Date€¦ · · 2016-09-30Date: IBSON. A. SPECIAL MEETING . ... 7917800, extension 4582 - or by email at - Some meeting information may also be available in alternate formats, upon

Council Agenda

Thursday, January 21, 2016

Date:

SPECIAL MEETING

REVISED AGENDA

Date: Thursday, July 21, 2016 Time: 9:30 AM Place: Council Chamber, 5th Floor

Regional Administrative Headquarters 10 Peel Centre Drive, Suite A Brampton, Ontario

Purpose: 1. To discuss the Proposed Changes Resulting from the

Provincial Coordinated Plans Review;

2. To consider the Financial Analysis of Options Related to the Bolton Residential Expansion Regional Official Plan Amendment.

For inquiries about this agenda, or to make arrangements for accessibility accommodations for persons attending, please contact: Christine Thomson at (905) 791-7800, extension 4582 or by e-mail at [email protected]

Some meeting information may also be available in alternate formats, upon request. Please contact Sharon Singh at (905) 791-7800, ext. 4320 or at [email protected]

CHAIR:

F. DALE

MEMBERS:

G. CARLSON

B. CROMBIE

J. DOWNEY

C. FONSECA

G. GIBSON

A. GROVES

N. IANNICCA

J. INNIS

L. JEFFREY

J. KOVAC

M. MAHONEY

S. MCFADDEN

M. MEDEIROS

G. MILES

E. MOORE

M. PALLESCHI

C. PARRISH

K. RAS

P. SAITO

B. SHAUGHNESSY

J. SPROVIERI

R. STARR

A. THOMPSON

J. TOVEY

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.peelregion.ca/council


Region of Peel Special Regional Council Agenda

Thursday, July 21, 2016 1.

ROLL CALL

2. DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 4. DELEGATIONS

5. ITEMS RELATED TO ENTERPRISE PROGRAMS AND SERVICES

5.1. Coordinated Plans Review 2016 - Preliminary Advocacy Opportunities and Recommendations for Improvement

Presentation by Arvin Prasad, Director, Integrated Planning Division

6. ITEMS RELATED TO PUBLIC WORKS

6.1. Response to Request for Supplemental Information: Bolton Residential Expansion

Regional Official Plan Amendment Application (Oral) (As requested at the July 7, 2016 Regional Council meeting) (See also Items 7.1 and 7.2)

Presentation by Dan Labrecque, Commissioner of Public Works and Arvin Prasad, Director, Integrated Planning Division

7. COMMUNICATIONS

7.1. Quinto Annibale, Partner, Loopstra Nixon LLP, on Behalf of Bolton North Hill

Landowners Group, letter dated July 7, 2016, Regarding the Bolton Residential Expansion Regional Official Plan Amendment Application Recommendations Report (Receipt recommended) (See also Item 6.1)

7.2. Patrick J. Harrington, Partner, Aird & Berlis LLP, on Behalf of Bolton Option 3 Landowner Group, letter dated July 18, 2016, Regarding the Proposed Region of Peel Official Plan Amendment (Receipt recommended) (See also Item 6.1)

8. OTHER BUSINESS 9. NOTICES OF MOTION 10. IN CAMERA MATTERS 11. BY-LAW TO CONFIRM THE PROCEEDINGS OF COUNCIL 12. ADJOURNMENT

ITEMS RELATED TO ENTERPRISE PROGRAMS

AND SERVICES

This page is intentionally left blank

REPORT Meeting Date: 2016-07-21 Special Regional Council

DATE: July 14, 2016

REPORT TITLE: COORDINATED PLANS REVIEW 2016 - PRELIMINARY ADVOCACY

OPPORTUNITIES AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT

FROM: Lorraine Graham-Watson, Commissioner of Corporate Services

RECOMMENDATION That the comments outlined in the report of the Commissioner of Corporate Services, titled “Coordinated Plans Review 2016 – Preliminary Advocacy Opportunities and Recommendations for Improvement”, be endorsed as the Region of Peel’s preliminary comments to the Province on the proposed changes in the Coordinated Plans Review; And further, that staff be directed to continue consultations with the local municipalities, conservation authorities, the building industry, and other stakeholders on the Coordinated Plans Review changes and develop final comments and recommendations for submission in September, 2016; And further, that a copy of the subject report be forwarded to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs, the Ministry of Housing, the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, the Cities of Brampton and Mississauga, Town of Caledon, Toronto Region Conservation Authority, Credit Valley Conservation Authority, and the Regional Planning Commissioners of Ontario, for information. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS

The Province of Ontario is proposing changes to four plans, all of which affect Peel region: the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, the Greenbelt Plan, the Niagara Escarpment Plan and the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan.

The proposed changes address many concerns that were raised in the Region of Peel’s response to the Province of Ontario in May 2015.

The Province of Ontario has launched a consultation on the proposed changes to the four land plans, and will receive comments until September 30, 2016.

This report outlines advocacy opportunities for improving upon the proposed changes and reflects early feedback from both internal and external stakeholders.

Recommended advocacy opportunities in this report include: o Addressing implications of density and intensification targets; o Enhancing alignment and delivery of infrastructure and programs; o Limiting Provincial involvement in areas of municipal planning expertise.

5.1 - 1

COORDINATED PLANS REVIEW 2016 - PRELIMINARY ADVOCACY OPPORTUNITIES AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT

- 2 -

DISCUSSION 1. Background

In spring 2015, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, and the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, initiated a co-ordinated review of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (The Growth Plan), the Greenbelt Plan (GBP), the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP) and the Niagara Escarpment Plan (NEP). They are collectively referred to throughout this report as the Plans. In the report from the Commissioner of Corporate Services, titled “2015 Coordinated Review of Provincial Plans” dated May 14, 2015, Peel Regional Council endorsed Regional staff’s comments to the Province for the initial stage of the co-ordinated review. A summary of those key recommendations along with an assessment of the Province’s responses is provided as a table in Appendix I. The Province considered stakeholder input, in addition to recommendations from an expert Advisory Panel chaired by David Crombie, to propose changes to the Plans. The Province has provided a commenting deadline of September 30, 2016 to receive feedback on these proposed changes to the Plans. a) Regional Council Direction

Preliminary Regional staff comments, found in this report, address Regional Council direction on June 23, 2016:

“That a Special Regional Council meeting be scheduled prior to the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) Conference which is held in August, 2016 to present a report regarding the implications of the proposed changes resulting from the Provincial Coordinated Plans Review.”

In developing this report, Regional staff incorporated preliminary feedback from internal departments and local municipalities. Final comments to the Province, by September 30, 2016 will reflect continued consultation with internal staff, local municipal staff, conservation authorities, and external stakeholders ranging from agricultural and environmental interests, to the development industry, and to bodies such as the Regional Planning Commissioners of Ontario (RPCO), the Greater Toronto Area Agricultural Action Committee, and the Golden Horseshoe Food and Farming Alliance.

FINDINGS

2. Summary of key advocacy opportunities and supporting recommendations

Overall, the proposed changes make significant strides towards delivering complete communities, while protecting the environment, conserving resources, and addressing climate change.

5.1 - 2


- 3 -

Three (3) key advocacy opportunities to improve proposed changes to the Plans have been identified. By addressing these through supporting recommendations, the Plans will be more responsive to regional needs, and be better positioned for success. In particular, the issues identified regarding greenfield density and intensification targets must be addressed to allow for comprehensive planning for complete communities in Peel. Generally, greater Provincial commitment and support, such as financial resources, coordination, and guidance to support local implementation, would result in significant improvements. A summary of key recommendations, organized under the advocacy opportunities, follows: a) Addressing implications of density and intensification targets

The proposed new residential intensification target should apply only to the post-2031A period at the regional level.

The proposed policies should incorporate both public-health and climate-change linkages to provide better support to municipal initiatives to improve health and climate change outcomes.

The proposed greenfield density target should apply only to development planned for the post-2031A growth allocation at the regional level.

Policies for prime employment areas should be clear that higher-density employment-related uses will not be unnecessarily restricted in these areas, provided these uses are appropriate.

Infrastructure investments in lands designated for strategic growth areas are needed, along with support for community hubs to resolve complex technical, administrative and program hurdles to implementation across all levels of government.

Investments by the Province in affordable housing, coordination of housing programs and funding mechanisms with all levels of government, and ensuring a wide variety of tools to address affordability issues, including housing supply considerations, are necessary.

b) Enhancing alignment and delivery of infrastructure and programs

Existing municipal integrated growth management strategies must be supported by the Province.

Investments in transit, and other mobility infrastructure, by the Province must accelerate to support increased density, intensification, and growth.

The GTA West Corridor Environmental Assessment must be completed, a Provincial commitment to a schedule to implement its recommendations is required, and the Region must participate in developing the terms of reference for the GTA West Advisory Panel.

The Province needs to ensure that its approaches to infrastructure do not undermine the principles of co-location of infrastructure.

c) Limiting Provincial involvement in areas of municipal planning expertise

Policies giving direction for the Province to map natural heritage systems outside the Greenbelt should be revised to enable municipal identification and mapping consistent with Provincial policy guidance.

5.1 - 3


- 4 -

Proposed changes should limit Provincial involvement in local planning, and enable municipalities to continue leading the identification and mapping of agricultural systems and prime agricultural land use designations.

Further harmonization of the agricultural policies, including permissions for agricultural uses, should be included in the proposed changes.

Proposed policies and guidance related to asset management, watershed planning, and climate change in infrastructure planning and delivery should provide implementation support, and provide flexibility to meet local study needs.

Affected communities and landowners should be consulted by the Province and sufficient time allowed for reviewing proposed boundary changes if new Greenbelt expansions are proposed.

Better alignment of Provincial policy support, such as funding and guidance, to support municipal climate change efforts is required.

Efforts to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions must expand to include all harmful emissions such as particulates, sulfur oxides and nitrogen oxides.

3. Key advocacy opportunities and supporting recommendations in detail

The improvement opportunities identified by Regional staff cut across three broad themes, each addressing specific categories of issues and having different intended outcomes. a) Density and intensification impacts

The Province’s continued commitment to complete communities is apparent in the proposed changes to the Plans. However, there are clear opportunities for improvement. i) Residential intensification target

The proposed new residential intensification target should apply only to the post-2031A period at the regional level. It is proposed by the Province that the minimum residential intensification target be increased to 60 per cent annually of all new residential unit growth located within the existing built-up area. In addition, the proposed change to 60 per cent would apply to the entire planning horizon, from the date of effect through to 2041, and apply separately to growth allocated to each municipality with an urban growth centre, such as Mississauga or Brampton. Appendix II illustrates the existing built-up area within Peel in which intensification growth is to be directed. Presently, residential intensification is targeted at 40 per cent annually of all new residential unit growth to be located within the existing built-up area across the Region of Peel. The Region has been planning for this regional 40 per cent intensification rate since incorporating the 2006 Growth Plan requirements into the Regional Official Plan, as approved by the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) in 2012. Municipalities across the Greater Golden Horseshoe have invested considerable time, effort, and money, including several lengthy OMB hearings, to ensure conformity with Places to Grow. This effort cannot be disregarded by the Province. Instead, appropriate transitional provisions must be put in place to ensure that the proposed amendments to the Plans apply to post 2031A planning.

5.1 - 4


- 5 -

In addition, the Region of Peel has already adopted a further intensification target of 50 per cent for the years 2026-2031. On a ten-year average basis (2006 to 2015), Peel has achieved an intensification rate of approximately 41 per cent. The rate, however, has been decreasing on annual basis as the early readily-developable lands at the edge of the built boundary have been developed (approximately 33 per cent between 2011 to 2015). There are practical limits to revising existing development approvals in the Region of Peel to accommodate additional intensification to meet the minimum target of 60 per cent within each municipality, from the effective date of the new Plans. In order to realize the proposed intensification targets for the Town of Caledon and the City of Brampton, this could mean diverting planned intensification from the City of Mississauga, to Brampton and Caledon, something that is not practical or supported. Further, as growth at this level of intensification could be almost exclusively in medium-density and high-density forms, there are concerns about the implications for the housing market, and housing-supply mix. A minimum intensification target of 60 per cent is more appropriate for the Region of Peel if applied at a regional level, and only to growth for the post-2031A planning horizon. This approach would appear to achieve broad planning goals and help support building complete communities, increasing densities, wisely using infrastructure, reducing sprawl, and mitigating climate change whilst recognizing the efforts of municipalities to ensure conformity with the 2031A Growth Plan. The proposed policies should incorporate both public-health and climate-change linkages to provide better support to municipal initiatives to improve health and climate change outcomes.

Intensification contributes both to better health and climate change outcomes, which should be reflected in changes to the Plans. Connecting intensification and density targets to measureable health and climate outcomes would be a significant step forward for planning in Ontario. The Province should also consider both public-health and climate-change criteria, targets and metrics that support municipal initiatives to improve health and climate change outcomes.

ii) Greenfield density target The proposed greenfield density target should apply only to development planned for the post-2031A growth allocation at the regional level.

Another significant proposed change is an increase of the minimum Designated Greenfield Area (DGA) density target from 50 to 80 residents and jobs per hectare. Presently, densities observed in recently developed residential communities within the approved and developed DGA range between approximately 65 to 75 residents and jobs per hectare. The proposed target of 80 residents and jobs per hectare would apply to the entire Regional DGA, including already built and planned portions. However, the proposed target would exclude prime employment areas which have typically developed at

5.1 - 5


- 6 -

much lower densities than residential, commercial and office areas. The Region is supportive of excluding prime employment areas. Nevertheless, achieving the proposed 80 residents and jobs per hectare collectively across the already-built, already-planned, and new greenfield areas, cannot be supported. This would result in densities in the new outer areas of the Region of Peel that cannot reasonably be expected to have an urban form and infrastructure characteristics to support such density which would need to be well above 80 residents and jobs per hectare as a result of the proposed implementation across the entire built, planned and new greenfield areas. However, if only limited to planned new greenfield communities, the proposed residential and job density target of 80 should be achievable by reassessing current approaches to greenfield development. Further, implementation of the proposed intensification and density targets should also recognize the need for individual communities to continue to have settlement expansions as part of their continuing role in accommodating growth in the Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH), and their continued evolution into complete communities. As with the proposed intensification target of 60%, the density target should also be limited to the regional level, only applied to the post-2031A planning period, and restricted to the new DGA.

iii) Prime employment areas Policies for prime employment areas should be clear that higher-density employment-related uses will not be unnecessarily restricted in these areas, provided these uses are appropriate.

The Province is proposing that upper and single-tier municipalities identify prime employment areas. These areas, once identified, would be excluded from density calculations. It is intended that this new land use category can help protect strategic locations for manufacturing, warehousing and logistics, and other low-worker density land uses requiring large property parcels. This positive change addresses previous advocacy to separate population and employment measures, in some circumstances, when calculating density. In identifying prime employment areas, however, care should be taken to ensure that these lands are not unnecessarily restricted from accommodating appropriate higher density manufacturing, office and employment servicing uses. The Province needs to ensure the opportunity, where appropriate, to allow higher-density employment-related uses within these lands. Municipalities are best-equipped to make the determination as to whether such uses are to be permitted.

iv) Developing strategic growth areas and delivering public service facilities

5.1 - 6


- 7 -

Infrastructure investments in lands designated for strategic growth areas are needed, along with support for community hubs to resolve complex technical, administrative and program hurdles to implementation across all levels of government.

Proposed revisions to the Plans make upper-tier municipalities responsible for designating lands for strategic growth areas and major transit station areas. As local municipalities are responsible for designating land uses, this approach introduces an additional required role for upper-tier municipalities. To ensure success, there is a need to align the identification of strategic growth areas with a greater commitment to investments. For instance, while strategic growth areas will be designated with higher-order transit service intended, and managed accordingly, accompanying infrastructure investment will be required to realize their development potential as complete communities. Further proposed changes to the Plans promote public service facilities where public services would be co-located and integrated. Community hubs would promote cost-effectiveness and also help complete communities. In particular, the Province has identified the potential use of schools as community hubs. More detail on using school sites, or other existing public service facilities, and funding to accommodate various services in one location would be crucial for the successful implementation. In addition, Provincial policies and funding are required for planning the development of community hubs, in order to resolve the complex technical, administrative and program hurdles across all levels of government to implement this initiative.

v) Housing Affordability Investments by the Province in affordable housing, coordination of housing programs and funding mechanisms with all levels of government, and ensuring a wide variety of tools to address affordability issues, including housing supply considerations, are necessary.

Affordability and availability of a variety of housing types and tenures that are responsive to different life circumstances are key components of complete communities. Proposed changes to the Plans are encouraging greater affordability and availability of a greater diversity of housing types and tenures by creating the conditions for higher-density housing supply. Further, potential changes through Bill 204 to introduce inclusionary zoning could encourage more affordable housing development. It has been noted, however, that the combined impact of changes to both the residential intensification and density targets may adversely impact the availability of detached, semi-detached, and townhouse dwellings. This may undermine objectives to ensure affordability of housing across a variety of housing types and tenures. The housing affordability and availability challenges are a complex issue that has many causes and requires many measures. The Province should enable, and

5.1 - 7


- 8 -

embrace, a variety of tools and programs to best address the housing affordability challenges across the spectrum of housing types and tenure. Some of these approaches could include, but are not limited to:

Advocate to the Federal government to lead a national, long-term strategy including an infusion of federal money into high-growth areas, such as Peel, and to encourage private sector investment in rental housing through tax incentives;

Continue focusing on inter-ministerial integration to address housing and health needs of all population groups, including people at-risk of homelessness;

Developing Province-wide performance measures and a platform to collect and share data, and best practices, to enhance municipalities and system partners’ abilities to service community;

Leading best practices research on inclusionary zoning implementation to benefit all municipalities, and;

Increase support of existing municipal efforts to address the affordability challenges in Peel.

Proposed changes to the Plans direct that upper-tier and single-tier housing strategies, a requirement of the 2006 Growth Plan, must align with housing and homelessness plans, a requirement of the 2011 Housing Services Act. Peel has both a housing strategy and a housing and homelessness plan. As such, Regional staff will need to ensure the Regional Housing Strategy aligns with the Peel Housing and Homelessness Plan, while leveraging the opportunities that inclusionary zoning may bring through the passage of Bill 204. These opportunities were detailed in a report to Council on July 7

th 2016, entitled “Response to Bill 204 – Promoting Affordable

Housing Act”.

b) Enhancing alignment of infrastructure and programs

Comprehensive growth management approaches that incorporate infrastructure considerations are at the heart of Peel’s ongoing new approach to planning, servicing, and financing growth. Realizing more compact growth, greater densities, better mobility and live-work opportunities, will create infrastructure challenges and opportunities unique to the local development environment that will need to be addressed. Recent studies on the costs of growth undertaken by the Region demonstrates that increased densities make better use of infrastructure, provide opportunities to plan and co-ordinate state of good repair (SOGR) needs of existing infrastructure, and that municipal infrastructure investment provides disproportionately greater benefits to provincial and federal levels of government. i) Integrating Infrastructure and Growth Management

Existing municipal integrated growth management strategies must be supported by the Province.

5.1 - 8


- 9 -

Through the ongoing ‘New Approach to Planning, Servicing, and Financing Growth’, the Region has embraced an approach to planning that more strategically considers the infrastructure and financing implications for accommodating planned growth. It will better align municipal visions for city building with infrastructure master plans and capital programs. Significant effort is being expended by the Region, in collaboration with its partners in local municipalities and the building industry, to ensure growth is affordable and complies with the Growth Plan forecasts. Provincial proposals for changes to the Plans should build upon efforts like these. Although the proposed new guidelines for land budgets are anticipated in late 2017 or 2018, Peel’s ongoing growth management work based on current land budgeting best practices should be recognized and supported.

ii) Mobility Investments in transit, and other mobility infrastructure, by the Province must accelerate to support increased density, intensification, and growth.

Proposed changes to the Plans should be coordinated with the Metrolinx Regional Transportation Plan, and Transportation Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, to ensure a comprehensive and harmonized approach to transportation planning, and to ensure accompanying, sustainable, funding to implement the planned transportation network.

Further, proposed changes to the plans encourage establishing a framework for

prioritizing decisions on transit planning and investment in areas with existing or planned higher residential and employment densities to optimize return on investment, and contribute towards provincial greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets.

However, efforts to date are just realizing improvements in transit infrastructure in the existing historic built boundaries such as the Hurontario corridor in Peel. The proposed policies must be accompanied by a firm Provincial commitment to mobility infrastructure investments, especially within greenfield areas, to achieve livable, healthy, and complete communities, as envisioned by the proposed policies.

iii) GTA West The GTA West Corridor Environmental Assessment must be completed, a Provincial commitment to a schedule to implement its recommendations is required, and the Region must participate in developing the terms of reference for the GTA West Advisory Panel.

Regional staff supports proposed changes to the Plans that strengthen policies with respect to the goods movement industry, and active transportation. Some concerns, however, must be addressed with respect to the GTA West corridor. The suspension of the GTA West Corridor Environmental Assessment (EA) study has resulted in many challenges and delays to planning in Peel. The absence of the GTA West corridor puts additional strain on regional and local network within Peel

5.1 - 9


- 10 -

Region. Additionally, lands within the study area, including significant employment developments, are essentially frozen, pending a decision. Completion of the Provincial Environmental Assessment, and construction of the GTA West corridor, would allow for more comprehensive growth planning that integrates infrastructure consideration and helps realize growth targets, as the Province intends. Its absence impedes Peel’s ability to meet its growth targets. Moreover, it would help support the desired increase in activity rates as recently endorsed by City of Brampton Council. Region of Peel staff have recently been informed that the Minister has established a GTA West Advisory Panel with a term ending in April 2017. As the municipality perhaps most affected by the GTA West, in fact the Region has defended corridor protection policies at the Ontario Municipal Board, Peel must participate in the development of the Terms of Reference for the GTA West Advisory Panel.

iv) Infrastructure Placement The Province needs to ensure that its approaches to infrastructure do not undermine the principles of co-location of infrastructure.

Regional staff supports Provincial proposals for infrastructure co-location. Peel has already implemented policies encouraging the co-location of appropriate infrastructure through ROPA 24. However, in the case of the GTA West EA and parallel Hydro One EA, greater coordination is required between various levels of government and utility companies. Peel staff has consulted with Hydro One staff, and confirmed that regardless of the GTA West EA outcome, the Hydro One EA study will continue. This highlights the need for the Province to coordinate and support infrastructure planning and co-location.

c) Limiting Provincial involvement in areas of municipal planning expertise

Changes proposed to the Plans create a more direct role for the Province in matters that municipalities currently lead. The Province should enable municipalities to continue in their leadership role in planning for natural heritage, water resources, infrastructure and agriculture, and provide support to facilitate municipal implementation. i) Protecting Natural Heritage and Water Resources

Policies giving direction for the Province to map natural heritage systems outside the Greenbelt should be revised to enable municipal identification and mapping consistent with Provincial policy guidance.

Proposed revisions to the Plans substantively increase the role of the Province in natural heritage planning, and create a greater role for the Province in mapping natural heritage systems outside of the designated Greenbelt.

In accordance with Provincial, Regional and local policy direction, Municipalities in Peel have effectively implemented the responsibility to identify and protect natural

5.1 - 10


- 11 -

heritage systems, features and areas through policy and studies. The policy framework of the Provincial Policy Statement is sufficiently effective that direct involvement of the Province in natural heritage identification and mapping is not necessary.

If the Plans identify a role for the Province in mapping, the proposed policy enabling municipal refinement of the boundaries should be retained.

ii) Supporting Agriculture Proposed changes should limit Provincial involvement in local planning, and enable municipalities to continue leading the identification and mapping of agricultural systems and prime agricultural land use designations.

Plan revisions reflect concerns that the Plans were not supporting economic viability of agriculture. Previous requests to the Province advocated harmonization of land use permissions for agriculture consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2014. Comments from the agriculture sector also advocated for policy which recognized and supported an agricultural system within the Greater Golden Horseshoe. The Province has proposed policy changes which substantively address requests for harmonization and support for an agricultural system. Proposed changes to the Plans indicate the Province will be leading the identification and mapping of the Greater Golden Horseshoe agricultural system and requiring municipalities to designate prime agricultural areas in accordance with Provincially-identified mapping.

Although the general direction on mapping is understood, it is not clear how prime agricultural areas will be mapped; whether local Land Evaluation and Area Review (LEAR) studies will be considered; or, if entirely new mapping exercises, evaluations, factors and weighting will be developed and applied. If a LEAR study is to be led by the Province, consultation on the process, factors, weighting and recommended boundaries for prime agricultural areas should be undertaken with affected communities.

The identification and mapping of an agricultural system and prime agricultural areas will result in land use designations. As such, these studies should be substantively led and implemented by municipalities. LEAR studies undertaken by municipalities and refined at a local level should be an acceptable basis for identifying prime agricultural areas within the agricultural system.

In light of these issues, the Province has indicated an interest in engaging municipalities and agricultural planners within the Greater Golden Horseshoe, and initiated staff-level consultation on a process to be undertaken to resolve these questions.

Further harmonization of the agricultural policies, including permissions for agricultural uses, should be included in the proposed changes.

Land use permissions for agriculture, agriculture-related and on-farm diversified uses have been harmonized among the Plans and in many of the land use designations

5.1 - 11


- 12 -

within the Plans. Further harmonization of permissions could be considered in additional land use designations, for example, ORMCP Natural Core and Natural Linkage designations.

Additional changes to the Plans should be considered to simplify criteria exempting agricultural uses, buildings and structures from the need to prepare natural heritage evaluations and extending more flexible setback permissions from agricultural drains and swales throughout the agricultural system. As proposed, the policy would only apply in Niagara Region.

Further, the Niagara Escarpment Plan proposed policies do not include the identification and support of the agricultural system. Inclusion of the agricultural system in each of the four plans should be considered.

In summary, the harmonization has moved policy in the right direction. Additional

changes to further policy harmonization are recommended.

iii) Asset Management, Watershed, and Climate Change Considerations in Infrastructure Delivery Proposed policies and guidance related to asset management, watershed planning, and climate change in infrastructure planning and delivery should provide implementation support, and provide flexibility to meet local study needs.

Proposed changes to the Plans emphasize a more integrated approach to land use and infrastructure planning, including the application of watershed planning, infrastructure asset management and climate change planning approaches. For example, municipal comprehensive review requirements for settlement expansions will require alignment with infrastructure master plans informed by asset management planning and watershed planning. New requirements for watershed plans may be onerous if guidance is not adapted to support current approaches, and permit the application of different scales of watershed planning to different stages throughout the planning process. Flexibility is needed as requirements for growth allocations, infrastructure master planning and settlement expansions vary. At the Region of Peel, significant effort is being expended to plan, service, and finance growth to 2041. Depending on how studies are scoped, watershed-planning considerations can add significant time and expense to processes that are already underway. Further, Provincial guidelines for new study requirements are proposed, but are not planned to be available until 2017 or 2018. If Provincial direction on watershed, asset management, stormwater management, and climate change planning is intended to inform growth management and infrastructure decisions, appropriate guidance and transition should be provided to:

avoid unnecessary and rigid interdependencies and allow flexible approaches that meet local study needs;

5.1 - 12


- 13 -

enable the use of existing regionally- and locally-developed plans, such as source water protection assessment reports;

permit implementation at different scales, including through sub-watershed or equivalent studies, and;

provide reasonable timelines to update broader watershed plans in accordance with new provincial direction.

In addition, it would be beneficial if roles and responsibilities for the Province, regions, local municipalities and conservation authorities were clarified in the delivery of these new requirements. Specifically, it should be done with a view that responsibilities should be disentangled and devolved to the appropriate local level as much as possible.

iv) Growing the Greenbelt Affected communities and landowners should be consulted by the Province and sufficient time allowed for reviewing proposed boundary changes if new Greenbelt expansions are proposed.

In general, there is broad public support for the Greenbelt Plan, the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan and the Niagara Escarpment Plan, which collectively protect agriculture, natural heritage, water resources and significant landscapes in the Greater Golden Horseshoe.

In the current round of proposed changes to the Greenbelt Plan, with the exception of Urban River Valley (URV) designations along the Credit River, Humber River and Etobicoke Creek, the Province is not proposing expansion of the Greenbelt in Peel Region. URV designations would apply only to public lands and only within 60 metres of watercourses. The Province has indicated that it is leading a separate process to identify areas to be added to the Greenbelt Protected Countryside. The exercise to potentially expand the Greenbelt is being conducted concurrently, but separately, from the proposed changes that are currently undergoing consultation.

Provincial staff has advised that potential further expansion of the Greenbelt will be focused beyond the Greater Toronto Area, particularly in areas having significant ecological and hydrologic features facing development pressure. Further consultation on the Greenbelt expansion initiative including the identification of additional expansion areas is proposed in the autumn, and winter, of 2016.

v) Adapting to, and mitigating climate change

Broadly, the Plans work together to address climate change from both a mitigation and an adaptation perspective by promoting the development of complete, compact communities; integrating transportation and land use; protecting natural heritage, water and agricultural systems; and promoting a culture of conservation.

Better alignment of Provincial policy support, such as funding and guidance to support municipal climate change efforts, is required.

5.1 - 13


- 14 -

Proposed changes to the Plans introduce policy requiring upper- and single-tier municipalities to develop official plan policies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and address adaptation. This approach could be strengthened through the requirement for all lower-tier, upper-tier, and single-tier municipal official plans to include policies, objectives and goals related to climate change and encourage collaboration through partnerships to align efforts. The recently released Climate Change Action Plan (CCAP) builds on Ontario’s Climate Change Strategy and defines how the Province’s potential new cap-and-trade revenues could be invested to help reduce the production of greenhouse gas emissions. CCAP estimates potential investments of $5 to $8 billion for a range of programs to reduce emissions in areas related to transportation, transit, industry, buildings, land use planning and community energy planning. These investment opportunities are welcomed and supported. Similar programming, and funding, for municipalities to support adaptation and improve resiliency of communities in areas of municipal responsibility would be helpful in realizing the objectives of the Plans. For instance, funding infrastructure for flooding, stormwater, and housing should be considered. These commitments should be included in the Province’s plan for adapting to climate change proposed to be released in 2017. In addition, further clarity and commitment is needed on the respective roles and responsibilities of the Province, single-tier, upper-tier and lower-tier municipalities in adapting to and mitigating climate change, in addition to Provincial supports such as funding, guidance, and subject matter expertise.

Efforts to mitigate Greenhouse Gas Emissions must expand to include all

harmful emissions such as particulates, sulfur oxides, and nitrogen oxides.

It is clear that the greenhouse gas emissions that drive climate change are a serious

issue. However, they do not capture the full spectrum of air pollutants that negatively impact our environment and our collective health. Other emissions such as particulates, sulfur oxides, and nitrogen oxides should be included in emissions management approaches. Proposed changes to the Plans should consider mitigation of this entire spectrum of air pollutants, in addition to the traditional carbon-orientated approach to greenhouse gases.

5.1 - 14


- 15 -

4. CONCLUSION

The proposed changes to the Plans will contribute towards a more effective built environment through reduced costs of infrastructure, improved mobility, affordable housing, conserved resources, and a healthier, protected environment. However, issues of concern remain with the proposed changes to the Plans, as identified in this report. Further consultation will be undertaken with municipal partners, and other stakeholders, to better understand these issues and develop appropriate options for addressing them. The results of this additional work will be in the Region’s comments for submission to the Province, for the stated September 30th 2016 deadline.

Lorraine Graham-Watson, Commissioner of Corporate Services Approved for Submission:

D. Szwarc, Chief Administrative Officer APPENDICES APPENDIX I – Prior Recommendations Assessment Table APPENDIX II – Illustration of Policy Areas in Peel For further information regarding this report, please contact: Arvin Prasad, Director, Integrated Planning Division, [email protected] 905-791-7800 x4251 Authored By: Indro Bhattacharyya, MCIP RPP

5.1 - 15

1

Appendix I - Assessment of Prior Region of Peel Recommendations for the Coordinated Plans Review

Regional Council Recommendations (2015) Regional Staff Comments On Proposed Provincial Plan

Amendments (2016)

Key Recommendations

Symbol Key:

+ Recommendation is addressed in proposed changes - Recommendation not addressed +/- Results are mixed ? Requires

Clarification

1 The Province should align and strengthen provincial

policies and infrastructure investments in transit, goods

movement, education and health care, to facilitate

complete communities and support municipal

implementation of the Growth Plan. +/-

Better alignment of provincial plans and policies is achieved.

Policies related to the creation of complete communities are

strengthened. Although proposed policies improve integration of

land use planning with infrastructure planning and investment and

clarify the policy intent of the Province to work with public sector

partners, Provincial support beyond policy to include stronger

provincial funding and program alignment is unclear. Program

areas where provincial alignment to support municipal

implementation is needed include planning for intensification,

mobility, affordable housing, community hubs and climate change.

2 The Province should ensure that growth forecasts,

allocations, targets and policies are reviewed and updated

to reflect structural trends in the economy, meet intended

planning objectives and support regional and local

financial capacities. +/-

The province has recognized the changing employment trends and

allowed low density employment uses to be excluded from the

calculations for designated greenfield area targets. The province

has updated the intensification targets for the built up and

designated greenfield areas to support complete communities and

address climate change. The province has not amended

employment forecasts or allocations to reflect structural trends in

the economy.

5.1 - 16

2

3 The Province should provide updated financial policies to

ensure growth pays for growth, and provide enhanced

provincial infrastructure investments to share risks and

opportunities. +/-

Proposed new policies would require infrastructure planning to be

undertaken in an integrated manner, including evaluations of long-

range scenario-based land use planning and financial planning, and

will be supported by infrastructure master plans and other relevant

studies. The province has also proposed to align its infrastructure

investments with the policies of the Growth Plan. Municipalities

are still responsible for funding or financing the majority of growth

related infrastructure.

4 Employment land policies should be improved to

strengthen guidance for identification and protection of

strategic employment lands in key locations and to remove

lower density warehousing and logistics employment from

the calculation of greenfield density targets +/-

Guidance has not been provided for identifying and protecting

strategic employment lands. The Province has proposed allowing

municipalities to identify “prime employment areas” and has

included the Region’s request to exclude lower density

employment lands when calculating the designated greenfield area

target. These areas would typically accommodate uses such as

warehousing and manufacturing that require a lot of land.

5 The Province should provide an updated, consistent

methodology and guideline to determine regional and

local land budgets and introduce legislative provisions

that, once approved, land budgets are not appealable to

the OMB.

+

The province will provide a standard methodology for assessing

land needs and requiring the use of this methodology by

municipalities. Consultation on OMB reform is proposed to start in

the fall 2016.

6 The Province should amend the Planning Act to enable

inclusionary zoning for affordable housing and should

implement with the federal government, incentives to

encourage more private sector investment in rental

housing.

+

The province has released Bill 204, the Promoting Affordable

Housing Act which proposes to amend the Planning Act to allow for

inclusionary zoning. If passed, municipalities would be enabled to

require the inclusion of affordable housing units in new

development projects.

7 The Province should ensure that health benefits and

health indicators become an important consideration

when developing compact built form and complete

communities. +/-

Proposed changes generally support development of complete,

compact communities, increased density, mixed uses and

alignment of land use, transportation and better mobility choices.

Further improvement could add requirements to require

consideration of health impacts and health criteria when assessing

land needs and development proposals.

Appendix I 5.1 - 17

3

8 The Province should harmonize policies, designations,

definitions and criteria within the GBP, ORMCP and NEP

and consider consolidating multiple plans into one plan. +/-

The province proposes to harmonize where feasible policies,

designations and definitions within the Greenbelt Plan, Oak Ridges

Moraine Conservation Plan and the Niagara Escarpment Plan.

9 Beyond protecting the agricultural land base, the Province

should ensure that the plans support agricultural viability

and have supportive provisions for agriculture-related and

on-farm diversified uses. +

The proposed changes to the Growth Plan indicate the Province

will support agricultural viability by identifying an agricultural

system for the Greater Golden Horseshoe and harmonize land use

permissions for agricultural, agriculture-related and on-farm

diversified uses. However, further harmonization to address

inconsistencies in the proposed agricultural policies within the Oak

Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan and Niagara Escarpment Plan is

requested.

Detailed Recommendations

1 How can the plans better support the long-term protection of agricultural lands, water and natural areas?

1.1 The Provincial Policy Statement policies, criteria and

definitions for agriculture-related and on-farm diversified

uses should be reflected throughout the three Greenbelt

plans (GBP, ORMCP, NEP) to provide consistent,

supportive policy guidance for agriculture. Provincial Plans

policies should not be modified or unnecessarily limit

permissions as they currently are within each of the plans. +

The proposed changes indicate the Province will support

agricultural viability by identifying an agricultural system for the

Greater Golden Horseshoe and harmonize land use permissions for

agricultural, agriculture-related and on-farm diversified uses.

However, harmonization of the identification of proposed

agricultural system in the Niagara Escarpment Plan with the other

Provincial Plans was not included and should be encouraged. As

well, further harmonization of permissions for agriculture-related

and on-farm diversified uses could be considered in additional plan

designations as existing farms in these areas may seek

opportunities for diversification (e.g. ORMCP Natural Core and

Natural Linkage). Policies requiring compatibility with natural

heritage features are included in the Plans to ensure both policy

objectives are met.

Appendix I 5.1 - 18

4

1.2 The Province should include policies and provide tools

such as guidelines to assist municipalities in implementing

the mitigation of new urban and rural non-farm uses

where these may be incompatible with existing agricultural

operations and advise when appropriate buffers, setbacks

or other mitigation may be required. +

Supporting policies are included in the Plans to promote land use

compatibility where agricultural uses and non-agricultural uses

interface and to mitigate impacts on the agricultural system to the

extent feasible. Agricultural impact assessments (AIA) are now

formally required for settlement expansions, infrastructure

corridors and mineral aggregate extraction in prime agricultural

areas. Detailed guidelines for AIAs and mitigating impacts between

agricultural and non-agricultural uses should be provided (e.g.

rural/urban edge planning guidelines).

1.3 Natural heritage and water resource systems policies,

designations, criteria and mapping should be harmonized

with an appropriate standard of protection across all of

the provincial Greenbelt plans. The Province should review

the need to prescribe criteria for certain types of key

natural heritage features (e.g. agricultural drains,

headwater swales, etc.) which have not been viewed to be

reasonable by the public or necessarily required in light of

existing regulation outside of the Planning Act (e.g.

Conservation Authorities regulations, Fisheries Act,

Woodland Protection By-laws).

+/-

Natural heritage and water resource policies, designations and

criteria have been substantively harmonized. Greater clarity is

provided in relation to agricultural uses and natural heritage

protection. Further harmonization of policy should be considered

and implemented to the greatest extent possible (e.g. Niagara

Escarpment Plan - defer to Endangered Species Act when

regulating development in habitat and extend special setback

policies for agricultural buildings from agricultural drains and

swales in Niagara throughout agricultural system).

The proposed provincial mapping of a natural heritage system by

the Province outside the Greenbelt Plan should be reconsidered

and direction should be provided to municipalities to map natural

heritage systems in line with the Provincial Policy Statement.

Appendix I 5.1 - 19

5

1.4 When harmonizing natural heritage policies, care should

be undertaken to ensure there is no over-regulation of

small scale development or unnecessary requirements

that trigger planning approvals for accessory uses,

buildings and structures or for minor modifications to

existing uses and non-conforming uses. Policy

harmonization for natural heritage should carefully

balance and simplify implementation requirements for

agriculture, since both agriculture and natural heritage can

co-exist in a working landscape.

+/-





and implemented to the greatest extent possible (e.g. include

permissions for agriculture-related and on-farm diversified uses in

ORMCP Natural Core and Natural Linkage).

1.5 The province should comprehensively review provincial

aggregates policies beyond the current policies within

provincial land use plans and strengthen provisions

encouraging comprehensive rehabilitation planning.

Strengthened policies within the provincial plans, as well

as new Provincial regulation or incentives outside the

Planning Act, such as dedicated use of increased

aggregates levies, should be developed as a coordinated

framework to more effectively achieve the plans’

comprehensive rehabilitation objectives related to

aggregates resources.

+/-

Policy direction is included that the Province will work with

municipalities, producers and stakeholders to develop a long-term

approach to ensure the wise use of resources and for co-ordinated

approaches to rehabilitation. The review of the Aggregate

Resources Act, regulations, policies and supporting programs has

not been finalized.

The Province has proposed extending Greenbelt-level land use

policy protections for natural heritage for aggregates extraction

outside the Greenbelt in identified natural heritage systems.

1.6 Greater oversight and control of fill and excess soil

disposal in rural areas is required. More rural communities

are recognizing this potential threat and would benefit

from stronger provincial guidance and oversight. +

Policies encouraging municipalities to develop soil reuse strategies

as part of planning for growth and integrate sustainable soil

management practices into planning approvals are included as

proposed changes. Policies revisions are consistent with the

MOECC’s proposed Excess Soil Management Policy Framework.

Appendix I 5.1 - 20

6

1.7 Development applications that pre-date the plans i.e.,

transitional applications, can currently proceed regardless

of their incompatibility with current planning standards

and their potential degradation and destruction of

ecological and hydrological features and functions.

Consideration should be given to having a ‘sunset clause’

for these applications. ?

The Minister is considering a review of the existing transition

regulation for the Growth Plan (O. Reg. 311/06) to clarify its

application. Any changes would come into force on the same date

the Growth Plan, 2016, if approved, would take effect. The Growth

Plan includes a new policy requiring the use of lapsing provisions

for draft plans of subdivision.

The transition provisions of the Greenbelt Act and Plan, in the Oak

Ridges Moraine Conservation Act and Plan, and the Niagara

Escarpment Planning and Development Act and Plan are not

substantively changed.

2 How can the plans be strengthened to ensure our communities make best use of key infrastructure such as transit, road, sewers and

water?

2.1 Goods Movement

2.1.a The Region thinks the Province should create a Long Range

Transportation Plan for the GGH Area (GGHA) to support

the overall goals of the Growth Plan. This plan would

identify transportation challenges anticipated in the GGHA

over the next 20-30 years, develop an integrated and

multi-modal transportation strategy to address these

issues, and prioritize investment opportunities.

+

The Region’s request was addressed. The province has

commenced the “Long Range Transportation Plan for the GGH

Area” study.

2.1.b The review should consider adding policies promoting the

establishment of Freight Villages to support goods

movements at key locations within the GGHA. This work

should be combined with the release of Freight Supportive

Guidelines to help municipalities achieve Growth Plan

goals.

+

Policy 3.2.4.2(a) calls for the coordination, optimization and long

term viability of major goods movement facilities and

corridors. Some elements of freight Transportation Demand

Management (namely consideration of off-peak deliveries) were

considered through the Freight Supportive Land Use Guidelines;

however Peel has undertaken a Freight TDM study and is

Appendix I 5.1 - 21

7

2.1.c Consideration should be given to the development and

implementation of freight TDM (transportation demand

management) programs to consolidate goods movement,

reduce truck trips and maximize capacity of truck trips.

-

undertaking a Freight Village Business Case study to further explore

Freight TDM, and hoped to have Provincial support/direction for

this concept.

2.1.d The review should consider introducing stronger policies

that will enable municipalities to identify and protect lands

for strategic employment uses, especially around

provincial corridors such as the GTA West Corridor.

+/-

New policies would require municipalities to identify and designate

suitable lands near major goods movement facilities and corridors

within settlement areas as prime employment areas.

Municipalities have committed significant resources to protect the

GTA West corridor for a study that is now suspended. Need and

justification for this corridor has been established through the EA,

which was at an advanced stage when suspended. Furthermore,

the corridor will not only serve passenger vehicles and trucks, it is

also planned to include a 60 metre transitway.

Much of Peel’s scarce developable land is essentially frozen

pending a decision on the GTA West, impeding Peel’s ability to

meet growth targets outlined in the Places to Grow Plan.

Therefore, the Minister of Transportation is urged to resume the

study without delay and identify the corridor to be protected so

that the remaining lands may be developed.

Region of Peel staff have recently been informed that the Minister

has established a GTA West Advisory Panel with a term ending in

April 2017. As the municipality perhaps most affected by the GTA

West, Peel requests to be consulted in the development of the

Terms of Reference for the GTA West Advisory Panel.

2.2 People Movement

Appendix I 5.1 - 22

8

2.2.a There is no requirement for municipal “complete street”

policies. Policy language remains discretionary, as the PPS,

2014 still only states that public streets “should be”

planned to facilitate cycling and other forms of human-

powered travel, rather than requiring them to be planned

in such a manner.

+

New policy would require adopting a complete streets approach

when designing, refurbishing or reconstructing the existing or

planned street network that ensures the needs and safety of all

road users are considered and accommodated.

2.2.b The review should include policies to mandate schools to

develop walkable schools and school travel plans to get

more students to walk and bike to/from school. +/-

Policies related to walkable schools have not been incorporated.

However, new Growth Plan policy requires municipalities to

integrate active transportation networks into transportation

planning to provide continuous linkages between strategic growth

areas and other key destinations.

2.2.c The Province should work with GO Transit to develop and

implement programs to have more GO passengers use

sustainable modes (carpool, bike and walk) to get to

stations. +/-

Proposed amendments to the Growth Plan require municipalities

develop and implement transportation demand management

policies in official plans or other planning documents… (Proposed

Growth Plan policy 3.2.2.4). However, there is no such requirement

for GO Transit.

3

How can the plans continue to support the design of attractive, livable and healthy communities that are accessible to all Ontarians

at all stages of life?

3.1 The Growth Plan should provide more specific guidance on

how municipalities are to address affordable housing

needs in their OPs.

+/-

A housing section has been added to the Growth Plan with

direction to upper-tier municipalities to develop a housing strategy

that aligns to housing and homelessness plans and policies to plan

for a range and mix of housing types and densities including second

units and affordable housing.

However, Provincial investments in affordable housing, ensuring a

wide variety of tools to address affordability issues, including

housing supply considerations, are necessary.

Appendix I 5.1 - 23

9

3.2 Complementary to the Growth Plan, the Province should

consider strengthening municipal planning tools for

affordable housing such as enabling inclusionary zoning. +

The Province has released Bill 204, the Promoting Affordable

Housing Act which proposes to amend the Planning Act to enable

municipalities to implement inclusionary zoning. If passed,

municipalities would be enabled to require affordable housing

units to be provided in new development projects and ensure the

affordability of units over time.

3.3 The Province should advocate to the federal government

to encourage private sector investment in rental housing

through:

o changes in the tax system (accelerating capital cost

allowance, reduction in capital gains tax, soft cost

deductibility); and

o tax incentives (e.g., Harmonized Sales Tax rebate on new

construction, low income housing tax credit program).

-

This recommendation was not addressed through the Coordinated

Plan Review.

4 How can the plans better support the development of communities that attract workers and the businesses that employ them?

4.1 The review should examine the Growth Plan employment

forecasts specifically the methodology, assumptions and

distribution within the Greater Toronto and Hamilton

(GTAH) area. In addition, the Growth Plan should allow for

flexibility when implementing its population and

employment forecasts at the municipal level. For example

the plan should provide a numeric and timing range within

which the forecasted growth will occur, depending on

economic conditions.

+/-

The province has recognized the changing employment trends and

has proposed allowing municipalities to identify “prime

employment areas”. The proposed amendments included the

Region’s request to exclude lower density employment lands when

calculating the designated greenfield area target.

The province has updated the intensification targets for the built up

and designated greenfield areas to address climate change and the

need to create compact communities. However, the province has

not provided a numeric and timing range within which the

forecasted growth will occur, depending on economic conditions.

Appendix I 5.1 - 24

10

4.2 If exact forecasted targets need to be met, then

municipalities should be allowed to set a time frame

within which these targets should be achieved. -

The province has set the timeframe within which targets are to be

achieved.

4.3 The review should also examine the practicability of the

combined greenfield density target. Planning to achieve a

combined greenfield density target of 50 jobs and

residents per hectare has been challenging in some parts

of the GTAH area. The greenfield combined employment

and residential density target should be amended in a way

that distinguishes which types of employment are included

in the combined density targets, whereby industrial jobs

would be excluded, and population-related jobs and

knowledge based jobs would stay combined with the

residential target. Alternatively, the review should at least

explore the issue of measuring greenfield densities

differently – possibly excluding some employment uses

(e.g. warehousing and logistics) that require few

employees.

+/-

The province has de-linked the combined greenfield density target

by excluding lower density types of employment lands. The

Province has proposed allowing municipalities to identify “prime

employment areas” as areas that would typically accommodate

uses such as warehousing and manufacturing that are low density

land-uses. Prime Employment Areas can be excluded when

measuring the designated greenfield area target.

Appendix I 5.1 - 25

11

4.4 The province should define a class of ‘strategic

employment lands’ that are essential for future

employment development and that are dependent on

infrastructure for goods movement, including industrial /

manufacturing / logistics, by articulating criteria in the

Growth Plan that would aid in identifying these strategic

employment lands, including such areas as 400 series

highways corridors, airport lands and strategic transit

corridors. Given their importance to the regional economy,

the provincial government should protect or allow for

‘generational’ protection of these strategic employment

lands, either with no time horizon, or a minimum 30 year

protection and planning horizon. This issue is particularly

important in the light of planning for a major

transportation corridor (GTA West) that may define Peel’s

urban structure.

+

Amendments to the Growth Plan would require municipalities to

identify and designate suitable lands near major goods movement

facilities and corridors within settlement areas as prime

employment areas.

The proposed policies would also require a municipal

comprehensive review for the conversion of lands within prime

employment areas to employment areas, or conversion of

employment areas to non-employment uses. Lands within prime

employment areas would not be eligible for conversion to non-

employment uses.

4.5 The residential intensification rate should be increased

beyond 40% minimum rate for the GTAH area to

encourage complete communities and protection of

environmentally sensitive areas such as the Greenbelt, Oak

Ridges Moraine and the Niagara Escarpment.

+/-

The province proposed to increase the intensification rate from

40% to 60%. This change is accompanied by specific policies (e. g.

“strategic growth) that require focusing intensification within

appropriate areas (e.g. urban growth centres, intensification/transit

corridors; transit stations, urban nodes). Further, changes to the

Plans as it pertains to residential intensification should incorporate

both public-health and climate-change metrics.

A minimum intensification target of 60% may be more appropriate

for Peel if applied at a Regional level and only to growth for the

post-2031 planning horizon. This approach would achieve broad

planning goals and help support building complete communities,

increasing densities, wisely using infrastructure, reducing sprawl

and mitigating climate change.

Appendix I 5.1 - 26

12

4.6 In order to intensify the corridors within employment

areas, the review should consider introducing more

flexible land use policies. The Growth Plan in particular

should provide more specific policies that encourage or

require achieving higher densities along urban corridors

and around transit stations.

+

The proposed amendments to the Growth Plan include the addition

of policies to permit a broader range of uses in Employment areas,

including commercial uses, if planned in locations that are

accessible by active transportation/transit.

The proposed amendments also require municipalities to identify

and designate suitable lands near major goods movement facilities

and corridors within settlement areas as prime employment areas.

4.7 The plans should make sure that new retail development is

better integrated with residential development through

appropriate location and functions.

+

The Growth Plan has been amended to allow employment areas to

permit a broader range of uses, including commercial uses, if

planned in locations that are accessible by active

transportation/transit. This amendment assists with the better

integration with residential development.

4.8 It is important that the provincial plans include policies

that support economic development of rural communities

taking advantage of local resources. Both, the agri-food

and mineral aggregate resource sectors should be

encouraged but better regulated to ensure that the

natural environment is protected.

+

Economic development of rural communities is supported through

proposed new polices in the Growth Plan. Municipalities would be

encouraged to implement strategies and other approaches to

sustain and enhance the agricultural system and the long-term

economic prosperity and viability of the agri-food sector, including

the maintenance and improvement of the agricultural support

network.

Policy direction is included that commits the Province to working

with municipalities, aggregate producers and stakeholders to

develop a long-term approach to ensure the wise use of resources

and for co-ordinated approaches to rehabilitation. In addition, the

Province has proposed extending Greenbelt-level land use policy

protections for natural heritage for aggregates extraction outside

the Greenbelt in identified natural heritage systems.

Other rural economic development policies include, a new

proposed policy to permit existing employment areas on rural lands

zoned or designated for those uses as of June 16, 2006, with ability

Appendix I 5.1 - 27

13

to expand subject to criteria.

5 How can the plans help address climate change?

5.1 Continue to promote and facilitate the development of

compact and complete communities that are properly

serviced by transit.

+

Several new policies in all of the amended plans relate to climate

change. The proposed changes in the Growth Plan strengthen

support for compact, complete communities at densities that will

support the provision of transit and active modes of transportation.

All four plans now contain policies directing municipalities to work

towards the achievement of net-zero communities, including

policies to mitigate climate change impacts, build resilience and

reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

In the Growth Plan, new policy would require municipalities to

develop official plan policies to identify actions that will reduce

greenhouse gas emissions and address climate change adaptation

goals, aligned with the 2015 Ontario Climate Change Strategy and

Action Plan.

New policy would encourage municipalities to develop greenhouse

gas inventories and climate change strategies to reduce

greenhouse gas emissions; and, establish municipal interim and

long-term targets greenhouse gas emission reduction targets

Appendix I 5.1 - 28

14

5.2 Given the apparent increase in weather related

emergencies, the Province should focus greater effort and

resources to proactively plan more resilient communities

in order to limit use of costly emergency response and

recovery after events. +

New policy would require municipalities to develop official plan

policies to identify actions that will address climate change

adaptation goals, aligned with the 2015 Ontario Climate Change

Strategy and Action Plan. Further, proposed amendments contain

new requirements for low impact development and green

infrastructure and requirements to assess infrastructure

vulnerability and identify priority actions to increase infrastructure

resilience and adapt to climate change.

5.3 The plans should continue other provincial leads such as

the PPS with respect to providing policy direction or

guidance on use of green infrastructure and other types of

infrastructure that are resilient in light of climate change.

+

The proposed amendments to the Growth Plan will require

municipalities to develop stormwater master plans that

incorporate low impact development and green infrastructure.

New requirements also include the integration of low impact

development and green infrastructure into complete communities.

Further policy is proposed that requires infrastructure risk and

vulnerability assessments as part of asset management planning

and the identification of actions and investments to increase

infrastructure resilience and adapt to a changing climate.

5.4 Policies, including options to strengthen growth

management direction in provincial and municipal plans,

such as improved support for intensification, better

staging, coordination and delivery of infrastructure to

support growth in existing built up areas, and planning

that supports mixed use, compact communities should be

considered.

+

The proposed changes in the Growth Plan strengthen support for

compact, complete communities at densities that will support the

provision of transit and active modes of transportation.

5.5 The enhancement and maintenance of natural heritage

systems through the GBP, NEP and ORMCP and through

municipal official plans contributes to potential carbon

sequestration and the ability to absorb (GHG). +

The proposed amended policy enhances natural heritage

protection by requiring municipalities to incorporate in their official

plans a natural heritage system, and to apply appropriate

designations and policies to maintain, restore or improve its

diversity and connectivity. Also, new policies add further

protection to NHS both inside and outside of settlement areas.

Appendix I 5.1 - 29

15

Proposed new policies would require the completion of watershed

plans to inform decision making and to provide an integrated and

long-term approach for the protection, improvement or restoration

of the quality and quantity of water within a watershed.

Finally, the Province has proposed extending Greenbelt-level land

use policy protections for natural heritage for aggregates

extraction outside the Greenbelt in identified natural heritage

systems.

6

How can the implementation of the plans be improved?

6.1

Add a section to the Growth Plan about public health that

addresses the impacts of land use planning and

development on health with particular reference to

chronic disease.

+/-







6.2 The Province should provide a methodology that

municipalities can use to determine land budgets for

consistency purposes. +/-

The province will provide a standard methodology for assessing

land needs and requiring the use of this methodology by

municipalities.

6.3 The review should consider introducing stronger policies

that will enable municipalities to identify and protect lands

for employment uses.

+

While detailed guidance has not been provided for identifying and

protecting strategic employment lands, the Province has proposed

allowing municipalities to identify “prime employment areas”.

These areas would typically accommodate uses such as

warehousing and manufacturing that require a lot of land.

Amendments to the Growth Plan would require municipalities to

identify and designate suitable lands near major goods movement

facilities and corridors within settlement areas as prime

employment areas.

Appendix I 5.1 - 30

16

The proposed policies would also require a municipal

comprehensive review for the conversion of lands within prime

employment areas to employment areas, or conversion of

employment areas to non-employment uses. Lands within prime

employment areas would not be eligible for conversion to non-

employment uses.

6.4 The province should establish more specific

implementation guidance for its plans. One of the areas

that could benefit from this initiative is land budgeting.

Differences in the methodology and assumptions used by

municipalities to determine their land budgets has made it

difficult to defend the municipal comprehensive review at

the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB). The Provincial

Government should provide a uniform methodology for

determining land budgets.

+/-

The province has agreed to provide implementation guidance and

mapping for several policy areas. Further, the province will provide

a standard methodology for assessing land needs and requiring the

use of this methodology by municipalities.

6.5 There should be consistent definitions, designations,

technical guidelines between the plans which should be an

outcome of an harmonization process. The key policies

requiring harmonization include agriculture, natural

heritage and water resources but others are important

also (rural uses, rural settlement policies, servicing, etc.). +





and implemented to the greatest extent possible (e.g. Niagara

Escarpment Plan - defer to Endangered Species Act when

regulating development in habitat and extend setback policies for

agricultural buildings from agricultural drains and swales in Niagara

throughout agricultural system).

Appendix I 5.1 - 31

17

6.6 The province should provide greater support to

municipalities and conservation authorities in the area of

policy interpretation through ‘best practices’ manuals,

technical workshops and dedicated and timely

communication. +/-

The Province has provided consultation events and technical

training sessions on the Coordinated Plans changes and has

committed to delivering further guidance materials to support

implementation of policies. Additional development of ‘best

practice’ manuals and delivery of educational workshops and

updates to existing policy manuals would be beneficial (e.g. Natural

Heritage Reference Manual).

6.7 Strengthen implementation through the expansion of

targets and indicators to monitor the achievement of

compact complete communities. This includes:

� Developing a set of indicators to measure the

implementation of the policies in the plan

� Monitoring the implementation of the plan, including

reviewing performance indicators

� Developing guidelines that municipalities can use to

monitor and report on the implementation of the Plan

+/-

The province has proposed new policies to support a monitoring

and reporting program. The proposed policy allows the province to

require municipalities and conservation authorities to provide data

for the purposes of monitoring implementation. The standards

related to the data would be determined by the province.

Development of this monitoring and reporting program should

include targets and indicators to monitor the achievement of

compact, complete communities.

6.8 Need greater accountability in the implementation of the

Plans +

A new policy has been added to the Growth Plan that allows the

province to require municipalities and conservation authorities to

provide data and information which demonstrates the progress

made towards the implementation of the Growth Plan.

6.9 Link incentives to monitoring which reward municipalities

for exceeding the minimum requirements of the plan +/-

The province has proposed to align its infrastructure investments

with the policies of the Growth Plan. However, municipalities are

still responsible for funding or financing the majority of growth


6.10 There is a need for accurate, up to date provincial mapping

within the plans (GBP, NEP, and ORMCP) which delineates

boundaries of features in order to protect them. The

Province should therefore, set up a process for amending

boundaries as considered necessary.

+

The province is proposing to provide new agricultural system

mapping, Greenbelt Urban River valley mapping and to work with

the municipality to develop natural heritage system mapping.

In addition, the province has provided updated settlement area

boundaries reflecting the latest municipal official plan schedules,

Appendix I 5.1 - 32

18

capturing transitioned matters and providing consistency across

the provincial plans.

6.11 The province should avoid duplication of drinking source

protection policy with source protection plans under the

Clean Water Act. In addition, municipalities play no role in

the water taking permitting process and should be given

more authority in that process.

+

The proposed amendments to the Greenbelt Plan, particularly the

mapping of vulnerable areas, which align with the requirements of

the Clean Water Act.

7 The report, Improving Health by Design in the Greater Toronto-Hamilton Area, (for which Peel Public Health was a contributing

author) stipulates how to strengthen Places to Grow. Recommendations included:

7.1 Reconsider existing targets in order to increase the

development of compact, complete communities. For

example, it has been recommended that “government

should gradually increase the Growth Plan’s density and

infill targets every 10 years.” However, it has also been

noted that there are challenges with how the existing

targets are being interpreted and applied, as well as the

extent of their achievement to date.

+

Through the proposed amendments, policies related to the

creation of complete communities have been strengthened. The

province has updated the intensification targets for the built up

and designated greenfield areas based on current trends related to

climate change and the need to create compact communities in

order to meet the climate change adaptation and mitigation goals.

All four plans now contain policies directing municipalities to work

towards the achievement of net-zero communities, including

policies to mitigate climate change impacts, build resilience and

reduce greenhouse gas emissions

7.2 Expand the use of indicators beyond simply measuring

density to better monitor the achievement of compact,

complete communities. +

New policies would support a monitoring and reporting program

and allow the province to require municipalities and conservation

authorities to provide data for the purposes of monitoring

implementation and to demonstrate progress made towards the

implementation of the Growth Plan.

Appendix I 5.1 - 33

19

7.3 Provide incentives to municipalities to meet and exceed

minimum targets. Provide incentives for municipalities to

achieve or exceed minimum targets. There are no

incentives to exceed or achieve the minimum

requirements, nor penalties for failing to achieve targets .

-

The province has proposed to align its infrastructure investments

with the policies of the Growth Plan. However, municipalities are

still responsible for funding or financing the majority of growth


7.4 Support municipalities in implementing Places to Grow by

providing tools to assess:

� The economic costs of development over the long

term (e.g., infrastructure, utilities, service provision)

using different scenarios of intensity.

� The health impacts of land use and transportation

planning.

+/-

Proposed new policies improve integration of land use planning

with infrastructure planning and investment.

However, improvement could add requirements to require



7.5 Support a public health perspective on the achievement of

healthy, compact, complete communities by:

� Incorporating greater consideration of health impacts

in the Review

� Actively supporting the involvement of public health

units in land use and transportation planning in

municipalities to support health-based analysis of

plans.

+/-







Also, the Growth Plan could acknowledge the importance for

land use and transportation planning in municipalities to

involve public health units in health based analysis of plans.

Appendix I 5.1 - 34

QEW

19

17

20

4

403

1

3

5

401

407

410

15

6

16107

7

427

8

10

4

14

14

1

1

4

9

8

50

7

7

1019

24

24

22

12

403

409

42

11

13

8

6

3

403

QEW

38

5

10

407

401

52

23

22

5

7

124

11

107

109

136

136

427

27

400

72

56

57

57

7

49

40755

17 73

25

11

27

50

427

18

14

401

50

9

9

10

YO

RK

RE

GIO

N

ADJALA - TOSORONTIOSIMCOE COUNTY

DUFFERIN COUNTYW

EL

LIN

GT

ON

CO

UN

TY

HA

LT

ON

RE

GIO

N

T

Eto

bi

c

oke

Cre

ek

Cre

ditRiver

Cre

dit

River

West Hum

ber

Rive

r

Humb

erRiver

MimicoCreek

ORANGEVILLE

EAST GARAFRAXA

ERIN

ERINVILLAGE

MONO

KING

VAUGHAN

TO

RO

NTO

OAKVILLE

MILTON

HALTONHILLS

LAKE ONTARIO

K

I NG ST W

HEALEY RD

DIX

IE R

D

AIR

PO

RT

RD

KING ST

TH

E G

OR

E R

D

HU

RO

NTA

RIO

ST

MAYFIELD RD

MIS

SIS

SA

UG

A R

D

TO

RB

RA

M R

D

BR

AM

AL

EA

RD

NIN

TH

LI

MA

VIS

RD

KE

NN

ED

Y R

D

HE

RIT

AG

E R

D

INN

IS L

AK

E R

DG

OR

EW

AY

DR

MA

IN S

TC

RE

DIT

VIE

W R

D

TO

MK

EN

RD

HE

AR

T L

AK

E R

D

QUEEN ST E

SH

AW

S C

RE

EK

RD

CH

ING

UA

CO

US

Y R

D

OLD SCHOOL RD

WIN

ST

ON

CH

UR

CH

ILL

BV

CE

NT

RE

VIL

LE

CR

EE

K R

D

MC

LA

UG

HL

IN R

D

THE GRANGE SR

ST

AN

DR

EW

S R

D

DERRY RD E

STEELES AV E

OLDE BASE LINE RD

HO

RS

ES

HO

E H

ILL

RD

BOSTON MILLS RD

ER

IN M

ILL

S P

Y

WIL

LO

UG

HB

Y R

D

MO

UN

T H

OP

E R

D

DUNDAS ST W

OLD CHURCH RD

CASTLEDERG SR

HEALEY RD

BEECH GROVE SR

EGLINTON AV W

WANLESS DR

TE

NT

H L

I W

WILLIAMS PY E

MC

VE

AN

DR

BRITANNIA RD W

BOVAIRD DR W

BOVAIRD DR E

STEELES AV W

HIGHPOINT RD

DU

FF

YS

LN

ESCARPMENT SR

EGLINTON AV E

CA

WT

HR

A R

D

PATTERSON SR

MO

UN

T P

LE

AS

AN

T R

D

DUNDAS ST E

KE

NN

ED

Y R

D N

QUEENSWAY E

MC

LA

RE

N R

D

BLOOR ST

CL

AR

KW

AY

DR

QUEEN ST W

BURNHAMTHORPE RD W

SANDALWOOD PY E

MC

LA

UG

HL

IN R

D N

MO

UN

T W

OL

FE

RD

KE

NN

ED

Y R

D S

CASTLEMORE RD

BRISTOL RD W

FINNERTY SR

MA

IN S

T S

MA

IN S

T N

LAKESHORE RD E

CAL/E GARAFRAXA TOWN LI

MC

LA

UG

HL

IN R

D S

BURNHAMTHORPE RD E

MATHESON BV E

COURTNEYPARK DR E

CENTRAL PY W

SO

UT

HD

OW

N R

D

CA

LE

DO

N K

ING

TO

WN

LI S

FIN

CH

AV

AL

BIO

N T

L

EASTGATE PY

BUSH ST

WILLIAMS PY W

HUNSDEN SR

SANDALWOOD PY W

CO

LE

RA

INE

DR

EMBLETON RD

EBENEZER RD

SE

CO

ND

LI

W

MO

UN

TA

INV

IEW

RD

COLUMBIA WY

AL

BIO

N V

AU

GH

AN

RD

MATHESON BV W

DERRY RD W

QU

EE

N S

T S

GL

EN

HA

FF

Y R

D

LAKESHORE RD W

HALLS LAKE SR

ROYAL WINDSOR DR

BRISTOL RD E

QU

EE

N S

T N

COURTNEYPARK DR W

RO

CK

SID

E R

D

RE

NF

OR

TH

DR

CHARLESTON SR

COUNTRYSIDE DR

OLD MAIN ST

HU

MB

ER

STA

TIO

N R

D

WIN

ST

ON

CH

UR

CH

ILL

BV

KE

NN

ED

Y R

D

DERRY RD W

CR

ED

ITV

IEW

RD

HE

AR

T L

AK

E R

D

HU

RO

NTA

RIO

ST

QUEEN ST E

COUNTRYSIDE DR

KE

NN

ED

Y R

D

BEECH GROVE SR

DU

FF

YS

LN

FINNERTY SR

MAIN ST

CR

ED

ITV

IEW

RD

MIS

SIS

SA

UG

A R

D

CH

ING

UA

CO

US

Y R

D

MC

LA

UG

HL

IN R

D

MIS

SIS

SA

UG

A R

D

HE

RIT

AG

E R

D

CO

LE

RA

INE

DR

8T

H L

INE

KING RD

TR

AF

AL

GA

R R

D

9T

H L

INE

2ND LINE

3RD LINE

HW

Y 2

7

KIRBY RD

10

TH

LIN

E

JAN

E S

T

ISL

ING

TO

N A

VE

5TH SIDEROAD

5TH

LIN

E R

D

32ND SIDEROAD

19TH SIDEROAD

2ND

LIN

E R

D

27TH SIDEROAD

7TH

LIN

E R

D

7TH

LIN

E E

HS

10TH SIDEROAD

STEELES AVE

CORNWALL RD

RUTHERFORD RD

ALB

ION

RD

10TH

CO

NC

ESSIO

N

WES

TO

N R

D

HWY 7

KIP

LIN

G A

V

12TH

CO

NC

ESSIO

N

MAJOR MACKENZIE DR

MO

NO

/AD

JALA

TO

WN

LIN

E

PIN

E V

ALLE

Y D

R

CO

LD

CR

EEK

RD

LANGSTAFF RD

UPPER MIDDLE RD

17TH SIDEROAD

KING/VAUGHAN RD

CLA

REN

CE S

T

8TH

CO

NC

ES

SIO

N

ERIN/E. GARAFRAXA TOWNLINE

RE

XD

AL

E B

V

CO

NF

ED

ER

AT

ION

ST

BURNHAMTHORPE RD

18TH SIDEROAD

15TH SIDEROAD

16TH SIDEROAD

NASHVILLE RD

LAKE SHORE BV W

KIP

LIN

G A

VE

MA

RTIN

GR

OV

E R

D

FO

RD

DR

11TH

CO

NC

ESS

ION

DIXON R

D

5TH SIDEROAD

17TH SIDEROAD

10TH

SID

ER

OA

D

5TH

SID

ER

OA

D

8T

H L

INE

10TH SIDEROAD

5TH SIDEROAD

9T

H L

INE

10

TH

LIN

E

8T

H L

INE

BU

RN

HA

MTH

OR

PE

RD

TR

AF

AL

GA

R R

D HW

Y 2

7

C A L E D O N

B R A M P T O N

M I S S I S S A U G A

This Schedule forms part of the Region of Peel Official Plan and should be read in conjunction with the Plan's written text and with the area municipal official plans.

Information outside of Peel Region is shown on this Schedule for illustrative purposes to display inter-regional linkages.

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Km

0 1 2 3 4 5 miles

Scale:

* These lands are identified in the Region of Halton Official Plan as the Ninth Line Corridor Policy Area. Currently, the policies of the Region of Halton and the Town of Milton official plans apply to these lands. A future amendment will bring these lands into conformity with the Region of Peel Official Plan.

THE GROWTH PLANPOLICY AREAS IN PEEL

October 2015

SCHEDULE D4

Palgrave EstateResidential Community

Urban Area outside Peel Region

Agricultural and Rural Area

Greenbelt

Legend

Designated Greenfield Area

Urban Growth Centre (As definedby Mississauga and Brampton)

Built-up Area

Settlement with Undelineated Built Boundary

Ninth Line Lands *

Regional Boundary

Municipal Boundary

Regional Urban Boundary

Appendix II 5.1 - 35

Implications of Provincial Planning Legislation and Policy Change Proposals:Preliminary Assessment

Arvin Prasad

Integrated Planning Division

July 21st 2016

1

5.1 - 36

Coordinated Plans ReviewPreliminary Consultation Phase

2

Regional Request Provincial Response

Methodology for land budgets ✓✓✓✓

Enable inclusionary zoning for affordable housing ✓✓✓✓

Support agriculture-related and on-farm diversified uses ✓✓✓✓

Consistency throughout three Greenbelt Plans ✓✓✓✓

Control of fill and excess soil disposal in rural areas ✓✓✓✓

Long Range Transportation Plan for GGHA ✓✓✓✓

Promoting establishment of Freight Villages ✓✓✓✓

De-linking low density employment uses ✓✓✓✓

Strengthening integrated growth management ✓✓✓✓

Need for greater accountability in Plans ✓✓✓✓

5.1 - 37

3

Advocacy OpportunityAddressing implications of density and intensification targets

RecommendationNew intensification and density targets should

apply only to the post-2031A period, and only at

the regional level.

Rationale

• No reasonable scenario to meet targets, from the effective date of the new

Plans across, or within, the municipalities.

• Concerns about implications for impact on housing market and supply mix.

5.1 - 38

4


Recommendation

Provincial investment is required for affordable

housing, strategic growth areas, community hubs,

transit, mobility infrastructure.

Rationale

• Need to ensure infrastructure investment commitments are aligned to

planned and existing growth.

• Provincial support required to resolve complex technical, administrative and

program hurdles.

5.1 - 39

5


Recommendation

Proposed policies should incorporate public-health

and climate-change linkages to better support

municipal initiatives to improve health and climate

change outcomes.Rationale

• Intensification and density contribute to better health and climate change

outcomes.

• Connecting intensification and density to measureable health and climate

change outcomes, similar to HDA would be a significant step forward.

5.1 - 40

6

Advocacy OpportunityEnhancing alignment and delivery of infrastructure and programs

Recommendation

Existing municipal integrated growth management

strategies must be supported by the Province.

Rationale

• Provincial proposals for land budget methodologies and growth

management approaches should build upon, not reinvent, existing municipal

efforts.

• Roles and responsibilities for the Province, regions, local municipalities, and

conservation authorities need clarification.

5.1 - 41

7

Advocacy OpportunityEnhancing alignment and delivery of infrastructure and programs

Recommendation

GTA West Corridor EA must be completed; a

commitment to implement its recommendations is

required, and; Region must participate in

developing the ToR for the Advisory Panel.Rationale

• Suspension of the GTA West Corridor Environmental Assessment (EA)

study has resulted in many challenges and delays to planning in Peel.

• Most affected by the GTA West, and defended corridor protection policies at

OMB: Peel must have a voice on the Advisory Panel.

5.1 - 42

8

Advocacy OpportunityProvincial involvement in areas of municipal planning expertise

Recommendation

Policies identifying new Provincial responsibilities in

natural heritage and agricultural mapping should

avoid duplication and leverage local knowledge.

Rationale

• Peel municipalities have effectively identified and protected natural and

agricultural heritage systems, features and areas through studies and policy.

• Provincial involvement in mapping may overlook local considerations without

municipal refinement of the boundaries.

5.1 - 43

9

Advocacy OpportunityProvincial involvement in areas of municipal planning expertise

Recommendation

Better alignment of Provincial policy, guidance and

funding to support climate change is required,

including consideration of harmful emissions such

as particulates, sulfur oxides and nitrogen oxides .Rationale

• Need standards for greenhouse gas inventories, emission reduction

strategies, municipal targets and performance measures in OPs.

• Need dedicated programming, and funding to support municipal adaptation

of , i.e. flooding, infrastructure, stormwater, and housing.

5.1 - 44

ITEMS RELATED TO PUBLIC WORKS

This page is intentionally left blank

Special Meeting of Regional Council July 21, 2016

Response to Request for Supplemental Information: Bolton Residential Expansion ROPA

– Request to Hold a Statutory Public Meeting

1

6.1 - 1

Outline

• Planning Context & Background

• Supplementary Financial Information – Hybrid Options

• Next Steps

2

6.1 - 2

Planning Context

3

6.1 - 3

Settlement Structure

4

6.1 - 4

Draft ROPA • Current 2031A Planning

Horizon

• Comprehensive and Transparent Planning Process

• 6 Evaluation Themes and 18 Criteria

• Emphasis on Fiscal Responsibility and Long Term Urban Structure

• Draft ROPA based on Option 4/5 Recommended for Statutory Public Meeting

5

6.1 - 5

Six Evaluation Themes

1) Protect natural heritage features and their associated functions

2) Promote coordinated, efficient, and cost effective infrastructure

3) Promote fiscal responsibility

4) Ensure compact, complete, and healthy communities

5) Protect agricultural lands

6) Response to long-term urban structure implications

6

6.1 - 6

Hybrid Options

7

6.1 - 7

Hybrid Option 3-4

8

6.1 - 8

Staff Recommended

for Public Meeting Hybrid Option 4-5

9

6.1 - 9

Hybrid Option 5-6

10

6.1 - 10

Hybrid Option 5-6 Solmar

11

6.1 - 11

Financial Tools &

Fiscal Impact

12

6.1 - 12

Long Term Financial Planning Strategy

Respect the tax and utility rate payer

Ensure the Capital Plan is sustainable

Maintain assets

Deliver value for money

Users pay where appropriate

Work with local municipalities to

support economic viability of the

community

Make prudent investments

Mitigate significant fluctuations in tax and utility rates

Borrow only for substantial long-term assets at

affordable levels

13

6.1 - 13

DC Area Rating - Status

• Fiscal Analysis Document

o Page 7 of 22

• BRES related costs incorporated into 2015 DC By-law

• 2015 DC By-law applies a uniform DC Rate

• Bill 73 requires municipalities to consider Area Rating

14

6.1 - 14

DC Area Rating - Pros & Cons

• Incentivize planning objectives

• Limited financial flexibility and greater admin

• DCs collected cannot be used elsewhere

• Different way of allocating growth related costs

• Does not increase overall revenue

• Does not address life cycle cost differences

15

6.1 - 15

DC Area Rating - Requirements • Criteria for consideration part of Growth

Management (2041) discussion with stakeholders

o Inter-municipal Working Group

o Development Industry

• Area Rating would require new DC By-law

o New by-law would be subject to appeal to the OMB by any person

• New DC By-laws must comply with multiple new requirements from Bill 73

16

6.1 - 16

Front End Financing

• Fiscal Impact Analysis Document

o Page 6 of 22

• Existing policy on Front Ending Financing

• Past experience has seen mixed results (Bram East agreement took years)

• Extremely complex to develop and administer agreements

17

6.1 - 17

Front End Financing - Continued

• Many variations but generally developers upfront cost of capital infrastructure

• Terms of repayment can vary

• May transfer financing risk of capital infrastructure being underutilized to developer

• Does not address operational and lifecycle costs

18

6.1 - 18

Alternate Proposal Option 3 • Developers of Option 3 lands have made

alternative proposals regarding financing since July 7th

• They propose to front-end incremental water, wastewater and road costs without interest

• Agree to area specific DC’s for infrastructure already included in the Region wide DC rates

• Will fund 25 years of lifecycle costs

19

6.1 - 19

Alternate Proposal Comments

• Other option area proponents could also make alternative financing proposals

• Front end financing used in tandem with area rating could improve cost revenue gap but the “devil is in the details” of the agreements

• Front-ending agreements can be appealed to the OMB by other land owners in the area

20

6.1 - 20

Alternate Proposal Comments - Continued

• Proposal to include BRES infrastructure costs in an area specific DC would result in “double-dipping” as these project costs are already in existing DC rates from 2015 DC by-law

• When next Region wide by-law is enacted “double-dipping” would be terminated

• Potential challenge from other landowners as 2015 By-law is still under OMB appeal

21

6.1 - 21

Fiscal Impact • Full Details provided in Fiscal Impact Analysis

document o http://www.peelregion.ca/planning/officialplan/bres/assets/BRES-

Fiscal-Impact-April-Report-to-PlanningRevisedJune29.pdf

• Reviews three major financial categories material to the Region o Capital Infrastructure – supported by development

charges

o Property Tax Supported Operations (including lifecycle)

o Utility Rate Supported Operations (including lifecycle)

22

6.1 - 22

http://www.peelregion.ca/planning/officialplan/bres/assets/BRES-Fiscal-Impact-April-Report-to-PlanningRevisedJune29.pdf













Factors Common to all Options • Same amount of residential (common residential

unit type distribution) and non-residential growth

o Results in no material difference in expected revenue generation (DC’s, Property Tax and Utility)

• Expenditures for tax supported services based on increase in population and employment

o No material difference in costs to provide tax supported services

• Incremental capital costs do not include costs for works located south of Mayfield Road

23

6.1 - 23

Drivers of Financial Differences • Capital infrastructure for water, wastewater and

transportation in each area

• Significant differences in capital infrastructure required for water and wastewater

o Impacts both the capital and operating costs

• Options located in water pressure zone 7 require relatively more capital infrastructure

o Not economically efficient for 10,000

o Capital outlay would add pressure to the Region’s debt requirements

24

6.1 - 24

Fiscal Impact Summary ($ in millions)

Total incremental capital costs do not include the downstream water and wastewater infrastructure costs or any contribution towards the payment of debt related to prior growth infrastructure investment.

Option /

Hybrid

Total DC

Revenue

Total

Incremental

Capital Cost

Incremental

Capital

Cost/Revenue

Differential

Tax Supported

Operating Net

Revenue

Lifecycle

Capital Costs

(100 years)

1 170.13 100.13 69.99 0.77 71.33

2 170.13 102.57 67.56 0.77 76.87

3 170.13 80.73 89.39 0.77 77.50

4 170.13 62.50 107.63 0.77 50.67

5 170.13 21.25 148.88 0.77 9.54

6 170.13 13.78 156.34 0.77 9.23

3/4 170.13 86.55 83.58 0.77 78.47

4/5 170.13 30.09 140.04 0.77 9.36

5/6 170.13 15.94 154.19 0.77 7.07

25

6.1 - 25

Option 6 Developer Alternatives

There is no significant cost difference to original Option 6 as shown on the previous slide.

Option /

Hybrid

Total DC

Revenue

Total

Incremental

Capital Cost

Incremental

Capital

Cost/Revenue

Differential

Tax Supported

Operating Net

Revenue

Lifecycle

Capital Costs

(100 years)

Solmar 6 170.13 13.78 156.34 0.77 9.47

Solmar 5/6 170.13 13.78 156.34 0.77 9.47

Fiscal Impact Summary ($ in millions)

26

6.1 - 26

Total Incremental Capital Costs ($ in millions)

Note: Intersection improvement costs do not include $1.02 million for the rounding out areas reflected in the Fiscal Impact Analysis Document. Cost estimate for the grade separation attributable to BRES is $7.65 million, total capital cost is $20 million (road overpass).

Option /

HybridWater Wastewater

Transportation

(Intersection

Improvements)

Transportation

(Grade Separation

attributable to BRES)

Total

1 63.07 29.33 7.74 0.00 100.13

2 68.71 29.66 4.19 0.00 102.57

3 46.86 22.12 4.10 7.65 80.73

4 27.43 23.45 3.97 7.65 62.50

5 3.64 15.58 2.02 0.00 21.25

6 5.35 7.41 1.02 0.00 13.78

3/4 47.75 27.04 4.10 7.65 86.55

4/5 4.40 21.72 3.97 0.00 30.09

5/6 4.09 9.83 2.02 0.00 15.94

27

6.1 - 27

Lifecycle Capital Costs ($ in millions)

Note: 100 years state of good repair capital requirements in 2016 dollars. Cost estimate for the lifecycle cost of the grade separation attributable to BRES is $12.03 million, total lifecycle cost is $26.74 million.

Option /

HybridWater Wastewater

Transportation

(Grade Separation

attributable to BRES)

Total

1 54.36 16.97 0.00 71.33

2 59.46 17.41 0.00 76.87

3 60.28 5.18 12.03 77.50

4 33.01 5.62 12.03 50.67

5 5.86 3.68 0.00 9.54

6 6.94 2.29 0.00 9.23

3/4 61.26 5.18 12.03 78.47

4/5 4.57 4.79 0.00 9.36

5/6 3.80 3.27 0.00 7.07

28

6.1 - 28

In Summary

• Staff have: o Highlighted urban structure and vision for settlement area

o At Council’s request provided detailed analysis on costing of hybrid options

• Staff continue to: o Recommend that Council authorize staff to proceed with Option

4-5 to the Statutory Public Meeting, while all lands within the study area be open for public consultation

29

6.1 - 29

Staff Recommendation That a statutory public meeting be scheduled on September 29, 2016, pursuant to

subsection 17(15) of the Planning Act for the purpose of giving the public an opportunity

to make representations in respect of a proposed expansion to the Bolton Rural Service

Centre settlement boundary, as detailed in a draft Regional Official Plan Amendment

(ROPA) attached to the report of the Commissioners of Public Works and Corporate

Services, titled “Bolton Residential Expansion Regional Official Plan Amendment Application - Request To Hold A Statutory Public Meeting”;

And further, that the public be invited to provide comment on the proposed expansion of

the Bolton Rural Service Centre settlement boundary on matters including but not limited

to the draft ROPA, the six candidate expansion options, the three “rounding out areas”, and the triangle-shaped piece of land located north of Mayfield Road and west of

Coleraine Drive;

And further, that an open house be scheduled in Caledon prior to the statutory public

meeting.

30

6.1 - 30

Quinto M. Annibale*

*Quinto M. Annibale Professional Corporation Tel: (416) 748-4757

Email: [email protected]

BY EMAIL ([email protected]) July 7, 2016 Region of Peel 10 Peel Centre Drive Suite A, 5th Floor Brampton, Ontario L6T 4B9

Attention: Kathryn Lockyer, Regional Clerk and Director of Clerk’s Office Dear Mr. Chair and Members of Council, RE: Bolton Residential Expansion Regional Official Plan Amendment

Application Recommendations Report We are the lawyers for the Bolton North Hill Landowners Group (the “BNHLG”). We have had an opportunity to review the June 28, 2016 staff report titled “Bolton Residential Expansion Regional Official Plan Amendment Application – Request to Hold a Statutory Public Meeting” which was prepared for the July 7, 2016 meeting of Council (the “Staff Report”). We have also had an opportunity to review the related Recommendations Report dated June 16, 2016 prepared by the Planning Partnership (the “Recommendations Report”). The BNHLG appreciates that we are at the start of an extensive public process and for this reason it does not intend on providing detailed submissions at this time. As a preliminary matter however, the BNHLG would like to express its concern with the conclusions that both the Staff Report and the Recommendations Report reach. Among other things, the BNHLG feels that a number of the evaluation criteria have been misapplied and that this has led to a skewed result which incorrectly favours Options 3 and 4. The BNHLG is in the process of preparing detailed submissions with respect to both the proposed ROPA, the reports, and the related technical background studies which it will present in the coming months.

REFERRAL TO ______________________________

RECOMMENDED

DIRECTION REQUIRED _______________________

RECEIPT RECOMMENDED ____________________P

July 7, 2016

REGION OF PEEL

CLERKS DEPT.

7.1 - 1



The BNHLG appreciates the opportunity to have its voice heard and looks forward to participating fully in the upcoming public process. Yours truly, LOOPSTRA NIXON LLP

Per: Quinto M. Annibale

7.1 - 2

Ai r d & Be r l i s LLPBarristers and Solicitors

[Patrick J. Harrington

Direct: 416-865-3424

E-mail :[email protected]

July 18, 2016 BY EMAIL

Council for the Regional Municipality of Peel 10 Peel Centre Drive, Suite A, 5th Floor Brampton, ON L6T 4B9

Attention: Chair Frank Dale and Members of Regional Councilc/o Kathryn Lockyer, Director of Clerks and Regional Clerk Email: kathryn.lockyer @ peelregion.ca

Re: Proposed Region of Peel Official Plan Amendment (ROP 14-002)

Bolton Residential Expansion Study (BRES) Area Submission on Behalf of Option 3 Landowners

_______ Regional Council Meeting - July 21,2016______________________________

As you are aware, Aird & Berlis LLP represents the Bolton Option 3 Landowner Group (“B3LG”). We previously wrote to you on July 5, 2016, expressing concerns with the staff report and recommendation dated June 28, 2016, which indicates that Peel Region should proceed to a public meeting on an Option 4/5 hybrid.

Representatives and consultants on behalf of the B3LG met with senior regional staff on July 13, 2016, to better understand why staff were recommending an Option 4/5 hybrid instead of Option 3. As the members of Regional Council will recall, Options 3 and 4 both ranked as the Most Preferred Options in The Planning Partnership’s report:

THEME OPTION 1 OPTION 1/2 OPTION 3 OPTION 4 OPTION 5 OPTION 6Overall

Preference

Theme 1

Natural heritage +

associated functions

Criteria 1 & 2

Some Least Most Some Some SomeOption

3

Theme 2

Coordinated, efficient,

cost-effective

infrastructure

Criteria 3, 4, 5 & 6

Some Least Least Some Most MostOptions

5 & 6

Theme 3

Promote fiscal

responsibility

Criteria 7 & 8

Least Least Least Some Most MostOptions

5&6

Theme 4

Compact, complete,

healthy communities

Criteria 9.10,11,12 & 13

Most Some Most Some Least LeastOptions

1&3

Theme 5

Agricultural lands

Criteria 14 & 15Some Least Some Some Some Some

No clear

preference

Theme 6

Urban Structure

Implications

Criteria 16,17 & 38

Some Some Most Most Least LeastOptions

3 &4

1 .SOME LEAST MOST MOST SOME SOME

Options

3 &4

Brookfield Place, 181 Bay Street, Suite 1800, Box 754 .Toronto, ON . M5J 2T9 • Canada

T 416.863.1500 F 416.863.1515

tiHMtwi ati'flLcit'lSc rnm

July 18, 2016

REGION OF PEEL

CLERKS DEPT.

REFERRAL TO ______________________________

RECOMMENDED

DIRECTION REQUIRED _______________________

RECEIPT RECOMMENDED ____________________P

7.2 - 1


July 18, 2016

Page 2

A review of The Planning Partnership’s summary chart shows that Option 3 was hindered by “Least” ratings under Themes 2 and 3. These themes relate to the provision of cost- efficient infrastructure and the promotion of fiscal responsibility. Option 3 was discounted by senior staff on the basis of perceived financial risks to the Region.

This letter is submitted to provide clarity regarding how the infrastructure needs of Option 3 can be met in a fiscally responsible manner. If the B3LG’s proposals as herein described are deemed acceptable in principle to Regional Council, it would easily result in Option 3 being rated the Most Preferred Option moving forward.

Financial Commitments Offered by the B3LG

The B3LG has authorized Aird & Berlis LLP to provide this letter as a commitment to the Region by the members of the B3LG that the future development of Option 3 will be achieved in a fiscally responsible manner. The B3LG’s proposals for financing the necessary infrastructure include the following specific commitments:

Front-Ending

o The B3LG will finance without interest up to $69.1 million of water and wastewater infrastructure. This commitment will ensure that the Region is relieved of the debts, carrying costs, financial risks, and repayment obligations associated with financing this infrastructure. The costs and risks will be borne by the developers that stand to benefit from the infrastructure.

Area Specific Development Charges (“ASDCs”)

o In addition to paying existing Region-wide DCs, the B3LG will agree to an ASDC for Option 3 for water and wastewater projects totalling $69.1 million. The B3LG will further agree to an ASDC respecting road infrastructure for Option 3 totalling $12.77 million. In total, the B3LG is committing now to ASDCs that would generate an additional $81.9 million towards the cost of roads and servicing.

Early Payment

o The B3LG will enter into an early payment agreement with the Region respecting the $12.77 million noted above for road infrastructure. This early payment will ensure the Region can offset road related expenses early in the process and build the necessary infrastmcture in a timely way. This willimprove cash flow while resulting in no growth-related debt to the Region.

Ai r d & Be r l i s LLP

Barristers and Solicitors

7.2 - 2

July 18, 2016

Page 3

Lifecycle Costs

o The B3LG will commit now to be responsible for the following lifecycle costs (unless the Region elects to use area specific user rates for these costs):

* Zone 7 water projects, for a period of 25 years from the in-service date or until complete build out of the Option 3 lands.

■ King Street grade separation, for the period of time until GO Rail service is provided or the date when the Region determines that existing traffic demonstrates the need for the grade separation.

The proposed use of front-ending, ASDCs and early payment agreements, along with the B3LG’s commitments concerning lifecycle costs, provides a comprehensive financial strategy that will result in the Region no longer incurring debt carrying costs for required growth-related infrastructure in Bolton. At the same time, B3LG’s proposed financial strategy - which is consistent with information provided to Regional Council in the staff report dated February 22, 2016, entitled “The New Approach to Planning, Servicing and Financing Growth in the Region of Peel - will eliminate current concerns about the disconnect between the Region building new infrastructure in Bolton, but having to wait for off-setting development charge revenue.

Moreover, the use of ASDCs for development within Option 3 neutralizes the issue of debt repayment:

i. An ASDC results in only those who benefit from infrastructure bearing the burden of its cost. Taxpayers and other developers are therefore not responsible for the costs attributable to Option 3. Once an ASDC is implemented, other developers within the Region will pay a lower Regional DC.

ii. Payments made to the Region by way of ASDC would provide the cash flow necessary to repay funding advanced by the B3LG. This mitigates concerns about cash flow and reduces Regional debt.

iii. To date the Region has collected approximately $4,459 million in DCs towards BRES-related infrastructure. These collections will continue until an ASDC is passed and the Regional DC is revised. These collections could be re

channelled towards other Regional infrastructure priorities, further reducing Regional debt.



7.2 - 3

July 18, 2016

Page 4

Most significantly in our submission, the commitments herein offered by the B3LG represent a willing financial involvement with the Region to realize the intended results of BRES-related growth. Options that do not present such willing financial participant ought to be discounted as risk-laden and potentially fraught with future challenges to the Region’s authority to use financial tools like ASDCs. We ask that the members of Regional Council carefully consider this aspect of the BRES process when determining which options to endorse.

Other Planning Considerations

The B3LG asks that the members of Regional Council keep the following additional considerations in mind when reviewing staff recommendations on a preferred option:

Government Grants

o The Province has signalled to municipalities through various recent legislative and regulatory changes that its grants and subsidies will be tied to a municipality’s ability to demonstrate that it is taking the government’s priorities into consideration in its decision-making. The most important provincial priority at this time is the provision of cost-effective mass public transit. There is a risk to the Region that future provincial and federal grants or stimulus programs will not be available if the Region directs future growth to areas that do not make efficient use of planned mass transit. The GO Rail station site selected by Metrolinx is adjacent to Option 3. None of the other options under consideration (including a hybrid Option 4/5) is proximate to the selected GO station site.

Environmental Impact

o A hybrid Option 4/5 would contain numerous environmental features, most of which are isolated and widely distributed. Accommodating a range of natural heritage features, either as isolated features or as part of a connected system, will present access, transportation, and servicing challenges, all of which will ultimately add costs to the realization of growth. These challenges have not been fully considered.

Agricultural Fragmentation

o A hybrid Option 4/5 would contain approximately 150-200 acres of orphaned agricultural lands. The impact of fragmenting Peel’s existing agricultural lands both on existing agricultural uses and on future urban development through a hybrid Option 4/5 has not been fully considered.



7.2 - 4

July 18,2016

Page 5

Land Use Compatibility

o A hybrid Option 4/5 would be adjacent to the proposed 1.5 million square foot Canadian Tire distribution centre in Bolton. Last month, Canadian Tire submitted a site plan amendment application seeking hydrogen fueling, storage and possible production at this facility. The compatibility of siting new urban growth in Bolton in close proximity to a potential hydrogen distribution, storage, and production facility has not been fully considered.

These issues should certainly be fully canvassed before Regional Council endorses a hybrid Option 4/5 as its preferred option for growth in Bolton.

Concluding Submissions

When Option 3 is re-evaluated with the financial commitments provided in this submission, the result is a clear winner:

THEME OPTION 1 OPTION 1/2 OPTION 3 OPTION 4 OPTION 5 OPTION 6Overall

Preference

Theme 1

Natural heritage +

associated functions

Criteria 1 & 2

Some Least Most Some Some SomeOption

3

Theme 2

Coordinated, efficient,

cost-effective

infrastructure

Criteria 3, 4,5 & 6

Some Least Most Some Most MostOptions

5 & 6

Theme 3

Promote fiscal

responsibility

Criteria 7 & 8

least least Most Some Most MostOptions

5 & 6

Theme 4

Compact, complete,

healthy communities

Criteria 9,10,11,12 & 13

Most Some Most Some Least LeastOptions

1 & 3

Theme 5

Agricultural lands

Criteria 14 & 15Some Least Some Some Some Some

No clear

preference

Theme 6

Urban Structure

Implications

Criteria 16,17 & 18

Some Some Most Most Least LeastOptions

3 & 4

I 1 yU( lol 1 SOME LEAST MOST MOST SOME SOMEOptions

3 &4

The B3LG acknowledges that the themes used in the foregoing chart are not to be considered in isolation, but are intended to be blended to create the most complete community on a variety of levels. However, in our submission, Option 3 delivers the best blend of all priorities.

Ai r d & Be r l is LLP


7.2 - 5

With the financial details provided in this letter, Option 3 clearly becomes the Most Preferred option from a financial planning perspective. There is no other option being considered by the Region that ensures less financial risk and less debt to the Region and its taxpayers. Equally, there is no other option under consideration by the Region that better succeeds in addressing the land use planning objectives of the Region and the Town. This has now been confirmed by two planning studies conducted by private consultants - Meridian Planning Consultants on behalf of the Town of Caledon and The Planning Partnership on behalf of Peel Region. In our submission, Regional Council would be unwarrantedly endorsing a suboptimal option were the Region to proceed with any option other than Option 3.

Finally, we remind the members of Regional Council that the options now under consideration originate from a ROPA application originally filed by the Town of Caledon in September 2014. The Town’s application sought to amend the Region of Peel’s Official Plan to include the Option 3 lands into the Bolton Rural Service Centre. When the proposed ROPA proceeds to a public meeting, it should at a minimum include the original ROPA as proposed by the Town (i.e. Option 3) along with any modifications to the applied-for ROPA being proposed by the Region (i.e. the hybrid Option 4/5). Proceeding in this manner will ensure that the public is given the best opportunity to weigh in on the preferred options for the residential expansion of Bolton.

Yours truly,

AIRD & BERLIS LLP

July 18, 2016

Page 6

c.c. Client

26722384.3

Ai r d & Be r l i s IIPBarristers and Solicitors

7.2 - 6

Date€¦ · · 2016-09-30Date: IBSON. A. SPECIAL MEETING . ... 7917800, extension 4582 - or by email at - Some meeting information may also be available in alternate formats, upon

Documents