 Call to Order
Councillor Woo called the meeting to order at 9:00 AM. He explained that the purpose of
the meeting was for a special education workshop for Members of Committee to learn
more about the Official Plan Review. Councillor Woo indicated that there will be no
delegations heard and the questions will only be from Members of Committee to Staff.
He also clarified that there will not be specific motions furthering any matters, but rather
only procedural motions during this meeting.
2 Declarations of Interest
Councillor Hooper declared a pecuniary interest, should the matter arise, in the Wilmot
Creek Development, as his mother owns property in the Development.
3 Presentations
3.1 Presentation(s) and Education Session Presented by Municipality of
Clarington Staff Regarding the Draft Official Plan Amendment No. 107
Clarington Official Plan Review
Curry Clifford, Interim CAO, provided some opening remarks outlining the scope of the
presentation and the timing of the meeting.
David Crome, Director of Planning Services, explained that the topics of this meeting are
based on planning questions submitted by Members of Committee and questions raised
at the September 26, 2016 General Government Committee meeting regarding costs.
He informed the Committee that the presentation will be structured as follows:
• General Background
• Secondary Plans
• Sequencing
• Hamlets — specific sites
• Costs by Finance
-1-
15
Clarii � Special Planning and Development Committee
Education Workshop Minutes
October 4, 2016
Carlos Salazar, Manager of Community Planning & Design, provided a verbal report,
accompanied by a PowerPoint presentation, highlighting the Provincial Plans, Regional
Plans, and Clarington strategies that provide the framework for the Official Plan Review
and Amendment No. 107, including:
• Provincial Policy Statement
• Growth Plan
• Regional Official Plan
• Clarington Strategic Plan
David Crome explained the slides related to general background information, related to:
• Historical Ground Related units vs. Apartment units over the 10 year period
between 2006-2016
• Total Units Committed and the Supply of Committed Units
• Growth Frontiers
Mr. Crome began the next section of the presentation, related to specific questions
arising from Members of Committee, beginning with Secondary Plans.
Mr. Crome continued by explaining the rationale behind the sequencing of the proposed
developments. The Committee asked questions about possible alternatives to the
proposed sequencing.
Suspend the Rules
Resolution #PD -152-16
Moved by Mayor Foster, seconded by Councillor Cooke
That the Rules of Procedure be suspended.
Carried
Extend Meeting
Resolution #PD -153-16
Moved by Councillor Traill, seconded by Mayor Foster
That the meeting be extended until 12:00 noon.
Carried
Mr. Crome continued with his presentation, in particular, explaining the development
sequencing of Bowmanville and Newcastle. Committee asked questions regarding:
• Possible alternatives for sequencing for these areas
Costs of infrastructure and possible alternative financing for infrastructure to
enable earlier development of certain areas
How to address the problem of the lack of affordable housing in Clarington
-2-
16
Clarington Special Planning and Development Committee
Education Workshop Minutes
October 4, 2016
Nancy Taylor, Director of Finance/Treasurer, made a verbal presentation to accompany
a PowerPoint presentation regarding the financial impacts of the changes to the Official
Plan. She based most of the discussion on the results of the Financial Impact Study of
2008. Ms. Taylor explained the following:
• Important considerations
• Key findings and recommendations from the 2008 study
• Historical Trends Assessment Growth History
• 10 Year History of New Residential Units
• 10 Year Projections in Current Development Charges Study
• Financial implications of the alternatives to Sequencing the Secondary Planning
Areas in the Official Plan
Committee Members asked questions of Staff regarding more details regarding the cost
of sequencing, and the amount of costs that are recoverable from Development Charges
given hypothetical situations.
Staff completed their presentation and the floor was opened to general questions
surrounding the Official Plan review and amendment. Members of Committee asked
Staff questions regarding:
• Whether there is any flexibility in the Plan in light of the GO train extension and
the potential for a long-term care facility on the Hope Fellowship lands
• Timeline of the Regional Official Plan review
• Special policy areas
• Rounding out of Hamlets
• Properties changing to Environmental Protection and the impact on those
property owners
• Moving the urban boundary in Kendal to the east side of County Road 18
• Orono BIA's request for expanding the urban boundary
• Industrial lands east of Highway 115, near Orono
• How the public submissions will be handled in the October 24th staff report to
Committee, as well as timelines
Suspend the Rules
Resolution #PD -154-16
Moved by Mayor Foster, seconded by Councillor Traill
That the Rules of Procedure be suspended.
Carried
-3-
17
Cladiw-n
Extend Meeting
Resolution #PD -155-16
Special Planning and Development Committee
Education Workshop Minutes
Moved by Mayor Foster, seconded by Councillor Traill
That the meeting be extended until 12:10 PM.
Carried
Closed Session
Resolution #PD -156-16
Moved by Mayor Foster, seconded by Councillor Cooke
October 4, 2016
That, in accordance with Section 239 (2) of the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended, the
meeting be closed for the purpose of discussing a matter that deals with advice that is
subject to solicitor -client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose,
regarding the legal ramifications of the proposed development sequencing plan.
Carried
Rise and Report
The meeting resumed in open session at 11:53 AM with Councillor Woo in the Chair.
Councillor Woo advised that one item was discussed in "closed" session in accordance
with Section 239(2) of the Municipal Act, 2001 and no resolutions were passed.
4 Adjournment
Resolution #PD -157-16
Moved by Mayor Foster, seconded by Councillor Partner
That the meeting adjourn at 12:08 PM.
Chair
Carried
W
Deputy Clerk
The Regional
Municipality
of Durham
Corporate Services
Department -
Legislative Services
October 14, 2016
Land Use Planning Review -
Ministry of Municipal Affairs
Ontario Growth-S-ecretariat
77T_Da treet, Suite 425 (4th floor)
_----T6ronto, ON M5G 2E5
RE: Durham Region's Response to the Co-ordinated Review of
the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe,
Greenbelt Plan and Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan
(2016 -COW -34), Our File: L00
Pa sox 223 ND RD. E.
Please be advised that Committee of the Whole of Regional Council
WHITBY ON L1N 6A3
considered the above matter and at a meeting held on October 12, 2016,
CANADA
Council adopted the following recommendations of the Committee:
905-668-7711
1-800-372-1102
"That Report #2016 -COW -34 of the Commissioner of Planning &
Fax: 905-668-9963
Economic Development be endorsed and submitted to the Ministry of
www.durham.ca
Municipal Affairs as Durham l4egion's response to:
Matthew L. Gaskell
A) Environmental Bill of Rights Registry No. 012-7194 regarding the
Commissioner of
Corporate Services
Proposed Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2016,
including the following key comments and recommendations:
i) That the Province be advised that Regional Council does not
support increasing the intensification target in the Growth Plan
for the Greater Golden Horseshoe from 40% to 60%,
ii) That the Province be advised that Regional Council does not
support increasing the minimum designated greenfield area
density target in the Growth Pian for the Greater Golden
Horseshoe from 50 to 80 residents and jobs combined per
hectare;
iii) That the Province be advised that Regional Council does not
support applying the proposed target of 80 residents and jobs
combined per hectare in the Growth Plan for the Greater
Golden Horseshoe to the entire greenfield area;
iv) That the Province be advised that Regional Council does not
support the introduction of the prime employment category of
employment areas and that the range of suitable employment
uses be left to the Regional and area municipalities to
determine;
"Service Excellence
fonDur If this information is required in an accessible format, please contact
the Accessibility Co-ordinator at 1-800-372-1102 ext. 2009.
19
-2-
v) Prioritize the development of a definitive, standardized and
non -appealable land needs methodology, and engage the
upper- and single -tier municipalities to assist with the
development of the methodology;
vi) Revise Schedule 5, Moving People — Transit, to incorporate
refinements made by Metrolinx to The Big Move;
vii) Revise Schedule 6, Moving Goods, to include:
a) The planned extension of Highway 404;
b) The existing Highway 407 and 412 infrastructure and
future 418; and
c) The Port of Oshawa as a Major Port;
d) The Oshawa Executive Airport;
B) Environmental Bill of Rights Registry No. 012-7195 regarding the
dProposed Greenbelt Plan, 2016, including the following key
comments and recommendations:
i) Establish a more clearly defined process including criteria and
timeframe to consider site specific requests for minor
adjustments to the Greenbelt Plan Area boundaries, and that
the Province complete this process in a transparent and
consultative manner;
ii) Revise the Greenbelt Plan mapping in Pickering, to reflect the
approved Urban Area Boundary in effect since 1993;
iii) Whereas the municipalities that comprise the Greenbelt pay a
heavy financial price due to severe servicing restrictions (ie:
sewage treatment capacity) resulting in very limited
development and growth in property tax assessment;
Whereas limited assessment growth means existing property
owners carry the burden of the ever increasing cost of
municipal services;
Whereas financial pressures over time because of the limited
growth has resulted in a backload of roads, bridges, capital
equipment and facilities and even with the assistance of
current Federal and Provincial grant funding, townships within
the Greenbelt will be unable to maintain the infrastructure in
good condition;
Whereas the province expects the Greenbelt townships to be
the "breadbasket" of the GGH;
20
1411
Therefore be it resolved that the Region of Durham
recommend that a new financial arrangement is needed for
the Greenbelt Communities in the form of provincial grants for
greenbelt communities to compensate for the reduced ability
of municipalities to increase their assessment through growth.
And that a provincial working group be established to examine
the financial implications associated with being located in the
Greenbelt and identifying appropriate mitigation measures for
predominantly rural municipalities;
C) Environmental Bill of Rights Registry No. 012-7197 regarding the
Proposed Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, 2016, including
the following key comments and recommendations:
i) Prioritize the development of guidance materials for watershed
planning and that the Province should develop this material in
consultation with the upper- and single -tiers, including the
Region -and Conservation Authorities; and
ii) Add atprovision in the proposed Growth Plan to explicitly limit
the expansion of Settlement Areas into Natural Core or
Natural Linkage Areas of the ORM, or at a minimum, include a
reference to the applicable provisions within the Oak Ridges
Moraine Conservation Act;
D) Amendments Proposed to Multiple Provincial Plans, including the
following key comments and recommendations:
i) Add transition provisions with respect to area municipal official
plan and secondary plan reviews that commenced prior to the
proposed Provincial Plan amendments;
ii) Reconsider the need for additional layers of agricultural and
natural heritage systems mapping within the GTHA. However,
if the identification and systems mapping is to be developed,
the Province should develop these systems in consultation
with the upper- and single -tiers, including the Region and
Conservation Authorities;
iii) Take a greater leadership role in developing and monitoring
regulations for the management of excess soil and fill;
iv) Increase the flexibility to exempt or reduce the scope of
hydrological studies for agricultural buildings larger than 500
square metres;
v) Establish a process or policies to consider the ability to extend
municipal services to settlement areas within the Greenbelt,
where circumstances warrant; and
21
-4 -
vi) Prioritize the development of guidance materials for
developing greenhouse gas inventories, targets and emission
reduction strategies, and that the Province develop this
guidance material in a transparent and consultative manner,
including Regional involvement; and
E) That a copy of Report #2016 -COW -34 be forwarded to the
Ministries of Municipal Affairs, Housing, Natural Resources and
Forestry, and Durham's area municipalities.
Please find enclosed a copy of Report #2016 -COW -34 for your
information.
Debi A. Wilcox, MPA, CMO, CMM III
Regional Clerk/Director of Legislative Services
DW/tf
c- C. Tan, Manager, Ministry of Municipal Affairs
The Honourable B. Mauro, Minister of Municipal Affairs
The Honourable C. Ballard, Minister of Housing
The Honourable K. McGarry, Minister of Natural Resources and
Forestry
A. Harras, Deputy Clerk, Town of Ajax
T. Gettinby, CAO/Clerk, Township of Brock
A. Greentree, Clerk, Municipalit�of Clarington
S. Kranc, Clerk, City of Oshawa
D. Shields, Clerk, City of Pickering
N. Wellsbury, Clerk, Township of Scugog
D. Leroux, Clerk, Township of Uxbridge
C. Harris, Clerk, Town of Whitby
B. Bridgeman, Commissioner of Planning and Economic Development
22
DIST UTION
REVIEWED BY
Original To: File
0 Council Direction 0 GG Direction 0 PD Direction
❑ Council Information ❑ GG Information ❑ I'D Information
Copy To:
0 Mayor 0 Members of U Ward Councillors
Council
❑CRO [)Clerks Z) Communications
Q Community [) Corporate 0 Emergency
Services Services Services
❑ Engineering [) Finance _-O Legal
Services Services
\
0 Operations 10 Planning
Services
a Other:
Municipal Clerk's File
If this information is required in an accessible format, please contact 1-800-372-1102 ext. 2564
77mD))
DURHAM
REGION
The Regional Municipality of Durham
Report
To:
The Committee of the Whole
From:
Commissioner of Planning and Economic Development
Report:
#2016 -COW -34
Date:
October 5, 2016
Subject:
Durham Region's Response to the Co-ordinated Review of the Growth Plan for the
Greater Golden Horseshoe, Greenbelt Plan and Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan,
File L35-03
Proposed Growth Plan for thefGreater Golden Horseshoe, 2016 — Environmental Bill of
Rights Registry No. 012-7194
Proposed Greenbelt Plan, 2016 -- Environmental Bill of Rights Registry No. 012-7195
Proposed Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, 2016 — Environmental Bill of Rights
Reaistry No. 012-7197
Recommendation:
THAT the Committee of the Whole recommends to Regional Council that Report #2016 -
COW -34 be endorsed and submitted to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs as Durham
Region's response to:
1) Environmental Bill of Rights Registry No. 012-7194 regarding the Proposed
Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2016, including the following key
comments and recommendations:
a. Hold off on establishing the intensification and density targets as proposed,
and engage the upper- and single -tier municipalities to undertake a process
to determine the appropriate targets that are reasonable to achieve the
desired goal of building healthy and complete communities;
b. Prioritize the development of a definitive, standardized and non -appealable
land needs methodology, and engage the upper- and single -tier
municipalities to assist with the development of the methodology;
c. Revise Schedule 5, Moving People — Transit, to incorporate refinements
23
Report #2016 -COW -34 Page 2 of 19
made by Metrolinx to The Big Move;
d. Revise Schedule 6, Moving Goods, to include:
i. The planned extension of Highway 404;
ii. The existing Highway 407 and 412 infrastructure; and
iii. The Port of Oshawa as a Major Port.
2) Environmental Bill of Rights Registry No. 012-7195 regarding the Proposed
Greenbelt Plan, 2016, including the following key comments and
recommendations:
a. Establish a more clearly defined process to consider site specific requests
for minor adjustments to the Greenbelt Plan Area boundaries, and that the
Province complete this process in a transparent and consultative manner;
and
b. Revise the Greenbelt Plan mapping in Pickering, to reflect the approved
Urban Area Boundary in effect since 1993.
3) Environmental Bill of Rights Registry No. 012-7197 regarding the Proposed Oak
Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, 2016, including the following key comments
and recommendations:
a. Prioritize the development of guidance materials for watershed planning
and that the Province should develop this material in consultation with the
upper- and single -tiers, including the Region and Conservation Authorities;
and
b. Add a provision in the proposed Growth Plan to explicitly limit the expansion
of Settlement Areas into Natural Core or Natural Linkage Areas of the ORM,
or at a minimum, include a reference to the applicable provisions within the
Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Act.
4) Amendments Proposed to Multiple Provincial Plans, including the following key
comments and recommendations:
a. Add transition provisions with respect to area municipal official plan and
secondary plan reviews that commenced prior to the proposed Provincial
Plan amendments;
b. Reconsider the need for additional layers of agricultural and natural heritage
systems mapping within the GTHA. However, if the identification and
systems mapping is to be developed, the Province should develop these
systems in consultation with the upper- and single -tiers, including the
Region and Conservation Authorities;
24
Report #2016 -COW -34 Page 3 of 19
c. Take a greater leadership role in developing and monitoring regulations for
the management of excess soil and fill;
d. Increase the flexibility to exempt or reduce the scope of hydrological studies
for agricultural buildings larger than 500 square metres;
e. Establish a process or policies to consider the ability to extend municipal
services to settlement areas within the Greenbelt, where circumstances
warrant; and
f. Prioritize the development of guidance materials for developing greenhouse
gas inventories, targets and emission reduction strategies, and that the
Province develop this guidance material in a transparent and consultative
manner, including Regional involvement.
5) A copy of Report #2016 -COW -34 be forwarded to the Ministries of Municipal
Affairs, Housing, Natural Resources and Forestry, and Durham's area
municipalities.
Report:
e
1. Purpose
1.1 The purpose of this report is to respond to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs' request
for comments on proposed amendments to Ontario's Growth Plan for the Greater
Golden Horseshoe (Growth Plan); Greenbelt Plan; and Oak Ridges Moraine
Conservation Plan (ORMCP). The deadline to respond to these matters was
extended from September 30th, to October 31, 2016.
1.1 This report provides an overview of the key proposed amendments, and provides a
Regional response to each.
2. Overview of the Proposed Amendments
2.1 According to the respective Environmental Bill of Rights Registry postings, the
proposed amendments, if passed, would:
Growth Plan
• Provide more detailed policy direction that would support the achievement
of complete communities and require municipalities to plan for sustainable
and livable communities;
• Increase the minimum intensification target from 40 per cent to 60 per cent
of residential development within the built up area;
• Increase the minimum density target for designated greenfield areas from
50 to 80 residents and jobs per hectare;
• Identify specific minimum density targets for major transit station areas
based on the type of transit existing or planned for;
25
Report #2016 -COW -34 Page 4 of 19
• Require municipalities to identify and protect "prime employment areas";
• Establish a standard methodology for assessing land needs;
• Clarify criteria for settlement area boundary expansions;
• Support the achievement of complete communities that mitigate climate
change impacts, build resilience, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and
contribute towards the achievement of net -zero communities;
• Provide direction on integrated planning for infrastructure and requirements
for financial, environmental and infrastructure planning analysis;
• Require municipalities to undertake water, wastewater and stormwater
master plans, informed by watershed planning, when planning for future
growth;
• Encourage the co -location of different types of linear infrastructure (e.g.
roads, railways, pipelines, high voltage lines, etc.) in the same corridors,
where appropriate;
• Require municipalities to undertake watershed planning to identify and
protect water resource systems;
• Identify an "Agricultural System" for the whole Greater Golden Horseshoe
(GGH) wherein municipalities must assess and minimize impacts on the
"Agricultural System" to support and enhance the long-term economic
prosperity and viability of the agri-food sector;
• Encourage municipalities to develop soil re -use strategies and include
sustainable soil management practices in planning approvals;
• Require municipalities to integrate climate change policies into municipal
official plans and to conduct climate change vulnerability risk assessments
for infrastructure to increase resilience; and
• Encourage municipalities to develop greenhouse gas inventories, emission
reduction targets and related performance measures.
Greenbelt Plan
• Recognize the "Agricultural Support Network";
• Permit more "on-farm diversified uses" and flexibility for larger "agriculture -
related uses";
• Require agricultural impact assessments to mitigate and minimize impacts
on agricultural lands and operations;
• Require municipalities to identify and protect "key hydrologic areas" (e.g.
highly vulnerable aquifers);
• Require municipalities to consider the Great Lakes Strategy as part of
watershed planning and waterfront planning initiatives;
• Require watershed planning to inform decisions on development, settlement
area boundary expansions and planning for water, wastewater and
stormwater infrastructure;
• Exempt agricultural buildings from a natural heritage or hydrologic
evaluation, subject to minimizing ecological impacts;
• Encourage the development of settlement areas as complete communities
and for community hubs;
26
Report #2016 -COW -34 Page 5 of 19
• Require municipalities to integrate climate change considerations into
planning and managing growth;
• Require subwatershed plans when considering settlement area boundary
expansions;
• Remove the policy that allowed minor rounding out of Hamlet boundaries;
• Encourage the development of soil re -use strategies and use of best
practices for managing excess soil and fill;
• Require that planning for growth be undertaken in an integrated and
coordinated manner with land use and master planning;
• Encourage municipalities to increase the resiliency of infrastructure and use
green infrastructure to reduce risks and costs associated with extreme
weather events;
• Revise cultural heritage conservation policies to more closely align with the
Provincial Policy Statement, 2014 (PPS), including the consideration of
interests of First Nations and Metis communities; and
• Add a new section to outline ways to grow the Greenbelt, including the
addition of Urban River Valley areas.
ORMCP
• Recognize the importance of the protection of natural areas for mitigating
and reducing the impacts of climate change;
• Support the conservation of cultural heritage resources;
• Permit "on-farm diversified uses" and "agriculture -related uses", where
appropriate;
• Provide for agricultural related buildings to be exempt from natural heritage
and hydrological evaluations, subject to minimizing ecological impacts,
where buildings are less than 500 square metres in area (i.e. non -major
development);
• Require watershed plans to include an evaluation of assimilative capacity of
the watershed and to assess climate change impacts;
• Require water budgets and conservation plans to identify climate change
impacts;
• Align lot creation policies with the PPS;
• Align the rehabilitation of mineral aggregate operations in prime agricultural
areas with the PPS;
• Require municipalities to use best practices for managing excess soil and fill
generated during development;
• Require major recreational uses to consider, avoid or mitigate impacts on
agricultural operations;
• Require the siting of trails away from prime agricultural areas and
agricultural operations;
• Require new infrastructure to be supported by appropriate studies, and
demonstrate adequacy of water supply and assimilative capacity, as well as
address greenhouse gas emissions and adaptation to climate change
impacts;
• Require stormwater master plans for settlement areas;
27
Report #2016 -COW -34
6of19
• Add provisions to encourage the development of settlement areas as
complete communities and for community hubs;
• Require that boundary changes for settlement areas be considered only as
part of a municipal comprehensive review; and
• Encourage municipalities to undertake infrastructure vulnerability risk
assessments and to use green infrastructure as a climate change
adaptation measure.
3. Key Amendments Proposed to the Growth Pian
3.1 While there are many positive changes to the Growth Plan that can be supported,
there are also some significant problems with certain proposed amendments that
make it impossible to know the impacts on, and implications for Durham's
communities. The following provides an overview with respect to these concerns.
Intensification and Density Targets
3.2 The Province is proposing to increase the residential intensification target within the
designated built boundary from 40 per cent to 60 per cent.
3.3 The uniform requirement for 60 per cent intensification appears to be an arbitrary
"one size fits all" application with no attention to any respective municipality's ability
to accommodate the future growth within the same limited geographic area that was
established ten years ago. For Durham, the area of land within the designated built-
up area is much smaller than some other Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area
(GTHA) Regions, but the number of residents and jobs required to fit within that
geography is comparable. Therefore, some Regions may be able to achieve the
intensification requirements more easily than Durham, where achieving the 60%
intensification target within the built boundaries will be a challenge.
3.4 The Province is proposing that lower -tier municipalities with an Urban Growth Centre
(i.e. Pickering and Oshawa) will have a minimum intensification target that is equal to
or higher than 60 per cent. Based on meetings with area municipal staff, and as
noted in Oshawa's Report DS -16-145 on the proposed changes, municipalities are
already facing challenges achieving the intensification rates for each area
municipality as allocated in the Regional Official Plan (ROP).
3.5 The Province is also proposing to increase the minimum density target for
designated greenfield areas (i.e. urban lands outside of the built boundary) from 50
residents and jobs combined per hectare to 80 residents and jobs combined per
hectare, measured across the entire greenfield area. Unlike the new provisions for
intensification which take effect once the next municipal comprehensive review has
been completed, the amended target for greenfield density will be effective
immediately upon the approval of the new Growth Plan.
3.6 The proposed increase to greenfield densities causes a number of concerns. Firstly,
since the built boundary is not changing, the area that is considered greenfield
includes many lower density neighbourhoods that were planned before even the last
Report #2016 -COW -34 Page 7 of 19
Growth Plan density target of 50 residents and jobs combined per hectare was in
place. As a result, a large proportion of the designated greenfield is either developed
or committed for development at densities that are at or below 50 residents and jobs
combined per hectare. As a result, the density for new areas necessary to
compensate for the lower densities will far exceed 80 to make up for the difference.
To put this into perspective, one must try to visualize new development around the
existing hamlet of Columbus at densities approaching those of downtown Oshawa
today. Since the new density requirements would take effect upon the approval of
the new Growth Plan, any lands not yet subject to a registered or draft approved
plan would be subject to the new policies.
3.7 Including both population and jobs in the calculations of density will continue to
create challenges, even though "prime employment areas" are proposed to be
exempt. At this time it is unclear how much of the existing and potential future
designated Employment Areas within the ROP will be considered "prime". Generally,
employment areas are at a much lower density than 80 jobs per hectare (Durham
average = 36 jobs per net hectare). As a result, the residential densities must be
higher to compensate for the lower employment densities.
3.8 A related concern is that the resulting higher density neighbourhoods to be
established at the edges of existing lower density neighbourhoods will not be
supported by necessary infrastructure (i.e. transit) in the early stages of
development. This could cause a misalignment of infrastructure need and spending
to address community expectations. Directing higher density development to the
greenfield areas could also undermine the Region's efforts to get more transit
supportive development in designated Regional Centres and along Regional
Corridors.
3.9 Substantial increases in densities also have potential financial implications.
Municipalities have been planning their infrastructure to accommodate the density
targets of the current Growth Plan. Infrastructure constructed under these
assumptions may not accommodate the new density targets in the proposed
amendments.
3.10 There is risk of significant financial challenges if the Region cannot achieve the
density targets established by the Province. If the Region constructs infrastructure to
accommodate the future growth targets identified in the proposed amendments, and
the development does not materialize, the Region will not collect the necessary
funding (development charges) to finance the infrastructure. This will put pressure on
future property taxes and water and sewer user rates, and presents a risk of
stranded and underutilized infrastructure.
3.11 Finally, the Province is proposing new density targets for Major Transit Station
Areas, which would include:
• 160 residents and jobs combined per hectare for areas served by bus rapid
transit; and
29
Report #2016 -COW -34 Page 8 of 19
• 150 residents and jobs combined per hectare for areas served by express rail
on the GO Transit network.
3.12 In addition, the definition of a "major transit station area" is proposed to be amended
to include the station "or stop". Therefore, as proposed, it appears that the
requirements for 160 residents and jobs per hectare would apply to every transit stop
along the planned route of the Highway 2 BRT (Pulse Route) from Pickering to
Oshawa. While the requirement to plan for higher densities around transit stations is
supported, there must be flexibility to apply the applicable density to key transit
stops, not all stops along a route.
3.13 Therefore, with respect to the proposed changes to the Growth Plan, it is
recommended that the Province hold off on establishing the intensification
and density targets as proposed, and engage the upper- and single -tier
municipalities to undertake a process to determine the appropriate targets that
are reasonable to achieve the desired goal of building healthy and complete
communities. It is noted that preliminary discussions have been initiated with the
Province and the upper- and single -tier municipalities in this regard.
Land Needs Methodology
3.14 The Province is proposing to develop a consistent land budget methodology to
determine urban land needs at the time of a municipal comprehensive review
exercise.
3.15 While the Region supports the need for a consistent methodology, Provincial staff
have indicated that this methodology may not be released until 2018, and there is no
indication of the process by which it will be developed.
3.16 The Region should be involved in a meaningful consultation process to develop the
land needs methodology. This process needs to begin as soon as possible, as there
are implications on timing for the upper- and single -tier municipalities across the
GGH in completing their next municipal comprehensive review.
3.17 In addition, municipalities throughout the GGH collectively spent millions of dollars
preparing and defending the results of their land needs assessments at the Ontario
Municipal Board during conformity exercises for the current Growth Plan. It would be
prudent to make the results of calculations undertaken as part of a land needs
assessment process approved by the Province exempt from appeal to the Ontario
Municipal Board.
3.18 Therefore, it is recommended that the Province prioritize the development of a
definitive, standardized and non -appealable land needs methodology, and
engage the upper- and single -tier municipalities to assist with the
development of the methodology.
Integrated Planning
30
Report #2016 -COW -34 Page 9 of 19
3.19 The Province has indicated that it may provide further direction on integrated
planning for infrastructure and requirements for financial analysis. When the
Province uses the term "integrated planning", it refers to coordinating infrastructure
planning, land use planning and infrastructure investment.
3.20 Integrated planning is already taking place in Durham Region. The Region conducts
long-term planning studies (10 -year forecast) on an annual basis which identifies
current and future growth patterns and the capital/financing needs also incorporates
asset management requirements and climate change. These studies are approved
by Regional Council and provide the necessary input into the Region's annual
Business Plans and Budgets. The Region also completes longer-term
capitallfinancing studies for development charge by-laws (up to 20 -year forecast).
3.21 The Province must ensure that any proposed amendments do not hinder
municipalities from continuing to complete their own integrated planning exercises.
In addition, the Province must ensure that proposed amendments do not diminish
the ability for municipalities to recover growth related capital costs and allow
municipalities to select its own fiscal measures to support intensification which best
suits its local circumstance. Municipalities face fiscal constraints with limited
opportunities to generate revenue, and should not be required to cover the cost of
infrastructure enhancements to meet provincially mandated intensification targets
through property taxes.
3.22 In addition, the Province should implement the following changes, not currently
contemplated by the proposed amendments:
Moving People
3.23 According to Schedule 5 (Moving People — Transit) of the proposed Growth Plan, the
only priority transit corridor in Durham corresponds to the Lakeshore East GO Rail
line to the existing Oshawa station. Schedule 5 should align more closely with
Metrolinx's Regional Transportation Plan (The Big Move), to at least include planned
higher order transit corridors. Within Durham, the following corridors should be
added to the schedule as priority transit corridors, as these will become areas of
focus for planning and intensification to 2041 and beyond:
• Highway 2 Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) corridor from Scarborough Centre to
Downtown Oshawa via Ellesmere Road and Highway 2;
• Simcoe Street, from Highway 407 to the Central Oshawa GO Station;
• Taunton Road (Durham continuation of Steeles Avenue), from the
York/Durham Boundary to Simcoe Street; and
• Brock Road, from Highway 407 to Bayly Street.
3.24 Further, a proposed higher order transit corridor designation should be added to the
schedule to capture projects which have significant potential in supporting
intensification around major transit station areas, but are not priority transit corridors.
For Durham, the Lakeshore East GO Rail Extension to Bowmanville project should
31
Report #2016 -COW -34 Page 10 of 19
be added to the schedule.
3.25 Therefore, it is recommended that Schedule 5, Moving People — Transit, be
revised to incorporate refinements made by Metrolinx to The Big Move.
Moving Goods
3.26 The extension of Highway 404, beyond its current terminus at Woodbine Avenue in
York Region, is an important piece of planned infrastructure to accommodate
growing commuter and recreational traffic, as well as goods movement in the
northern areas of Durham and York, and should be illustrated on Schedule 6,
Moving Goods.
3.27 In addition, the Highway 407 extension, between Brock Road and Harmony Road,
as well as Highway 412, should be shown as Existing Major Highways instead of
Highway Extensions, as these facilities are now open to traffic.
3.28 Finally, the Port of Oshawa is a significant commercial port, and should be identified
on Schedule 6 as a Major Port.
3.29 Therefore, it is recommended that Schedule 6, Moving Goods, should be
revised to include:
• The planned extension of Highway 404;
• The existing Highway 407 and 412 infrastructure; and
• The Port of Oshawa as a Major Port.
3.30 The proposed amendments to the Growth Plan that are generally supported are as
follows:
• Streamlining and aligning the policy framework with the PPS, and other
Provincial Plans, where appropriate;
• Developing a consistent land budget methodology to assess land needs to
accommodate forecasted growth to the horizon of the Plan;
• Providing further clarification on features/areas to be netted -out from the
calculation of density targets, including natural heritage features, certain
infrastructure rights-of-way, and prime employment areas;
• Requiring municipalities to identify and designate suitable lands as prime
employment areas to be protected over the longterm;
• Requiring municipalities to integrate active transportation networks into
transportation planning to provide continuous linkages, where appropriate;
• Encouraging the co -location of linear infrastructure and ensure that existing
and planned corridors would be protected in accordance with the PPS; and
• The Province developing a set of performance indicators to measure the
implementation of the policies in this Plan provided the performance
indicators are developed in consultation with the upper- and single -tier
municipalities and are delivered in a timely manner.
32
Report #2016 -COW -34 Page 11 of 19
4. Key Amendments Proposed to the Greenbelt Plan
4.1 Generally, the Greenbelt Plan provides a good policy basis for enhancing the
protection of the natural environment and agricultural land base, supporting near
urban food production and long-term food security. Many of the proposed
amendments generally seek to strengthen those protections, enhance the
recognition and viability of the broader agricultural support network, as well as align
the Greenbelt Plan with other Provincial Plans.
4.2 Proposed amendments related to the following are generally supported:
• Updating definitions to align with the PPS, ORMCP and Growth Plan;
• Ensuring proposed agriculture -related uses and on-farm diversified uses are
compatible with and will not hinder surrounding agricultural operations;
• Clarifying that the Provincial "Guidelines on Permitted Uses in Ontario's Prime
Agricultural Areas" applies to lands within the Greenbelt Plan Area; and
• Acknowledging agriculture as the predominant land use, and an important
economic driver in the Greenbelt.
4.3 The following provides an overview of concerns with proposed amendments to the
Greenbelt Plan.
Urban River Valleys
4.4 The Province is proposing to add many of the major watercourses between the
Greenbelt and Lake Ontario (the external connections shown on Schedules 1, 2 and
4 of the Greenbelt Plan) and several coastal "wetlands" into the Greenbelt Plan as
Urban River Valley areas. Within Durham, this would apply to publicly owned lands
within the following:
• Pickering — Duffin Creek;
• Ajax — Duffin and Carruthers Creeks;
• Whitby — Lynde Creek;
• Oshawa -- Oshawa, Harmony, Black and Farewell Creeks; and
• Clarington — Black, Farewell, Bowmanville, Soper, Wilmot and Graham
Creeks.
4.5 The general intent of Urban River Valleys supports the Province's commitment to
protecting, supporting and growing the Greenbelt, and is therefore reasonable.
However, the Urban River Valley policies, as proposed:
• Results in a patch -work approach to designating and protecting Urban River
Valleys and coastal wetlands, and therefore does not promote a continuous
and contiguous extension of the Greenbelt;
• Creates a perceived inequality between public and private lands along Urban
River Valleys; and
• Does not offer any additional policy -supported protection to valley lands or
33
Report #2016 -COW -34 Page 12 of 19
coastal wetlands, above what is already achieved through existing Regional
and/or area municipal Official Plan policies and Conservation Authority
regulations.
Greenbelt Area Boundary
4.6 As a component of the Review, the Province is currently undertaking two separate
initiatives to:
• Consider possible expansion of the Greenbelt outside of the GTHA where
important water resources are under pressure from urban growth (Growing
the Greenbelt); and
• Respond to site specific requests by determining if further refinements to the
Greenbelt are required (Response to Site Specific Requests).
4.7 The Growing the Greenbelt Provincial Working Group has begun the process to
identify areas for inclusion in the Greenbelt outside the GTHA. Provincial staff are
gathering existing provincial data, and are meeting with municipalities and
conservation authorities to seek additional local data to further assist with analysis.
The Province intends to complete the process of identifying lands for addition to the
Greenbelt by the end of this year.
4.8 The Provincial Working Group responding to site specific requests has begun
reviewing and assessing site specific requests for further refinements to the
Greenbelt that may potentially take lands out of the Greenbelt Area. Provincial staff
are collecting technical information from municipalities, conservation authorities and
landowners in the GTHA to determine if further refinements are required to achieve
the natural heritage protection objectives of the Greenbelt. More specifically, the
group is reviewing areas where, due to the scale of the original mapping,
refinements may be appropriate. For example, situations may include where:
• The Greenbelt boundary is intended to provide a buffer to a feature, but
actually passes through a building;
• A bend in the river that is to be protected is outside the Greenbelt boundary;
and
• Portions of a property at the edge of a hamlet where part of the backyard was
captured within the boundary.
4.9 Provincial staff have indicated that they expect any adjustments resulting from this
technical review to be minor. If any changes are deemed necessary, the public will
be consulted on the lands that are identified prior to any changes being made.
4.10 While the intent of a technical review of potential refinements to the Greenbelt
boundary is consistent with previous requests of the Region to establish a process to
consider minor boundary revisions, the current approach by the Province does not
establish a clearly defined process to consider minor adjustments to the boundaries
of the Greenbelt Plan Area at the site or localized level.
34
Report #2016 -COW -34 Page 13 of 19
4.11 There is concern that the Province's current approach to responding to site specific
requests is:
• Limited in scope to those who participated in the Review's first phase of
consultations specifically those who made site specific submissions;
• The criteria by which this Working Group is reviewing potential refinements to
the Greenbelt boundary is not fully transparent to all stakeholders; and
• That the process by which these site specific requests are being reviewed is
subject to limited public consultation.
4.12 The Region must be involved in whatever process is established by the Province in
order to ensure Regional interests are considered and that previous positions of
Regional Council are taken into account.
4.13 Therefore, it is recommended that the Province should clarify and establish a
more clearly defined process to consider site specific requests for
adjustments to the Greenbelt Plan Area boundaries, and that the Province
complete this process in a transparent and consultative manner.
4.14 In addition, the Province released detailed maps showing proposed adjustments to
reflect matters that were already in a planning process prior to the creation of the
Greenbelt Plan and thus allowed to continue. The proposed changes align with
municipal official plans and existing urban boundaries. Within Durham, the Province
has proposed to amend the Greenbelt Plan boundary in Bowmanville, were it was
mistakenly extended into the existing Urban Area boundary. A detailed map showing
the area currently in the Protected Countryside that is proposed to be removed from
the Greenbelt Area in Bowmanville is shown in Attachment 1.
4.15 However, the proposed amendments did not amend the Greenbelt Plan boundary
where it was mistakenly extended into the existing City of Pickering Urban Area
Boundary, along the western edge of the City, south of the CPR Rail line (refer to
Attachment 2).
4.16 Therefore, it is recommended that the Province revise its Greenbelt Plan
mapping lin Pickering to reflect the approved Urban Area Boundary in effect
since 1993, to avoid any further confusion.
5. Key Amendments Proposed to the ORMCP
5.1 Generally, the ORMCP provides a good policy basis for the environmental protection
of the Oak Ridges Moraine. Many of the proposed amendments generally seek to
strengthen and enhance those protections, as well as align the ORMCP with other
Provincial Plans.
5.2 Proposed amendments related to the following are generally supported:
• Aligning ORMCP definitions with the PPS, Growth Plan and Greenbelt Plan,
where appropriate;
35
Report #2016 -COW -34 Page 14 of 19
• Allowing on-farm diversified uses in prime agricultural areas;
• Exempting buildings and structures for agricultural, agriculture -related and on-
farm diversified uses from the requirements for a Natural Heritage Evaluation,
where appropriate;
• Removing the current permission for the creation of retirement lots, consistent
with the PPS, Greenbelt Plan, and ROP;
• Requiring aggregate operations in prime agricultural lands to restore the soil
capacity for agriculture to conditions that are on average the same as it was
before the aggregate operation began; and
• Requiring the establishment or expansion of a major recreational use to
consider and mitigate potential impacts on surrounding agricultural operations
and lands.
5.3 The following provides an overview of concerns with proposed amendments to the
ORMCP.
Watershed Planning
5.4 The Province is proposing to add new requirements for watershed planning,
including but not limited to environmental monitoring, assimilative capacity
evaluation, and climate change impact assessment.
5.5 Given that the Region previously completed ORM Watershed Plans, as well as
Assessment Reports under the Clean Water Act, in collaboration with the
Conservation Authorities, it is unclear if the intent is that existing Watershed Plans
must be updated. It is also unclear what the full scope of these requirements are,
and what the cost to prepare, monitor and update the existing watershed plans will
be.
5.6 Traditionally in Durham, watershed planning is undertaken by Conservation
Authorities, while the provision of sewage and water services is a Regional
responsibility. The Region questions if the assessment of climate change impacts on
sewage and water service systems and stormwater management systems is best
done through watershed planning.
5.7 The Provincial information materials related to the proposed amendments note that,
to support implementation, guidance materials will be produced for watershed
planning and stormwater management. However, no additional reference or timing
has been provided for this guidance material on watershed planning.
5.8 Therefore, it is recommended that the Province should prioritize the
development of guidance materials for watershed planning and that the
Province should develop this material in consultation with the upper- and
single -tiers, including the Region and Conservation Authorities.
5.9 The Province is proposing to add an exception to the existing Wellhead Protection
Area policies for agricultural operations, provided that the requirements of the
36
Report #2016 -COW -34 Page 15 of 19
Nutrient Management Act and Clean Water Act are met. This proposed amendment
is supported in principle, as it serves to align the ORMCP with the policy directives
developed through Source Water Protection planning. However, given the extensive
work and comprehensive policies created through Source Water Protection and the
development of Source Protection Plans, it remains unclear why Wellhead
Protection Policies are still required in the ORCMP.
Settlement Area Expansions into Natural Core and Linkage Areas
5.10 The Province is proposing to delete the settlement area expansion requirements and
defer those policies to the proposed Settlement Area policies in the Growth Plan.
However, the proposed Growth Plan does not explicitly state that settlement areas
cannot expand into Natural Core or Natural Linkage Areas, as currently provided by
the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Act and Plan.
5.11 Therefore, it is recommended that the Province should add a provision in the
proposed Growth Plan to explicitly limit the expansion of Settlement Areas
into Natural Core or Natural Linkage Areas of the ORM, or at a minimum,
include a reference to the applicable provisions within the Oak Ridges Moraine
Conservation Act.
6. Key Amendments Proposed to Multiple Provincial Plans
6.1 Proposed amendments related to the following are generally supported:
• Identifying and defining the Agricultural Support Network;
• Requiring Agricultural Impact Assessments;
• Permitting additional uses such as on-farm diversified uses (e.g. agri-tourism)
and larger agriculture -related uses (e.g. grain dryers) to service the broader
farming community; and
• Deferring the policy requirements for settlement area expansions to the
Growth Plan.
6.2 The following provides an overview of concerns with proposed amendments to
multiple Provincial Plans.
Transition Regulations
6.3 The Province is proposing to require that all planning -related decisions made on or
after the effective date of a Provincial Plan's approval will conform to the respective
amended Plan.
6.4 Within Durham, there are several on-going area municipal official plan reviews that
include conformity exercises to the original Greenbelt Plan and Growth Plan. If the
proposed Provincial Plans come into effect before these lower -tier plans are
approved, all of the conformity components completed by the lower -tiers would be
nullified, and the work would have to be re-initiated under the newly approved
37
Report #2016 -COW -34 Page 16 of 19
Provincial Plan policies.
6.5 Many area municipal official plan and secondary plan reviews that were initiated
prior to the release of the proposed 2016 Plans are in the final stages of the approval
process. As a result, these reviews should either be exempt from this provision or
the Province should establish transition regulations for all conformity exercises
commenced prior to the release of the proposed 2016 Plans.
6.6 It is recommended that the Province include transition provisions, in the
respective Plans or by regulation, with respect to area municipal official plan
and secondary plan reviews that commenced prior to the proposed Provincial
Plan amendments.
Agricultural and Natural Heritage Systems
6.7 The Province is proposing to identify and map an agricultural system and a natural
heritage system for the GGH. If approved, municipalities will be required to apply
appropriate designations and policies in their official plans to maintain, restore or
improve the diversity and connectivity of each system.
6.8 The need for additional systems identification and mapping within a region such as
Durham, which is almost entirely governed by the Greenbelt Plan in rural areas and
the Growth Plan in urban areas, is questioned. In Durham, a proposed natural
heritage system may only cover the Region's "Whitebelt", lands between the existing
urban area boundary and the Greenbelt boundary, comprised primarily of lands
designated prime agricultural and major open space areas within the ROP.
6.9 Therefore, it is recommended that the Province should reconsider the need for
additional layers of agricultural and natural heritage systems mapping within
the GTHA. However, if the identification and systems mapping is to be
developed, the Province should develop these systems in consultation with
the upper- and single -tiers, including the Region and Conservation Authorities.
Excess Soil and Fill
6.10 The Province is proposing consistent new policy requirements for excess soil and fill
in the Growth Plan, Greenbelt Plan and ORMCP. The proposed policy requires
municipalities and industry to utilize best management practices to ensure that
excess soil is reused on-site or locally and to avoid adverse impacts for fill receiving
sites.
6.11 While the Province recognized the need for a proposed policy on excess soil and fill,
the Province should also develop regulations to address site alteration, and that
such regulations should address the issue of commercial fill from the initial extraction
to final placement, not just disposal,
6.12 Therefore, it is recommended that the Province should take a greater
leadership role in developing and monitoring regulations for the management
Report #2016 -COW -34 Page 17 of 19
of excess soil and fill,
Major Development
6.13 Existing major development policies in the ORMCP, and newly proposed policies in
the Greenbelt Plan, require extensive consideration of impacts to hydrological
features and systems for the construction of a building or buildings with a ground
floor area of 500 square metres or larger. While requiring these studies may
generally be appropriate for development of this scale, agricultural buildings of this
scale are generally much lighter construction and less impactful than comparably
sized buildings for other uses (e.g. a large residence or banquet hall on a golf course
compared to a large structure to house farm machinery or livestock).
6.14 While the Province has proposed to exempt smaller agricultural related buildings
from natural heritage and hydrological evaluations (subject to minimizing ecological
impacts), the Province should also allow municipalities and conservation authorities
the flexibility to exempt or reduce the scope of extensive hydrological studies for
agricultural buildings larger than 500 square metres in appropriate circumstances.
6.15 Therefore, it is recommended that the Province should increase the flexibility
to exempt or reduce the scope of hydrological studies for agricultural
buildings larger than 500 square metres.
Water and Wastewater Infrastructure
6.16 Many rural communities struggle with servicing constraints that are exacerbated by
policies that restrict servicing options and the location of servicing infrastructure
within the Plans' areas.
6.17 For example, prior to the approval of the existing Greenbelt Plan, the ROP
(approved by the Province in 2003) expressed the intent to extend lake -based
sanitary sewage service to Orono once expansions to the Newcastle Water Pollution
Control Plant were complete. The existing Greenbelt Plan, and now the proposed
Growth Plan, continues to prohibit the Region from doing so and as a result, Orono
remains on municipal water services only.
6.18 Therefore, it is recommended that the Province should establish a process or
policies to consider the ability to extend municipal services to settlement
areas within the Greenbelt, where circumstances warrant.
Climate Change Measures
6.19 A new objective for settlement areas is to develop in a manner that reduces
greenhouse gas emissions, and support the long-term goal of becoming "net -zero
communities". However, it is unclear at this time how these requirements are to be
implemented or measured.
6.20 Provincial staff have indicated that, to support implementation, guidance materials
39
Report #2016 -COW -34 Page 18 of 19
will be produced for developing greenhouse gas inventories, targets and emission
reduction strategies. It is presumed that this material will provide the necessary
clarification for implementation; however, no additional information or timing for this
material has been provided by the Province.
6.21 Therefore, it is recommended that the Province should prioritize the
development of guidance materials for developing greenhouse gas
inventories, targets and emission reduction strategies, and that the Province
develop this guidance material in a transparent and consultative manner,
including Regional involvement.
7. Conclusion and Next Steps
7.1 In general, there is support for many of the proposed amendments that are
consistent with submissions previously made by the Region. However, there are a
number of further refinements that would strengthen and clarify the proposed
Provincial land use Plans, as outlined in this report.
7.2 In addition, there are a number of outstanding initiatives that will provide
supplementary direction to the proposed amendments, where implications are not
fully known at this time. On-going discussions with Provincial staff and further
comprehensive analysis will provide more information in this regard. Regional staff
will continue to monitor and report back to Committee on the progress of these
supplementary guidance materials.
7.3 In preparing this report, the proposed amendments and a summary document
entitled "Shaping Land Use in the Greater Golden Horseshoe — A Guide to Proposed
Changes" was circulated to various Regional Departments and Regional Advisory
Committees (i.e. DAAC, DEAC, DTCC) for review and comment. All stakeholders
previously involved in the Durham Greenbelt Plan Review consultation exercise
were also advised of the Provincial consultation process. In addition, the Planning
Division hosted a meeting with Durham's area municipalities to discuss the proposed
amendments and to canvass additional input.
7.4 Should the proposed amendments come into effect, amendments to the ROP will be
necessary. These matters would be the subject of future reports to Committee.
7.5 It is recommended that this report be forwarded to the Minister of Municipal Affairs
as the Region's submission to the Co-ordinated Review of the Growth Plan,
Greenbelt Plan and ORMCP. A copy of this report will also be forwarded to the area
municipalities for their information.
8. Attachments
Attachment #1: Provincially Proposed Adjustment to the Greenbelt Area
(Bowmanville)
Attachment #2: Regionally Requested Correction to the Greenbelt Area
HE
Report #2016 -COW -34 Page 19 of 19
(Pickering)
Attachment #3: Provincial Co-ordinated Land Use Planning Review — Project
Webpage, including the Proposed Plans
(www.ontario.ca/land useplanningreview)
Respectfully submitted,
Original signed by
B. E. Bridgeman, MCIP, RPP
Commissioner of Planning and Economic
Development
Recommended for Presentation to Committee
Original signed by
G.H. Cubitt, MSW
Chief Administrative Officer
41
"o, R�C�0f 4T
.Zp
P9H� HG 4� # FANxLPN4 LR�5
Fj
'Y [9O1
6g P��ii fP H5l
� �yoN Oa
''M�Ey S 4S Net �n LREg ��
Pj �S
l 4'i
V JS 3J � (ij
O 'Vh
iJ
PSN
ER,is,
�1R r �5 N
9p4WEtt OF
C
D otl0113 ,l
P � O Hr,.H 4� oo-
F
18 h�tR A�
a
�
4 41v L xe• 1.HP'xN1HO VPpV!g05A p0.°E� ° P '+° 91 Y °N w
Qi
,-
$
m �
v
ti G % p
Opt�Rp Z acsH'FKS
-bib 3
r7
1
a
Q
0
4
m
42
2
coLE P� �wY P
a
rvE
W000V1°
c�H° a
N $b aH
yah' �HeW`x
opsoykRG od os
bo
rp
y
'�� Ry�Gtox�taR �4
� L
pp�
'd C
Z�
� bs
YA
°as
Qr� SR
1B iii
C �r
9p4WEtt OF
C9
O
pp�
'd C
D
C �r
3S i5
C
Y
V LYK
�
z
4
a ava
a
nE
c
cob
cu
64
O
C GZL
O
iL
u F
a"m�
L
6s
Qo�
3S i5
W
s 9a
a
J
((ii
[� l.J� ��
4 Ke• `Ff syn e
2 Z)
a. a
43
.�
�)&■!»
] 2
§
/:3
.0
C
.c
C
m
a
y
C
J
41
,C
O
V
v
v
f6
C C
] a
N
U
U
N
(0
L
.0 N
F■r
]
O N
C
0 a
ch
m
E
fN�C
o.�z°z
uC7''
3V
y
u
O
O
w
z-0 c�
C:
OH
fli
N
4
O
N
0- f0
_
O
O
O U
4�
f~
L
•� re
0.
tf
a N
L
p
d
c
'
= o � mcl)
] N v
Qac
o
a�
n–�.
C E 0
�y'
tu
C 'a
.2 oc
u 0 fs j
fo
-
n'
m
r_:a''
c
.- m M
M 0
a CD
v
,n N C
�- Q
O C
L
U
C Clf1 C: y
fL 40 CL O
t N
4'
O
Q
O .0
C
U o E U c
u a- -r- 3
w N
v
0
1 O
o
v
C
o
f0/f
v v 0� 0
W p IV
> c
N C
v L
Q
++
_
C
L „Q U
C (p +�
U a N
3O
C
Z
° C i3
0
O L
x N
f=
•1 ll7
-0
N
<u
U
fli LA
N_
fo ri
C
ru
!+ f
VOF
O O p—
a
N O v
N
N 4•
C
U N
O
O •p
Oa) - ffo
N U~
2 E
C
Z
u
,C C3i 41
0 NiO
�
` E
O
O
0-
Cm
v
O N U
v
> u 0
-0 v
>
N
1°
b
pO
u
fC0
E E p
m p c
O
U fs
+'
4J
.0 i
4a
2
fv C
U�
v
N
U
OL U
C
L
0
CU '0
d -C c U
C O
(UO U)
o +—�'
C
C
v G3
++ l4
C
L O
o t')
In
U
v c
0
v L7
G70
-♦r
—_
�~
v� f°'oC7 >
m
E
E—
0
-C
L
i U
fU O
f0 O
4-�
C
4-)41 0
fo
L id
u
-0 U
U
v
E E
O C Q
LL
'fO
C N
V
C
C
O
s'cn `4 vOi c E
OL
C N
V N
N
L
C
f�
0
Ln v c `�
U -o
M° 0
'°
o
t7
s o
O N v N
ZO fll
o
f0
.
41
Q
v�
L
V
Q.0
.0
Cl
tf
�fo�ry
m@N
°7�
��
o�
�w
B
CLL
c���°
oLr ���,
.�
0 ,1
D
N C
�C c
m
O U C
� o °'
`q o v
m ;'
ro
x
c E
v aE o'O
C:
I -:L- v
w
O�
M
y
o u ai
w v
fo v
E
.0 r
0 4J
D
�
0
M N C
v U
v
L "O
U= N
p
p
ro C
p
E 0 a
0 3�
V
L- NQ
W
c c U +v
E
o
M
r1 C Q v
� ) o
U -r
O c
Q)�
0
C Qi C
C E O U
L fJ1 O
C a
N
O fp
aj
fU p W
O (� W
v 7 4.1
O
C
CL
U+ O
E
° Qt o u_
u L C
9 C N
o U
-z' �`
O
U
L m L
is O s Q
(D L v U 'L L
p w�
,�
0 O
�
Q7 U O O U
f0 U
U] v p�
C
U p fp
•N
n7 >
•
•
LU CLs Q w
Q a C7 =
u
N Q
(6
a
4 0
M
C
4--
0 O
CL
C.
M
P
N
.a
c
m
V)
C
W
7
U
0
C
cn
t
7
O
c
0
N
clE
C 4-;
W
o -0
C
a�
cu
� L
W
C
m
CL
4)
s
4a
0
M�
W
C
m
r
U
N
CL
0
IL
N
t
0
J-�
4-1
� G C
V 0 0
'p U
o h
CL a u
O � L
p C.
N O
C N CD
C
N Q C
0U
U
O > -0
c v �
L
� 0 0
O 'C
CL 0- [a
4-1 N
QJ
Eui a
C *�
-O a
C >
w N
L
O
C
E
C
@
�
a
c
x
a
oo
i
a�Ci
C
V
oC7N
O
C
fa 0
a
v
U
L
t7 c
L
o
�Ui
L �
NO
IDO
i
tD
Gi
N
> U
L
O
L
a
E
C
{p
C
C
x
oo
i
a�Ci
oC7
�
oC7N
c
U
fa 0
cu m
C
N . W
oU
L
N
L
o
�Ui
L �
V
L
O
L
a
E
C
{p
C
C
x
oo
i
a�Ci
oC7
�
oC7N
c
U
fa 0
cu m
C
N . W
oU
L
N
L
o
�Ui
L �
45
45
a-
�
E
x
i
Gf x E
c
z6 I
f
a-
m
V
C
L
w
� N
3 7
VI
L11 .v)
0
N v
0
Q) a
E
o c
L 0
G a
O E
G �
CO O�
CC
C
U
L �
1_
O t°
N
C N
0
V
L 0
O L
ro
��
La -0
ro c
OL M
C V1
O C
� n
4-1
N `n
°'
41
U
a_} V,
V)
C
fTf
a
as
41
41
0
tR
o�
G
ro
U
a3
0
a
O
CL
IV
0
u
f0
0
w
G
(ID
N
C:
Q)
Y E
V O
U
CL w 0
LL ro
CL �. o
aO,l 0 C
z `
a
ro
N
L
ro
L
O
0
VL
0
O
2
c
a,
O
V
0
o.
ro
01
C
G
0
m
v
0
C
L
ro
(U
J
rn
C
c
Q)
E
0
U
0
O
C
0
a�
0 0
v
� 0
> E
ro
V
NT(13 (D
C a)
v
L
a�
U
G
O
N
U
e�
w
0
m
0
c
v
E
0
C
w
Go
rn
rn �
O
O
U
co Z
o
4-P
z
z 44� c
0
U Co Lip
N 0 N
Z ^ a)
-4 O
a7 111 N O
U O
O
Z� O ED
c a z
-0O C:Aw
# O tD L
Up v sT'Q
a+
w O
M
z C (1)
U a 0
W 0 4-J CD
O c (V O
E
o m a o
ro
u c
a w LU (V
s � -0 M -0
ro
L L 10._ E
C7 CD O z a
a� 0 0 0 as
u!N iA V1 N
0 0 0 0 0
a a a a a
0 0 0 0 L-
CL a a a a
ri fV m cY LA
C
O
E
E
O
U
4�
c
ro
E
CL
L
U
u1 a) 4�
LU 9 O
ro C 4�
tri ro Mn
ro CD
L a
ro 0
cO
a, o
E
L 131
UEn
LSC
o
o a
N a3
roca y
C O
O a
V) a)
G L
ro E m
M E
C Of0
0 U a
aw C
N Q O
ro uui w
w
L71 1$
ro p
ro +,
O ro O
C
L 4 L
V1
0 ° a
Ln
0
u v c
(U U
O N
° o
0
CL E fu
o 0 �'
L
o Fu 0 a
v a v
C 0
U CL�
c miv ,► c G
E c ° croi
ro *'
0 E ' 0c
_ E 4J
Q U ,� O
0
z
a
LD
k O
U Q
o
z kp
O #
.:. W
_I
O O
01 z
OC
ko
N
G v
O p
O�
ro
L1 O
a
cu a}
0
of C
0 0
c �
E L31
a�
Q O
O O
O. a
as
ri N
0
T3
fo
47
E
w
0
m
f0
G
N
E
O
V
0
.E}
m
N
c
0
CL
O
0
41
.0
0
0
C
O
w
in
0
41
0
c
L
w
ai
I-
CL a
O
w
r -i
d
M
i..
O
U
0
a
C
a
X
a
C
v
a
fh
rd
-se
U
ra
a
W
w
en
c
Le,
G N
C N
3 [O
i
c O
to co
E O
11J u
O
O
o
°
�
L
0-
L
.41
a
4- v
N
a
ufu
� 4-a
OC fa u — �
3 N
a
U1 C a
U C In V) (D
-F-
0
C 7 +' N �
z
t
a 0 +
o V) p
v
+J
�
C
a
m
4)
C
N r
C CC^ O
N
-j 0 r,
a
G N
C N
3 [O
i
c O
to co
E O
11J u
47
y
3
m
C
m
M
C
N
m
O1
L
0
a
L
u
f-
0 4-J u
U Q
C rA u
wv
E C
u
uu CO o
� L
C C O
o
fao
N
m D
CL
a u +�
0
V) N
O = fD
•p O C
L L �
O O C
O a
(U E
c E
] N O
fa
E � Cl
V) a C
C E
Zn- O -Q
7 U 3
0 a fA
QJ
O 4-J C
C C 0
O c
� ro
NQ)
C
O
� 0
p U
C C
O OL
:u
O
0 � �
E
s o
C
0 0 u
CD
O C
'L fa
f i° a
4-
c
o a +�
410
Qi
N
O E4-1 la
E +� c
� � a
L p rA
O U
W O C
O
4-0
E a E
ov
H
m
Z
w
a
E
_0 a
a —
>O
2
°- a
4 CL
a m
E w
u
c fu
fa a
+J E
ra
O
� a
ro fu
a c
� L
co 0
a O
3
u
L C
fac
-r:O
a '"
fa
o E
C
O
C
t O
{a L
0
O
t a
C E
ua
L
O
]� C
c �
O 0
E
Q) L
3 S
fu .�
Z: 0
L
C a
p fZ
ra E a
U
L C
p O
v
t 4
O U
C
0-0
L-
0
O ui
O i a
a- N O
rn
c
L
0
'c
Q.a
a
4J
4
L
0
4 0-J
^
N
�
C
a
�-
�
M
o
M
Co
0-
C
>
U
O
L
C
t
0
a
o
V)c
cn
C
C
�
u
c
ate+
a
to
p
4�
0
0 r"a
a
ra
c
O
o.
u
O
N
3
CL
fn
to
v
v
t
CLLn
4-
1
O
O
c
0 Ln
ra
OL
L Ui
O N
C
ra
d
0
LLA
N
�
D
a
s
� O
v
p 'C
C
C71
a 4.+
a
VO
0 a
ro
uui c
C
E
U ro
6
L.
]
�
'n 2
w
=aL
0)
3N
C
N
L
00
m
r_ >.
oro
V+
O
w C
C O
a
L
4.J
m
C
2
V
4-
O
O N
E o
a L
V
o a
L0
rpn
C
++
4� >
O
V
ra
0 Q
ci
C C
0yp—
a
-
fa
a
C
O ra
CL
L
a
c >
O •L
4-- L
O
a
a
CC
3
3
O• m
J O
t
> O
0
a E
a
co tZi
u
> w
u
`U)
3 E
w
O
Z
c L
aU-
>,
��4
47
y
3
m
C
m
M
C
N
m
O1
L
0
a
L
u
f-
0 4-J u
U Q
C rA u
wv
E C
u
uu CO o
� L
C C O
o
fao
N
m D
CL
a u +�
0
V) N
O = fD
•p O C
L L �
O O C
O a
(U E
c E
] N O
fa
E � Cl
V) a C
C E
Zn- O -Q
7 U 3
0 a fA
QJ
O 4-J C
C C 0
O c
� ro
NQ)
C
O
� 0
p U
C C
O OL
:u
O
0 � �
E
s o
C
0 0 u
CD
O C
'L fa
f i° a
4-
c
o a +�
410
Qi
N
O E4-1 la
E +� c
� � a
L p rA
O U
W O C
O
4-0
E a E
ov
H
m
Z
w
a
E
_0 a
a —
>O
2
°- a
4 CL
a m
E w
u
c fu
fa a
+J E
ra
O
� a
ro fu
a c
� L
co 0
a O
3
u
L C
fac
-r:O
a '"
fa
o E
C
O
C
t O
{a L
0
O
t a
C E
ua
L
O
]� C
c �
O 0
E
Q) L
3 S
fu .�
Z: 0
L
C a
p fZ
ra E a
U
L C
p O
v
t 4
O U
C
0-0
L-
0
O ui
O i a
a- N O
N
T
D
C3
tD
a
N
CO
O
O
N
O
a
F
z
a
o�
0
LL
w
W
F
z
a
Y)
z
W
W
D
a
Q
z
c�
a
O
u
h
Letter of Undertaking
I, Andrew Gumbin er , owners of the following land; 2830 Solina Road ,
intend to construct a new Single Detached Dwelling on the said lands for completion by
December 8, 2016
It is understood that IIWe may inhabit the existing Single Detached Dwelling during the
construction period of the proposed new Single Detached Dwelling.
It is further understood and agreed that I will:
Conform with all Municipal By-laws in the construction of the Single Detached
Dwelling.
2. Inhabit the existing Single Detached Dwelling on a temporary basis while the new
Single Detached Dwelling is under construction no later than December $ 2016
or with the occupation of the new dwelling, whichever occurs first.
3. On December 8, 2016 or prior to the occupation of the new Single Detached
Dwelling, whichever occurs first, remove the existing Single Detached Dwelling
immediately, or convert to accessory building by filling in the basement, removing
all plumbing, removing septic tank & pump, removing stove & all related
electrical, removing washer & dryer and laundry sink, and removing dryer outlet
& all related electrical.
4. At no time allow the new Single Detached Dwelling and the existing Single
Detached Dwelling to be occupied simultaneously.
5. One (1) month before the expiry date of December 8, 2016, request Council's
approval to exceed the six (6) month period should it be necessary to complete
the construction of the new Single Detached Dwelling.
6. 1 agree to submit the required Development Charges prior to the issuance for the
New Single Detached Dwelling. The refund of the Development Charge will be
returned once occupancy is granted to the new dwelling and the removal of
existing Single Detached Dwelling has been completed, or converted to an
accessory building.
7. 1 agree that the Municipality will cash the cheque for the Development Charges
once the Building Permit is ready for issuance.
Dated a the Muni p Iity of Clarington this 8th day of June_ _, 2016.
Witness ! Owner
Owner
50
Clarftwn
Planning Services
Report
If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the Municipal
Clerk at 905-623-3379 ext. 2102
Report To: Planning and Development Committee
Date of Meeting: October 24, 2016
Report Number: PSD -059-16 Resolution Number:
File Number: PLN 1.1.21 By-law Number:
Report Subject: Municipal Comments on the Co-ordinated Review of the Growth Plan
for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, the Greenbelt Plan, and the Oak
Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan
Recommendations:
That Report PSD -059-16 be received as the Municipal comments on the Provincial Co-
ordinated Land Use Planning Review;
2. That a copy of Report PSD -059-16 be forwarded to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and
Housing, Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural
Affairs, and the Region of Durham; and
3. That the interested parties listed in Report PSD -059-16 and any delegations be advised
of Council's decision.
51
Municipality of Clarington
Report PSD -059-16
Report Overview
Page 2
On May 10, 2016 the Province of Ontario released proposed amendments to the Growth Plan,
the Greenbelt Plan, the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, and the Niagara Escarpment
Plan as part of a co-ordinated review of the Province's four land use plans. These four plans
govern land use planning in Ontario. The purpose of this report is to provide comments to the
Province on the proposed amendments, excluding the Niagara Escarpment Plan, which does
not apply to the Municipality of Clarington. The deadline to respond is October 31, 2016.
1. Summary of Key Concerns and Comments
Staff commend the Province for the enactment of the four land use plans that have led to
the shift in the way communities are designed in the Greater Golden Horseshoe when
compared to how they were planned a decade ago. The focus of growth is shifting from
undeveloped areas along the fringe of our communities to intensifying the existing built-
up areas, while protecting the connected natural heritage system across our rural areas
and into our urban areas.
Staff encourages the Province to continue to plan for more complete and compact
communities but also recognize that this is a difficult task given the large geographic area
and the diverse needs of each individual community. There are many adjustments to the
policies that will need to be managed by the Province and the hope is that the
Municipality's key concerns and comments outlined below will assist with achieving great
communities in the Greater Golden Horseshoe overall.
Below is a summary of Staff's key concerns and comments with the proposed
amendments to the Provincial Growth Plan, Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, and
the Greenbelt Plan:
Better transit infrastructure funding and transit planning is needed prior to increasing
the intensification and density targets in the Growth Plan. The increased targets
would change the character of the community to higher densities greater than what
the community has ever seen and Clarington would not have the frequent public
transportation service that is needed to support these densities.
Request that the Province expand the Greenbelt to cover the most significant
agricultural lands south of the current Greenbelt Boundary.
Request that the Urban Settlement Area of Orono be expanded to the limits
recommended in the Municipally Initiated Official Plan Amendment 107 (OPA 107)
in order to grow the population base that is needed to support the services that
contribute to a complete community, which is a key goal to be achieved in the
Growth Plan.
52
Municipality of Clarington
Report PSD -059-16
Page 3
Allow municipalities to continue to have the ability to round out the hamlet
boundaries under the Greenbelt Plan policies as part of a municipally led official
plan comprehensive review.
Request the removal of Ministerial designation of "Prime Employment Areas" and
instead allow municipalities to determine the most appropriate areas for these types
of uses through the next comprehensive review. It is also suggested, to add
policies to allow for these types of business to be located in areas that have access
to the major transportation routes, but may not necessarily need the exposure along
the corridor.
• Request that municipalities have the ability to further refine the natural heritage
system and that in the event that an Official Plan policy, with respect to provincially
defined and/or delineated features (i.e. Provincially Significant Wetland or an Areas
of Natural or Scientific Interest) is appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board, the
appropriate Provincial Ministry should be required to defend the information.
• Request that the creeks sourced in the Lake Iroquas beach and their associated
coastal wetlands be covered under the urban river valleys provision of the
greenbelt.
• Incorporate transitional provisions to provide continuity with respect to the planning
direction that has already been undertaken.
• Request that the province further considers the request of Nash Road
Developments Inc. in the context of broad expansions to the Greenbelt in other
areas of Clarington.
2. Background
2.1. The Provincial Plans under review provide the long term planning framework and
direction to manage growth, protect agricultural lands, conserve the natural
environment and support economic development within the Greater Golden
Horseshoe.
2.2. The co-ordinated review began in February 2015. An advisory panel was appointed
by the Province to develop recommendations on how to amend and improve the
Plans. The review also included open house meetings and written submissions from
various stakeholders including farmers, developers, environmental organizations, and
the public. Municipal governments have also been involved by providing comments to
the Province throughout the process.
2.3. Staff prepared three reports on the Co-ordinated Provincial Four Plan Review:
a) Staff Report PSD -026-15 (May 4, 2015) provided comments requesting the
Province to use a science based agricultural capability analysis as the basis for
expanding the Greenbelt and protecting high yielding agricultural lands.
53
Municipality of Clarington
Report PSD -059-16
Page 4
b) Staff Report PSD -031-015 (May 25, 2015) provided recommendations to the
Province in other areas of concern that should be considered within the context of
the review. This report provides a summary of the comments that have not been
addressed in the proposed amendments released by the Province on May 10t"
2016.
c) Staff Report PSD -040-16 (May 16, 2016) provided a summary of the changes
proposed in the Growth Plan, the Greenbelt Plan and the Oak Ridges Moraine
Plan and advised that a subsequent Staff report would be prepared to respond to
the Ministry of Municipal Affairs' request for comments on the proposed
amendments.
2.4 There are four recommendations from the Municipality that have not been addressed
in the proposed amendments:
a) That the Province grow the Greenbelt to cover prime agricultural lands south of
the Greenbelt using a scientific evaluation of the lands.
b) That municipal designation of Provincially Significant Wetlands should not be
subject to an Ontario Municipal Board appeal.
c) That if municipalities are responsible for implementing the Province's land use
Plans, further support is needed from the Province, such as a criteria to evaluate
prime agricultural lands and the provision of infrastructure (i.e. public transit) to
support intensification and density policies.
d) Removal from the Greenbelt of the lands owned by Nash Road Developments
Inc.
3. Comments on the proposed Amendments
3.1 The following are detailed concerns and comments of interest to the Municipality in
response to the changes proposed in the Province's amendments.
3.2 Intensification
The minimum residential intensification target is proposed to increase from 40% to 60%.
If adopted, the Municipality would be required to implement the increased intensification
target through the next comprehensive review of the Official Plan. It should be noted thal
this is a Regional target and that it may be lower for Clarington. However, we have to
assume it will be somewhere around 50%. Consistently achieving a 50% intensification
rate will be difficult if not unrealistic, as Clarington does not have the infrastructure and
services, such as high frequency transit, that is needed to support this level of
intensification. If transit funding is not in place, the proposed intensification target of 60%
is likely too high for these areas to truly function as a "complete community" since higher
density areas cannot thrive without sufficient transit services to keep people and goods
moving.
54
Municipality of Clarington
Report PSD -059-16
Page 5
Resulting impacts include traffic congestion and the financial, environmental and health
impacts associated with increased traffic on our Municipal road infrastructure.
Furthermore, Clarington's market for intensification is limited due to the geographical
location at the edge of the Greater Toronto Area.
There would be a greater demand for local municipal services such as parks and
community facilities that would need to be upgraded. As part of Clarington's Official Plan
Review, one of the key priorities heard from our residents is to maintain and enhance the
small town/rural character of the community. Managing growth to maintain our "small
town feel" is also a key action of Council's Strategic Plan.
"One size" does not fit all. Many of the areas within Clarington are stable neighbourhoods
where the impacts of intensification could be detrimental to the community. Also, some
areas within the Built Boundary are low density subdivisions that have no area left for
intensification, nor are they suitable or realistic to redevelop for intensification. There are
also some areas within the Built Boundary that have yet to be developed and are actually
"greenfield areas" and are not true intensification. Focusing intensification on these lands
in order to achieve higher intensification targets will potentially shift growth away from key
urban growth areas.
Recommendation:
That in recognizing that "one size does not fit all", any increase in the Intensification
Targets be based on existing and committed transit infrastructure/service and the relative
geographic position in the Greater Golden Horseshoe so that municipalities closest to
Toronto have the higher target matching frequency of transit service. Further, the built
boundary should be updated to incorporate additional lands developed over the past 10
years. Much of the Bowmanville West Town Centre, near to the future GO Station is still
considered Greenfield and higher densities in this area do not contribute to the
Intensification Targets.
3.3 Greenfield Targets
The proposed Growth Plan policy increases the density target for "Designated Greenfield
Areas" from 50 to 80 residents and jobs per hectare. This seems relatively high for areas
envisioned to provide ground -related housing. For some municipalities, including
Clarington, Greenfield lands have already been planned, and approvals granted at a
density of 50 residents and jobs per hectare. By increasing the overall density to 80, any
new development within the remaining Greenfield will have to make up for the under -
density (50) at an even higher density than provided for in the proposed policy.
An unintended consequence of this may be more intensive density along the urban
fringes than the existing downtown areas. This would put a greater density of
development in the wrong place.
55
Municipality of Clarington
Report PSD -059-16
Page 6
The combination of the increase in the intensification target and the increase housing
density for greenfield lands, will make it even harder to achieve the residential
intensification target. There is a limited market for high density housing. More higher
density housing units in the Greenfield Areas means it can potentially bring down the
intensification percentage.
Recommendation:
That the province be advised that the increase of the Greenfield Density to an overall of
80 persons and jobs per hectare for Clarington is not supported; that in recognition that
"one size does not fit all" any increase in the Greenfield Density be based on relative
geographic position in the Greater Golden Horseshoe so that municipalities closest to
Toronto have the higher target; and further that the new Greenfield Density target not be
based on an overall average that includes Greenfield lands that are developed or
approved for development.
3.4 Orono Urban Boundary Expansion
Orono is a designated urban area comprised of approximately 540 dwelling units. The
major portion of Orono is serviced with municipal water but many residents have private
wells. There are no municipal sanitary sewer services.
Under the Greenbelt Plan, 2005 the boundaries of Urban Areas (including Orono) are
frozen as they existed on the day the Plan came into effect. Under the Growth Plan, 2005
"settlement areas", which include both urban areas and hamlets, are permitted to expand
in accordance with an upper -tier land budget process during a municipal comprehensive
review.
The commercial downtown Orono is in
decline. Additional residential lands would
provide a basis to maintain a more complete
community. The area proposed to be
expanded is a small portion to the west of
Orono. This will allow the area to develop in
an affordable, green, self-sustaining way.
In order for a small business to thrive or even
remain viable in a small town there has to be
a certain local population base to support the
business activity. Growth in the population will
encourage activity that allows for this
population base to be maintained. Orono has
specialty shops, antique stores, locally owned
cafes, small town street festivals, agricultural
fairs and specialized communit events that
Y
are a destination for people and families looking for diverse experiences. Furthermore,
the supply of committed residential units in the rural areas is limited, with only a three
year supply based on the past 10 year historical rate of growth.
56
Municipality of Clarington
Report PSD -059-16
Page 7
The Municipality, through the Official Plan Review process and as recommended in
Clarington's Official Plan Amendment No 107 to the Clarington Official Plan has allocated
approximately 800 units to Orono, and other rural areas in Clarington as part of the land
budget process.
Recommendation:
Clarington is supportive of the revisions to the Growth Plan and Greenbelt Plan that
would now allow for expansion of urban areas in the Greenbelt but requests that the
expansion of Orono be permitted under the current Municipal Comprehensive Official
Plan Review being implemented through Amendment 107.
3.5 Hamlet Rounding Out
The existing Greenbelt Plan allows for a one-time minor rounding out of Hamlets within
the Greenbelt during a municipal conformity exercise. Recognizing this, the Municipality,
through the Official Plan Review process has proposed the minor rounding out of several
Hamlets.
Should the Municipality not be successful at completing the conformity exercise before
the new proposed amendment to the Provincial Plans are in effect, the minor rounding -
outs proposed in the Clarington Official Plan amendment, will no longer be permitted.
In order to preserve the ability to round out the Hamlets, Staff recommend that a
transition policy be added to the proposed Greenbelt Plan, 2016 that would permit
municipalities to implement the rounding out provision in conformity with the Greenbelt
Plan, 2015.
Recommendation:
That transition policies be added to the Greenbelt Plan such that the one time minor
rounding out of Hamlets, as permitted in the Greenbelt Plan, 2005, continue to be
permitted when adopted by a municipal council as part of a comprehensive review.
3.6 Prime Employment Lands
Proposed Growth Plan policy has added a definition of Prime Employment Area as well
as corresponding Prime Employment Area policies. A Prime Employment Area is an
employment area that is protected for uses that are land extensive or have low
employment densities and require these locations, including manufacturing, warehousing
and logistics, and appropriate associated uses and ancillary facilities. Lands that are
near major goods movement facilities and corridors, including major highway
interchanges, should be identified as prime employment areas. The Minister may also
identify other prime employment areas.
The proposed amendments maintain the philosophy of separating employment land uses
from other land uses, which continues to be a reasonable planning approach for freight -
intensive employment uses (i.e. warehousing, manufacturing, logistics, and other
industrial -type uses) that often need to be close to a major highway or railway corridor.
57
Municipality of Clarington
Report PSD -059-16
Page 8
However, given that the nature of the GTA economy is shifting, it may be appropriate to
re -visit the proposed "Prime Employment Areas" in light of the types of land that will need
to be protected over the long-term from sensitive land uses (i.e. being far enough away
from residential land uses to enable the business to thrive over the long-term).
The term "Prime Employment Areas", specifically the word "Prime", is misleading as it is
typically used to refer to prestige industrial or office -type uses. However, office uses are
not permitted in the proposed "Prime" Employment Areas even though mixing prestige
industrial and office uses with other employment land uses is an accepted and
appropriate planning practice that supports the notion of complete communities.
Furthermore, given the close proximity and exposure along the transportation corridors,
there is usually a premium cost for these lands to purchase and to start up a business.
Warehouses and logistic companies usually require large parcels of land, which would be
costly to obtain given the high premiums along the corridor.
Recommendation:
The proposed policy which allows the Minister to designate "Prime" Employment Lands is
not supported. The location of "Prime" Employment Lands should be determined through
a public process by the lower -tier municipality with direction being provided by the upper -
tier through the next comprehensive review.
3.7 The Natural Heritage System
Policies have been included in the Growth Plan which would require municipalities to
incorporate in their Official Plans a natural heritage system that has been identified and
mapped by the Province using a Provincial Methodology. This Methodology is not
projected to be available until 2018 at the earliest and would only apply to a small amount
of land. The Municipality supports the efforts by the province to protect the natural
heritage system through the development of a consistent methodological approach
however, requests that the methodology be used as a minimum protection for the
features. Municipalities and Conservation Authorities should have the ability to further
refine and define the areas that need protection. Further, with the Province taking a
greater role in defining natural heritage features and, in particular, wetlands and ANSI's,
the Municipality should be shielded from the time and expense of defending appeals on
these designations.
Recommendation:
That the Province's policy for the preparation of a natural heritage system protection
methodology and mapping be supported as a minimum, however request that there is still
flexibility for municipalities and Conversation Authorities to further refine and protect the
natural heritage features. It is also requested that appeals to the Ontario Municipal Board
not be permitted for areas that are delineated by the Province.
PP
Municipality of Clarington
Report PSD -059-16
3.8 Growing the Greenbelt — Creek Valleys and Coastal Wetlands
Page 9
Municipal Official Plan policy has always recognized the importance of the natural
heritage system including water resources within the larger geographic context. The Oak
Ridges Moraine, the former Lake Iroquois Beach Shoreline and the Lake Ontario
waterfront are identified as significant components of the Municipality's natural heritage
system. The Urban Valleylands (such as the Bowmanville Creek and the Soper Creek)
and Provincially Significant Coastal wetlands that have been identified on the Greenbelt
Schedules all originate on the Oak Ridges Moraine and outlet into Lake Ontario.
However, there are other Urban Valleylands, that originate from the Lake Iroquois Beach
formation, that may or may not outlet through Provincially Significant Coastal Wetlands
into Lake Ontario. The Province should be encouraged to also protect these features by
identifying them on the appropriate Schedules.
Recommendation:
That the Province include the following watercourses that originate from the Lake Iroquois
Beach on Schedule 1:
• Robinson Creek;
• Tooley Creek;
• Westside Creek;
• Newtonville Creek.
And that the Province include the following Provincially Significant Coastal Wetlands on
Schedule 1:
McLaunghlin Bay (as depicted on Sheet 4 of 50) adjacent to the outlet of Robinson
Creek;
Westside Marsh (as identified on Sheet 3 of 50) adjacent to the Bowmanvile Marsh.
It is also recommended that the Province include all river valleys within the Urban Areas
as part of the Greenbelt, regardless of ownership. The proposed amendments only
recognize those lands which are in public ownership.
3.9 Growing the Greenbelt — Prime Agricultural Lands
On May 11, 2015, Clarington Council endorsed a report requesting that through the
Provincial Four Plan Review, the Province consider expansions to the Greenbelt by
undertaking a scientific evaluation of production capability of the land between the
Greenbelt Plan Area and the urban boundary areas in Clarington.
This evaluation was not undertaken as part of the Co-ordinated Review. However, the
proposed Greenbelt Plan (2016) indicates that the Province will lead a process to identify
potential areas to be added to the Protected Countryside by working with municipalities.
It will be based on a systems approach, which now not only includes a natural heritage
system but an agricultural system.
59
Municipality of Clarington
Report PSD -059-16
Page 10
The Minister can now add additional lands to the Greenbelt through those studies or in
response to municipal request outside of the review cycle.
Recommendation:
In recognition of further studies contemplated to grow the Greenbelt, and the desire of
Council and the Agriculture Advisory Committee, Clarington further reiterates its request
for a significant expansion of the Greenbelt to cover the most significant agricultural lands
south of the current Greenbelt Boundary and looks forward to the further provincial review
on growing the Greenbelt using a scientific evaluation of the agricultural system.
3.10 Nash Road Developments Inc.
On February 8, 2016 Council passed a resolution requesting that the province consider
removing the lands owned by Nash Road Developments Inc.at the north-east corner of
Nash Road and Hancock Road from the Greenbelt in the context of broad expansions to
the Greenbelt in other areas in Clarington.
The Draft Greenbelt Plan (2016) did not incorporate any changes to remove lands from
the Greenbelt other than correcting the error for lands within the Brookhill
Neighbourhood.
Recommendation:
That the province further consider the request of Nash Road Developments Inc. in the
context of broad expansions to the Greenbelt in other areas of Clarington.
3.11 Transitional Policies
While the proposed amendments have better aligned the Plans to make them more
consistent, there remains a lack of clarity on how transition is being dealt with and a need
for additional non -appealable matters.
The Province should consider adding a transition regulation for proposed developments
that are still in process at the time the Plans are enacted, along with a regulation for
municipally -initiated plans that are still in process. This will help to provide continuity and
certainty with respect to the planning direction that has been undertaken.
4. Conclusion
The Municipality supports many of the proposed amendments and commends the
Province for undertaking a Co-ordinated Review of four Provincial Plans, which govern
land use planning in Ontario. The concurrent review will ensure that there is greater
consistency and integration between the plans. Staff encourages the Province to continue
to consult with upper and lower -tier municipalities in order to provide further clarity and
understanding of the concerns raised by many municipalities across the Greater Golden
Horseshoe.
Municipality of Clarington
Report PSD -059-16
Page 11
Staff will continue to monitor and report back to the Committee on the progress of the Co-
ordinated Review. It is anticipated that the final amendments to the Plans will be released
early in 2017. Should the proposed amendments come into effect, amendments to the
Clarington Official Plan will be necessary.
There are many adjustments that will need to be considered by the Province. The hope is
that the Municipality's key concerns will assist the Province in their Review to achieve a
common goal of creating great communities in the Greater Golden Horseshoe.
Submitted by: Reviewed by:
David J. Crome, MCIP, RPP
Director of Planning Services
Curry Clifford MPA, CMO
Interim CAO
Staff Contact: Carlos Salazar, Lisa Backus & Nicole Zambri, 905-623-3379 ext. 2409
or csalazar(q)_clari ngton. net
Attachment
The Four Proposed Provincial Plans can be found on the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and
Ministry of Housing website at: http://www.mah.gov.on.ca/Pagel0882.aspx
I:\^Department\LDO NEW FILING SYSTEM\PLN Planning Files\PLN 1 Planning Legislation\PLN 1.1.21 2015 Provincial 4 Plans Review\Staff Report\PSD-059-16_Four Plan Review.Docx
61
Clarftwn
Planning Services
Report
If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the Municipal
Clerk at 905-623-3379 ext. 2102.
Report To: Planning and Development Committee
Date of Meeting: October 24, 2016
Report Number:
File Number:
Report Subject:
PSD -061-16
ZBA 2016-0020
Resolution:
By-law Number:
An Application by 2103386 Ontario Limited
Removal of Holding Symbol for 6 residential lots
Recommendations:
1. That Report PSD -061-16 be received;
2. That the application submitted on behalf of 2103386 Ontario Limited to remove the Holding
(H) Symbol be approved and that the attached By-law to remove the Holding (H) Symbol
be passed;
3. That Council's decision and a copy of Report PSD -061-16 be forwarded to the Region of
Durham and the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation; and
4. That all interested parties listed in Report PSD -061-16 and any delegations be advised of
Council's decision.
62
Municipality of Clarington
Report PSD -061-16
Page 2
Report Overview
Staff are recommending approval of an application submitted by 2103386 Ontario Limited to
emove the Holding (H) Symbol on a Draft Approved Plan of Subdivision for 6 lots.
1. Application Details
1.1 Owner/Applicant: 2103386 Ontario Limited
1.2 Proposal: Removal of Holding (H) Symbol from "Holding -Urban
Residential Exception ((H) R1-67) Zone";
1.3 Area: 0.39 Hectares
1.4 Location: West Side of Rudell Road, North of Regional Highway 2, Part
Lot 31, Concession 2, former Township of Clarke
1.5 Roll Number: 030 030 12204
1.6 Within Build Boundary: No
9c 70
C, C, 0201
i 3
.41
t
O 6 90
t ii F
��rt •� 7R. ' F.
to ri
!12re 21%34 VD—i
i
:�- ;+ i
�i7�' f' F+ YSi• f
r
F.
r
• � � � � .. rc � , r 1 �f 5 l ,rJ : i � � rl
Figure 1 — Site Location Map
63
Municipality of Clarington
Report PSD -061-16
2. Background
Page 3
On October 5t", 2016 an application was submitted requesting that the Holding (H)
Symbol be removed from 6 lots in Draft Approved Plan of Subdivision S -C 2007-0001.
This subdivision was Draft Approved in July 2008 and included all lands on the east side
of Rudell Road from the south limits of the proposed six lots to the limits of Highway
35/115. The balance of the lands, with the exception of the existing residence
immediately north of the six lots, have since been acquired by the public school board for
a future Secondary School site.
3. Staff Comments
3.1 The subject property is zoned "Holding -Urban Residential Exception ((H) R1-67) Zone"
Council must be satisfied that the provisions of the Official Plan are met prior to removing
the Holding (H) Symbol and no building permits can be issued. The applicant has entered
into a subdivision agreement with the Municipality and has provided all the necessary
securities and payments. Registration of the final plan is imminent. There are no
concerns with lifting the (H) Symbol.
3.2 All property taxes have been paid in full.
4. Concurrence
Not applicable
5. Conclusion
The removal of the Holding (H) Symbol for 6 lots in S -C 2007-0001 is recommended.
6. Strategic Plan Application
Not applicable.
•
Municipality of Clarington
Report PSD -061-16
Submitted by:
David J:"Crome, MCIP, RPP
Director of Planning Services
Page 4
Reviewed by:
Curry Clifford, MPA, CMO
Interim CAO
Staff Contact: Cynthia Strike, Principal Planner, 905-623-3379 ext. 2410
or cstrike(ab-clarington.net
Attachments:
Attachment 1 - Zoning By-law Amendment to Remove (H) Symbol
List of interested parties to be notified of Council's decision is listed below:
2103386 Ontario Limited
CS/CP/tg/df
I:\^Department\LDO NEW FILING SYSTEM\Application Files\ZBA Zoning\2016\ZBA2016-0020 2103386 Ont. Removal of H\Staff
Reports\PSD-061-16 Removal of Holdings.docx
65
Municipality of Clarington
Attachment 1 to
Report PSD -061-16
The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington
By-law Number 2016 -
being a By-law to amend By-law 84-63, the Comprehensive Zoning By-law for the
Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington
Whereas the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington deems it advisable to
amend By-law 84-63, as amended, of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington to permit
the development of 6 single detached dwellings on the subject lands (ZBA 2016-0020);
Now Therefore Be It Resolved That the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of
Clarington enacts as follows:
1. Schedule "Y (Newcastle)" to By-law 84-63, as amended, is hereby further amended by
changing the zone designation from:
"Holding — Urban Residential Exception ((H)R1-67) Zone" to "Urban Residential
Exception (R1-67) Zone"
as illustrated on the attached Schedule "A" hereto.
2. Schedule "A" attached hereto shall form part of the By-law.
3. This By-law shall come into effect on the date of passing hereof, subject to the
provisions of Sections 34 and 36 of the Planning Act.
By -Law passed in open session this day of , 2016
Adrian Foster, Mayor
C. Anne Greentree, Municipal Clerk
. •
This is Schedule "A" to By-law 2016- , passed this day of , 2016 A.D.
Q
J
w ERSKINE DRIVE
❑
Uj
THOMAS
w
z_
Y
W
FLOOD AVENUE
ITE
�G�/V
�z
RoaD
O
U
Q
J
J
W
❑
KING AVENUE WEST KING
® Zoning Change From "(H)R1-67" To "R1-67" /V
Newcastle Village • ZBA 2007-0002 • Schedule 3
Adrian Foster, Mayor C. Anne Greentree, Municipal Clerk
Clarington
Planning Services
If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the
Municipal Clerk at 905-623-3379 ext. 2102.
Report To: Planning and Development Committee
Date of Meeting: October 24, 2016
Addendum to
Report Number: PSD -038-16 Resolution Number:
File Number: ZBA 2016-0005 By-law Number:
Report Subject: Municipally -Initiated Zoning By-law Amendment for Properties
Frontina on Toolev Road in Courtice
Recommendations:
1. That Addendum to Report PSD -038-16 be received;
2. That the Zoning By-law Amendment be approved as contained in Attachment 2 of
Addendum to Report PSD -038-16;
3. That the Durham Regional Planning and Economic Development Department be
forwarded a copy of Addendum to Report PSD -038-16 and Council's decision; and
4. That all interested parties listed in Report PSD -038-16 and this Addendum Report
PSD -038-16 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision.
Municipality of Clarington
Addendum to Report PSD -038-16
Report Overview
Paae 2
This addendum report brings forward a recommended Zoning By-law for the subject
portion of Tooley Road. Staff have made changes to the proposed By-law to address
concerns expressed at the May 24, 2016 Council meeting.
1. Background
1.1 At the May 16, 2016 Planning and Development Committee meeting, staff brought
forward a recommendation report for the municipally initiated zoning by-law
amendment for Tooley Road. Three delegations addressed the Committee
regarding this report. Committee approved the zoning amendment and added a
special exception permitting a narrower 14.5 metre frontage for the southerly 14.8
metres of 3270 Tooley Road.
1.2 At the May 24, 2016 Council meeting, two additional delegations addressed
Council. In addition, three correspondence items were received on this matter.
Concerns were raised with respect to the proposed adjustments to the
Environmental Protection (EP) Zone limits on the east side of Tooley Road.
Ultimately, Council did not approve the by-law amendment and referred the matter
back to staff to consult with Rob and Nora Blaauw (the Blaauw's) and consider the
correspondence items received.
2. Discussion
2.1 The proposed changes to the Zoning By-law implement the Council resolution
from February 8, 2016 in response to comments from residents of Tooley Road to
permit single detached dwellings on larger lots with greater setbacks. It also
implements the 2016 Worden East Neighbourhood Design Plan by allowing for a
medium density block near the future intersection of Tooley Road and Adelaide
Avenue. As part of the rezoning of the subject area, the Environmental Protection
exception zone limits would be adjusted to match the Natural Heritage System on
Map C of the current Official Plan and the most recent information from Central
Lake Ontario Conservation Authority (CLOCA).
Kahraman Exception
2.2 In July, the Land Division Committee approved an application by Dan Kahraman at
3270 Tooley Road to create a 15.0 metre wide frontage, single detached dwelling
lot and retain a 19.4 metre frontage lot with the existing dwelling. This severance
negates the need to recognize a 14.8 metre frontage lot as originally considered
by Committee.
Municipality of Clarington
Addendum to Report PSD -038-16
Blaaw Property
Paae 3
2.3 Since the May 24, 2016 Council meeting, staff have met with the Blaaw's and
walked their property together with CLOCA staff to determine development limits
for a potential severance. The Blaauw's have an application before the Durham
Land Division Committee to sever one lot. It was approved with conditions on
October 17, 2016. We understand that the balance of their lands are under
contract to a developer.
Environmental Protection Zone
2.4 Staff have reviewed best practices used to provide flexibility in determining the
limits of an Environmental Protection zone. The policies of the Clarington Official
Plan require that an Environmental Impact Study, be submitted in support of a
development application where a natural heritage feature has been identified by
the Municipality, the Region, a Conservation Authority or the Province. The
purpose of this policy is to refine development limits based on the policies and
minimum buffers of the environmental feature(s) on the property.
2.5 Recognizing that this is an infill situation with existing lots and residences staff
have examined how some flexibility could be provided. In order to provide more
flexibility and minimize the need for future rezoning, the provisions of the
Environmental Protection Zone exception have been drafted to allow the zone
boundary to follow the recommendations of required studies or evaluation. This
will continue to extend protection to identified natural heritage and hydrological
features, where necessary, while recognizing that lands beyond the feature and
buffer can be developed without the need for a zoning by-law amendment.
Specifically, the proposed by-law states that: "The boundary of the EP -20 zone
may be refined after consultation with the appropriate Conservation Authority".
2.6 The scope of the study or evaluation will be determined based on the scale of the
proposed development and proximity to and/or significance of the feature and the
extent of the proposal. Where the proposed development is within or adjacent to a
generally "undisturbed" portion of a natural heritage and/or hydrologically sensitive
feature and includes, for example, the creation of new lots, the required study or
evaluation may need to be conducted by a qualified person to the satisfaction of
the Municipality. Where the proposed development is relatively minor (e.g.
accessory building, swimming pool) the Municipality will contact CLOCA to arrange
a site visit to determine the need and scope of the study and alternatively whether
the impacts can be addressed in the field.
3. Concurrence
Not Applicable
70
Municipality of Clarington
Addendum to Report PSD -038-16
4. Conclusion
Paae 4
While it is difficult to draw a precise line without detailed field information, the
proposed approach provides for flexibility implementing the zoning of natural
heritage and hydrologic features. Staff are proposing the attached by-law which
addresses both the concerns of environmental protection and require reasonable
development in an infill situation that may otherwise require rezoning. The
proposed Zoning By-law for the Tooley Road area represents good planning and
staff recommend that it be passed.
5. Strategic Plan Application
Not applicable.
Submitted by:
David J. XCrome. MCIP, RPP
Director of Planning Services
Reviewed by: - j��
Curry Clifford, MPA, CMO
Interim CAO
Staff Contact: Mitch Morawetz, 905-623-3379 ext. 2411 or mmorawetz(a-)_clarington.net
Attachments:
Attachment 1 PSD 038-16 and Attachments
Attachment 2 Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment
List of interested parties to be notified of Council's decision is on file in the Planning
Services Department.
CP/MM/df/tg
I:\ADepartment\LDO NEW FILING SYSTEMApplication Files\ZBA Zoning\2016\ZBA2016-0005 Tooley Road\Staff ReportAddendum to PSD-038-16.docx
71
Municipality of Clarington
C]tV*MR
Attachment 1 to
Addendum to Report PSD -038-16
Planning Services
If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the
Municipal Clerk at 905-623-3379 ext. 2102.
Report To: Planning and Development Committee
Date of Meeting: May 16, 2016
Report Number: PSD -038-16 Resolution Number:
File Number: ZBA 2016-0005 By-law Number:
Report Subject: Municipally -Initiated Zoning By-law Amendment for Properties
Fronting on Tooley Road in Courtice
Recommendations:
1. That Report PSD -038-16 be received;
2. That the Zoning By-law Amendment be approved as contained in Attachment 1 of
Report PSD -038-16;
3. That the Durham Regional Planning and Economic Development Department be
forwarded a copy of Report PSD -038-16 and Council's decision; and
4. That all interested parties listed in Report PSD -038-16 and any delegations be
advised of Council's decision.
72
Municipality of Clarington
Report PSD -038-16
Report Overview
Page 2
The Municipality of Clarington is proposing to amend Zoning By-law 84-63 for lots
fronting onto Tooley Road between Nash Road and McLean Road. The amendment
would allow only single detached dwellings and require a minimum of 17 metres of
frontage per lot. The amendment also proposes a minimum front yard setback of 7
metres for all new dwellings. Further, the amendment would zone the lands near the
future intersection of Tooley Road and Adelaide Avenue to permit, in addition to single
detached dwellings, linked townhouses on a development block of at least 1 hectare in
size.
1. Proposed Rezoning
1.1. Proposal: The Municipality of Clarington is proposing to amend the
Zoning By-law for lots fronting onto Tooley Road by
allowing only single detached dwellings and requiring a
minimum of 17 metres of frontage per lot. The
amendment also requires a minimum front yard setback of
7 metres for all new dwellings.
Furthermore, lands near the future intersection of Tooley
Road and Adelaide Avenue would permit, in addition to
single detached dwellings, linked townhouses on a
development block of at least 1 hectare in size, subject to
the typical development approval process.
1.2. Location: All properties with frontage on Tooley Road in Courtice
from Nash Road to McLean Road (future extension of
Adelaide Avenue) with the exception of the lands that
were part of application ZBA 2015-0002 (by H&H
Properties Inc.).
1.3. Within Built Boundary: Most of the properties fronting on the subject portion of
Tooley Road are within the Built Boundary. The exception
are those properties north of and including 3398 Tooley
Road on the west side of the road only.
2. Background
2.1 In 2015, H & H Building Corp. submitted development applications for lands on the
west side of Tooley Road. As a result of residents' concerns with this development
proposal and future development within the neighbourhood, staff undertook a
review of the Worden East Neighbourhood Design Plan in 2015.
73
Municipality of Clarington
Report PSD -038-16
Page 3
2.2 The residents for the most part understand that development on Tooley Road is
inevitable yet want to ensure that the character of their street is maintained.
Protection of the natural environment, maintaining larger lots and allowing homes
with greater setbacks from Tooley Road to maintain `green' along the frontage
rather than a `wall' of garages and driveways were important to the residents.
2.3 At the Council meeting of February 8, 2016, Clarington Council approved a
resolution that supported the revised Worden East Neighbourhood Design Plan
and that authorized Staff to "initiate an amendment to the Zoning By-law to permit
only single detached dwellings with greater lot frontages and setbacks in the
Urban Residential Type One (R1) Zone, fronting on Tooley Road with the
exception of the medium density area, which would be rezoned to an appropriate
zone".
3. Provincial Policy
3.1 Provincial Policy Statement
The Provincial Policy Statement encourages planning authorities to create healthy
liveable and safe communities by accommodating an appropriate range and mix of
residential; employment; recreation, park and open space; and other uses to meet
long term needs. The proposal is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement,
as it is consistent with healthy, livable and safe communities by accommodating an
appropriate mix of residential dwelling types and is sensitive to the characteristics
of the neighbourhood.
3.2 Provincial Growth Plan
The Provincial Growth Plan encourages municipalities to manage growth by
directing population growth to settlement areas such as the Courtice Urban Area.
Municipalities are encouraged to create complete communities that offer a mix of
land uses, employment and housing options, high quality open space, and access
to stores and services. The subject area is mainly within the Built-up Area of the
Growth Plan, with the exception of some of the medium density lands at the north
end of the subject area. The Growth Plan includes policies to direct development
to settlement areas, and provides direction for intensification targets within Built-up
Areas. The proposal provides opportunities for intensification within an existing
residential area and is consistent with the Growth Plan.
4. Official Plans
4.1 Durham Regional Official Plan
The Durham Regional Official Plan designates the subject lands as Living Areas
and Major Open Space. Lands designated as Living Areas permit the
74
Municipality of Clarington
Report PSD -038-16
Page 4
development of communities with defined boundaries, incorporating the widest
possible variety of housing types, sizes and tenure to provide living
accommodations that address various socio-economic factors. The proposed
change is consistent with the Living Areas designation. Lands designated Major
Open Space are to be conserved, which the proposed change will also
accomplish.
4.2 Clarington Official Plan
This neighbourhood is designated Urban Residential and Environmental Protection
Area with a medium density symbol at the north end of the subject area on the
west side of Tooley Road. The lands are within the Worden Neighbourhood,
which has a population allocation of 3900 and a housing unit target of 1300,
including 85 medium density units and 50 units for intensification.
The Urban Residential designation allows a (low) density of 10 to 30 units per net
hectare with the predominant form of housing being single and semi-detached
dwellings. The area of the neighbourhood with the medium density symbol allows
a density of 31 to 60 units per net hectare with the predominant form of housing
being townhouses, low rise apartments and mixed use developments.
Tooley Road is a collector road with a sidewalk planned on the west side of the
road.
The revised Worden East Neighbourhood Design Plan was approved February 11,
2016 in harmony with the Clarington Official Plan, as amended.
5. Zoning By-law
Zoning By-law 84-63 zones the subject lands "Urban Residential Type One (R1)"
Zone, which permits single detached dwellings on 15 metre (minimum) lots and
semi-detached or linked dwellings on 18 metre (minimum) lots. The current front
yard setback is 4.5 metres to the dwelling and 6 metres to the garage or carport.
6. Public Notice and Submissions
6.1 The Public Notice was given by mail to landowners within 120 metres of the
subject lands in accordance with the Planning Act. The notice also advised of a
Public Information Centre on April 12, 2016 at White Cliffe Terrace Retirement
Residence in Courtice.
6.2 The Statutory Public Meeting was held on April 25, 2016, at the Planning and
Development Committee meeting. Staff provided a presentation on the proposed
zoning changes. No one spoke in support of or opposition to the proposal.
75
Municipality of Clarington
Report PSD -038-16
Page 5
6.3 Staff received numerous comments leading up to the Statutory Public Meeting. A
number of individuals who live on Tooley Road have commented on the proposal.
No additional comments have been received since the Statutory Public Meeting.
6.4 The comments received are summarized below:
• Support for the proposed Zoning By-law changes;
• Concern from some residents regarding moving the Environmental Protection
zone boundary to match the current Environmental Protection Area designation
in the Official Plan;
• Concern with parking issues on Tooley Road;
• More green space and trails are needed in the area
• Keep the Environmental Study Area, identified on the Worden East
Neighbourhood Design Plan, as green space;
• Do not allow clear cutting of trees;
• Potential for legal non -conforming issues.
These comments were addressed in report PSD -029-16.
7. Agency Comments
Comments are outstanding from Central Lake Ontario Conservation and the
Region of Durham Planning Department.
8. Departmental Comments
Clarington Engineering Services concerns have been addressed through the
amendments to the Neighbourhood Design Plan.
9. Discussion
9.1 The proposed changes to the Zoning By-law implements the Council resolution in
response to comments from residents of Tooley Road to permit single detached
dwellings on larger lots with greater setbacks. As part of the rezoning of the
subject area, the EP zone limits are being adjusted to match the Environmental
Protection Area designation boundary as currently contained within the Clarington
Official Plan. Further adjustments to this boundary will be necessary with the
adoption of the updated Official Plan.
9.2 The proposed zoning changes do not affect the Environmental Study Area
identified on the Worden East Neighbourhood Design Plan with the exception of
the frontage of 3336 and 3362 Tooley Road, which is currently zoned R1 and
would continue to be zoned for residential purposes the same way as the lands to
the south.
76
Municipality of Clarington
Report PSD -038-16 Page 6
10. Concurrence
Not Applicable
11. Conclusion
The proposed Zoning By-law for the Tooley Road area is good planning and staff
recommend that it be adopted.
12. Strategic Plan Application
Not applicable.
Submitted by: Reviewed by:
Davi J. Crome, MCIP, RPP 4/Frhnk/ftn' Wu,
Director of Planning Services Chief Administrative Officer
Staff Contact: Staff Name, Mitch Morawetz, 905-623-3379 ext. 2411 or
mmorawetz(a),clarington.net
Attachments:
Attachment 1 — Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment
List of interested parties to be notified of Council's decision is on file in the Planning
Services Department,
CP/MM/df
77
Attachment 1 to
Municipality of Clarington Report PSD -038-16
Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington
By-law Number 2016 -
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
ZBA 2016-0005;
Now Therefore Be It Resolved That, the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of
Clarington enacts as follows:
1. Section 12.4 "SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS — URBAN RESIDENTIAL TYPE ONE (R1)
ZONE" is hereby amended by adding thereto, the following new Special Exception
Zone 12.4.95 as follows:
12.4.95 Urban Residential Exception (R1-95) Zone
Notwithstanding the provisions of 12.1, 12.2 b., c., d.i) and f. those lands zoned "R1-95"
on the Schedules to this By-law shall be subject to the following regulations:
a. Permitted Uses
i) A single detached dwelling
ii) A home occupation use in accordance with the provisions of Section 3.11 of
this By-law, save and except the retail sale of antiques, arts, crafts, or hobby
items.
b. Lot Frontage (minimum)
i) Interior
ii) Exterior
C. Yard Requirements (minimum)
i) Front Yard
d. Lot Coverage (maximum)
i) Dwelling
ii) Total of all buildings and structures
17 metres
20 metres
7.5 metres to private garage
7 metres to dwelling
40 percent
45 percent
2. Section 14.6 "Special Exceptions — Urban Residential Type Three (R3) Zone" is hereby
amended by adding thereto, the following new Special Exception zone 14.6.50 as follows:
"14.6.50 Urban Residential Exception (R3-50) Zone
Notwithstanding the provisions of 14.1, 14.2 and 14.3 those lands zoned "R3-50" on the
Schedules to this By-law shall be subject to the following regulations:
a. Permitted Uses:
i) A single detached dwelling
ii) A link townhouse dwelling
iii) A home occupation use in accordance with the provisions of Section 3.11 of
this By-law, save and except the retail sale of antiques, arts, crafts, or hobby
items.
b. Regulations for Single Detached Dwelling
i) Lot Frontage for single detached dwellings (minimum)
a) Interior 17 metres
b) Exterior 20 metres
ii) Yard Requirements (minimum)
a)
Front Yard
7.5 metres to private garage;
7 metres to dwelling
b)
Interior Side Yard
(i) With an attached garage
1.2 metres
(ii) Without an attached garage
1.2 metres on one side,
4.5 metres on the other
c)
Exterior Side Yard
4.5 metres
d)
Rear Yard
7.5 metres
iii) Lot Coverage (maximum)
a) Dwelling 40 percent
b) Total of all buildings and structures 45 percent
iv) Dwelling Unit Area (minimum)
a) 1 storey or split level 85 square metres
b) 1 '/z or two storey 100 square metres
v) Landscaped Open Space (minimum) 30 percent
vi) Building Height (maximum) 10.5 metres
C. Regulations for Link Townhouse Dwelling
i) Lot Area (minimum) 1 hectare
ii) Unit Requirements
For the purpose of establishing regulations for each Link Townhouse
Dwelling Unit, the following specific regulations shall apply as if each unit is
located on a lot:
79
a)
Lot Area (minimum)
180 square metres
b)
Lot Frontage (minimum)
6 metres
c)
Lot Coverage (maximum)
50 percent
d)
Landscaped Open Space (minimum)
30 percent
e)
Yard Requirements (minimum)
(i) Front Yard
(a) Garage or carport
6.0 metres
(b) Dwelling
4.0 metres
(c) Porch
2.0 metres
(ii) Rear Yard
7.5 metres
(iii) Side Yard
1.5 metres
Nil where a building has a common wall with any
building on an adjacent lot in the same zone
f)
Parking spaces shall not be located in the required yard between a
public street and Link Townhouse Dwelling Unit.
3. Schedule `4' to By-law 84-63, as amended, is hereby further amended by changing
the zone designation from:
"Urban Residential Type One (R1) Zone" to "Urban Residential Type One Exception
(R1-95) Zone";
"Urban Residential Type One (R1) Zone" to "Urban Residential Type Three
Exception (R3-50) Zone";
"Urban Residential Type One (R1) Zone" to "Environmental Protection (EP) Zone";
and
"(Holding) Urban Residential Type One ((H)R1) Zone" to "Environmental Protection
(EP) Zone"
as illustrated on the attached Schedule `A' hereto.
4. Schedule 'A' attached hereto shall form part of this By-law.
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 , 2016
Adrian Foster, Mayor
C. Anne Greentree, Municipal Clerk
F�. 1
MY
�p��{1(��=��� 1
I RMA -- 1
�
;. rllill lfl1�
111I1111111111-I
r►►►.►rrr
!F �
►� �►���1�
OE&E ���►r��►►i
0-1-1
of
r ♦ o �
VIII VIII
rl►t�Mod■111=
IIIlllll�� �� ■1� IIIIIIIIIIII
.. ►" -
IIIIIIIIIIIL� • �� :IIIIIIIIIIII
���� `;
� � �
►ILII j�jl � � IIIIIIIIIIII
.. ON
=�
��r
io►� �11�
*IIIIII ~moi �i%IIl1��
�� -�
■1. �:���IIIIIIl�1�
'ki111111�
�� M®�/�
�
� 1111111.
���
����lll�
�11111111� .111
111111111111r 1I��i�Il .Wei'
.11111111 ��■■
X111111 l� _
f��
1
• 1 . IIF -•
Attachment 2 to
Municipality of Clarington Addendum to Report PSD -038-16
Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington
By-law Number 2016 -
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 ZBA 2016-0005;
Now Therefore Be It Resolved That, the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of
Clarington enacts as follows:
1. Section 12.4 "SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS — URBAN RESIDENTIAL TYPE ONE (R1)
ZONE" is hereby amended by adding thereto, the following new Special Exception
Zone 12.4.95 as follows:
12.4.95 Urban Residential Exception (R1-95) Zone
Notwithstanding the provisions of 12.1, 12.2 b., c., d.i) and f. those lands zoned "R1-
95" on the Schedules to this By-law shall be subject to the following regulations:
a. Permitted Uses
i) A single detached dwelling
ii) A home occupation use in accordance with the provisions of Section 3.11
of this By-law, save and except the retail sale of antiques, arts, crafts, or
hobby items.
b. Lot Frontage (minimum)
i) Interior
ii) Exterior
C. Yard Requirements (minimum)
i) Front Yard
d. Lot Coverage (maximum)
i) Dwelling
ii) Total of all buildings and structures
ME
LID Jr 11�
17 metres
20 metres
7.5 metres to private garage
7 metres to dwelling
40 percent
45 percent"
2. Section 14.6 "Special Exceptions — Urban Residential Type Three (R3) Zone" is
hereby amended by adding thereto, the following new Special Exception Zone
14.6.50 as follows:
"14.6.50 Urban Residential Exception (R3-50) Zone
Notwithstanding the provisions of 14.1, 14.2 and 14.3 those lands zoned "R3-50"
on the Schedules to this By-law shall be subject to the following regulations:
a. Permitted Uses:
i) A single detached dwelling
ii) A link townhouse dwelling
iii) A home occupation use in accordance with the provisions of Section
3.11 of this By-law, save and except the retail sale of antiques, arts,
crafts, or hobby items.
b. Regulations for Single Detached Dwelling
i) Lot Frontage for single detached dwellings (minimum)
a) Interior 17 metres
b) Exterior 20 metres
ii) Yard Requirements (minimum)
a)
Front Yard
7.5 metres to private garage
7 metres to dwelling
b)
Interior Side Yard
(i) With an attached garage
1.2 metres
(ii) Without an attached garage
1.2 metres on one side
4.5 metres on the other
c)
Exterior Side Yard
4.5 metres
d)
Rear Yard
7.5 metres
iii) Lot Coverage (maximum)
a) Dwelling 40 percent
b) Total of all buildings and structures 45 percent
iv) Dwelling Unit Area (minimum)
a) 1 storey or split level 85 square metres
b) 1 1/2 or two storey 100 square metres
v) Landscaped Open Space (minimum) 30 percent
vi) Building Height (maximum) 10.5 metres
C. Regulations for Link Townhouse Dwelling
i) Lot Area (minimum) 1 hectare
ii) Unit Requirements
3
0
For the purpose of establishing regulations for each Link Townhouse
Dwelling Unit, the following specific regulations shall apply as if each unit is
located on a lot:
a) Lot Area (minimum)
b) Lot Frontage (minimum)
c) Lot Coverage (maximum)
d) Landscaped Open Space (minimum)
e) Yard Requirements (minimum)
(i) Front Yard
(a) Garage or carport
(b) Dwelling
(c) Porch
(ii) Rear Yard
180 square metres
6 metres
50 percent
30 percent
6.0 metres
4.0 metres
2.0 metres
7.5 metres
Side Yard 1.5 metres, Nil where a
building has a common
wall with any building
on an adjacent lot in the
same zone.
f) Parking spaces shall not be located in the required yard between a
public street and Link Townhouse Dwelling Unit."
Section 5.2 "Special Exceptions — Environmental Protection (EP) Zone" is hereby
amended by adding thereto, the following new Special Exception Zone 5.2.20 as
follows:
"5.2.20 Environmental Protection Exception (EP) Zone
Notwithstanding Section 5.1, those lands zoned EP -20 on the Schedules to this
By-law shall be subject to the following regulations:
a. Permitted Uses:
i) Conservation
ii) Flood and erosion control works
b. Zone Regulations:
i) The boundary of the EP -20 zone may be refined without amendment
to the Zoning By-law, after consultation with the appropriate
Conservation Authority.
ii) An Environmental Impact Study or Natural Heritage/ Hydrologic/
Geotechnical Evaluation may be required in order to determine the
extent to which the boundary of the EP -20 zone can be refined in
accordance with the Clarington Official Plan.
iii) Where the EP -20 zone boundary is refined, lands determined to be
developable within the boundary of the EP -20 zone shall be subject to
the regulations of the adjacent zone."
Schedule `4' to By-law 84-63, as amended, is hereby further amended by changing
the zone designation from:
"Urban Residential Type One (R1) Zone" to "Urban Residential Type One
Exception (R1-95) Zone";
"Urban Residential Type One (R1) Zone" to "Urban Residential Type Three
Exception (R3-50) Zone";
"Urban Residential Type One (R1) Zone" to "Environmental Protection Exception
(EP -20) Zone"; and
"(Holding) Urban Residential Type One ((H)R1) Zone" to "Environmental Protection
(EP) Zone"
as illustrated on the attached Schedule 'A' hereto.
5. Schedule 'A' attached hereto shall form part of this By-law.
6. 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 , 2016
Adrian Foster, Mayor
C. Anne Greentree, Municipal Clerk
This is Schedule "A" to By-law 2016- , passed this day of , 2016 A.D.
3459
McLEAN ROAD 39 ADFLAI
197 193 i ��*St,�Y41y �•-a �. ]J�7 �� -�� ry¢ 38
"i:+1 'm
166 1B9 ti }.� -.�y ))
164 1B3 :�ti>1tia�L 43 �"4'1i4 Yui 0 90
14 U 4
10 W 1
q�. �...
C;v 6� 0. vr{'ei J r: wa ~ `• -
wl�Q- ftS �h
7
PAGE PLACE w
n
3 �4 sM � • � �Q a •"1 �M1I- i. -
27 a
h '�c-ti-`� .�`-•=d'�.` ';�:""Y" - 2% (SLAY CCU RT p 2
ry
GFNrFRfi n B 12 t� y 94t daj
N %7 'P ARRANC,
1T DURA COURT
y� 73 6
CT 36 60 M11M1 �ti 71 4
56 ] �wr`•
".-''----
46 KINTYRE 5TREE
3 4 O
47 112 4]
v 64 111 - O i•y 54 56 50 Z -
43 110
W
RTSFIELD DRIVE= 1n] _ J a3 as rq
6 4 2 105 _ O ` - d} 42 62 n
Vao- fio
O DUNKINAVENUEry
n CIRCLE GT: :fa::: ::: :: r::. 'y`+-`,` - 67 ae as w
75 T w1 36 5s L9 -
13 5 3 1 99
3a 59
TI m m m 97 _ 33
67 5a 72 POP111 Mfvj�': - -•
.i 2B
6a 96 fi] G7 W94 -
70- .'iYy�
fie 92 93 a 27
tez 193 61 Q fi SB ❑
$
57
1MW 105 69 d 86 9 tab o 3q a6 qM1
Sg
53 107 57 W
84 m B5
58 IL
Be51 u 56 82
12
f
D
U 77
49 d8 T6 �
731
$112
ayS° BI RCHFIELO DR
- 4fv a'S D2VONDALE ST 5 ,
N 43 GB 69 7.8 4
a3 2 66 6T - ; dg � .32y 2M1
41 a0 6a 65 O n4 t 61 0 �. t9
33 '� 39 9 62 63 } ^•:� 85 a ZO 1T
66 61
31 368 3972
56 5e "� McLELLAN DR 'g 12 13
29A m '" 56 5]^4r`•~'�v F- 15 10 11
n
�` [6 m 21 B p s
54 55 16
15 8
1. 52 53 30.54 O
s 10
27 < 5 13 4
25
CLOVERFIELD STry s Ir
ti 0 13 11 C7
O
m v f 15x4
f zL f
NASH ROAD' HASH ROAD
_ NASH ROAD
65
® Zoning Change From 'R1' To'EP-20'
®i Zoning Change From'R1'to'R3-50'
® Zoning Change From 'R1' to'R1-95' /V V
' Y
Zoning To Remam '(H)R1'
E3 Zoning To Remain 'A'
Zoning To Remain 'EP'
- Zoning Change From'(H)R1' To'FP'
Courtice - ZBA 2016-0005 - Schedule 4
Adrian Foster, Mayor C. Anne Greentree, Municipal Clerk
•
•