DATE: February 13, 2018 REPORT NO. CD Chair and Members Committee of the Whole Operations and Administration

Transcription

1 DATE: February 13, 2018 REPORT NO. CD TO: FROM: Chair and Members Committee of the Whole Operations and Administration Paul Moore, General Manager Community Development 1.0 TYPE OF REPORT CONSENT ITEM [ ] ITEM FOR CONSIDERATION [ x ] 2.0 TOPIC City of Brantford Comments on the Provincial Initiative: Protecting Water for Future Generations Growing the Greenbelt in the Outer Ring [Financial Impact none] (CD ) 3.0 RECOMMENDATION A. THAT Report CD , City of Brantford Comments on the Provincial Initiative: Protecting Water for Future Generations Growing the Greenbelt in the Outer Ring, BE RECEIVED; B. THAT the Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs BE ADVISED that the official comments from the City of Brantford in regard to the Provincial Initiative: Protecting Water for Future Generations Growing the Greenbelt in the Outer Ring are as follows: i. The City of Brantford DOES NOT SUPPORT the inclusion of any City of Brantford lands within the Study Area for the Expansion of the Greenbelt in the Outer Ring for the reasons outlined in Report CD ; and ii. The City of Brantford DOES NOT SUPPORT any future extension of the Greenbelt into the City of Brantford s municipal boundary for the reasons outlined in Report CD ; C. THAT a copy of Report CD BE APPENDED to the City s official comments submitted to the Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs; and

2 February 13, 2018 Page 2 D. THAT a copy of the City s letter to the Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs, including a copy of Report CD , BE FORWARDED to Phil McColeman, MP, Brantford-Brant and Dave Levac, MPP, Brant. 4.0 PURPOSE The purpose of this Report is to provide the City of Brantford s comments to the Province regarding the Provincial initiative: Protecting Water for Future Generations Growing the Greenbelt in the Outer Ring. 5.0 BACKGROUND 5.1 Request for Comments on the Greenbelt Study Area On December 7, 2017, the Province of Ontario released a Public Consultation Document entitled: Protecting Water for Future Generations Growing the Greenbelt in the Outer Ring. The complete document and consultation process is available at The deadline for submitting comments is March 7, Figure 4 of the Public Consultation Document illustrates the Study Area for Potential Greenbelt Expansion, which includes land within the City of Brantford, to the north and east of the City s current Settlement Area, and is attached as Appendix A to this Report. The Public Consultation Document notes that the Study Area is conceptual at this time and may be refined by the Province based on the feedback it receives. Input on the Study Area may be considered by the Province as it proposes a future Greenbelt Plan amendment that would expand the Greenbelt Area boundary in which the policies of the Greenbelt Plan apply. The Province intends to consult further on a proposed Greenbelt Area boundary expansion prior to amending the Greenbelt Plan, providing additional opportunity to comment in the future. 5.2 Policy Context The Province establishes direction for planning policy in Ontario through the Planning Act, the Provincial Policy Statement (2014) and more detailed and geographically specific land use plans. The Greenbelt Plan is one of four Provincial land use plans updated in May 2017 as a result of the Co-ordinated Land Use Planning Review initiated by the Province in The other three plans are the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, the Niagara Escarpment Plan and the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan. These four plans work together to provide the framework for long term planning and direction on how to manage growth, build complete communities, curb sprawl and protect the natural environment. The City of Brantford is part of the Greater Golden Horseshoe, subject to the Growth Plan as a single-tier municipality in the Outer Ring. The Growth Plan

3 February 13, 2018 Page 3 provides the overarching strategy for where and how growth should be accommodated while protecting the agricultural system and natural and cultural heritage resources. The Growth Plan directs population and employment growth to Settlement Areas. Urban development may be permitted within Settlement Area boundaries that may only be expanded through a City-initiated Municipal Comprehensive Review. The other three plans identify where urbanization should not occur, providing additional policy to protect the agricultural land base and natural heritage and water resource systems that sustain ecological and human health, notably the potable water supply. The Niagara Escarpment Plan and the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan are not applicable to Brantford as the City is not situated near the Niagara Escarpment or the Oak Ridges Moraine. The City of Brantford is not currently within or adjacent to the existing Greenbelt Area or subject to the Greenbelt Plan. The Study Area for Potential Greenbelt Expansion includes much of the northern Boundary Expansion Lands that were transferred from the County of Brant to the City of Brantford to enable the City to plan for and achieve the population and employment targets set by the Province in the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. The Municipal Boundary Adjustment Agreement between the City of Brantford and the County of Brant was approved by the respective Councils on June 28, The Minister of Municipal Affairs signed the Restructuring Order on December 13, 2016, approving the annexation effective January 1, (Refer to Appendix B and Appendix C.) The approved Municipal Boundary Adjustment Agreement anticipates a future expansion of the City s current Settlement Area. The limits of the expanded Settlement Area are to be determined through the Municipal Comprehensive Review/Land Needs Assessment now underway as part of the City s ongoing Official Plan Review, conducted in accordance with the requirements of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. If the Greenbelt was to be expanded as illustrated in the Study Area for Potential Greenbelt Expansion, any future expansion of the City s current Settlement Area into the Boundary Expansion Lands on the north side of the City would be prohibited. Those lands would be included in the Greenbelt and subject to the additional policies of the Greenbelt Plan, including Section : Settlement Areas outside the Greenbelt are not permitted to expand into the Greenbelt. Urban development would not be permitted in the Boundary Expansion Lands on the north side of Brantford as shown in greater detail in Appendix D. A Draft City of Brantford Official Plan was released in July 2016 and subsequently put on hold while the updated Growth Plan policies were still pending and the Municipal Boundary Adjustment was finalized. The Official Plan

4 February 13, 2018 Page 4 Review process resumed in September 2017 and a new City of Brantford Official Plan will be established in conformity with the updated Growth Plan, taking into account the Boundary Expansion Lands. Planning Staff anticipate the final draft of the new Official Plan will be presented to Council for adoption in 2019 and then sent to the Province for approval. Together with concurrent updates to the City-wide Master Servicing Plan and Transportation Master Plan, it will guide future growth and development at the more detailed municipal level. The new Official Plan must implement the Growth Plan targets. At the same time, it will incorporate stronger policies to protect the natural environment, first introduced in the 2016 Draft Official Plan. How the various plans and policies of the City of Brantford demonstrate its commitment to natural heritage preservation, including water resource protection, is discussed in Section 8.2 of this Report. 5.3 Previous Comments to the Province The City has previously expressed to the Province the City s concerns about the potential extension of the Greenbelt into Brantford. Report CD , Coordinated Land Use Planning Review: City of Brantford s Comments on the Final Round of Consultation on the Proposed Updated Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, is provided in Appendix E. It includes a letter dated May 21, 2015, which stated: As the Greenbelt Plan is being reviewed, the Province must keep in mind the ongoing discussions surrounding the proposed boundary expansion between the City and the County of Brant. The land being discussed must not be brought into the Greenbelt Plan as this would certainly hinder future opportunities for the City to meet Provincial population and employment targets beyond its current [i.e. pre-2017] municipal boundary. While the earlier comments provided in September 2016 through Report CD were focused on the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, they also raised concerns regarding potential Greenbelt expansion affecting Brantford, and noted the significant planning work that the City will be undertaking in the Boundary Expansion Lands. It was requested: That no new agricultural or environmental land use designations are applied by the Province to any lands in the expansion areas, as these lands will be reviewed as part of the Municipal Comprehensive Review and Secondary Planning process to be completed by the City, and will be reviewed by the Province. In addition, upon receipt of the Public Consultation Document, Protecting Water for Future Generations Growing the Greenbelt in the Outer Ring, City Staff immediately contacted the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and with their cooperation, a meeting was held at the City on December 12, The purpose of the meeting was to firstly gain a better understanding of the approach and timing of the consultation process and most importantly, to relay City Staff s

5 February 13, 2018 Page 5 immediate concerns regarding the inclusion of the northern Boundary Expansion Lands within the Study Area for Potential Greenbelt Expansion. Planning Staff also attended a Technical Meeting hosted by the Province on January 18, 2018 in Guelph. In addition to presenting an overview of the Provincial initiative to protect water by growing the Greenbelt, the meeting was intended to provide an opportunity for municipalities and conservation authorities to offer advice to the Province on how to move from a Study Area to a proposed Greenbelt expansion area. Planning Staff reiterated the City s concerns, and were advised to ensure that fulsome comments are provided to the Province along with any related supporting materials, such as the Appendices to this Report. 6.0 CORPORATE POLICY CONTEXT 6.1 Shaping Our Future: Brantford s Community Strategic Plan One of the four main pillars of Brantford s Community Strategic Plan is Managed Growth and Environmental Leadership. It includes the following Long-Term Desired Outcomes: Brantford will be recognized for its environmental stewardship and protection of its natural assets. Brantford will be known for managing growth wisely, ensuring optimization of its infrastructure while protecting and enhancing our heritage and natural assets. Completing the Official Plan Review is one of the Strategic Actions identified in the Community Strategic Plan to help achieve the above noted Long-Term Desired Outcomes. Related Strategic Actions include the review and implementation of the Transportation Master Plan and the Water, Wastewater and Stormwater Master Servicing Plan in conjunction with the Official Plan. This work, including the incorporation of the Boundary Expansion Lands into the new and updated plans, follows the Strategic Action to explore opportunities for expansion of boundaries. 7.0 INPUT FROM OTHER SOURCES City Staff had a discussion with the Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) about the potential Greenbelt expansion into the Boundary Expansion Lands. The GRCA has reviewed the Official Plan Review Work Plan, is an active participant in the Review process, and has a mandate to protect water resources throughout the Grand River watershed. In particular, the City is working with the GRCA to ensure that the scope of the environmental analysis and subwatershed study components of the Official Plan Review are appropriate.

6 February 13, 2018 Page 6 The Province is hosting six public open houses across the Study Area as part of its consultation on Growing the Greenbelt in the Outer Ring. They will be held in Brantford, Alliston, Barrie, Guelph, Kitchener and Orangeville. The Brantford open house is scheduled for the evening of Tuesday February 20, 2018 at the Branlyn Community Centre. 8.0 ANALYSIS City Staff do not support the inclusion of any City of Brantford lands within the Study Area for Potential Greenbelt Expansion. Further, City Staff do not support the inclusion of any City of Brantford lands within a future Greenbelt expansion that may be implemented by the Province through a future amendment to the Greenbelt Plan. The reasons for this position are as follows: 8.1 Conflict with the Provincially Approved Municipal Boundary Adjustment Agreement Inability to Meet Growth Plan Targets The City of Brantford is required to implement the targets for population and employment set by the Province in the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. As per Section of the Growth Plan: All upper- and single-tier municipalities will, through a municipal comprehensive review, apply the forecasts in Schedule 3 for planning and managing growth to the horizon of this Plan. Schedule 3 of the Growth Plan assigns 163,000 persons and 79,000 jobs in Brantford by year This forecast accounts for an increase of approximately 61,600 persons and 32,000 jobs between 2016 and The Greenbelt expansion into Brantford conflicts with the Municipal Boundary Adjustment that was recently approved to enable the City to meet Provincial growth targets. The purpose and intent of the Municipal Boundary Adjustment was for the City of Brantford to have sufficient land to meet the population and employment targets established by the Province in the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. The City currently has an approximate two year supply of greenfield lands available for development and cannot meet the growth targets established by the Province without the ability to develop new areas within the Boundary Expansion Lands. In addition, the City will not meet the Growth Plan requirement to maintain land with servicing capacity sufficient to provide at least a three-year supply of residential units. The City cannot reasonably accommodate the growth targets only through intensification of the Built-Up Area and within the limited greenfield land supply. Nearly all of the land currently vacant in the City s current Designated Greenfield Area is already active in the development application process or subject to approved draft plans of subdivision.

7 February 13, 2018 Page 7 It is unclear as to why the Province would even consider including the Boundary Expansion Lands in the Study Area for Potential Greenbelt Expansion, which may lead to a future Greenbelt Plan amendment to expand the Greenbelt to those lands. This outcome would prohibit a future Settlement Area expansion into the northern Boundary Expansion Lands, after the Province approved the Municipal Boundary Adjustment that was completed for the purpose of facilitating a future Settlement Area expansion. Including the Boundary Adjustment Lands within the Greenbelt Plan would make it impossible to meet the Provincial targets for growth under the amended Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe Compensation to Brant County for Boundary Expansion Lands The Greenbelt expansion into the northern Boundary Expansion Lands may impact the City s requirement to compensate Brant County as per the approved Municipal Boundary Adjustment Agreement. The City is required to pay the County of Brant compensation including $1,163,350 per year for ten years commencing January 1, 2018, in accordance with Section of the Boundary Adjustment Agreement (Appendix B): Compensation The City shall to pay the County the sum of Eleven Million Six Hundred and Thirty-Three Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($11,633,500.00) by way of ten (10) equal annual installments, each to be made on January 1 of each year commencing on January 1, 2018 and ending on January 1, The compensation is reflected in Section 5 of the Restructuring Order signed by the Minister to implement the Boundary Adjustment Agreement on December 13, 2016 (Appendix C). The compensation sum noted above in Section is based on the projected number of residential dwelling units and employment growth anticipated to be developed within the Boundary Expansion Lands. Additional background is provided in Item 8 of the January Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Brantford and County of Brant, used as the basis for the Boundary Adjustment Agreement, and attached as Appendix G. If the Greenbelt is expanded to include the Boundary Expansion Lands and development is restricted in that area, the City will not gain the anticipated growth in assessment value. In the event that Greenbelt expansion into Brantford is approved, perhaps the annual compensation paid to the County related to future development opportunities should be taken over by the Province?

8 February 13, 2018 Page Disruption to the Ongoing Official Plan Review The City expended significant investment in terms of time and resources to justify and negotiate the Municipal Boundary Adjustment, which was signed by the City of Brantford and the County of Brant, and implemented through the Minister s Restructuring Order issued on December 13, It should also be noted that Section 5.02 of the Boundary Adjustment Agreement, attached as Appendix B, recognizes that an urban boundary expansion (Settlement Area expansion) will be required following the Municipal Boundary Adjustment, to establish any additional Urban land use areas in the Boundary Expansion Lands. The expansion of the Greenbelt into the Boundary Expansion Lands will have a significant impact on the scope and direction of the City s growth now being assessed through the ongoing Municipal Comprehensive Review, conducted in accordance with the Growth Plan as part of the Official Plan Review. Adding the northern Boundary Expansion Lands to the Greenbelt will make waste of much time and investment made thus far to add those lands to the City and incorporate them into the City s future Official Plan. The City has been consistent in its messaging to the public, Council, First Nations and the Province that environmental features in the Boundary Expansion Lands will be protected. The map provided in Appendix F shows areas to be protected from development. It includes over 900 hectares of land coinciding with the Natural Heritage System as identified in the Brant County Official Plan, and a 30 metre protective buffer added as part of the Boundary Expansion discussions. This map was used during the public consultation for the Municipal Boundary Adjustment to indicate that not all of the 2,719 gross hectares in the Boundary Expansions Lands can be developed. The Boundary Expansion Lands will be thoroughly assessed through the Official Plan Review process to determine the precise limits of the Settlement Area, including developable lands and areas to be protected. 8.2 Redundancy of the Greenbelt Plan in Brantford Existing Municipal Plans and Policies The City of Brantford has municipal plans and policies that recognize the importance of water resources and demonstrate its commitment to protecting environmental features. The Grand River is the source of the raw water supply for Brantford, as well as other communities within the watershed. Protecting ground water aquifers, river valleys, coldwater streams and wetlands in Brantford, including the Boundary Expansion Lands added to the City in January 2017, is necessary to maintain quality and quantity of the source water. In addition to comments regarding the impact of the potential Greenbelt expansion on Brantford s future growth, this Report also highlights how the City is protecting its natural heritage features and will continue to do so through its ongoing planning processes, ensuring that the mutual goal of protecting water for future

9 February 13, 2018 Page 9 generations can still be achieved without application of Provincial Greenbelt policy in Brantford. The Boundary Expansion Lands now in the City of Brantford in the proposed Greenbelt Study Area are currently designated in the applicable Brant County Official Plan as Agricultural, Rural Residential or as part of the Natural Heritage System. The County Official Plan has an extensive Natural Heritage System which includes the watercourses in the Boundary Expansion Lands. In accordance with the Boundary Adjustment Agreement between the City of Brantford and Brant County, the Brant County Official Plan and Brant County Zoning By-law continue to apply to the Boundary Expansion Lands until they are amended or repealed. These changes will occur as the Lands are incorporated into Brantford s new Official Plan, and subsequently, Brantford s Zoning By-law. Excerpts from the City s Draft Official Plan (Version 1, July 2016) are provided in Appendix H. The Plan recognizes the need for Source Water Protection in Section It establishes a minimum 30 metre buffer from identified natural heritage features in the Core Natural Areas Designation (Section 8.6.1). This policy approach is consistent with the 30 metre buffer established in Section of the Greenbelt Plan for wetlands, seepage areas and springs, fish habitat, permanent and intermittent streams, lakes and significant woodlots. A minimum 30 metre buffer to core natural heritage features was recommended in the City of Brantford Waterfront Master Plan which addresses protection to the Grand River corridor flowing through Brantford. The Waterfront Master Plan also recommended an Official Plan amendment to expand the areas to be protected from development. Amendment No. 166 to the City of Brantford Official Plan resulted in a reduction in the capacity of the City s Designated Greenfield Area. It removed land from development in favour of protecting areas with natural heritage features, including Provincially Significant Wetlands, Coldwater Streams, an Area of Natural and Scientific Interest and other important natural heritage features. While this particular Amendment was not upheld by the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB), the City was partly successful in protecting these natural heritage features as the OMB did support a significant reduction in the area available for development through the Board s Order to dismiss part of a related application for Draft Approval of a Plan of Subdivision that was to be located on the lands affected by Amendment No In addition, the Grand River Source Protection Plan, approved by the Ontario Ministry of Environment and Climate Change on July 1, 2016, will inform the the environmental analysis and watershed planning components of the Official Plan Review. The Source Protection Plan identifies vulnerable areas related to the quantity and quality of drinking water sources and outlines policies and programs to prevent and manage or remove significant threats. It identifies Intake (IPZ) and Wellhead Protection Zones where those policies apply, including areas in the Boundary Expansion Lands as illustrated in Appendix I.

10 February 13, 2018 Page Further Detailed Analysis to Identify and Protect Water Resources is Underway The City of Brantford is undertaking a more detailed level of study in the Boundary Expansion Lands to ensure that environmental features, including water resources, will be protected. The Official Plan Review now underway includes all the technical background studies, including a Municipal Comprehensive Review and watershed planning, as required by the Growth Plan to support a Settlement Area expansion. The City s budget for this project is $2 million, committing significant resources to undertake the necessary detailed level of analysis. Once the amount of land required for Settlement Area expansion is determined through the Land Needs Assessment, the Municipal Comprehensive Review will determine where the Settlement Area should be expanded. A Master Plan will then be prepared for the Settlement Area expansion. The scope of work for this portion of the Municipal Comprehensive Review and Master Plan process, as it relates to the protection of the natural heritage and water resource systems includes the following subwatershed study objectives: Identify hydrologic features, areas, linkages, and functions as well as natural features, areas, and related hydrological functions; Provide for protecting, improving, and/or restoring the quality and quantity of water; Consider existing development and evaluate impacts of proposed land uses and development, and provide guidance as to how, and when urban development can occur within the subwatersheds to ensure that impacts related to severe weather events are minimized and ecological needs are supported; and Provide a clear implementation and monitoring plan that will be used to help guide/direct development while ensuring that potential impacts to the natural heritage and water resource systems are appropriately mitigated. The subwatershed study will be one of the key guiding documents to be used to manage growth within the Boundary Expansion Lands. The scope of the field investigation and appropriate system modelling and mapping would include such items as: Stream gauging and temperature monitoring for the objectives of temperature regime analysis to classify coldwater streams; Quantitative analysis to support capacity, erosion, and base flow characterization; Surface water quality sampling; Groundwater monitoring to support investigation into recharge/discharge areas, groundwater depth; Species investigation;

11 February 13, 2018 Page 11 Stream Morphology and Channel Erosion; Aquatic and Terrestrial Environment investigation; Headwater feature investigation; and Wetland classification. The City s subwatershed study will provide more detailed analysis than the data being relied upon by the Province to establish the Study Area for Potential Greenbelt Expansion, which identified, but has not evaluated, the three key building blocks (i.e. moraines, coldwater streams and wetlands) with an arbitrary 1 km buffer. While the Province has indicated that it is consulting only on a Study Area at this time, City Staff are concerned about future implications should the Study Area as proposed result in an amendment to the Greenbelt Plan that expands the Greenbelt into Brantford. An expanded Greenbelt in the northern Boundary Expansion Lands removes the options available for growth that are being evaluated in more detail through the Official Plan Review than in the work conducted thus far to determine a Greenbelt Study Area. In the City of Brantford s case, as illustrated on the Study Area Building Blocks Maps, provided as Appendix J, the Paris-Galt Moraine complex is present in a very small portion of the northern Boundary Expansion Lands. Other alternatives for Settlement Area expansion that Brantford would look to are encumbered by moraine and sand and gravel deposits on the west side and existing Brant County Settlement Areas in Paris, Oakhill, Mount Pleasant and Cainsville surrounding other parts of the City. City Staff believe the Study Area for Potential Greenbelt Expansion is premature. Municipalities must first have the opportunity to bring Official Plans into conformity with the updated Growth Plan (2017), including the land needs assessments that determine how much land is needed to accommodate growth targets based on newer intensification and density targets. The subsequent analysis to decide where that growth should go, completed in accordance with Growth Plan policies for expanding Settlement Areas, should result in new growth situated away from significant water resources. Furthermore, the Greenbelt expansion is premature before the Natural Heritage System and the Agricultural System are in place in the Growth Plan as per Sections and of the Growth Plan (2017). 9.0 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS While there are no financial implications to the municipality associated with the recommendations of this Report, the potential inclusion of the northern Boundary Expansion Lands in the Greenbelt would have future financial implications related to the loss of assessment and the related compensation issue noted in the Section of this Report.

12 February 13, 2018 Page CONCLUSION The Study Area for Potential Greenbelt Expansion should not include land within the City of Brantford s current municipal boundary. This Report outlines significant concerns and implications should the Study Area result in the future application of the Greenbelt Plan within the Boundary Expansion Lands. Therefore, City Staff do not support the inclusion of any City of Brantford lands within a future Greenbelt expansion that may be implemented by the Province through a future amendment to the Greenbelt Plan. The Public Consultation Document notes that a key consideration for potential Greenbelt expansion is the need to balance protection of water with accommodating appropriate urban growth. This balance cannot be achieved in Brantford if the Province applies the Greenbelt Plan to the Boundary Expansion Lands, prohibiting a future Settlement Area expansion, after the Province approved the Municipal Boundary Adjustment that was completed for the purpose of facilitating a future Settlement Area expansion. Including those lands within the Greenbelt Plan would make it impossible for the City to meet the Provincial targets for growth under the amended Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. Nonetheless, the City is committed to protecting its water resources as outlined in this Report. The aims of the Greenbelt Plan and the Growth Plan can be achieved through City of Brantford policy and ongoing planning processes as set out in existing Provincial policy applicable in Brantford. Alan Waterfield, MCIP, RPP Senior Policy Planner Community Development Nicole Wilmot, MCIP, RPP Manager of Policy Planning Community Development Lucy Hives, MCIP, RPP Director of Planning Community Development Paul Moore, MCIP, RPP General Manager Community Development

13 February 13, 2018 Page 13 Attachments: Appendix A: Figure 4 of the Public Consultation Document, Study Area for Potential Greenbelt Expansion Appendix B: Brantford-Brant Boundary Adjustment Agreement, Schedule A to City of Brantford By-law and County of Brant By-law 89-16, June 28, 2016 Appendix C: Minister s Restructuring Order Made under the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c. 25, December 13, 2016 Appendix D: Map of Potential Greenbelt Expansion Study Area in Brantford Appendix E: Report CD , Co-ordinated Land Use Planning Review: City of Brantford s Comments on the Final Round of Consultation on the Proposed Updated Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe Appendix F: Map of Proposed Municipal Boundary Adjustment Protected Lands Appendix G: Brantford-Brant Boundary Adjustment Memorandum of Understanding, January 6, 2016 Appendix H: Excerpts from the City of Brantford Draft Official Plan (Version 1, July 2016) Appendix I: Intake Protection Zones Map Appendix J: Potential Greenbelt Study Area Building Blocks Maps (Appendix 1 to the Public Consultation Document) In adopting this report, is a by-law or agreement required? If so, it should be referenced in the recommendation section. Bylaw required [ ] yes [ x ] no Agreement(s) or other documents to be signed by Mayor and/or City Clerk [ ] yes [ x ] no Is the necessary by-law or agreement being sent concurrently to Council? [ ] yes [ x ] no

14 February 13, 2018 Page 14 Appendix A: Figure 4 of the Public Consultation Document, Study Area for Potential Greenbelt Expansion

15 February 13, 2018 Page 15 Appendix B: Brantford-Brant Boundary Adjustment Agreement, Schedule A to City of Brantford By-law and County of Brant By-law 89-16, June 28, 2016, pages 1-20 (excluding Schedules)

16 February 13, 2018 Page 16

17 February 13, 2018 Page 17

18 February 13, 2018 Page 18

19 February 13, 2018 Page 19

20 February 13, 2018 Page 20

21 February 13, 2018 Page 21

22 February 13, 2018 Page 22

23 February 13, 2018 Page 23

24 February 13, 2018 Page 24

25 February 13, 2018 Page 25

26 February 13, 2018 Page 26

27 February 13, 2018 Page 27

28 February 13, 2018 Page 28

29 February 13, 2018 Page 29

30 February 13, 2018 Page 30

31 February 13, 2018 Page 31

32 February 13, 2018 Page 32

33 February 13, 2018 Page 33

34 February 13, 2018 Page 34

35 February 13, 2018 Page 35 Appendix C: Minister s Restructuring Order Made under the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c. 25, December 13, 2016, pages 1-6 (excluding Schedules)

36 February 13, 2018 Page 36

37 February 13, 2018 Page 37

38 February 13, 2018 Page 38

39 February 13, 2018 Page 39

40 February 13, 2018 Page 40

41 February 13, 2018 Page 41 Appendix D: Map of Potential Greenbelt Expansion Study Area in Brantford

42 February 13, 2018 Page 42 Appendix E: Report CD , Co-ordinated Land Use Planning Review: City of Brantford s Comments on the Final Round of Consultation on the Proposed Updated Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe DATE: September 13, 2016 REPORT NO. CD TO: FROM: Chair and Members Committee of the Whole Community Development Paul Moore, General Manager Community Development 1.0 TYPE OF REPORT CONSENT ITEM [ ] ITEM FOR CONSIDERATION [ X ] 2.0 TOPIC Co-ordinated Land Use Planning Review: City of Brantford s Comments on the Final Round of Consultation on the Proposed Updated Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe [Financial Impact $0] (CD ) 3.0 RECOMMENDATION A. THAT Report CD , Co-ordinated Land Use Planning Review: City of Brantford s comments on the Final Round of Consultation on the proposed updated Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe BE RECEIVED; B. THAT comments in Report CD on the Co-ordinated Land Use Planning Review BE ENDORSED, and C. THAT a copy of Report CD BE FORWARDED to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs (MMA) as the official comments from the City of Brantford in regard to the Co-ordinated Land Use Planning Review.

43 February 13, 2018 Page 43 Report No. CD September 13, 2016 Page PURPOSE The purpose of this Report is to provide Council with an overview of the proposed changes to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe as part of the Provincial Co-ordinated Land Use Planning Review. This Report also outlines issues that the City requests be addressed by the Province prior to adopting the amended Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. 5.0 BACKGROUND On February 27, 2015 the Ministry of Municipal Affairs (MMA) announced a coordinated Review of Ontario s Land Use Plans: The Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe; Greenbelt Plan; Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan; and the Niagara Escarpment Plan. These Plans regulate land use planning in Ontario and provide the long term planning framework and direction on how to manage growth, protect agricultural lands, preserve the natural environment and support economic development within Ontario s Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH). The co-ordinated review includes two rounds of public consultation. During the first round in 2015, the Province sought feedback from municipalities subject to the Plans, and the City submitted comments to MMA in May of 2015, attached as Appendix A. The first stage of consultation was intended to assist the Province in understanding how the Plan(s) are performing, and how they may be improved, while the current round of consultation is now aimed at obtaining comments regarding the proposed policy amendments as a result of the first stage of stakeholder input. The Province is requesting comments by October 31 st A copy of the proposed changes to the Growth Plan can be found at: This Report provides an overview of key proposed changes to the Growth Plan, and outlines issues that the City requests be addressed by the Province prior to adopting the amended Growth Plan. It should be noted that the City of Brantford is subject only to the Growth Plan; and as such, the Greenbelt Plan, Niagara Escarpment Plan and Oak Ridges Moraine Plan have not been reviewed as part of this Report. 6.0 CORPORATE POLICY CONTEXT 6.1 Shaping our Future: Brantford s Community Strategic Plan Implementation of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, relates to the long-term desired outcome of the Community Strategic Plan , that is to manage growth wisely. The Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe

44 February 13, 2018 Page 44 Report No. CD September 13, 2016 Page 3 represents the Province of Ontario s strategy for planning for growth in the Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH) and the City of Brantford is required to implement the Growth Plan. 7.0 INPUT FROM OTHER SOURCES N/A 8.0 ANALYSIS The responsibility for long-range planning in Ontario is shared between the Province and municipalities. The Province establishes directions for planning policy through the Planning Act and the Provincial Policy Statement, and additional plans, including the four plans under review, are developed to provide more detailed and geographically specific policies. Municipalities are then required to implement the direction of these plans through their local Official Plans which must conform to provincial plans and policy statements. The following Section provides an overview of the proposed policy changes to the Growth Plan and highlights key issues that the City requests are addressed by the Province prior to adopting the final proposed Growth Plan. 8.1 Density and Intensification Targets and the Impact on Settlement Area Expansions The Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe places strong emphasis on building complete communities. In an effort to further regulate and reduce land consumption for growth across the Region, the Province proposes to; Increase the current intensification targets for Greenfield Areas from 50 to 80 people and jobs per hectare, Increase the current Built-Up Area target for all new residential development occurring annually from 40 to 60%; and, Limit opportunities for settlement area expansions. (urban boundary expansion) The proposed revisions to the Growth Plan will increase intensification and density targets across the GGH for outer ring municipalities through a blanket, or one size fits all allocation, without consulting with outer ring municipalities to determine whether the current Provincial targets are being met, constraints to meeting the targets, and the impact that proposed new targets will have on long range planning initiatives.

45 February 13, 2018 Page 45 Report No. CD September 13, 2016 Page 4 As part of the current Official Plan Review and some preliminary analysis completed to support the need for a boundary expansion, both land supply and opportunities for intensification in the Built Boundary and Greenfield Areas were reviewed. Given the current housing mix in the City s Greenfield Area, which is generally comprised of a 70/30 split of low to high density housing types, coupled with limited opportunities for intensification in the City s Built-Up Area, the current population and employment targets as allocated to the City by the Province, cannot be accommodated within the current municipal boundary. The current composition of housing types in the City s Greenfield Area (southwest) equates to 46 persons and jobs per hectares, which is below the Provincial 50 persons and jobs per hectare target. In terms of land supply (serviced and un-serviced lands) the City has a limited 3 year supply of land, which just meets the Provincial requirement, thus triggering the need for more residential and employment land, as this is the only remaining Greenfield land in the City. While increasing the density requirement from 50 to 80 persons and jobs per hectare would extend the land supply beyond 3 years, thus slowing the rate of land consumption for growth (a key Provincial initiative), it is important to consider the required housing mix to achieve 80 persons and jobs per hectare and the market conditions required to support that mix. As noted above, generally the housing composition in the southwest is comprised of 70% singles, and 20-30% medium to high-density housing types. In order to achieve 80 persons and jobs per hectare, the housing split would need to be in the range of 70% medium to-high density development, and 30% low density. This housing composition is not realistic given the City s current housing market, as there is no demand for high density apartment style housing in the City s Greenfield Area. Furthermore, there is very little demand for high density development in our Built Boundary and Urban Growth Centre (UGC). In the past 20 years there has only been one high density development in the Built-Up Area, illustrating the lack of demand for this style of housing in the City as a whole. Considering there is no demand for this style of housing type in the core, where the amenities and transit network support this housing type, it is not realistic to assume this type of development will be in demand in the City s only remaining Greenfield Area. In addition to issues regarding the increase in density and intensification targets, there are concerns over how the application of these targets will impact the ability to expand the City s settlement area as a result of an approved municipal boundary expansion, and the designation of additional land for residential and employment uses. The City will be undertaking detailed land use planning justification studies as part of the Secondary Planning process in order to expand the City s settlement area. However with increased intensification and density targets as the basis for this analysis, the City is concerned over the impact that these targets may have on the approval of such an expansion, as the City will be required to justify additional land needs based on these increased planned

46 February 13, 2018 Page 46 Report No. CD September 13, 2016 Page 5 density targets, which are not realistically achievable in the current Brantford housing market. Additionally, should the expansion of the settlement area be approved by the Province, the application of these targets will reduce the amount of land permitted to be converted to residential and employment designations in the twenty year planning horizon established by the Province. It should be noted, that the City will be undertaking significant investment to bring these lands into the City s municipal boundary, and the impact of bringing on less land in the initial stages for development will result in the City having to front end significant costs in terms of operations, servicing and capital infrastructure needs, with a slower rate of return in terms of development charges and assessment growth. In conclusion, the City requests: That the Province eliminate the one size fits all approach to the allocation of intensification and density targets, particularly in the outer ring municipalities, and work in consultation with municipalities to determine appropriate targets that meet Provincial objectives for growth management, and which reflect on the ground realities and current market conditions in each impacted municipality. 8.2 Urban Growth Centre and Student Population With the release of the Growth Plan in 2006, the City of Brantford along with seven (7) other outer ring municipalities were identified as having an Urban Growth Centre (UGC). Urban Growth Centres are intended to function as focal points for investment in regional public services, as well as commercial, recreational, cultural and entertainment uses, and to accommodate significant population and employment growth. Additionally, the Province applied a density target of 150 people/jobs per hectare to the City of Brantford UGC. The City of Brantford s UGC has undergone significant transformation and renewal over the past decade, mainly due to the presence of a post-secondary university campus; however under the Growth Plan the student population is excluded from the Provincial density calculation. The density and mixed use built form within the UGC will continue to grow and evolve over time, and aside from the density calculation it meets the overall intent and objectives for an Urban Growth Centre as defined by the Province. With the exclusion of students from the density calculation, the UGC density remains significantly below the planned target of 150 people and jobs per hectare and does not accurately reflect the transformation of the downtown core. Students play a significant role in the UGC and as the post-secondary institution expands, the number of jobs continues to

47 February 13, 2018 Page 47 Report No. CD September 13, 2016 Page 6 increase, yet the number of people continues to decline despite the increase in student population. The City of Brantford has requested on several occasions that the Province recognize students in the density calculations for municipalities that have a postsecondary campus in their UGC s, and this is currently not addressed in the proposed new Growth Plan. In conclusion, as the Growth Plan is now under a fulsome Provincial review, the City requests: That the Province amend their policies to include and recognize students in the density calculations for municipalities that have a post-secondary campus in their Urban Growth Centre. 8.3 Identification of the Agricultural System and Greenbelt Protection The proposed Growth Plan includes new policies which focus on increased agricultural/ environmental protection and further Provincial regulation of the land base. New policies in the Growth Plan require the Province to identify a regional agricultural system, and to protect this system s long term viability. The City of Brantford recognizes the importance of protecting the natural heritage system and agricultural food network across the GGH, and supports Provincial initiatives to protect the environment and grow the agricultural land base. As noted previously, the City of Brantford is in the early stages of undertaking the necessary technical studies and municipal comprehensive review to support a settlement area expansion that will bring approximately 2700 gross hectares of land, mainly designated Agricultural, into the City of Brantford from the County of Brant. Currently neither the City of Brantford nor County of Brant, are subject to the Greenbelt Plan, nor have any lands been identified by the Province as part of a regionally protected agricultural system. Furthermore, identification of such lands for inclusion in a regional protection plan, whether for agricultural or environmental protection, will have significant impacts in terms of the viability of any potential land use conversions in the expansion area, and the potential for redevelopment of these lands. The City will be required to complete environmental/agricultural studies as part of the Secondary Plan and Municipal Comprehensive Review which will evaluate and identify any lands suitable for protection; therefore the City requests: That no new agricultural or environmental land use designations are applied by the Province to any lands in the expansion areas, as these lands will be reviewed as part of the Municipal Comprehensive Review and Secondary Planning process to be completed by the City, and will be reviewed by the Province.

48 February 13, 2018 Page 48 Report No. CD September 13, 2016 Page New Performance Indicators and Monitoring Currently there are no reporting requirements related to performance monitoring requirements to measure Plan implementation across the GGH. Performance indicators were developed in 2014 by the Province, with the intent of measuring implementation and establishing a baseline to measure effectiveness of the Plan over time. Since 2014, there has been very little direction provided by the Province on the purpose, use, review and/or the development of indicators or reporting requirements. While the City of Brantford supports the development of performance indicators as a monitoring tool to track the implementation of the Growth Plan, the current approach remains vague, and consequences to municipalities for poor implementation of the Growth Plan remains unclear. It has been noted previously in this Report, that blanket approaches in terms of density and intensification allocations, and the lack of recognition for local issues, can make measuring performance not only difficult but inaccurate. Although there has been no link thus far between performance and the allocation of provincial funding, the City of Brantford has concerns over how these may become linked as provincial funding for capital project becomes further constrained. Lastly, the Growth Plan does note that the intent of developing performance indicators is not to compare municipalities throughout the GGH. Although the Province may not use this information as a comparative tool, it does not account for how others may use this tool, and how what may be seen as poor performance could negatively impact the regional view of the City, and the attractiveness of the City as a place to live, work, and invest. Therefore, prior to the implementation of any type of performance monitoring requirements, the City requests: That the Province recognize the significant concerns that the City faces in terms of implementing the Growth Plan and commit to resolving these concerns prior to the approval of the new Growth Plan and implementation of a performance monitoring system, which could negatively impact the City s ability to compete for investment and new business in the regional market Conformity Requirements and the New Official Plan The City of Brantford is in the early stages of formally consulting with internal departments, external agencies and the public on the new draft Official Plan (OP). In general, key policy directions which support the major themes of the Growth Plan such as; building complete communities, managing growth wisely,

49 February 13, 2018 Page 49 Report No. CD September 13, 2016 Page 8 protecting the natural environment, and supporting economic development have been incorporated into the new draft OP. Given the extensive consultation involved in passing a new Official Plan, it is anticipated that the new OP will not be before the Province for final approval in advance of the new Growth Plan coming into effect, and the impact of such has not been outlined in transitional policies provided by the Province to date. Policies regarding the time line in which Official Plans must conform to the Provincial Plans will likely be released at the time that the new Growth Plan is approved, which creates a level of risk and uncertainty as it relates to the approvals process for the new draft Official Plan. With the passing of the Smart Growth of Our Communities Act, (Bill 73) in 2015 (in effect July 1 st, 2016) the required review cycle for new Official Plans was extended from 5 to 10 years. This was intended to provide certainty to the planning process and limit the constant flux of the land use policy framework, and to align the review of local Official Plans with Provincial Plans. For new Official Plans caught in the transition, there needs to be greater direction and certainty provided to municipalities who are in the latter stages of Plan development and the requirements in terms of timing to bring new Plans into conformity with newly amended Provincial policies. Considerable technical background studies, review, and consultation has been and will continue to form the basis of the City s new Official Plan. With a changing Provincial policy framework, this work will need to be reviewed, updated, and the outcomes, in terms of policy directions, planning justification, and land use designations may change. In this regard, the City requests: That the Province provide additional direction in terms of the conformity requirements in advance of the amended Growth Plan coming into effect, to address these concerns, and to assist municipalities in completing their current Official Plan Reviews FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS There are no financial implications associated with this Report CONCLUSION Since the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe was first introduced in 2006, the City of Brantford has struggled with implementing the Plan and achieving Provincial growth targets. Further enacting amendments to the Growth Plan, and increasing the density and intensification targets, without consideration of the key concerns expressed by the City of Brantford in this Report, will only

50 February 13, 2018 Page 50 Report No. CD September 13, 2016 Page 9 further exasperate the City s ability to meet the requirements of the Plan and will impact our ability to plan for balanced growth now and in the future. To assist the City in implementing key directives of the Growth Plan, the City requests that the issues, as outlined in this Report, be addressed by the Province prior to adopting the amended Growth Plan. Nicole Wilmot, MCIP, RPP Manager, Policy Planning Community Development Lucy Hives, MCIP, RPP Director of Planning, Community Development Paul Moore, MCIP, RPP General Manager, Community Development Attachs: cc: Letter: Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing: Coordinated Land Use Planning Review, May In adopting this report, is a by-law or agreement required? If so, it should be referenced in the recommendation section. Bylaw required [ ] yes [ x ] no Agreement(s) or other documents to be signed by Mayor and/or City Clerk [ ] yes [ x ] no Is the necessary by-law or agreement being sent concurrently to Council? [ ] yes [ x ] no

51 February 13, 2018 Page 51 Report No. CD September 13, 2016 Page 10 Appendix A May 21, 2015 Land Use Planning Review Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing Ontario Growth Secretariat 777 Bay Street, Suite 425, 4 th floor Toronto, ON M5G 2E5 RE: Coordinated Review: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, the Niagara Escarpment Plan, the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan and the Greenbelt Plan Thank you for the opportunity to provide input into the coordinated review of the abovenoted Provincial documents. Currently, only the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe is applicable to the City of Brantford. The following comments are provided for your consideration. 1. Urban Growth Centre With the release of the Growth Plan in 2006, the City of Brantford was presented with numerous challenges in terms of implementation. The City, along with 7 other Outer Ring municipalities, was identified as having an Urban Growth Centre (UGC). A density target of 150 people and jobs per hectare is required to be planned for in the UGC. The City of Brantford s downtown (UGC) has undergone significant revitalization over the past decade with the development of a post-secondary school campus as the driving force behind this revitalization. However, the Growth Plan does not include students within the calculation for density within a UGC. The vibrancy, density and the mixed-use built form within the City s UGC exists today and will continue to grow. However, without the inclusion of students in the density calculation, the UGC density is significantly below the planned for target of 150 people and jobs per hectare. Students play a significant role in the UGC and as the postsecondary institutions expand annually, the number of jobs increase but the number of people falls behind despite the increases in the number of students within the UGC. Any amendments to the Growth Plan must permit students to be included in the density calculation for municipalities having post-secondary campuses in their UGC s.

52 February 13, 2018 Page 52 Report No. CD September 13, 2016 Page Provincial Targets and Land Needs With Amendment #2 to the Growth Plan being approved in 2013, the City s growth targets to 2041 are 163,000 people and 79,000 jobs. These projections represent significant growth for the City. While opportunities exist within the City through infill/intensification and greenfield development, sufficient land to accommodate the Province s growth projections to 2041 for both residential and employment purposes are not available within the City s current municipal boundary. As the City continues to move forward, conformity with the Growth Plan cannot be achieved within the current municipal boundary. The City is currently preparing a new Official Plan (OP). As a supporting background document to the new OP, a Municipal Comprehensive Review has been completed for Employment and Commercial lands. The results of this study indicate that the City is short on both employment and commercial lands. Meeting Provincial employment targets cannot be met within the current boundary of the City. Since the Growth Plan establishes the growth targets for the City, the Province must be prepared to assist municipalities who cannot achieve Provincial targets within their own boundaries. 3. Transportation One of the vison statements of the Growth Plan is as follows: Getting around will be easy. An integrated transportation network will allow people choices for easy travel both within and between urban centres throughout the region. The City of Brantford, as stated earlier is identified as an Outer Ring municipality with and Urban Growth Centre designation. Brantford also has post-secondary institutions. Despite this and the above-noted vison statement, GO service is not provided to the City. Further, many of the current municipalities having GO service do not have a UGC or the projected growth that Brantford is expected to achieve by Brantford is the only Outer Ring municipality not to have any type of GO transit to service its existing and future residents, employees and students. Attached is a map showing the current GO service routes and locations it serves. It is essential that the City receives GO service to support the projected residential growth and employment jobs in a manner that is economically sustainable and connects

53 February 13, 2018 Page 53 Report No. CD September 13, 2016 Page 12 the City with the other surrounding urban centres for shared mutual benefit surrounding growth. 4. Greenbelt Plan Currently, the Greenbelt Plan does not apply to the City of Brantford. As the Greenbelt Plan is being reviewed, the Province must keep in mind the ongoing discussions surrounding the proposed boundary expansion between the City and the County of Brant. The land being discussed must not be brought into the Greenbelt Plan as this would certainly hinder future opportunities for the City to meet Provincial population and employment targets beyond its current municipal boundary. We appreciate the opportunity to provide input into the coordinated review of these important Provincial documents. This letter has outlined the significant issues the City of Brantford is faced with in achieving Provincial targets and initiatives. We look forward to providing additional feedback throughout the remainder of the review process. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at ext or by at Yours Truly, Paul Moore, MCIP, RPP Director of Planning City of Brantford Cc: Mayor Chris Friel Geoff Rae, CAO Greg Dworak, GM Community Services Russ Loukes, Acting GM, Public Works

54 February 13, 2018 Page 54 Appendix F: Map of Proposed Municipal Boundary Adjustment Protected Lands

55 February 13, 2018 Page 55 Appendix G: Brantford-Brant Boundary Adjustment Memorandum of Understanding, January 6, 2016

56 February 13, 2018 Page 56

57 February 13, 2018 Page 57

58 February 13, 2018 Page 58

59 February 13, 2018 Page 59

60 February 13, 2018 Page 60

61 February 13, 2018 Page 61 Appendix H: Excerpts from the City of Brantford Draft Official Plan (Version 1, July 2016) Section 5.0 Healthy Neighbourhoods and Communities Source Water Protection a. Clean drinking water is essential for maintaining human health, economic prosperity and a high quality of life for Brantford residents. As such, it is critical to protect Brantford s drinking water supply, drawn from the Grand River, from contamination and from land uses that could hinder the quality and quantity of clean drinking water. b. The City shall protect, improve or restore the quality of water by: i. Using the watershed as the ecologically meaningful scale for integrated and long-term planning, and for considering the cumulative impacts of development; ii. Minimizing potential negative impacts to the Grand River Watershed, including cross-jurisdictional and cross-watershed impacts; iii. Identifying water resource systems consisting of ground water features, hydrologic functions, natural heritage features and areas, and surface water features including shoreline areas, which are necessary for the ecological and hydrological integrity of the watershed; and, iv. Maintaining linkages and related functions among groundwater features, hydrologic functions, natural heritage features and areas, and surface water features including shoreline areas. c. The City shall implement necessary restrictions on development and site alteration to: i. Protect all municipal drinking water supplies and designated vulnerable areas; ii. Promote measures for water conservation and that sustain water quality; iii. Ensure stormwater management practices minimize stormwater volumes and contaminant loads, and maintain or increase the extent of vegetative and pervious surfaces; iv. Restrict development and site alteration in or near sensitive surface water features and sensitive ground water features such that these features and their related hydrologic functions will be protected, improved or restored; and, v. Require mitigation measures and/or alternative development approaches to protect, improve or restore surface and ground water features and their hydrologic and hydrogeologic functions. Section 8.0 Land Use Designations Core Natural Areas Designation a. Core Natural Areas are designated on Schedule 1: Growth Management, Schedule 2: Land Use Plan and Schedule 4: Natural Heritage System. Core Natural Areas are comprised of the following environmental components: i. Provincially significant wetlands;

62 February 13, 2018 Page 62 ii. Provincially significant woodlands; iii. Provincially significant valley lands; iv. Significant wildlife habitat attributes and functions, including habitat for species-at-risk and rare plant communities such as prairie, savannah and oak woodland; v. Significant areas of natural and scientific interest; vi. Hazard lands; vii. Other natural heritage features (i.e. woodlands that are less than 4 hectares, locally significant wetlands, treed slopes, and cultural habitat features); and, viii. Enhancement/restoration areas. b. The Core Natural Areas Designation also includes a 30 metre buffer from identified natural heritage features to protect their ecological and hydrological functions. The 30 metre buffer is a minimum buffer and may be increased as a result of further analysis carried out in an Environmental Impact Study. Uses Permitted in this Designation c. Permitted uses, subject to the results of an Environmental Impact Study, on lands designated Core Natural Areas may include: i. Conservation uses; ii. Public parks and trails and other associated passive recreational opportunities and facilities that do not require substantial site alterations; iii. Buildings or structures appropriate and supportive of public parks and trails and other associated passive recreational opportunities and facilities; iv. Buildings or structures necessary for flood or erosion control; and, v. Existing lawful uses, restricted to their geographic location as of the date of the passing of this Plan. d. In addition to those permitted land uses, the extension of existing municipal infrastructure projects where the alignments or locations of those facilities have been established in this Plan, approved Secondary Plans, Plans of Subdivision and/or approved Environmental Assessments, may be permitted within lands designated as Core Natural Areas, subject to the application of specific mitigation measures as set out in an approved Environment Impact Study. e. The range of permitted land uses within the Core Natural Area Designation shall be further refined through the implementing Zoning Bylaw. Development Policies f. No buildings or structures, nor the removal or placing of fill of any kind whether originating on the site or elsewhere, may be permitted within the Core Natural Areas Designation, except with the approval of the City, in consultation with the Conservation Authority and any other agency having jurisdiction. g. The establishment of any permitted use shall demonstrate no negative impact to the natural heritage feature or the supporting ecological and hydrological functions of that environment, as demonstrated through the required Environmental Impact Study. Where a permitted use requires mitigation, the mitigation shall result in no

63 February 13, 2018 Page 63 negative impact on the natural heritage features or their ecological and hydrological functions. h. Where a negative impact is unavoidable, then the City at its sole discretion, and in consultation with the Conservation Authority and any other agency having jurisdiction, may accept a compensatory mitigation approach. Where compensatory mitigation is proposed, it must be demonstrated that the mitigation results in no net loss of the natural heritage feature and/or its ecological and hydrological functions. i. Where fish habitat and/or the habitat of endangered species and/or the habitat of threatened species are identified, the required Environmental Impact Study shall ensure that all Provincial and Federal requirements have been satisfied. j. Existing legal non-conforming uses, within the Core Natural Areas Designation are permitted and may be replaced if destroyed by natural causes. An application for the expansion or enlargement of such structures and uses may be considered by the City, subject to the submission of an Environmental Impact Study, in consultation with the Conservation Authority and any other agency having jurisdiction. The application shall demonstrate no negative impact to the natural heritage features and/or their supporting ecological and hydrological functions. k. The removal or destruction of a key natural heritage feature or key hydrologic feature or any associated ecological function by unauthorized development or site alteration is prohibited. Such removal or destruction will not provide the rationale for the removal of these lands from the Core Natural Areas Designation. Restoration, to the satisfaction of the City, in consultation with the Conservation Authority and any other agency having jurisdiction, will be required where the removal or destruction of a key natural heritage feature or key hydrologic feature or any associated ecological function by unauthorized development or site alteration has occurred. l. Where development and/or site alteration is proposed within the Core Natural Areas Designation, the City shall require that an Environmental Impact Study be prepared that demonstrates that there will be no negative impacts on any natural heritage features, or their ecological and hydrological functions. m. Where an application for development and/or site alteration is of a minor nature, the City in consultation with the Conservation Authority, or any other agency having jurisdiction, may waive the requirement to conduct an Environmental Impact Study, or appropriately scope the study requirements. n. Significant changes to the Core Natural Areas Designation may be considered through an Environmental Impact Study, submitted in support of an Official Plan Amendment application. o. Minor adjustments to the boundary of the Core Natural Areas Designation may be facilitated through an Environmental Impact Study without the need to amend this Plan. Where a minor adjustment to the boundary of the Core Natural Areas Designation is approved by the City, in consultation with the Conservation Authority and any other agency having jurisdiction, the adjacent land use

64 February 13, 2018 Page 64 designation as identified on Schedule 2, shall apply, without the need to amend this Plan. p. Lands within the Core Natural Areas Designation may be dedicated to the City or other public authority, subject to the approval of the City, without cost and shall not be considered as part of the required parkland dedication Adjacent Lands Overlay Designation Intent of this Overlay Designation a. The intent of the Adjacent Lands Overlay Designation is to trigger the requirement for the preparation of an Environmental Impact Study in support of applications for development. b. Lands within 120 metres and abutting the Core Natural Areas Designation are shown on Schedule 4: Natural Heritage System, as the Adjacent Lands Overlay Designation. Adjacent Lands may have ecological and hydrological functions or linkages that are important to the long-term health of the features and functions of the Natural Heritage System. c. As an Overlay Designation, the policies in this Section of this Plan must be read in conjunction with the policies of the associated underlying land use designation that is identified for any specific site, on Schedule 2: Land Use Plan. Uses Permitted in this Overlay Designation d. The uses permitted on any specific site or area within the Adjacent Lands Overlay Designation may include those land uses permitted by the underlying land use designation, as identified on Schedule 2, subject to the results of the required Environmental Impact Study. e. In addition to any permitted land uses, the extension of existing municipal infrastructure projects where the alignments or locations of those facilities have been established in this Plan, approved Secondary Plans, Plans of Subdivision and/or approved Environmental Assessments, may be permitted within lands delineated as within the Adjacent Lands Overlay Designation, subject to the application of specific mitigation measures as set out in an approved Environment Impact Study. f. The range of permitted land uses within the Adjacent Lands Overlay Designation shall be further refined through the implementing Zoning Bylaw. Development Policies g. Prior to any lands being considered for development, redevelopment or site alteration, within any area identified as subject to the Adjacent Lands Overlay Designation, an Environmental Impact Study is to be undertaken by the proponent in accordance with City and Conservation Authority requirements and approved by the City in consultation with the Conservation Authority and any agency having jurisdiction.

65 February 13, 2018 Page 65 h. Subject to the conclusions and requirements of the Environmental Impact Study, the lands may be developed in accordance with the permitted uses and development policies of the underlying land use designation that is identified on Schedule 2. Any changes to the extent of the developable land area, restrictions on any permitted land use and/or any required impact mitigation requirements identified in the Environmental Impact Statement shall be identified, implemented, regulated or otherwise secured to the satisfaction of the City.

66 February 13, 2018 Page 66 Appendix I: Intake Protection Zones Map

67 February 13, 2018 Page 67 Appendix J: Potential Greenbelt Study Area Building Blocks Maps (Appendix 1 to the Public Consultation Document)