HomeMy WebLinkAboutPSD-027-19Clarftwn
Planning Services
Report
If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the Accessibility
Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131.
Report To: Planning and Development Committee
Date of Meeting: June 3, 2019
Report Number: PSD -027-19 Resolution: PD -091-19
File Number: PLN.1.1.25 By-law Number:
Report Subject: Summary of proposed amendments to The Growth Plan for the
Greater Golden Horseshoe 2019; Bill 108, the More Homes, More
Choice Act, and other related Legislation
Recommendations:
1. That Report PSD -027-19 be received;
2. That Council reaffirms Resolution C-061-19 passed on February 25, 2019, in respect to
Provincially Significant Employment Zones and the Major Transit Station Areas;
3. That the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing be forwarded a copy of Report PSD -
027 -19 and Council's decision;
4. That the Durham Regional Planning and Economic Development Department be
forwarded a copy of Report PSD -027-19 and Council's decision; and
5. That all interested parties listed in Report PSD -027-19 and any delegations be advised
of Council's decision.
Municipality of Clarington
Report PSD -027-19
Report Overview
Page 2
The Provincial government introduced and passed first reading of Bill 108, More Homes,
More Choice Act, 2019 on May 2, 2019. Bill 108 is considered an omnibus Bill as it seeks to
amend 13 different acts that have a major impact on municipalities particularly in the areas
of planning and development and finance. As part of the proposed changes, the Province
also issued discussion papers and regulatory proposals with different time frames for public
review.
These proposed changes are in addition to the amendments to the Growth Plan; staff
presented a report to Council on February 19, 2019 (PSD -015-19) on the proposed changes.
The final changes were released on May 2, and the new Growth Plan for the Greater Golden
Horseshoe 2019 is in effect as of May 16, 2019.
This information report presents a summary of the most important changes; however, the
extent of the full impact of the proposed legislation will only be known once the Province
releases the respective Provincial regulations. Once the Regulations are released, more
detailed reports to Council will be provided as required.
1. Summary of Key Changes of the Growth Plan for the Greater
Golden Horseshoe, 2019
Employment Lands
1.1 The Growth Plan now gives municipalities some flexibility to convert Employment Areas
to a designation that permits non -employment uses in advance of a Municipal
Comprehensive Review (MCR) subject to the following criteria:
x A need is determined;
x There are no adverse effect on the viability of an Employment Area or achievement
of intensification and density targets;
x There are existing or planned infrastructure and public services; and
x A significant amount of jobs are maintained.
Provincially Significant Employment Zones - PSEZ
1.2 As presented in 'PSD -01 5-19 the Province has introduced a new designation, Provincially
Significant Employment Zones that are to be protected and cannot be converted to permit
non -employment uses outside of an MCR. The Growth Plan defines PSEZ as areas
defined by the Minister in consultation with affected municipalities for the purpose of long-
term planning for job creation and economic development. Provincially significant
employment zones can consist of employment areas as well as mixed-use areas that
contain a significant number of jobs.
Municipality of Clarington
Resort PSD -027-19
Page 3
1.3 The Province issued the map of the proposed Provincially Significant Employment Zones;
the boundaries of these zones are yet to be finalized by the Province even though the
policies are already in effect.
1.4 The Province has identified the majority of the Courtice Employment Lands as
Provincially Significant Employment Zones, including the areas identified for the proposed
GO Train station. However, the map released on May 2, 2019, does not reflect the
changes requested by Clarington Council through PSD -015-19. As a result, it is
recommended that Council reaffirm the resolution passed on February 25, 2019.
Settlement Area Boundary Changes in Advance of an MCR
1.5 Under the new Growth Plan, municipalities may expand their settlement area boundaries
in advance of an MCR, provided that the amount of land being added to the settlement
area is not more than 40 hectares.
1.6 In addition to the limited size, Settlement Area Boundaries may be expanded without an
MCR in accordance with the following:
x The lands will meet the resident and job density targets or the employment area
density targets established pursuant to the Growth Plan;
x The normally applicable requirements for a settlement area expansion are met;
x The land is not a rural settlement or in the Greenbelt;
x The land is serviced and there is sufficient reserve capacity; and
x The land will be fully accounted for in the next MCR.
1.7 On February 25, 2019, as part of Council resolution C-061-19 requesting changes to the
mapping for the Provincially Significant Employment Zones, Council requested that it be
allowed the opportunity to complete the rounding out of Hamlet boundaries approved
through OPA 107. Following the release of Bill 108 Council passed resolution PD -069-19
on May 21, 2019, requesting once more that the Provincial government support the
rounding out of Hamlets as adopted in the Clarington Official Plan and approved by the
Region of Durham in June 19, 2017. The Resolution states:
"That Staff make written submission with respect to OPA 107 to the Ministry of Municipal
Affairs and Housing to request that the transition regulation for the Growth Plan 2019, and
the Greenbelt Plan be reviewed and amended to accommodate minor rounding out in the
hamlets in appropriate circumstances."
1.8 Staff has already sent this request to the Provincial government as part of the
commenting period for the proposed Modifications to O. Reg. 311/06 (Transitional Matters
- Growth Plans) made under the Places to Grow Act, 2005 to implement A Place to Grow:
Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe 2019.
Municipality of Clarington Page 4
Resort PSD -027-19
Major Transit Station Areas - Transit Oriented Development
1.9 The Growth Plan allows Durham Region to delineate the boundaries of Major Transit
Station Areas ("MTSA") and to identify density targets. To implement these policies, the
Region of Durham is currently undertaking its' municipal comprehensive review (MCR) —
Envision Durham. Through Envision Durham, the Region has been releasing discussion
papers on a variety of topics, the next release is related to Growth Management.
1.10 In preparing of the Growth Management discussion paper, the Region has held a number
of meetings with the municipalities, in particular with the City of Oshawa and the
Municipality of Clarington to assist with delineation of the Major Transit Station Areas in
support of the proposed GO Train expansion to Bowmanville.
1.11 As Council is aware, Metrolinx is reviewing the GO Train expansion project and has
released four alternatives, three of which would change the planned structure of the
Regional and local Official Plans.
1.12 The proposed alternatives by Metrolinx and the station sites will be the subject of a
separate report to Council in the future.
Intensification and Density Targets
1.13 The Growth Plan 2019 retains the same intensification target for development within the
delineated built-up areas for Durham Region: 50 per cent until 2031. To implement the
intensification target, the Growth Plan requires that at a minimum 50 per cent of
residential development each year must occur within the delineated built-up area.
1.14 The Growth Plan also maintains the density targets for designated Greenfield areas.
These are areas between the delineated built boundary and the urban boundary and the
density continues to be 50 residents and jobs combined per hectare. Greenfield lands
should not be confused with lands in the Greenbelt Plan area (lands outside of the urban
areas).
Natural Heritage System and Agricultural System Mapping
1.15 The Province has created Provincial Natural Heritage System mapping and Provincial
Agricultural System mapping. These mapping products, may be refined by the upper or
single tier municipality prior to being implemented in an applicable upper tier or single tier
official plan. Clarington will assist with this refinement as part of the MCR review and
prior to implementation.
1.16 Until then, existing official plan mapping applies. Through changes to O. Reg. 525/97 the
Minister's approval is now required for any official plan amendment seeking to implement
changes to the agricultural system for the GGH and Natural Heritage System for the
Growth Plan.
Municipality of Clarington Page 5
Report PSD -027-19
2. Summary of proposed changes in Bill 108, the More Homes,
More Choices Act, 2019
2.1 Much of the implementation of Bill 108 will take place through Provincial Regulations.
Staff will be reporting to Council as the legislation evolves and the related regulations are
published.
3. Changes to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal Act, 2017 and
the Planning Act
3.1 The proposed changes have the effect of undoing the revisions made by the previous
government to the Ontario Municipal Board system. Some of the key changes are:
x Allow the Tribunal to require the parties to participate in meditation or dispute
resolution under rules to be established by the Tribunal;
x Continued power for the Tribunal to limit direct and cross examination of
witnesses;
x Those granted participant status in a proceeding may now only make written
submissions to the Tribunal;
x The list of persons for which the Tribunal can examine or require to produce
evidence has been narrowed to those persons who are actively involved in the
proceeding;
x Grounds for appeal are no longer limited to failure to conform with provincial plans
or official plans or failure to be consistent with Provincial Policy Statements;
x Tribunal may decide on the appeal based on what may constitute "good planning"
for the adjudicator;
x If the minister determines that a matter of provincial interest may be adversely
affected by the amendment before the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal, the
minister may give notice 30 days before the hearing commences.
3.2 Changes to the Planning Act significantly reduce the time a municipality would have to
make a decision on an application before an appeal can be filed:
Application Pre- Bill 0: is
Official Plan/Official Plan Amendment 210 days 120 days
Zoning By-law Amendment
Plan of Subdivision
150 days 90 days
180 days 120 days
Table 1: Timeframe for Applications
Municipality of Clarington Page 6
Report PSD -027-19
4. Changes to the Development Charges Act and the Planning
Act
New Community Benefits Charge for Section 37 and Parkland Dedication
Contributions
4.1 Bill 108 proposes some significant changes to how a Municipality collects development
charges; should these changes be passed, it will affect the municipality's annual budget
and long term financial planning processes. The legislation would allow municipalities to
continue to collect development charges for some capital costs (e.g. water, waste water,
police, and fire protection), but would eliminate development charges for a number of
other capital costs.
4.2 Under the proposal, the municipality would no longer be permitted to collect development
charges for capital costs related to libraries, recreation, development studies, park
development, and animal control. Instead, the draft legislation introduces the concept of a
"Community Benefit Charge" (CBC) as an amendment to the Planning Act, which would
substitute for development charges in relation to capital costs for these items. The CBC
would be limited to a percentage of the land value.
x It is not entirely clear that our ability to acquire parkland based on 5% dedication
for residential and 2% industrial/commercial is still available. Also, the mechanism
to allow the Municipality to acquire parkland or cash -in -lieu based on dwelling
units (1 ha per 300 dwelling units) has been eliminated;
x Where there is a site plan control area or zoning by-law amendment application,
the amount of development charges would be determined as of the date of the
application, rather than the date the building permit is issued;
x In most situations, payment of development charges for rental housing,
institutional, industrial, commercial, and non-profit housing would be payable in six
annual instalments, the first of which would be deferred until the occupancy or
issuance of the occupation permit, whichever is earlier.
4.3 Much of the details will be defined through the regulations, but the proposed CBC
framework includes the following:
x Before passing a CBC by-law, the municipality must prepare a community
benefits charge strategy that identifies the facilities, services and matters that will
be funded with community benefits charges;
x There is a dispute mechanism available if payment is made under protest (as
supported by an appraisal) and the difference between the owner's appraisal and
the municipality's appraisal is greater than five per cent;
x Moneys received under a CBC by-law must be paid into a special account. The
municipality must spend or allocate 60 per cent of the special account funds at the
beginning of each year;
Municipality of Clarington
Resort PSD -027-19
Page 7
x The ability to save funds for future large scale projects may be hampered by the
requirement to spend (or "allocate") 60% every year. It is not clear if committing
funds to a specific project in the future will be allowed, given that funds must be
set aside into a separate account ("reserve fund") this requirement may not allow
for saving for large scale projects;
x If a CBC by-law is passed, Council must provide the prescribed reports and
information;
x A land owner may provide contributions in-kind (facilities, services or matters
required because of development);
x Parkland dedication requirements are no longer in effect when a Community
Benefits Charge By-law has been passed;
x The impact of the change from Development Charges to the Community Benefit
Charge is not yet quantifiable due to the fact that the allowed rate will be set out
through regulations which are not yet publicly known.
Other Planning Act Changes
4.4 Proposed changes to the legislation would make it permissible to create additional
residential units in a house or ancillary building where official plan policies allow. These
additional residential units would be exempt from the payment of development charges.
4.5 New provisions promoting inclusionary zoning policies for protected major transit station
areas and areas in which a development permit system is established in response to a
minister's order.
4.6 The minister could, by order, require a municipality to adopt a development permit system
applicable to an area delineated in the order, or to a specific location with a surrounding
area to be determined by the municipality.
5. Changes to the Education Act
5.1 School boards could apply to the Minister of Education for:
x 'Alternative Projects' that would allow school boards to spend education
development charge funds on non -eligible costs so long as the project provides
for pupil accommodation and reduces the costs of acquiring land; and
x 'Localized Development Agreements' that would allow a school board to accept a
real property interest or other prescribed benefit in lieu of the developer paying
education development charges.
5.2 New ministerial oversight over school boards' plans to acquire land including veto powers
over expropriations and acquisitions.
Municipality of Clarington Page 8
Resort PSD -027-19
6. Changes to the Ontario Heritage Act
Conservation Review Board Role
6.1 One of the major changes to the Act is how appeals to designation by-laws are handled. If
a designation by-law is appealed, the LPAT would have jurisdiction to amend or repeal
the by-law, rather than the Conservation Review Board. Whereas the Conservation
Review Board can only make recommendations to Council, the LPAT can make decisions
that override the decisions of Council. A Party that objects to the notice of intent to
designate their property would be granted a right to appeal a designation by-law to the
LPAT. In addition, under the proposed changes to the LPAT Act, the appeal of a
designation by-law would be a new hearing on the merits, instead of a review of Council's
decision.
6.2 The right to appeal to the LPAT is also proposed to apply to Council's decisions regarding
the alteration of protected heritage properties. Other heritage matters, such as the
demolition or removal of designated structures, and the designation of a heritage
conservation district are currently subject to appeal to an LPAT appeal process that is not
proposed to be modified by Bill 108.
New Complete Application Timelines and Information Requirements
6.3 Bill 108 proposes a 60 -day timeline requiring municipalities to provide notice as to
whether an application for alteration or demolition is complete, and to render decisions
within 90 days of receiving a complete application. Also proposed is clarification that in
certain instances, demolition/removal on a designated property pertains to heritage
attributes as set out in the by-law, as well as to the building or structure as a whole.
6.4 Similar to applications under the Planning Act, proposed Heritage Act changes would
provide for future regulations enabling municipalities to establish minimum information
and material requirements for alternation and demolition applications.
Potential Regulations to Prohibit Designation after Prescribed Events and New
Timelines for Designation
6.5 Bill 108 introduces a new 90 -day time limit for municipalities to initiate the designation
process via a notice of intent where a "prescribed event" has occurred on the property.
After the time period elapses, the designation process would not be permitted to be
pursued. Prescribed events are to be identified by future regulations, however certain
Planning Act applications are anticipated to be included.
6.6 New timelines would require municipalities to pass the designation by-law within 120 days
of issuing the notice of intent to designate, after which the notice of intent would be
deemed to have been withdrawn.
Municipality of Clarington Page 9
Resort PSD -027-19
New Right to Object the Addition of a Property to the Municipal Register
6.7 The Heritage Act currently provides municipalities the opportunity to list non -designated
properties on a Municipal Register without passing a by-law and without giving notice to
the owners that their property has been listed. Listing non -designated properties has the
effect of preventing demolition unless the owner gives Council at least 60 days' notice,
which protects the buildings from being demolished without proper evaluation of their
cultural heritage significance.
6.8 Bill 108 would require municipalities give the owners notice within 30 days of adding a
property to the Register, and would allow owners to object to the listing. Council would
then be obliged to consider the owner's objection, but the owner would have no right of
appeal if Council decides to list the property over the owner's objections. It is currently
Clarington's practice to notify property owners that Council will be considering adding
their property to the Register in advance of bringing forward a recommendation report.
Heritage Principles under Future Regulations
6.9 Bill 108 also indicates that the provincial government will likely bring forward new heritage
regulations after it amends the current Heritage Act. Such regulations would include
statements of heritage principles that must be considered by municipalities, and
requirements for descriptions of heritage value or interest in designation by-laws.
7. Changes to the Environmental Assessment Act (the EA Act)
7.1 Bill 108 introduces several short-term changes while broader longer term review of the
environmental assessment program is considered by the Minister. The focus of the
changes proposed as part of Bill 108 is to reduce the regulatory burden on low-risk
projects.
Exempting Certain Undertakings from Class EAs
7.2 Proponents of projects subject to the Ontario Environmental Assessment regime are
required to complete an assessment of the proposed undertaking either as an individual
environmental assessment (EA), or as a class environmental assessment (Class EA),
7.3 Class EAs apply to projects that are carried out routinely, and have predictable
environmental effects that can be readily managed. The proposed changes would require
Class EAs to be amended to describe undertakings which are to be exempt from the
application of the EA Act. The projects likely to be exempt are described by the Ministry
as very low-risk activities.
7.4 The proposed amendments further identify certain Crown Corporations and Provincial
Ministries which, acting as proponents, would be able to identify in the course of the early
screening stage that a proposed undertaking does not require further assessment or
public consultation, thereby exempting it from the application of the EA Act.
Municipality of Clarington Page 10
Report PSD -027-19
7.5 Bill 108 amendments also propose the following list of specific low-risk undertakings as
exemption from the application of the EA Act:
x Group A of the GO Transit Class Environmental Assessment
x Group D of the Class Environmental Assessment for Provincial Transportation
Facilities
x Schedules A and A+ of the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment
x Category A of the Class Environmental Assessment for MNR Resource
Stewardship and Facility Development Projects
7.6 The EA Act has a provision to integrate a Municipal Class Environmental Assessment
with the Planning Act to satisfy both Acts' requirements during the Secondary Plan
process. Directly integrating the streamlined environmental assessment processes into
the Planning Act or developing a mechanism to coordinate reviews being proposed to
avoid separate reviews of the same issue as a long term solution.
8. Changes to the Environmental Protection Act - Brownfields
and Redevelopment — Ontario Regulations 153/04
8.1 The Ministry has also proposed amendments to the Records of Site Condition Regulation
(O. Reg. 153/04, Brownfields Regulation), with the stated purpose of enhancing the
economic viability of brownfield projects by reducing delays, enhancing clarity, and
providing certainty for redevelopment.
8.2 Brownfields are properties that have become contaminated as a result of prior industrial
or commercial use. Brownfield properties are often left vacant or underutilized, and may
be located in areas where redevelopment would otherwise be desirable. To allow for
redevelopment, an approved Record of Site Condition is required (RSC).
8.3 The proposed amendments would exempt certain projects from the requirement to file an
RSC.
x Low-rise buildings changing from commercial or community use to a mixed use
adding either residential or institutional use would be exempt, as long as the
residential and institutional use is limited to floors above the ground floor.
x Indoor cultivation of crops using hydroponics or other cultivation methods that do
not rely on soil from the property is proposed to be defined as an industrial use, as
opposed to the more sensitive agricultural use, if the building was previously in
industrial, commercial, or community use.
Municipality of Clarington Page 11
Resort PSD -027-19
9. Changes to the Conservation Authorities Act
9.1 The proposed legislative changes are intended to add clarity to the core responsibilities of
conservation authorities, and to ensure municipalities agree and understand the
objectives of the municipal funding provided to the conservation authorities (CAs), in our
case, the three CAs in Clarington are Ganaraska Region and Central Lake Ontario and
Kawartha Conservation Authorities.
9.2 Amendments propose the following programs and services as the core mandate for
conservation authorities:
x risk of natural hazards;
x conservation and management of lands owned or controlled by the authority;
x Related to the authority's duties, functions and responsibilities as a source
protection authority under the Clean Water Act, 2006.
9.3 Proposed changes also outline the permitting and regulatory powers of CAs with respect
to development in hazard lands (e.g., floodplains) and with respect to interference with a
watercourse or a wetland.
9.4 CAs will be permitted to provide programs and services outside of the core mandate.
These include programs and services requested to be provided by a municipality and
delivered in accordance with a memorandum of understanding entered into between the
authority and the municipality. Lastly, a CA may provide any programs and services within
its area of jurisdiction to further the authority's objectives, provided the funding
requirement described below is met.
Conservation Authority Funding Transparency
9.5 The proposed amendments which address the process of allocating the costs for capital
and operational expenditures as between the benefiting municipalities. The proposed
amendments further stipulate that if a CA wishes to carry out a non -mandatory program
which requires municipal funding, the authority must enter into an agreement to secure
funding for the program from each participating municipality
9.6 The amendments will also affect the permitting and regulatory powers of CA by
exempting certain low-risk development activities, and allow CAs to further exempt other
low-risk development activities from requiring a permit.
9.7 The new regulation is also proposed to require CAs to notify the public of changes to
regulated areas, such as floodplains and wetland boundaries.
Municipality of Clarington Page 12
Resort PSD -027-19
10. Proposed Changes to the Endangered Species Act
Landscape Agreement — A New Compliance Mechanism
10.1 The proposed amendment introduces a landscape agreement as a way for a proponent to
receive authorization for multiple activities throughout an identified geographic area.
Activities that would otherwise be prohibited by the protection provisions may be allowed
under a landscape agreement, provided the proponent undertakes certain beneficial
actions within the same geographic area. The key to the landscape agreement is that the
benefiting species are not all required to be the same as the species impacted by the
proponent's activities.
Species at Risk Conservation Fund and Species Conservation Charge
10.2 The amendments proposed as part of Bill 108 would establish the Species at Risk
Conservation Fund. The purpose of the fund is to fund activities that are reasonably likely
to protect or recover Conservation Fund Species or support their protection or recovery.
10.3 One of the sources of revenue of the fund are species conservation charges, which may
be required as part of the following:
x Landscape agreement, if an impacted species is also a Conservation Fund
Species;
x an overall benefit permit, where species conservation charge may be an
alternative to demonstrating that an overall benefit to the species will be achieved;
x a permit issued pertaining to an activity that will result in a significant social or
economic benefit, where the proponent may be required to pay a species
conservation charge;
x Authorization to engage in an activity permitted by other acts, if the authorized
person is required to pay the species conservation charge by regulation;
10.4 The Species at Risk Conservation Fund is proposed to be administered by a Crown
agency referred to as the Species at Risk Conservation Trust. This agency will determine
which activities are eligible for funding, and will develop guidelines to establish the
objectives, priorities, and standards for activities.
Municipality of Clarington
Resort PSD -027-19
11. Conclusion
Page 13
The Changes to the Growth Plan and the legislative proposals of Bill 108 will have a
significant impact on the development process and on how the municipality plans for and
provides facilities and services for new development. The details about the implementation
of many of these changes are still to be defined through Provincial regulations. Staff will
update Council once the final legislation and regulations are enacted.
Submitted by: Reviewed by:
Michael Seaman, RCIP, MPP, Andrew C. Allison, B. Comm, LL.B
Director of Planning Services CAO
Staff Contact: Carlos Salazar, Manager, Community Planning and Design Branch, 905-623-
3379 ext. 2409 or csalazar@clarington.net
List of interested parties to be notified of Council's decision is on file in the Planning Services
Department.
MS/CS/nl
Attachment 1: Council Resolution
Excerpt of the February 19, 2019
Planning and Development Committee Minutes
12.5 PSD -015-19 Proposed Changes to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden
Horseshoe
Resolution #PD -021-19
Moved by Councillor Hooper, seconded by Councillor Anderson
That Report PSD -015-19 be endorsed;
That the proposed changes to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe are
generally supported. However, the following recommendations and the comments
contained in Report PSD -015-19 be endorsed as Clarington's formal submission to the
Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing:
x The proposed Provincially Significant Employment Zones be removed from the
area identified as the Courtice Major Transit Station Area as shown in
Attachment 2;
x Provincially Significant Employment Zones be added to the lands between
Courtice Road and Highway 418, south of Bloor Street as shown in
ttachment 2;
x The proposed Provincially Significant Employment Zones be removed from the
areas where they overlap with the Southeast Courtice Secondary Plan and the
Southwest Courtice Secondary Plan areas as shown in Attachment 2;
x The lands between Durham Highway 2 and Bloor Street, east of Courtice Road
to the future Highway 418 be added as employment area to the Courtice urban
area; and
x The long-term goal of net -zero communities be maintained as a guiding principle
of the Growth Plan.
That a copy of report PSD -015-19, be forwarded to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and
Housing, Metrolinx, the Durham Regional Planning and Economic Development
Department and any interested parties.
Carried