CITY OF BRANTFORD GROWTH MANAGEMENT STRATEGY MHBC PLANNING

CITY OF BRANTFORD GROWTH MANAGEMENT STRATEGY MHBC PLANNING April 18, 2006

TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary...i Introduction...1 Part A The Identification of Land Needs...2 Factors Affecting Growth Trends in the City of Brantford...2 The Policy Framework for Continued Growth...2 Growth Strategy Timeframe...4 Population, Household and Employment Projections...6 Consideration of Growth Scenarios within the Existing City of Brantford Boundary...7 Industrial Development Capability within Existing City Municipal Boundary...9 Industrial Employment Projections to 2046...12 Industrial Land Needs to 2046...13 Future Greenfield Residential Density Targets...12 Residential Land Needs to 2046 Existing Planning Scenario A...14 Residential Land Needs Compact City Scenario B...15 Part B Analysis of Alternative Growth Directions...17 Potential Growth Area Directions...17 The Scale of Potential Growth Areas...18 Growth Area Evaluation Criteria...19 The Weighting of Evaluation Criteria...20 Growth Area Direction Discussion...21 Part C Conceptual Land Use Allocation...23 Part D Water and Wastewater Servicing Assessment...25 Conclusion...28

City of Brantford Growth Management Strategy April 2006 i CITY OF BRANTFORD Growth Management Strategy EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART A THE IDENTIFICATION OF LAND NEEDS Factors Affecting Growth Trends in the City of Brantford Brantford is a diverse urban growth centre characterized by successful business park expansion, employment growth, robust residential development and intensification, an expanding downtown higher education campus, and a location integrated with the Provincial 400-series highways. The Policy Framework for Continued Growth The Provincial Greater Golden Horseshoe Places to Grow Plan includes the City of Brantford as an Urban Growth Centre within an integrated growth management concept designed to accommodate significant growth to the year 2031. The Plan provides for a strong policy framework of economic development, livable and complete communities, environmental protection, resource management, comprehensive transportation improvements and infrastructure investment. Growth Strategy Timeframe Forty years is an appropriate (and perhaps minimum) growth strategy time frame to consider long-term municipal boundaries and major public infrastructure investment.

City of Brantford Growth Management Strategy April 2006 ii Population, Household, and Employment Projections The population of the City of Brantford is projected to increase from 93,000 in 2006 to 155,000 in 2046, and employment from 43,000 (2006) to 82,000 in 2046. Growth Scenarios within the Existing City The Existing Planning Scenario A would accommodate 124,000 people at buildout to City boundaries (2026), resulting in a need to accommodate another 31,500 people to 2046. The Compact City Scenario B (based on the density targets of the proposed Places to Grow Plan) would accommodate 139,000 people at buildout to City boundaries (2036) resulting in a need to accommodate another 15,000 people to 2046. Industrial Development Capacity within the Existing City The Northwest Industrial Area and the Braneida Industrial Park have an estimated 312 (2005) vacant net hectares remaining, capable of accommodating another 6,862 jobs at the City s existing employment density of 22 employees per net hectare. 15,000 new industrial jobs are required to 2046. Industrial Land Needs to 2046 At the current City net employment density, the shortfall of 8,100 industrial jobs (i.e. 15,000 projected 6,862 in City = 8,100 +/- shortfall) would require 371 net hectares, or 495 gross hectares, beyond City boundaries. Residential Land Needs to 2046 Residential land requirements beyond City boundaries range from 493 gross hectares (Scenario B Compact City) to 1,071gross hectares (Scenario A Existing Planning Scenario) not including natural features.

City of Brantford Growth Management Strategy April 2006 iii PART B ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVE GROWTH DIRECTIONS Potential Growth Area Identified and Assessed Seven potential growth areas were identified surrounding the City of Brantford. These areas were assessed relative to developable land area and evaluation criteria, including agricultural resources, mineral aggregate resources, environmental features, wellhead protection, sanitary and water servicing, transportation accessibility and community integration. The Preferred Growth Direction Area 1 (north) achieved the highest rank in an overall consideration of the evaluation criteria. Area 1 has a lower potential to be considered specialty crop lands when compared to lands to the southeast, southwest and west of the City. Unlike Area 7, Area 1 is mostly unconstrained by sand and gravel resources of primary significance. All seven areas exhibited environmental/natural features to a greater or lesser extent. Area 1 contains tributaries to Fairchild Creek. This natural system would be preserved as an open space system. Area 2 is highly impacted by the meander belt of Fairchild Creek, is bisected by numerous drainage tributaries and as a result, has a very rolling topography. Area 1 is not subject to wellhead protection policies (such as apply to Area 5). Area 1 has one of the least impacts on the existing sanitary and water system servicing capacities since the lands can be serviced from the two major trunk sanitary sewers (i.e. east and west) and from two existing water pressure zones (Zone 2/3 and Zone 4), thus reducing the need for major pipe upgrades and pumping/storage facilities. Area 1 ranks highest relative to transportation/accessibility, given existing north-south arterial road connections (Oak Park Road, Paris Road/Brant Avenue, King George Road/Highway 24 and Wayne Gretzky Parkway) with interchanges to Highway 403. Powerline Road and County Road 5/99 provide good west to east connections. The expansion of the northwest industrial node will increase the feasibility of transit service. Area 1 also achieves a high rank for community integration given the potential to naturally

City of Brantford Growth Management Strategy April 2006 iv extend industrial and residential development to the north of existing industrial and residential areas. There is a good potential to achieve a high level of integration relative to road patterns, transit service, pedestrian system, and commercial, recreational and school facilities. Extension of future development into Area 1 would also avoid some of the more significant County of Brant Settlement Areas bordering the City. The above indicates a logical preference for Area 1. However, this should not be viewed as ruling out the possibility of more minor boundary adjustments and rounding out in other areas. One such example might be the small industrial designation at the Garden Avenue/Highway 403 interchange.

City of Brantford Growth Management Strategy April 2006 v PART C: CONCEPTUAL LAND USE ALLOCATION Preliminary conceptual land use plans have been prepared which approximately relate land need to land areas; Industrial Business Park 570 gross hectares Residential Compact Scenario 493 gross hectares Residential Existing Planning Scenario 938 gross hectares The concepts would locate industrial lands in the west part of Area 1 in order to expand on the Northwest Industrial Park in proximity to Highway 403. Residential development is shown immediately north of Brantford s existing residential neighbourhoods with the ability to achieve a high level of integration with same.

City of Brantford Growth Management Strategy April 2006 vi PART D: WATER AND WASTEWATER SERVICING COSTS An assessment of the existing water and wastewater system capacities was performed to determine upgrading requirements and costs to accommodate the water and wastewater servicing demands of the preferred growth area (Area 1) at the following three critical stages of development: Scenario 1: 2036 Intensified Build-Out of the present City Scenario 2: Development of Area 1 to the 2046 Scenario 3: Buildout of Area 1 beyond 2046 The total investment in infrastructure to serve the above scenarios will be in the order of $150 million over a 40 year period including a $ 50 million expansion to the Wastewater Treatment Plant in 2026 and a $ 50 million expansion to the Water Treatment Plant in 2026.

City of Brantford Growth Management Strategy March 2006 1 INTRODUCTION The City of Brantford retained Earth Tech and MHBC Planning to conduct a Growth Management Strategy to identify long-term land use requirements for the City of Brantford. The City commissioned this study given a desire to plan comprehensively for the long-term within a context of limited land resources, increasing growth pressures, and a need to facilitate continued employment and economic health. The consultant team includes expertise in municipal planning, civil engineering, transportation planning, environmental analysis, agricultural analysis, and aggregate resource planning. This report is organized into the following headings: Part A: Identification of Land Needs. Part B: Analysis of Alternative Growth Directions. Part C: Conceptual Land Use Allocation.

City of Brantford Growth Management Strategy March 2006 2 PART A: THE IDENTIFICATION OF LAND NEEDS Factors Affecting Growth Trends in the City of Brantford Brantford is a diverse urban growth centre characterized by successful business park expansion, employment growth, robust residential development and intensification, an expanding downtown higher education campus, and a location integrated with the Provincial 400-series highways. Within the last 10 years a number of factors have combined to accelerate the role of Brantford as an urban growth centre. Brantford is a centre for residential, employment, institutional, and commercial growth. Over the five-year period from 2000 to 2004, municipal and private industrial land sales averaged 49 hectares (121 acres) per year, reflecting the impact of the completion of Highway 403. Residential building permits have been steadily increasing from 255 in 2001, to 556 in 2004, to 594 in 2005. Approximately 37 percent of residential units has been in the form of intensification between the years 2001 and 2005. Laurier University/Brantford and the affiliated campuses of Nipissing University and Mohawk College have continued to increase in enrollment and are transforming downtown Brantford. Brantford s strong locational advantages are anticipated to improve in the future as transit and highway connections to the Greater Golden Horseshoe continue to be expanded. The Policy Framework for Continued Growth The Provincial Greater Golden Horseshoe Places to Grow Plan includes the City of Brantford as an Urban Growth Centre within an integrated growth management concept designed to accommodate significant growth to the year 2031. The Plan provides for a strong policy framework of economic

City of Brantford Growth Management Strategy March 2006 3 development, liveable and complete communities, environmental protection, resource management, comprehensive transportation improvements and infrastructure investment. The proposed Places to Grow Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, includes the City of Brantford within the outer ring of municipalities expected to accommodate an additional one million population by 2031. Brantford is one of only nine Urban Growth Centres situated within the outer ring and well located just beyond the Greenbelt and in proximity to other major growth centres. The following map focuses on that part of the proposed Places to Grow Plan that relates to Brantford.

City of Brantford Growth Management Strategy March 2006 4 The plan designates the downtown as an Urban Growth Centre. The built-up area designation encompasses the majority of the lands within the City s boundaries. Designated growth areas include 4 greenfield sites within the City s boundaries as well as additional designated growth areas located immediately to the north of the City s boundaries. The Paris urban area is also indicated to the north west of the City. A Future Goods Movement Corridor is located east of the City. While shown as conceptual, this Corridor intersects with Highway 403 and would provide a major corridor connecting the City to the GTA and the Gateway Economic Zone identified at the Fort Erie/USA border crossing. The concept of connecting the goods movement corridor with Highway 403 will further enhance Brantford s strategic growth location in Southern Ontario. Improved Inter-regional Transit links are identified between the Brantford Urban Centre and the Hamilton Urban Centre and Cambridge Urban Centre. The identification of this transit system link provides the framework for future transit investment decisions in the Greater Golden Horseshoe. The existing major highway (Highway 403), goods movement corridor, and improved inter-regional transit links identified in the Places to Grow Plan improve and expand upon Brantford s strong location advantages within the Greater Golden Horseshoe. Growth Strategy Timeframe Forty years is an appropriate (and perhaps minimum) growth strategy time frame to consider long-term municipal boundaries and major public infrastructure investment. In preparing a growth strategy, a longer term view is required to ensure municipal boundaries are established for reasonable lengths of time, to allow sufficient surplus lands to satisfy economic and other growth needs, and to adequately plan for and fund major public infrastructure investments.

City of Brantford Growth Management Strategy March 2006 5 The Places to Grow Plan timeframe is to the year 2031. However, when preparing growth strategies that may affect long-term infrastructure investments, municipalities often review growth needs within a longer time frame. In 2001, the Ontario Professional Planners Institute (OPPI) commissioned a policy development paper on growth management. The paper entitled Exploring Growth Management Roles in Ontario: Learning from Who Does What Elsewhere, assessed current efforts in North America and provided direction with respect to current growth management initiatives in Ontario. It concluded that 20-year growth boundaries are not an effective growth management strategy on their own. It recommended that a 5-year, 20-year and 50-year perspective to growth management is needed, to provide for long-term infrastructure investment, and coordination between rural and urban areas. Examples of longer term growth management perspectives include: The Region of Waterloo Growth Management Strategy adopted by Regional Council in June 2003 providing a framework to guide growth in Waterloo Region to a target year of 2041. Initiated in 2001, the growth strategy had a 40-year time horizon. The Region of Peel is undertaking a growth management strategy to consider the long-term (to 2051) impacts of demographic and socioeconomic changes combined with high levels of growth, on the programs and services delivered by the Region. The City of London completed background studies as part of a growth management review that identified a 50-year servicing boundary. For the purposes of the Brantford Growth Strategy, a 40-year time frame is recommended to the year 2046. This also assumes that at 2046 there should be a minimum 10 year ability to accommodate residential growth (in keeping with Section 1.4.1 of the Provincial Policy Statement.

City of Brantford Growth Management Strategy March 2006 6 Population, Household, and Employment Projections The population of the City of Brantford is projected to increase from 93,000 in 2006 to 155,000 in 2046, and employment from 43,000 (2006) to 82,000 in 2046. The City of Brantford has completed population, household, and employment projections to the years 2031 and 2046 (see Appendix 1). These projections are based on the work carried out by CN Watson & Associates as part of the Development Charges Background Study that was completed in 2004. Three alternative forecasts, low; reference; and high, were prepared by CN Watson & Associates using a housing market-based model to forecast future housing units and population and are differentiated on the basis of the assumptions used on the level of future new residential construction in Brantford. The table below provides a comparison of the C.N. Watson forecasts and the City of Brantford forecasts: C.N. Watson & Associates Low Residential Growth Reference Residential Growth High Residential Growth 2006 Official Plan Review Program Development Charges Reference Forecast Growth Assumption (residential units/year) 361 465 Current Trends Forecast 575 Growth Management Forecast 650 For the purposes of the City s new forecasts, the C.N. Watson Low Forecast scenario was discarded as it does not appear relevant to conditions and trends in Brantford. The High Residential Forecast was renamed the Current Trends Forecast, as it reflects recent growth in the City. There are many factors that point to higher growth rates for Brantford than what has been experienced in the mid-term past. Based on these considerations, the City prepared a new forecast called the growth management forecast. The growth management forecast is based on approximately 650 new residential units per year

City of Brantford Growth Management Strategy March 2006 7 to 2031. The 2031 forecast was then extended to 2046, the timeline for this growth strategy. This forecast reflects increased levels of residential construction in Brantford, the high level of industrial development within Brantford (such as the Ferrero plant with its first phase employment of 600 employees), as well as new industrial-related opportunities in nearby communities such as Woodstock (the new Toyota automotive assembly plant). In addition, favourable house prices in Brantford, the development of post-secondary education facilities, and the entrance of large scale GTA home builders into the local housing market are all factors which support the growth management forecast. Consideration of Growth Scenarios within the Existing City of Brantford Boundary The following graph provides a summary of the growth management population forecast from 2001 to 2046: 160 155,500 155,500 140 Compact City Scenario B: 139,000 people (+15,000 people) 132,000 132,000 Population (in thousands) 120 100 80 60 40 Existing Planning Scenario A: 124,000 people 86,000 86,000 93,000 93,000 New Official Plan Time Horizon to 2031 Complete buildout of industrial land by 2021 Buildout of low density housing supply by 2023 Population Buildout A Population Buildout B 20 0 2001 2001 2006 2006 2011 2011 2016 2016 2021 2021 2026 2026 2031 2031 2036 2036 2041 2041 2046 2046 Years 20 Year PPS Time Horizon 25 Year Places to Grow Time Horizon 40 Year Long-Term Growth Strategy

City of Brantford Growth Management Strategy March 2006 8 This forecast results in an increase of 62,500 people (67% increase) over the 40- year growth strategy time frame. Two development scenarios have been identified for build-out of the land capacity within existing City of Brantford municipal boundaries: CITY CAPACITY SCENARIOS Existing Planning Scenario A Growth based on densities in the City s existing development inventory Compact City Scenario B Growth based on the Province s Proposed Places to Grow Plan densities Existing Planning Scenario A is based on existing inventories of known infilling projects as well as current estimates of development in residential greenfield areas. Planning Scenario A would result in an ultimate population at total build-out to City boundaries of approximately 124,000 people. The Compact City Scenario B is based on the intensification and density targets contained within the draft Places to Grow Plan. For example, the capacity of greenfield areas has been adjusted based on 50 people or jobs per gross hectare. Downtown density has been estimated at 150 people or jobs per hectare. A minimum of 40% of future residential units have been assumed to be provided through intensification within the built-up area. The Compact City Scenario would add additional capacity of 15,000 people over existing Planning Scenario A within the City s existing boundaries (see Appendix 2). However, this would be achieved at a substantial change to housing mix / density types. For example, the following table compares the City s projected demand for housing by density type relative to the housing distribution, which results from the Compact City Scenario:

City of Brantford Growth Management Strategy March 2006 9 Current City Density Distribution Target Places to Grow Impact on Density Distribution Low Density 75% vs. 47% Medium Density 15% vs. 22% High Density 10% vs. 31% Based on current projected housing demand, it is anticipated that the lower density forms of housing (single detached and semi-detached) would be completely builtout in approximately 17 years (i.e. by 2023). This would leave a long-term shortfall of new low density housing in the remaining 23 years to 2046. Potential implications of a shortfall of low density housing include: An inability to satisfy Section 1.4.1 of the Provincial Policy Statement, which requires provision of an appropriate range of housing types and densities to meet projected requirements of current and future residents; Impact on availability and affordability of single and semi-detached units; Difficulties in achieving the concept of complete communities (as per Places to Grow Plan), which by definition includes a full range of housing ; Changes in commuting patterns wherein single detached homebuyers choose to drive further to satisfy their housing preference; Potential impact on ability to achieve Provincial growth targets given not all housing needs are being satisfied. Industrial Development Capability within Existing City Municipal Boundary The two main industrial employment areas are the north-west industrial area, and the Braneida Park industrial area. Both are favourably located at interchanges of Highway 403.

City of Brantford Growth Management Strategy March 2006 10 The following table provides a summary of the existing inventory of vacant industrial land within these two industrial parks by city owned and privately owned land parcels. ADDITIONAL INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT CAPACITY IN BRANTFORD S INDUSTRIAL PARKS (based on 22 employees per net hectare ) LOCATION NORTH-WEST INDUSTRIAL AREA CITY OWNED PRIVATELY OWNED TOTAL TRAFFIC ZONE HA JOBS HA JOBS HA JOBS 17 14.8 326 164.9 3,628 179.7 3,954 BRANEIDA INDUSTRIAL AREA 07 08 0.5 11 15.3 08.0 337 176 15.3 08.5 337 187 09 31.6 695 38.5 847 70.1 1,542 10 21.6 475 21.6 475 11 06.6 145 06.6 145 12 10.1 222 10.1 222 32.1 706 100.1 2,202 132.2 2,908 TOTAL 46.9 1,032 265.0 5,830 311.9 6,862 Source: City of Brantford Vacant Industrial Land map May 2005 (see Appendix 10) 1 Average Brantford industrial park density = 22 employees/net hectare 197.2 gross hectares (487.3 acres) for parcels 1,2,3,12,13,14 reduced by 49.3 ha (25%) to equal 147.9 net ha to account for future roads, storm water management, and topographic constraints related to previous aggregate extraction. (147.9 net ha + parcels 5,7,8 & 11 = 17.0 ha = 164.9) Complete build-out of these remaining industrial areas, and the resulting jobs which could be accommodated, are based on an employment density of 22 employees

City of Brantford Growth Management Strategy March 2006 11 per net hectare. This density is the current City of Brantford average employee density within the City s developed industrial parks. The table identifies a remaining inventory of 312 vacant industrial hectares, capable of accommodating approximately 6,862 additional industrial jobs. Industrial Employment Projections Employment projections prepared by the City of Brantford are summarized in the following graph. Approximately 40,000 new jobs are anticipated. Of these, approximately 15,000 will be industrial jobs requiring an industrial park location. CITY OF BRANTFORD EMPLOYMENT FORECASTS BY SECTOR A comparison of the long-term projection of an additional 15,000 industrial jobs relative to the existing vacant industrial land capacity within the City (6,862 jobs), results in a shortfall of land required to accommodate approximately 8,100 jobs. A literal application of the remaining available land would suggest a complete buildout of industrial land within City boundaries by the year 2021 (i.e. 15 years). However, as the industrial land supply continues to decrease and selection of sites become limited in respect to competitive prices, and choice of lot sizes and locations, industrial land opportunities will likely be significantly constrained within 5 to 8 years.

City of Brantford Growth Management Strategy March 2006 12 Industrial Land Needs to 2046 The previous analysis identified a shortfall in land to accommodate 8,100 industrial jobs to the year 2046, within existing City of Brantford boundaries. At current City net employment densities of 22 jobs per hectare, this would result in a requirement for 371 net hectares beyond the current City boundaries. In order to determine the amount of gross industrial park area required (not including environmentally sensitive non-developable areas) a ratio of 3 net hectares to 4 gross hectares has been utilized. The difference between net and gross would include a combination of the area taken up by municipal roads, storm water management facilities, and topographic limitations. Using this ratio, approximately 495 gross hectares of additional industrial land to 2046 are required. It is conceivable that the current density of employees per hectare could intensify over the planning period. However, this needs to be balanced against ensuring a sufficient amount of land to accommodate unforeseen economic attraction contingencies. Such contingencies, which are difficult to predict, might include a demand for larger lot sizes and the attraction of significant industries, fluctuations/increases in demand from time to time, and having a sufficient ongoing supply to provide choice and flexibility in industrial attraction and retention efforts. Care should be taken in limiting the amount of land based on excessive employment density targets. Industrial parks tend to have a range of densities depending upon the type and function of industrial use (i.e. warehousing, light assembly, intense industrial), the age/maturity of the industry, potential expansions to same, impacts of automation, the desire for single floor operations, and the relative health of the economy with respect to hiring and layoffs. Brantford is attracting many logistic related industries due to its highway accessibility. Logistic industries support the integrated manufacturing economy of Southern Ontario. However, logistic operations generally yield lower employment densities.

City of Brantford Growth Management Strategy March 2006 13 The recent announcement of the Toyota automobile manufacturing plant in Woodstock proposes 2,000 jobs on a site of approximately 400 hectares. This yields an employment density of 5 employees per hectare, or only one tenth of the Places to Grow Plan target of 50 jobs per hectare. Yet, the need to accommodate such a facility cannot be denied given the positive economic impact and spin-off jobs that will result. An example of differing employment densities is illustrated by the recent attraction of two industries to the City. Proctor and Gamble and Ferrero each occupy the same square footage of building (approximately 750,000 sq.ft.), but one employs about 300 while the other employs 600. These variations could not be predicted at the Official Plan stage and cannot be controlled through planning regulatory mechanisms. Another example of industrial employment density is the average of 28 jobs per hectare in Waterloo Region. Perhaps minimum building coverage targets can be established. However, even this approach should be tempered by the realization that industries may buy more land than they initially build on, given a desire to provide for future expansion on the same site. Future Greenfield Residential Density Targets In determining the additional land required to accommodate residential development beyond City boundaries, a target density of 50 persons and jobs per hectare (as per the Places to Grow Plan) was assumed. In order to estimate the relative proportion of other land uses (i.e. commercial and institutional), the proportion of population to jobs in the developed residential neighbourhoods in north Brantford were identified:

City of Brantford Growth Management Strategy March 2006 14 2001 Population and Jobs by Traffic Zone in North Brantford Residential Neighbourhoods Traffic Zone Population Jobs Total 2 2,647 1,170 3,817 3 2,579 765 2,344 5 10,720 935 11,655 6 5,110 625 5,735 49 4,544 0 4,544 Total 25,600 3,495 29,095 Percentage 12% 88% 100% Proportion @ 50/hectare 44 6 50 Therefore, to provide for related commercial and institutional uses in greenfield areas the density target of 50 has been further refined to a combination of 6 jobs and 44 persons per gross hectare. Residential Land Needs to 2046 Existing Planning Scenario A The extent of the residential land shortfall within City boundaries covers a range depending on which scenario is used. The existing current Planning Scenario A would accommodate 124,000 people within the City of Brantford boundaries. Given the population projection of 155,500 to the year 2046, this would result in a population capacity shortfall of 31,500 people. At a derived Places to Grow density of 44 persons and 6 jobs per hectare for greenfields, approximately 716 gross hectares would be required beyond current City boundaries to 2046. One of the difficulties in estimating land needs to a set date (i.e. 2046) is the assumption that the resulting calculation provides for no additional developable land beyond that time period. For example, the above 716 hectares would be completely utilized by 2046. The Provincial Policy Statement (Section 1.4.1) requires planning authorities to, maintain at all times the ability to accommodate residential growth for a minimum of 10 years. As the 2046 time period

City of Brantford Growth Management Strategy March 2006 15 approaches and 5-year reviews of the Brantford Official Plan are conducted, the need to address this policy will become increasingly urgent. Thus 10 to 15 years before 2046 the minimum requirement for an additional 10 year supply will need to be addressed. Providing for an additional 10 year residential land supply at 2046 would require providing for an additional population of 15,600, which at 44 persons per gross hectare would equal another 355 hectares. In summary the additional residential land requirements for Existing Planning Scenario A were calculated as follows: 2046 population projection: Scenario A City build-out population: Population shortfall to 2046: Gross residential hectares required: (31,500 shortfall ) 44 persons/hectare) Provide for additional 10 year supply at 2046: (15,600 population ) 44 persons/hectare) Total Scenario A Residential Land Required: 155,500 persons 124,000 persons 31,500 persons 716 gross hectares 355 gross hectares 1,071 gross hectares Residential Land Needs to 2046 Compact City Scenario B The Compact City Scenario B would accommodate 139,000 people within City of Brantford boundaries (See Appendix 2). The following provides a summary of calculations to determine the additional longer term residential land requirements to 2046: 2046 population projection: Scenario A City build-out population: Population shortfall to 2046: Provision of an additional 10 year supply at 2046 for a population of: Total additional population planned for: 155,500 persons 139,000 persons 16,500 persons 15,600 persons 32,100 persons

City of Brantford Growth Management Strategy March 2006 16 Estimated number of dwelling units at 2.51 people per unit: 40% of units through intensification: 60% of units in new greenfields: 7,673 new greenfield units are equivalent to: Unit Density Type % total units # of units People /unit Estimated population Low 75% 5,755 3.0 17,265 Medium 15% 1,151 2.5 2,878 High 10% 767 2.0 1,534 TOTAL 100% 7,673 21,677 12,789 units 5,116 units 7,673 units 21,677 persons Total Scenario B Residential Land Required: (21,677 persons ) 44 persons/hectare) 493 gross hectares Therefore, depending on which scenario and densities are applied, an additional residential land area of approximately 493 to 1,071 gross hectares are required beyond existing City boundaries.

City of Brantford Growth Management Strategy March 2006 17 PART B: ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVE GROWTH DIRECTIONS Part A of this report identified a need for additional industrial business park and residential land, beyond the build out capacity within existing City boundaries. The City of Brantford is surrounded by one municipality, the County of Brant. Potential growth expansions to the year 2046 would therefore affect lands within the County. Potential Growth Area Directions The following map identifies seven potential growth areas surrounding the City. The seven areas have been identified for comparative analysis purposes. All extend outward from the City boundary for a distance ranging from two to three kilometres. The seven areas have been determined based on natural and cultural boundaries and characteristics. For example: Area 1 (north) extends across the top (north) of the City to County Roads 5 and 99 in the north. The west side is bounded by Paris Road and the municipal boundary, and the east side by Fairchild Creek. Area 2 (east) extends east of the City to Fairchild Creek and is bisected by Highway 403. Area 3 (south-east) includes the Oxbow of the Grand River and lands to the southeast above the Grand s high embankment. Area 3 also includes the Cainsville/Blossom Avenue Settlement Area. Area 4 (south) is located south of the Grand River, is traversed by County Road 18 and includes the Tutela Heights Settlement Area and approximately the north half of the Mount Pleasant Settlement Area. Area 5 (south-west) is located west of the Grand River and includes a large wellhead protection area designation in the County Plan, and the Airport/Oakhill Settlement Area.

City of Brantford Growth Management Strategy March 2006 18 Area 6 (west) is a smaller area bounded by the Grand River, the future Brantford South Access Road, the Airport and Oakhill Settlement Area. Area 7 (west) is bounded by the Grand River to the east, the Paris settlement boundary to the west and the airport to the south. This area is characterized by aggregate resources and is bisected by Highway 403 and Whitemans Creek. The Scale of Potential Growth Areas Area The following map identifies sub-areas for each potential growth area. Area calculations in hectares are provided for each sub-area. Natural features and proposed regulated areas as provided by the Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) have been assumed to be non-developable lands and therefore have not been included in the land area calculations. These natural features also in many instances serve to define the limits of the sub-areas. The following table provides land area calculations for the lands not constrained by natural features (based on GRCA mapping), and also indicates land areas already affected by existing uses (i.e. airport) and development designations (based on the County Official Plan). Agriculture Area Calculations for Potential Growth Areas (in hectares) Industrial Designation Licensed Pit Airport Cemetery Hamlet & Estate Residential Highway Commercial 1 1484 33 34 1551 2 403 75 16 494 3 647 248 11 83 8 997 4 768 355 1123 5 620 95 179 156 17 1067 6 168 168 7 305 134 439 TOTAL 4395 323 240 179 33 594 75 5839 Area Total

City of Brantford Growth Management Strategy March 2006 19 The seven study areas have a total of 4,395 hectares not affected by natural features or developed land uses and settlement designations. This exceeds the additional City industrial and residential land area required to 2046 (i.e. 1,083 to 1,528 gross hectares) by a factor of 4.0 times to 2.9 times respectively. The next section of this report will therefore assess and rank the seven growth areas in order to determine a preferred growth direction(s). Growth Area Evaluation Criteria In order to evaluate the relative advantages and disadvantages of the seven areas to accommodate growth, the policies of Section 2: Wise Use and Management of Resources and Section 3: Protecting Public Health and Safety of the Provincial Policy Statement were considered and the following eight criteria were developed: Prime agricultural land - Prime agricultural areas to be protected for agricultural use. Prime agricultural areas are areas where prime agricultural lands predominate and include Class 1, 2 and 3 soils. The analysis is included as Appendix 3. Mineral aggregate resources / licensed pits Protection of mineral aggregate resources to make as much resource as close to market as possible. The analysis is included as Appendix 4. Environmental features Natural features to be protected, including wetlands, rivers, streams, woodlands. The analysis is included as Appendix 5. Wellhead protection areas Restrict development in or near sensitive ground water features such that these features and their related hydrologic functions will be protected, improved or restored. The existing policy area from the Brant County Official Plan is included as Appendix 6.

City of Brantford Growth Management Strategy March 2006 20 Sanitary servicing Direct and accommodate expected growth in a manner that promotes the efficient use of existing municipal sewage systems. Consideration of optimizing existing infrastructure and facilities, where feasible, before developing new infrastructure and facilities. Municipal services are the preferred form of servicing. The analysis is included as Appendix 7. Water servicing Direct and accommodate expected growth in a manner that promotes the efficient use of existing municipal water systems. Municipal services are the preferred form of servicing. The analysis is included as Appendix 7. Transportation accessibility - Provision of an integrated, safe and energy efficient transportation system to facilitate the movement of people and goods to address projected needs. The analysis is included as Appendix 8. Community integration The proposed Places to Grow Plan requires complete communities, which could also include consideration of integration of community facility planning with existing facilities and neighbourhoods. The Weighting of Evaluation Criteria Each criteria was given a weight of high constraint (3), medium constraint (2) or low constraint (1), as it applied to a specific potential growth area. Therefore, the seven potential growth areas were evaluated against eight criteria, each of which was given a weighting from 1 to 3. For example, potential specialty cropland was considered a high constraint (3) to development, while a mixed agricultural capability was a medium constraint (2), and lower agricultural capability a low constraint (1). The following fold out matrix provides a visual summary of this exercise and results in a ranking of least constrained to more constrained. The following table provides a summary of the results:

Brantford Growth Management Strategy Evaluation Summary of Potential Growth Directions Area One Area Two Area Three Area Four Area Five Area Six Area Seven CRITERIA North East Southeast South Southwest West West Prime Agricultural Land Mineral Aggregate Resources/Licensed Pits Environmental Features (overall) Wellhead Protection Area Sanitary Servicing Water Servicing Transportation Accessibility Community Integration Constraint Summary 9 11 15 13 18 17 20 High Constraint Medium Constraint Low Constraint 3 2 1

City of Brantford Growth Management Strategy March 2006 22 Area 1 has one of the least impacts on the existing sanitary and water system servicing capacities since the lands can be serviced from two major trunk sanitary sewers (i.e. west and east) and from two existing water pressure zones (Zone 2/3 and Zone 4), thus reducing the need for major infrastructure upgrades and pumping/storage facilities. Area 6 is limited in scale (only 168 hectares) and is more difficult to service. From an industrial location perspective and proximity/accessibility to Highway 403, Area 1 north ranks high. The extension of industrial uses northerly along Oak Park Road is seen as a natural extension of the Northwest Industrial Park, and compatible with existing highway commercial and industrial designations within the Brant County Official Plan (immediately to the west). The area also has moderate topography. By comparison, Area 2 to the east has a more rolling topography and is characterized by numerous natural features and tributaries relating to the oxbow meander of Fairchild Creek. The ability to assemble contiguous parcels is more difficult in Area 2, given the numerous drainage corridors which bisect this area. From a residential perspective, Area 1 north immediately abuts onto the northern completed neighbourhoods of the City of Brantford. This enables the logical extension of residential growth northerly, as well as the ability to utilize and relate to existing soft services located within the northern portion of the City. Extending residential development to the north also provides the opportunity to balance the area of residential growth in close proximity to the area of future industrial employment. Growth to the north would also limit the impact on existing settlements within Brant County. Areas 2, 3, 4 and 5 presently include designated settlement areas of either an industrial or residential nature. The proposed Places to Grow Plan also indicates a Designated Growth Area to the north of the City within portions of Area 1.

City of Brantford Growth Management Strategy March 2006 23 PART C: CONCEPTUAL LAND USE ALLOCATION The attached maps provide preliminary land use concepts for Area 1 north. The land use concepts are at a very general level and intended to indicate the relationship between the land area requirements identified in Part A, and available land areas within Area 1 north. Natural features are shown in green. These natural features relate to the tributaries of Fairchild Creek, which drain through the central portion of Area 1 from west to east. The boundaries of the natural features are based on the proposed regulated area as provided by the Grand River Conservation Authority. It is expected that future more detailed environmental assessments at a neighbourhood and/or subdivision planning level, will address the boundaries of the natural features designation in greater detail in order to refine the limits of developable lands. These west/east natural features could supplement the future transportation system with pedestrian linkages. Public input comments from the ongoing City of Brantford Official Plan program has put a high value on a walkable City, including an integrated pedestrian/open space system. The concepts illustrate an area for industrial/business park development, in the westerly portion of Area 1. This area consists of 570 gross hectares, which is close to the identified 495 hectares required for industrial land. The industrial land allocation is in the area of Powerline Road, Golf Road, the Paris Road and County Road 5. It has good accessibility to the Oak Park Road and Paris Road interchanges with Highway 403. The industrial area is less constrained relative to identified natural features, as compared to the potential residential areas further to the east. It is expected that future more detailed planning will provide for an industrial area concept that might identify a range of industrial/business park designations. For example, areas closer to residential development might be considered for a transitional business park designation. The more detailed industrial concept could

City of Brantford Growth Management Strategy March 2006 24 also identify complementary land uses, access and collector road layouts, and appropriate servicing and phasing of development. An area immediately north of the residential neighbourhoods contained within the City of Brantford is illustrated as potential future residential development. Planning Scenario A illustrates an area of 938 gross residential hectares, which utilizes all of the remaining lands in Area 1 not affected by natural features (and is still less than the estimated need of 1,071 gross residential hectares). The Compact City Scenario B concept illustrates an area of 493 gross residential hectares. More detailed planning at a neighbourhood level would ultimately be required for these conceptual residential lands. A major objective should be a high level of integration with the existing residential communities to the south. This would include maximizing the extension of the existing residential road pattern, providing for the extension of existing transit routes and considering the relationship to recreation, schools, commercial areas, and recreation facilities.

City of Brantford Growth Management Strategy March 2006 25 PART D: WATER AND WASTEWATER SERVICING ASSESSMENT The water and wastewater servicing assessment identified the relative servicing impact of each of the proposed seven growth areas on the existing infrastructure. The results of this analysis were combined with the other evaluation criteria as described in Part B to identify the preferred growth direction. The details of this assessment can be reviewed in Appendix 7, Part 1. Based on the preferred growth direction and the final population growth projections, a more detailed analysis of the water and wastewater system upgrades and estimated costs was performed for three critical stages of development as follows: Scenario 1: 2036 Intensified Build-Out of the present City Scenario 2: Development of Area 1 to the 2046 Scenario 3: Buildout of Area 1 beyond 2046 The existing water and wastewater linear systems were modeled, based on the compact growth scenario to identify wastewater trunk sewer, water transmission main, pumping, storage and treatment upgrade requirements. Plant expansion costs were allocated to the three growth scenarios based on current construction unit costs and average per capita equivalent consumption rates. The following is a more detailed description of the scope of work performed for each of the three growth scenarios: Scenario 1 Assessment of wastewater trunk sewer and water transmission main improvements, pumping station upgrades, water storage expansions and incremental water and wastewater treatment expansions to accommodate all new growth within the existing city boundary to accommodate the build-out population of 139,000 persons (2036). Scenario 2 Assessment of wastewater trunk sewer and water transmission main extensions to the external boundaries of Area 1, water and wastewater pumping upgrades and water storage and water and wastewater treatment

City of Brantford Growth Management Strategy March 2006 26 expansions to accommodate the first phase of Area 1 growth (16,500 persons plus ICI) by 2046. Scenario 3 Assessment of wastewater trunk sewer and water transmission main extensions to the external boundaries of Area1, water and wastewater pumping system upgrades and water storage and water and wastewater treatment expansions to accommodate the balance of Area 1 development (i.e. to build-out).. Details of the upgrade and costing analysis can be reviewed in Appendix 7 Part 2. The following table summarizes the estimated growth related costs required to provide the necessary water and wastewater service upgrades to accommodate the three growth scenarios. The table also includes year of construction of each component of infrastructure and the distribution of costs to accommodate each growth scenario.

City of Brantford Growth Management Strategy March 2006 27 Summary of Total Water and Wastewater Servicing Costs

City of Brantford Growth Management Strategy March 2006 28 CONCLUSION The Growth Management Strategy was initiated by the City of Brantford to identify land use needs and adequately plan for major public infrastructure investments. A time horizon of 40 years has been used to consider long-term land needs. The methodology used to assess growth needs and directions is illustrated as follows: Preparation of Population, Household and Employment Forecasts Development of Buildout Growth Scenarios for the City Inventory of Current Land Supply within City Boundary Determination of Land Needs to 2046 Identification of Potential Growth Directions Comparison and Ranking of Potential Growth Directions Selection of a Preferred Growth Direction Preparation of Preliminary Land Use Concepts to Address Land Needs

City of Brantford Growth Management Strategy March 2006 29 The City s forecasts project continued growth to 2046, due to Brantford s strategic location in Southern Ontario, the recent development of post-secondary institutions in the downtown, relatively affordable housing by comparison with the Greater Toronto Area, and the City s identification as an Urban Growth Centre by the Province. An additional 62,540 people, 82,000 jobs and 26,450 new households are forecasted to 2046. The City currently has capacity to accommodate some industrial and residential growth. However, additional land will be required beyond the current City boundaries to adequately accommodate the forecasted growth. From an industrial land needs perspective, approximately 495 gross hectares would be required. Residential land requirements beyond the City boundaries range from 493 gross hectares to 1,071 gross hectares depending upon the degree of intensification achieved. The Growth Management Strategy identified seven potential growth area directions surrounding the City. These were assessed based on criteria from current provincial policy. The growth areas were compared and ranked, with the area to the north of the current City determined as the preferred growth direction. Preliminary concepts for this area illustrate possible land use combinations to meet industrial and residential land needs to 2046. Generally, growth to the north provides for a logical extension of the residential and industrial areas existing within the City. It has one of the least impacts on existing sanitary and water servicing system capacities and allows for efficient expansions to existing systems. The Province s Proposed Places to Grow Plan also identifies an area to the north of the City for future growth. While the area to the north was selected as the preferred direction, there may also be the opportunity for other areas of minor rounding out of the City from portions of other growth areas.

APPENDICES Appendix 1 Appendix 2 Appendix 3 Appendix 4 Appendix 5 Appendix 6 Appendix 7 Appendix 7 Appendix 8 Appendix 9 Appendix 10 City of Brantford Population and Employment Projections Growth Scenario B Compact City (Growth capacity of the existing City of Brantford based on the G.G.H. Places to Grow Plan) Agricultural Assessment of Potential Growth Areas Mineral Aggregate Resources Overview of Natural Heritage Features by Potential Growth Areas Groundwater and Wellhead Protection Area Policies from the County of Brant Official Plan Water and Wastewater Assessment (Part 1) - Relative Impact of Growth Areas on the Existing Water and Wastewater Systems Water and Wastewater Assessment (Part 2) - Water and Wastewater Servicing Upgrades and Costs for Growth Area 1 Transportation Assessment Residential Monitoring Map Vacant Industrial Land Map

Appendix 1 City of Brantford Population and Employment Forecasts

Appendix 1 CITY OF BRANTFORD POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT PROJECTIONS INTRODUCTION Appendix 1 is based on the report Growth Forecasts, 2005/06 Official Plan Review Program, prepared by the City of Brantford Planning Department. 1.0 HISTORICAL GROWTH 1.1 Historical Population Growth Recent historical census population data and annual rates of growth for Brantford are presented in Table 1. Brantford s population grew by approximately 12,000 people over the 20-year period from 1981 to 2001. Over the 20-year period, the population of Brantford grew at annual average rate of 0.8 per cent. Table 1 Historical Population Growth, Brantford: 1986-2001 Year Brantford Population Annual Rate of Growth (%) 1981 74,336 0.5 1986 76,146 1.5 1991 81,997 0.7 1996 84,764 0.4 2001 86,417 1986-2001 0.8 Table 2 provides data on the number of households, average household size and total employment in Brantford for the period between 1991 and 2001. Over the 10-year period, the total number of households in Brantford increased by

Appendix 1 City of Brantford Population and Employment Projections almost 3,400. The average household size declined over the 10-year period, reaching an average size of 2.5 persons per household in Brantford in 2001. Total employment in Brantford declined by about 4,000 jobs between 1991 and 1996 and then recovered by 2001. Brantford was hit particularly hard by the general economic downturn in the 1990 s and this is reflected in the jobs lost in Brantford during the first half of that decade. The employment data also indicate that Brantford had recovered from the economic downturn by 2001. Table 2 Households, Average Household Size and Total Employment, Brantford: 1991-2001 Category Year Brantford Total # of 1991 30,460 Households 2001 33,845 Average 1991 2.6 Household Size 2001 2.5 Total Employment 1991 37,705 1996 33,665 2001 37,440 Page 2

Appendix 1 City of Brantford Population and Employment Projections 2.0 Development Charges Background Study Projections A new growth forecast for Brantford was completed in 2004. This forecast, which was also prepared by C.N. Watson and Associates in conjunction with the City s recent Development Charges Background Study, used the 2001 Census as base data. These projections are outlined in the report City of Brantford Household, Population and Employment Projections: 2001 2026. Three alternative forecasts, low; reference; and high, were prepared using a housing market-based model to forecast future housing units and population. The results of this approach were then checked against forecasts prepared using a cohort/survival model based on projected births, deaths and net migration to Brantford over the forecast period. The age/sex profile of the projected population, under each growth alternative, was prepared by using the cohort/survival approach. An employment forecast was prepared, for the reference forecast, by examining relationships between employment and population amongst major employment categories. The three alternative forecasts can be differentiated on the basis of the assumptions used on the level of future new residential construction in Brantford. The residential unit growth assumptions used for each of the three alternative forecasts are presented in Table 3 and the resultant population projections and average annual growth rates are presented in Table 4. The forecast of total employment are presented in Table 5. Page 3

Appendix 1 City of Brantford Population and Employment Projections Table 3 Residential Unit Assumptions Alternative Development Charge Growth Forecasts: 2001-2026 Residential Growth Assumption (new units) Period Low Reference High mid 2001-mid 2006 2,533 2,283 3,080 mid 2006-mid 2011 1,888 2,500 2,847 mid 2011-mid 2016 1,500 2,250 2,750 mid 2016-mid 2021 1,500 2,250 2,750 mid 2021-mid 2026 1,612 2,250 2,956 Total 9,033 11,633 11,533 Annual Average 361 465 575 Source: C.N. Watson & Associates. City of Brantford Household, Population and Employment Projections: 2001 2026, 2004 The reference forecast estimates a 2026 population of 112,055. The average annual rates of growth for all of the three alternatives are relatively modest, ranging from 0.8% in the Low Forecast, to 1.0% in the Reference Forecast and 1.3 % in the High Forecast. It should be noted that the Reference Forecast was used for the calculation of development charge rates in the Development Charges Background Study. An employment forecast, based on the reference forecast, is presented in Table 5. Total employment in Brantford is expected to grow by about 20,600 new jobs over the 25-year period between 2001 and 2026. This compares to a projected population growth of 25,600 over the same period. Page 4

Appendix 1 City of Brantford Population and Employment Projections Table 4 Population Growth Alternative Development Charge Growth Forecasts: 2001 2026 Residential Growth Assumption (new units) Low Reference High Annual Growth Rate (%) Annual Growth Rate (%) Annual Growth Rate (%) Year Pop. Pop. Pop. 2001 86,417 86,417 86,417 2006 91,807 1.2 92,381 1.3 92,812 1.4 2011 95,914 0.9 97,925 1.2 99,434 1.4 2016 98,954 0.6 103,120 1.0 106,085 1.3 2021 101,735 0.6 107,258 0.8 112,437 1.2 2026 105,159 0.7 112,055 0.9 119,452 1.2 Total Growth 18,742 25,638 33,035 Avg. Growth Rate (%) 2001-26 0.8 1.0 1.3 Source: C.N. Watson & Associates. City of Brantford Household, Population and Employment Projections: 2001 2026, 2004 Table 5 Forecast of Total Employment in Brantford Reference Forecast: 2001-2026 Year Total Employment 2001 37,440 2006 42,518 2011 47,685 2016 52,070 2021 54,910 2026 58,039 Total Change 20,599 Source: C.N. Watson & Associates. City of Brantford Household, Population and Employment Projections: 2001 2026, 2004 Page 5

Appendix 1 City of Brantford Population and Employment Projections 3.0 RECENT GROWTH FACTORS There are many factors that point to higher growth rates for Brantford than what has been experienced recently, particularly during the 5-year period between 1996 and 2001. The completion of Highway 403 between Brantford and Ancaster, in 1997, has considerably improved the accessibility of Brantford and has been a key contributor to changing local growth dynamics. This is most clearly demonstrated in statistics on recent industrial development in Brantford. Figure 1 illustrates the trends in municipal industrial land sales over the past 15 years. Before 1997, annual industrial land sales were consistently below 20 acres a year and in some years no municipal industrial land was sold at all. Since 1997, industrial land sales, although fluctuating significantly from year to year, has been consistently above 20 acres a year and actually hit a peak of 188 acres in 2004. The only exception was in 2005 when only 17 acres were sold. The 2005 total is primarily due to the lack of supply availability in the municipal industrial land inventory. In the six years before 1997, the municipality sold on average 6.5 acres of industrial land annually and after 1997 this figure increased almost tenfold to 60.8 acres a year. It should be noted that the 2004 peak year does not include the 150 acres of private land that was sold to Ferrero for its new industrial plant in the City s northwest which is now nearing completion. Page 6

Appendix 1 City of Brantford Population and Employment Projections Figure 1 City of Brantford Industrial Land Sales: 1991-2005 # of Acres Sold 200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 Annual Sales 1998 1999 Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 Average 2004 2005 Figure 2 displays data on the value of industrial building permits in Brantford from 1991 to 2005. Before 2000, the annual building permit value for industrial construction projects, which includes plant additions as well as new buildings rarely rose above $15 million in any year. There was a lag between the increase in industrial land sales and the increase in the level of industrial building activity. Note that the industrial building activity peaked in 2005, when it reached $126 million. Figure 2 also shows that the value of construction activity in Brantford has increased steadily since 1997 after suffering a general decline in the first half of the 1990 s. As the graph indicates, industrial construction has mirrored the Page 7

Appendix 1 City of Brantford Population and Employment Projections overall trend and the increase in industrial construction activity has been a factor in the increase in the overall level of construction, particularly in 2005. The graph also shows that construction activity in other sectors such as residential, institutional and commercial has also contributed to the increase in the volume of construction activity. The graph indicates that, in the early 1990 s, industrial construction activity was only a small portion of total construction activity and that it is now a very important sector in the local building industry. Figure 2 City of Brantford Building Permit Values: Industrial, Other Sectors and Total Construction: 1991-2005 Building Permit Value $ millions 250 225 200 175 150 125 100 75 50 25 0 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total Construction Other Sectors 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Industrial 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Year To a considerable extent, the City s ability to attract further industrial development is related to the industrial operations that are already located within Page 8

Appendix 1 City of Brantford Population and Employment Projections the community. The City s Economic Development Department has a wellestablished business retention program designed to work with businesses in the community and to facilitate their future expansion requirements. A number of the new industrial operations, such as the Proctor and Gamble distribution centre, the Camco distribution centre and the Ferrero operation announced their intentions to expand soon after their original investments are operational. Many other industries have further expansion potential as well. In the past, Brantford was very susceptible to economic downturns as its industrial base was concentrated in only a few sectors. With the departure of the agricultural machinery industry from the community, the local industrial base has become considerably diversified particularly in recent years as there has been significant expansion in food processing operations and distribution centres for consumer products. The City s industrial base is dominated by small and medium sized industries with only a few plants having more than 500 employees. Ferrero when it begins full operations with over 600 employees (not including its announced expansion) will be Brantford s largest industrial employer. Also of relevance is Brantford s location with respect to the recently announced Toyota car plant to be constructed in Woodstock, about a half hours drive to the west of Brantford. This new plant will be an easy commute for Brantford workers and a short distance for parts suppliers. With this new plant, Brantford is wellpositioned with respect to the southern Ontario automobile manufacturing centres of Alliston, Oshawa, Brampton, Oakville, St. Catharines, Woodstock, St. Thomas and Windsor. Another factor is that a number of the communities in the western half of the greater Golden Horseshoe, particularly Kitchener and Cambridge, have dwindling supplies of available industrial land and will have difficulty bringing more Page 9

Appendix 1 City of Brantford Population and Employment Projections industrial land on-stream in the near future. While Brantford is also facing supply issues, it is taking pro-active steps to deal with the matter. In addition to Brantford s ability to attract industrial development, there are other factors as well that point to strong growth in the community in the future. Important amongst these other factors is the emergence of Laurier Brantford and the affiliated campuses of Nipissing University and Mohawk College in the downtown core. The 2005/06 academic year fulltime enrolment in the downtown post-secondary campus is 1,500 students and continued expansion is expected. The development of the university campus allows Brantford to retain more university students from amongst its own residents as well as to attract students from other communities who may become permanent residents. The growing campus also provides many jobs for faculty and support staff that were not previously available in the community. The development and continued expansion of the university campus will further contribute to the diversification of the City s economic base and contribute to other spin-off job creation. Over the next 25 years, Brantford strong locational advantages will be further enhanced with planned improvements in the inter-city transportation network to the west of the Greater Toronto Area. These improvements include the expansion inter-regional transit to Brantford from the east and to the north and the development of the mid-peninsula goods movement corridor that will intersect the 403 between Hamilton and Brantford. These improvements are part of the Province s Places to Grow strategy. The Red Hill Creek Expressway, now under construction, will further reduce travel times to the US border. The Ministry of Transportation is also investigating how the Highway 24 corridor that links Brantford to Waterloo Region can be improved. Page 10

Appendix 1 City of Brantford Population and Employment Projections Brantford has been proactive in providing incentives in various sectors to encourage development that would not otherwise have occurred. The City s Downtown Performance Grant program and the Civic Square project has facilitated investment in commercial, institutional and residential development in the downtown core which would not have happened otherwise. The City s affordable housing strategy has been responsible for a number of residential projects that would not have been feasible if the financial assistance offered by the City was not made available. The Brantford Brownfields Financial Tax Incentive Program, which is to begin operating in 2006, will encourage investment in the redevelopment of brownfield properties that will economic spinoffs that will contribute to growth in the local economy. Also of importance is the difference in the cost of homes in Brantford to that in nearby communities that are part of the Greater Toronto-Hamilton (GTAH) area. The relatively lower prices in Brantford and the availability of land has made it an attractive area for GTAH home-builders. The best example of this is Empire Community Homes which now owns large tracts of land in the City s southwest and actively markets its Brantford product in the GTAH. Other GTAH homebuilders are following suit. According to the local housing market analyst for the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, Brantford housing starts should go up to 600 to 650 new units a year. A major factor is the significant difference in prices for new homes in the Brantford and Hamilton housing markets. Figure 3 displays the average absorbed price of a new single-detached home in Brantford and in the Hamilton CMA from 1989 to 2005. Whereas the gap between Brantford and the Hamilton CMA in the average absorbed price for a new home was about $65,000 in 1989, the gap stood at $192,000 in 2005, with most of this increase occurring after 2001. According to data obtained from CMHC, the average MLS sale in the Page 11

Appendix 1 City of Brantford Population and Employment Projections 400 380 360 340 320 300 280 260 240 220 200 180 160 140 120 100 Avg. Absorbed Price $ 000's 1989 Figure 3 Average Absorbed Price of a New Single-Detached Home, Brantford and Hamilton CMA: 1989-2005 Hamilton 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005-YTD Brantford Source: Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation Year Hamilton CMA is now about $50,000 higher in than in the Brantford area. These price gaps are encouraging home buyers to look seriously at the Brantford market and encouraging developers to move into the Brantford market. The impact of all of these factors are already evident in the local housing market. Figure 4 shows the trends in building permit data for the totals number of new housing units and for single-detached housing units issued over the past twentyyear period from 1986 to 2005. New housing construction was at a relatively high level in the late 1980 s and then declined in the 1990 s reaching a low level of 186 units in 1996. Total housing construction was then relatively stable to 2001 and then increased significantly and has been above 500 units a year since Page 12

Appendix 1 City of Brantford Population and Employment Projections 2003. In 2005, the total number of new residential units for which building permits were issued stood at 594 units. The level of total residential construction, since and including 2002, has been above the levels forecasted by C.N. Watson and Associates in their Low and Reference forecast scenarios prepared in 2004 and in 2005 was higher than that projected in Watson s high forecast. It should be noted that the trend in the level of construction of single-detached housing closely mirrors the trends displayed for the total units. In the 1990 s, when total residential construction activity was at a relatively low level, singledetached housing comprised a very large proportion of the total units constructed. Since 2001, while single-detached housing construction has increased significantly, there has also been a large number of new townhouse and apartment dwellings constructed. Figure 4 Residential Building Activity: 1986-2005 # of New Units 1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 Year 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Total Units Single-Detached Source: City of Brantford Planning Department as drawn from Building Dept. Page 13

Appendix 1 City of Brantford Population and Employment Projections 4.0 REVISED CITY OF BRANTFORD FORECAST Based on the consideration of all of these factors it was evident that a review of the C.N. Watson growth forecasts was necessary. Residential construction in Brantford, particularly in 2004 and 2005, was approaching the level upon which the C.N. Watson High Forecast scenario, prepared in 2004, was based. With the various factors pointing to more sustained growth in the future and the consideration that population growth tends to lag behind industrial growth, a higher level of future growth than what has recently been experienced is not unreasonable. Based on these considerations a new forecast was prepared. Also, the C.N. Watson Low Forecast scenario was discarded as it no longer appears to be relevant to current conditions in Brantford. Table 6 displays the growth forecasts that will be presented in this report, the basic assumptions upon which they are based as well as comparisons to the C.N. Watson growth forecast scenarios. As the reference forecast was the base forecast used for the Development Charges Background Study it is renamed as the Development Charges Reference Forecast. C.N. Watson s high residential forecast now corresponds closely to recent residential construction levels in Brantford and is renamed as the Current Trends Forecast. The new forecast, which is based on the higher annual growth rate of 650 new residential units a year will be referred to as the Growth Management Forecast. Page 14

Appendix 1 City of Brantford Population and Employment Projections Table 6 C.N. Watson & Associates Low Residential Growth Reference Residential Growth High Residential Growth Growth Forecasts Official Plan Review Program Development Charges Reference Forecast Growth Assumption (residential units/year) 361 465 Current Trends Forecast 575 Growth Management Forecast 650 The methodology used for the preparation of the forecasts followed that used by C.N. Watson & Associates in the development of its three residential growth forecasts. This methodology is outlined in their report City of Brantford Household, Population and Employment Projections: 2001 2026. The statistics used in their forecasts that vary household size according to the age of the housing stock and by housing type were also applied in the Official Plan Review Forecasts. The employment to population ratios used in the C.N. Watson report were also to derive estimates of future employment in Brantford. In preparing the forecasts, it was assumed that new housing would be proportioned amongst the various density categories as follows: - low density - 75 % - medium density - 15% - high density - 10%. This is the same distribution that was used in the C.N. Watson forecasts. For all three forecasts, Development Charges Reference, Current Trends, and Growth Management, it was assumed that over the 2001-2005 period that the total number of new units to be created over that period would be as follows: Page 15

Appendix 1 City of Brantford Population and Employment Projections - low density - 1,810 units - medium density - 350 units high density - 240 units - Total - 2,400 units. As a result, all three growth scenarios provide for the same population forecast for 2006 and the varying growth assumptions on the amount of new residential construction apply after 2006. The C.N. Watson forecasts went to 2026. To be consistent with the pending Places To Grow growth plan for the GGH, the Official Plan forecasts need to be extended to 2031. The forecasts were prepared at 5-year intervals to this date. They were also extended a further 15 years, to 2046, to allow for an estimation of land requirements to accommodate future growth at the end of the planning period in 2031 and to meeting the planning requirements for the Growth Study. The projection was extended from 2031 to 2046 by calculating the growth that was forecasted between 2016 and 2031 and then adding this growth to the 2031 forecasted population. It was further assumed that the employment to population ratios and average household size would stay constant over the 2031 to 2046 period. The population and household forecasts resulting from this exercise for each of the three growth scenarios are presented in Table 7. Table 8 presents the results for the employment forecasts. The employment forecasts are provided for each of the major employment sectors as well as for total employment in Brantford. The employment to population ratios used to derive calculate these forecasts are provided in Table 9. Page 16

Appendix 1 City of Brantford Population and Employment Projections Table 7 Population and Household Forecasts for Brantford: 2001 2046 Development Charges Reference Forecast Year Pop. Change in Pop. Annual Growth rate (%) Hshlds. Change in # of Hshlds Persons/ Hshld 2001 86,417 33,850 2.55 2006 92,960 6,543 1.5 36,250 2,400 2.56 2011 98,384 5,424 1.1 38,750 2,500 2.54 2016 103,646 5,262 1.0 41,000 2,250 2.53 2021 108,020 4,374 0.8 43,250 2,250 2.50 2026 113,774 5,755 1.0 45,500 2,250 2.50 2031 119,529 5,755 1.0 47,750 2,250 2.50 2046 135,412 15,883 0.8 54,165 6,415 2.50 Current Trends Forecast Annual Growth rate (%) Change in # of Hshlds Year Pop. Change in Pop. Hshlds. 2001 86,417 33,850 2.55 2006 92,960 6,543 1.5 36,250 2,400 2.56 2011 99,470 6,510 1.4 39,125 2,875 2.54 2016 106,069 6,599 1.3 41,875 2,750 2.53 2021 111,706 5,637 1.0 44,625 2,750 2.50 2026 118,740 7,033 1.2 47,375 2,750 2.51 2031 125,773 7,033 1.2 50,125 2,750 2.48 2046 145,477 19,704 1.0 58,660 8,835 2.48 Growth Management Forecast Annual Growth rate (%) Change in # of Hshlds Persons/ Hshld Year Pop. Change in Pop. Hshlds. 2001 86,417 33,850 2.55 2006 92,960 6,543 1.5 36,250 2,400 2.56 2011 100,557 7,597 1.6 39,500 3,250 2.55 2016 108,493 7,936 1.5 42,750 3,250 2.54 2021 115,394 6,901 1.2 46,000 3,250 2.51 2026 123,706 8,312 1.4 49,250 3,250 2.51 2031 132,018 8,312 1.3 52,500 3,250 2.51 2046 155,500 23,482 1.1 62,700 10,200 2.51 Persons/ Hshld Page 17

Appendix 1 City of Brantford Population and Employment Projections Table 8 Employment Forecasts for Brantford: 2001 2046 Development Charges Reference Forecast Comm./ Year Pop. Primary/ Industrial Pop. Related Instit. Work At Home Total 2001 86,417 15,555 12,098 7,778 1,728 37,159 2006 92,960 17,662 13,944 9,296 1,859 42,762 2011 98,384 19,677 15,741 10,822 2,952 49,192 2016 103,646 20,729 16,583 11,401 3,109 51,823 2021 108,020 22,684 18,363 11,882 3,241 56,170 2026 113,774 23,893 19,342 13,653 3,413 60,300 2031 119,529 25,101 20,320 14,343 3,586 63,350 2046 135,412 28,436 23,020 16,249 4,062 71,768 Current Trends Forecast Year Pop. Primary/ Industrial Comm./ Pop. Related Instit. Work At Home Total 2001 86,417 15,555 12,098 7,778 1,728 37,159 2006 92,960 17,662 13,944 9,296 1,859 42,762 2011 99,470 19,894 15,915 10,942 2,984 49,735 2016 106,069 21,214 16,971 11,668 3,182 53,035 2021 111,706 23,458 18,990 12,288 3,351 58,087 2026 118,740 24,935 20,186 14,249 3,562 62,932 2031 125,773 26,412 21,381 15,093 3,773 66,660 2046 145,477 30,550 27,731 17,457 4,364 77,103 Growth Management Forecast Year Pop. Primary/ Industrial Comm./ Pop. Related Instit. Work At Home Total 2001 86,417 15,555 12,098 7,778 1,728 37,159 2006 92,960 17,662 13,944 9,296 1,859 42,762 2011 100,557 20,111 16,089 11,061 3,017 50,278 2016 108,493 21,699 17,359 11,934 3,255 54,247 2021 115,394 24,233 19,617 12,693 3,462 60,005 2026 123,706 25,978 21,030 14,845 3,711 65,564 2031 132,018 27,724 22,443 15,842 3,961 69,970 2046 155,500 32,655 26,435 18,660 4,665 82,415 Page 18

Appendix 1 City of Brantford Population and Employment Projections Table 9 Employment to Population Ratios by Mayor Employment Sectors, Brantford: 2001 2046 Employment to Population Ratios Comm./ Year Pop. Primary/ Industrial Pop. Related Instit. Work At Home Total 2001 86,417 0.18 0.14 0.09 0.02 0.43 2006 92,960 0.19 0.15 0.10 0.02 0.46 2011 98,384 0.20 0.16 0.11 0.03 0.50 2016 103,646 0.20 0.16 0.11 0.03 0.50 2021 108,020 0.21 0.17 0.11 0.03 0.52 2026 113,774 0.21 0.17 0.12 0.03 0.53 2031 119,529 0.21 0.17 0.12 0.03 0.53 2046 135,412 0.21 0.17 0.12 0.03 0.53 It is recommended that the Growth Management Forecast be used for planning purposes as it best takes into account the growth dynamics that are in play in the Brantford area and which are likely to be sustained for some time. Planning for this level of growth will ensure that Brantford can adequately respond to growth pressures and maintain a strong local economy. Page 19

Appendix 2 Growth Scenario B Compact City (Growth capacity of the existing City of Brantford based on the G.G.H. Places to Grow Plan)

TZ # Growth Scenario B Compact City - 1 ESTIMATED CAPACITY OF BRANTFORD S URBAN GROWTH CENTRET HA 2001 POP 2001 JOBS 2001 TOTAL 2001 DENSITY/ HA 2031 POP 2031 JOBS 2031 TOTAL 2031 DENSITY/ HA 23 27.36 1,159 470 1,359 49.70 2,462 848 3,310 121 24 42.40 909 4,035 5,036 118.80 1,654 6,725 8,379 198 34 50.23 1 94 740 1,449 28.90 1,875 1,919 3,794 152 TOTAL 120.00 2,162 5,245 7,844 5,991 9,492 15,483 163 TZ #34 reduced to 25 ha for purposes of estimating intensification potential, given extensive public uses such as B.S.A.R., civic centre, YMCA and parkland. Assumptions on distribution of jobs to population to 2031: Traffic Zone 23: 74% people to 26% jobs. 24: 20% people to 80% jobs. 34: 49% people to 51% jobs. Summary for Urban Growth Centre: 1. The urban growth centre will accommodate an additional 3,829 people and 4,247 jobs in the core by 2031. 2. An additional 3,829 people @ 2 ppu equals 1,914 dwelling units, or an average of 77 units per year over 25 years 3. An additional 4,247 jobs @ 1 job per 18 m 2 of floor area approximates 76,500 m 2 (7.6 ha) of renovated/newly constructed employment floor area (ie. 3,060 m 2 per year over 25 years). Y517-A Brantford Growth Study N:\Y517\A\Reports\Final Mar14 Report\Appendix 2 Revised.doc

Growth Scenario B Compact City - 2 ESTIMATED CAPACITY OF BRANTFORD S RESIDENTIAL GREENFIELD AREAS AT A DENSITY OF 50 RESIDENTS & JOBS PER HECTARE GREENFIELD TRAFFIC HA POP JOBS TOTAL LOCATION ZONE SOUTH-WEST 45 136.0 6,750 50 6,800 37 274.0 13,462 238 13,700 NO. of RESIDENTIAL UNITS LOW MED HIGH TOTAL 410.0 20,212 288 20,500 5,214 1,042 698 6,954 SOUTH 35 28.2 1,410-1,410 32 12.0 600-600 40.2 2,010-2,010 518 104 69 691 EAST 47 63.7 3,185-3,185 822 164 110 1,096 NORTH-WEST 46 97.2 4,840 20 4,860 1,248 249 167 1,664 Notes: TOTAL 611.1 30,247 308 30,555 7,802 1,559 1,044 10,405 Area between abandoned rail tracks reduced from 86 to 43 ha due to environmental constraints. Full services assumed. Area E1 reduced from 91 to 75 ha based on open space constraints. Developable hectares reduced by 5.4 ha. of open space. Areas for A3 (17.83 ha), E.24 (10 ha) & A4 (18.38 ha) were reduced given open space constraints. JOB ESTIMATES: - Community commercial centre (1 job per 1000 sq. ft.) 165 - Two schools @ 20 jobs each 40 - Community centre 50 - Neighbourhood commercial site 30 Residential unit distribution based on the following: % Total People Units Per Unit Low Density 75% 3.09 Medium Density 15 2.60 High Density 10 2.00 288 jobs Y517-A Brantford Growth Study N:\Y517\A\Reports\Final Mar14 Report\Appendix 2 Revised.doc

Growth Scenario B Compact City - 3 ADDITIONAL INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT CAPACITY IN BRANTFORD S INDUSTRIAL PARKS (based on 22 employees per net hectare ) LOCATION NORTH-WEST INDUSTRIAL AREA BRANEIDA INDUSTRIAL AREA TRAFFIC CITY OWNED PRIVATELY OWNED TOTAL ZONE HA JOBS HA JOBS HA JOBS 17 14.8 326 164.9 3,628 179.7 3,954 07 08 09 10 11 12 0.5 31.6 11 695 15.3 08.0 38.5 21.6 06.6 10.1 337 176 847 475 145 222 15.3 08.5 70.1 21.6 06.6 10.1 337 187 1,542 475 145 222 32.1 706 100.1 2,202 132.2 2,908 TOTAL 46.9 1,032 265.0 5,830 311.9 6,862 Source: City of Brantford Vacant Industrial Land map May 2005 1 Average Brantford industrial park density = 22 employees/net hectare 197.2 gross hectares (487.3 acres) for parcels 1,2,3,12,13,14 reduced by 49.3 ha (25%) to equal 147.9 net ha to account for future roads, storm management, and topoconstraints related to previous aggregate extraction. (147.9 net ha + parcels 5,7,8 & 11 = 17.0 ha = 164.9) Y517-A Brantford Growth Study N:\Y517\A\Reports\Final Mar14 Report\Appendix 2 Revised.doc

Growth Scenario B Compact City - 4 SUMMARY OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT TO CITY BUILD-OUT (per GGH Places to Grow ) DEVELOPMENT CATEGORY Low Density NO. of RESIDENTIAL UNITS Medium High Density Density TOTAL UNITS POPULATION ACCOMMODATED GREENFIELD AREAS 7,802 1,559 1,044 10,405 (60%) 30,247 INTENSIFICATION Urban Growth Centre Infilling (Known Inventory) Corridors & Brownfields 1,914 1,914 3,829 418 1,291 900 2,609 6,355 988 1,622 2,610 5,813 SubTotal 418 2,279 4,436 7,133 (40%) 15,997 TOTAL 8,220 3,838 5,480 17,538 46,244 DWELLING DENSITY (%) 47.3% 21.8% 30.9% 100% Y517-A Brantford Growth Study N:\Y517\A\Reports\Final Mar14 Report\Appendix 2 Revised.doc

Growth Scenario B Compact City - 5 INVENTORY INFILL UNITS WITHIN BUILT-UP AREA TRAFFIC ZONE LOW DENSITY UNITS MEDIUM DENSITY UNITS HIGH DENSITY UNITS TOTAL 01 12 12 05 93 192 285 49 80 80 11 214 214 13 75 132 207 15 86 86 16 111 111 19 28 34 68 130 21 21 21 25 16 16 27 171 382 553 28 17 17 32 19 19 35 36 36 36 14 14 37 74 260 222 556 45 71 30 120 221 48 31 31 TOTAL UNITS 418 1,291 900 2,609 POPULATION 1,292 3,357 1,800 6,355 Y517-A Brantford Growth Study N:\Y517\A\Reports\Final Mar14 Report\Appendix 2 Revised.doc

Growth Scenario B Compact City - 6 RESIDENTIAL SUMMARY A. GREENFIELDS POPULATION SOUTH-WEST 20,212 SOUTH 2,010 to 5,750 EAST 3,185 NORTH-WEST 4,840 TOTAL 30,247 B. INTENSIFICATION TARGET Minimum of 40% of residential development by 2015 Greenfield Intensification 60% 40% No. of Units 10,405 7,133 POP 30,247 15,997 TOTAL 100% 17,538 46,244 C. POPULATION CAPACITY PER PLACES TO GROW MINIMUM TARGETS Estimated 2006 population 92,960 Greenfield population 30,247 Intensification population 15,997 139,204 D. 2046 POPULATION PROJECTION 155,500 E. POPULATION NOT ACCOMMODATED WITHIN CITY BOUNDARIES TO 2046 16,296 Y517-A Brantford Growth Study N:\Y517\A\Reports\Final Mar14 Report\Appendix 2 Revised.doc

Appendix 3 Agricultural Assessment of Potential Growth Areas

- 1 - APPENDIX 3 BRANTFORD GROWTH STRATEGY AGRICULTURAL ASSESSMENT 1.0 Provincial Policy Statement (2005) The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) is issued under the authority of Section 3 of the Planning Act and came into effect on March 1, 2005. It provides policy direction on matters of Provincial interest related to land use planning and development. The wise use and management of the Province s agricultural lands over the long-term is of Provincial interest. The PPS requires that prime agricultural areas be protected for the long-term use of agriculture. Prime agricultural areas defined in the PPS as specialty crop areas and/or Canada Land Inventory 1, 2 and 3 soils. Specialty crop areas are given the highest priority for protection followed by Classes 1, 2 and 3 soils, in this order of priority. A specialty crop area is defined by the PPS as an area designated using evaluation procedures established by the Province, where specialty crops such as tender fruits (peaches, cherries, plums), grapes, other fruit crops, vegetable crops, greenhouse crops, and crops from agriculturally developed organic soil lands are predominantly grown. The Ministry of Agriculture and Food is developing evaluation procedures for identifying specialty crop areas outside the Greenbelt Areas. At the time of writing, Ministry Staff advised that Brant County has been identified as a potential specialty crop municipality, but no evaluation procedures have been developed to date. Policy 2.3.5.1(a) of the PPS does allow planning authorities to exclude land from prime agricultural areas for expansion of settlement areas only at the time of a comprehensive review in accordance with policy 1.1.3.9 of the PPS. Policy 1.1.3.9 allows for the expansion of settlement area boundaries in prime agricultural areas, provided that: 1) the lands do not comprise specialty crop areas;

- 2-2) there are no reasonable alternatives, which avoid prime agricultural areas; and, 3) there are no reasonable alternatives on lower priority agricultural lands in prime agricultural areas. 2.0 Canada Land Inventory The Canada Land Inventory (CLI) mapping (Map No. 40 P, O) was reviewed to establish the capability of soils for agricultural production in the potential growth areas. The CLI mapping was produced in 1968 at a scale of 1:250,000. The CLI mapping provides a general representation of the soil capability for agriculture. The information obtained from the CLI mapping was compared against the more detailed land resource information provided in the County of Brant Soils Report produced by the Ministry of Agriculture and Food. 3.0 Soils of Brant County - Report No. 55 The Soils of Brant County Report No. 55 was produced by the Ministry of Agriculture and Food in 1989.The Report provides a detailed assessment of the capability of the soils to produce common field crops and specialty crops based on an assessment of the surficial geology, climate and land uses which influence the characteristics of the soils. The Report also provides a generalized soil map at a scale of 1:100,000 for the entire County. Figure 3-1 is a rendered version of the soils map and illustrates the agricultural capability of the soils surrounding the City of Brantford. The County s diversified agricultural industry has benefitted from the broad range of soils and favourable climate in Brant County. According to the Soils Report, livestock farming is prevalent in the lacustrine and glacial till soils, which are generally located in the eastern and northeastern portions of the County. Tobacco, vegetables, grain crops and other cash crops are located in the outwash soils, which are generally located in the west and southwestern portions of the County.

- 3 - Cultivated hay, wheat, grain corn and soybeans are the main crops grown in the County. However, substantial areas in the County are also planted in tobacco and vegetable crops. These latter crops represent a major component of the County s agricultural economy and make effective use of the County s sandy soils. The following generally describes the characteristics of the soils within the seven potential growth areas: Area 1 (North) Soil capability to the north is mixed. The amount of Class 1 is relatively small and with a few small concentrations to the extreme northwest, and immediately north of the City (east of Highway 24). Areas of poor capability soil generally are coincident with the valleys and side-slopes related to the Fairchild Creek tributaries. Class 3 areas are generally related to topographic constraints with Class 2 areas being the higher area of land. The higher capability soils (Class 1 and 2) in the area are generally comprised of Brant soils, whereas the lower capability soils are generally Brantford soils. Both of these soil types are extensively used for field crops. These soils are less commonly used for specialty crops given their soil characteristics and common limitations associated with steep slopes and topography. Area 2 (East) Area 2 is characterized by a wide mix of capability from Classes 1-4. There are a few small pockets of Class 1 land. Class 2 lands are relatively small in area and located in areas of the Fairchild Creek oxbows. Class 3 lands are mostly located central to Area 2 and closer to the City boundary. There is a large area of Class 4 lands in the southwest portion of Area 2 and close to the City boundary. This is coincident with an area of rolling topography.

- 4 - Brantford soils, which are coincident with the Class 3 and 4 soils, predominate in the area. Fox and Berrien soils reflect the small pockets of Class 1 / 2 land. Specialty crops are grown to a limited extent on Brantford soils, whereas the Fox and Berrien soils are well suited for specialty crop production, particularly tobacco and specialized horticultural crops. Area 3 (South East) Area 3 is a mix of Classes 1-4 capability. Much of the higher capability Class 1 lands are approximately coincident with the existing industrial designation in the County Plan. Classes 3 and 4 lands comprise much of the remainder of this area with some Class 2 lands closer to the bluff along the river and in the most westerly oxbow of the Grand River. South of the river and outside the existing industrial area, the soils are generally comprised of Brantford soils (representing the lower capability areas) and Berrien soils (coinciding with the higher capability area). The Berrien soils are generally well suited for specialty crops. North of the river and within the oxbow, the soils consist of a mix of Bookton, Brant and Tuscola soils. With the exception of the Brant soils, these soils are well suited for horticultural crops. Area 4 (South) Area 4 has large areas of Class 4 capability, which is non-prime agricultural land. Much of this Class 4 land is related to very rolling topography and centres on the tributaries which drain west to east towards the Grand River. This area is also characterized by large areas of Class 3 land along the drainage tributaries and a larger area of Class 3 land in the most westerly portion. Overall, Area 4 has the greatest degree of poorer agricultural lands. The Class 3/4 soils in Area 4 reflect the characteristics of the Brantford soils. Brantford soils are extensively used for common field crops and are used to a limited extent for specialized horticultural crops. The Class 4 areas associated with the valleys and

tributaries are characterized as alluvium soils with fine textured clayey floodplain deposits. - 5 - Area 5 (South West) Area 5 is roughly centered on the airport. The majority of Area 5 is Class 2 agricultural capability with some Class 3 lands closer in towards the City boundary. Of all the study areas, Area 5 has the largest concentration of better agricultural lands largely as a result of fewer tributaries passing through the area and larger areas of flatter topography. The Class 2 lands are representative of the Fox soils. Small pockets of Caledon and Teeswater soils are also present in this area. All of these soils are very good soils for specialty crops, and most commonly, tobacco and potatoes. Area 6 (West) Area 6 is a mix of all four classifications and is a relatively small area for consideration. Similar to Area 5, the Fox soils predominate this area, with small pockets of Caledon and Teeswater soils. All of these soils are considered Class 1 / 2 soils, and are very good soils for specialty crops, such as tobacco and potatoes. Area 7 (North) Area 7 West has small isolated pockets of Class 1 soils surrounded by larger areas of Class 2 soils, with some Class 3 soils and poorer located along Whitemans Creek, valley and along the floodplain of the Grand River. Much of Area 7 is affected by existing and future aggregate activities. The higher agricultural capability soils of Burford and Fox are largely represented in this area with small pockets of Teeswater soils. All of these soils are very good for specialty crop production. However, the Burford soils may require more intensive management for some specialty crops such as tobacco and potatoes.

- 6 - In summary, the higher quality agricultural soils are generally located in Growth Areas 5, 6 and 7. Area 4 has the poorest agricultural soils because of the topography and drainage limitations associated with the tributaries to the Grand River. The soil capability in Areas 1, 2 and 3 are mixed with few concentrations of acres with higher agricultural soils.

Appendix 4 Mineral Aggregate Resources

APPENDIX 4 MINERAL AGGREGATE RESOURCES AND LICENSED PITS There is a provincial interest in ensuring that mineral aggregate resources are protected for long-term use. In order to achieve this, the PPS limits development and activities that preclude or hinder the establishment of new operations or access to resources in areas adjacent to, or in, known deposits of mineral aggregate resources. Furthermore, the PPS requires that as much of the mineral aggregate resources, as is realistically possible, be made available as close to market as possible. Both the County of Brant Official Plan and City of Brantford Official Plan implement the PPS. The County Plan recognizes mineral aggregates as an essential non-renewable resource, and the policies of the Plan provides for the protection of existing pits and quarries and extraction operations as well as the mineral aggregate resources. Primary aggregate resources, as identified the Ministry of Natural Resources Aggregate Resource Inventory Papers, are protected in the County Plan, and with the exception of aggregate uses, only land uses directly related to Agriculture and Natural Environment shall be permitted. The City of Brantford Official Plan also protects the mineral aggregate resources within the City boundaries. Mineral Resources Areas within the City are identified in the Plan, and the policies of the Plan are intended to control development within, and adjacent to, Mineral Resource Areas such that the long-term availability of the resource is not precluded. The County of Brant, and in particular the former Brantford Township, has large concentration of good quality sand and gravel deposits. Crushed aggregate from bedrock resources is generally not available or economically feasible in the County, given the depth of the bedrock formations in the County.

According to the Ministry of Natural Resources Aggregate Resources Inventory Paper (ARIP) No. 8, the primary sand and gravel resources surrounding the City of Brantford (and in the former Township of Brantford) are predominantly located west and northwest of the City (see Figure 4-1). These primary resources are comprised of extensive outwash deposits that extend along the Grand River, between Paris and Brantford and along Whiteman s Creek. A number of licensed pits are located within these outwash deposits west of the City of Brantford. The primary resources areas do not affect potential growth areas 1, 2, 3 and 4, and therefore, these growth areas are not constrained by aggregate resources and/or licensed pits. Area 5 (Southwest) Area 5 Southwest is partially constrained by virtue of two licensed pits to the south and southwest of the airport. However, identified aggregate resources do not affect the majority of Area 5. A small portion of the Primary Resource Area, as identified in ARIP Report No. 8, is located in the northwest corner of the growth area. Area 6 West Area 6 is largely unconstrained by aggregate resources. There is an area immediately adjacent to the river that is shown as a Secondary Resource Area, in ARIP Report No. 8 Area 7 (West) Area 7 West has the greatest area of aggregate resource potential. Firstly, there is a cluster of licensed pits to the north and south of Highway 403, immediately west of the Grand River. These licensed pits occupy much of the area between the Grand River and the Paris Urban Area. The Paris Urban Area forms the westerly boundary of the northern portion of Area 7. The southerly portion of Area 7 is centered on Whiteman s Creek. The Primary Resource Areas are located to the northwest and southeast of Whiteman s Creek and occupy much of the southern portion of Area 7. According to the Aggregate Resources Inventory Report No. 8, the aggregate resources within Area 7 are considered to have high quality gravel with an average depth of 8 metres (25 feet).

In summary, Area 7 has the greatest area of aggregate resources potential and licensed pits. Aggregate resources affect the majority of Area 7.

Appendix 5 Overview of Natural Heritage Features by Potential Growth Areas

BRANTFORD GROWTH MANAGEMENT STRATEGY NATURAL HERITAGE FEATURES The following provides an overview of natural heritage features by potential growth area. The rationale was based on a compilation of existing information from a variety of sources including relevant Official Plans, Natural Heritage Information Centre (NHIC), aerial photos, and GRCA mapping and data. To evaluate the constraints to development in each area, a ranking system was developed (i.e. 1 = least constrained to 7 = most constrained). The methodology and evaluation criteria are summarized in the Evaluation Table. For clarity and consistency, we separated out the main aquatic, wetland, and terrestrial rationale and grouped them accordingly in each respective Block, similar to our Evaluation Table. Area 1 Low Constraint Rating (3 rd Overall) Aquatic Features Numerous tributaries of Fairchild Creek, including some headwater reaches occur laterally through this area. Within this block, aquatic features collectively represent 12% of its total area; Wetland Features Within this block, wetland features collectively represent 6% of its total area where 3% constitutes Provincially Significant Wetland area. Terrestrial Features Features include Conservation Lands and lands identified with susceptible slopes (i.e. Slope Erosion in the table). These lands collectively represent 7.5% of the total area within this block. Area 2 Medium Constraint Rating (6 th Overall) Aquatic Features A fairly large section of the Fairchild Creek meander belt and various tributaries traverse through this area. Within this block, aquatic features represent just over 24% of its total area; Wetland Features Only non-provincially significant wetland features occur within this block constituting approximately 4% of this block s total area. Terrestrial Features - Features include Conservation Lands and lands identified with susceptible slopes. These lands collectively represent 18% of the total area within this block.

MEMO Page 2 th Area 3 High Constraint Rating (7 Overall) Aquatic Features - The Grand River, its floodplain, and associated tributaries meander right through the middle of this block. In addition, the river also flanks the northwestern and southern edges of this area. Therefore, the aquatic coverage represents almost 66% of the total available area in this block; Wetland Features - Only non-provincially significant wetland features occur within this block constituting approximately 2.5% of this block s total area. Terrestrial Features - Features include Conservation Lands and lands identified with susceptible slopes. These lands collectively represent 10% of the total area within this block. Area 4 Medium Constraint Rating (4 th Overall) Aquatic Features This block contains some headwater reaches of D Aubigny Creek and a section of the Grand River in the northeast corner, which collectively represents only 6% of the total area in the block; Wetland Features - Within this block, wetland features collectively represent 9% of its total area where 3% constitutes Provincially Significant Wetland area. Terrestrial features - Features include Conservation Lands and lands identified with susceptible slopes. These lands collectively represent 14.5% of the total area within this block. Area 5 Low Constraint Rating (1 st Overall) Aquatic Features The only aquatic constraint is a small section of Mount Pleasant Creek that cuts across the southern end of this block, which represents only 3% of the total area; Wetland features - Only non-provincially significant wetland features occur within this block constituting approximately 1% of this block s total area. Terrestrial features - Features include Conservation Lands and lands identified with susceptible slopes. These lands collectively represent 1% of the total area within this block.

MEMO Page 3 nd Area 6 Low Constraint Rating (2 Overall) Aquatic Features The only aquatic constraint to development is a section of the Grand River and floodplain that flanks the northside of this block, which comprises 12% of the total block area; Wetland features - Only non-provincially significant wetland features occur within this block constituting approximately 0.5% of this block s total area. Terrestrial features - Features include Conservation Lands and lands identified with susceptible slopes. These lands collectively represent 10% of the total area within this block. Area 7 Medium Constraint Rating (5 th Overall) Aquatic Features Whiteman s Creek bisects this entire Block and the Grand River floodplain flanks the entire eastside. As a result, 31% of the total area represents a significant constraint to development (floodplains included); Wetland features - Within this block, wetland features collectively represent 4.5% of its total area where 4% constitutes Provincially Significant Wetland area. Terrestrial features - Features include Conservation Lands and lands identified with susceptible slopes. These lands collectively represent 1% of the total area within this block.

Brantford Growth Strategy - Draft Natural Heritage Evaluation Category Natural Feature Block (Area) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Aquatic Wetland Terrestrial Shoreline 0.03 a 2.16 19.45 0.21 0.67 4.43 11.91 GRCA Flood plains 11.48 21.76 45.94 5.21 2.23 7.64 18.89 Virtual Drainage 0.24 0.36 0.46 0.32 0.07 0.1 0.145 River-stream cold water 0.004 0.0086 0 0 0.0043 0 0 Total Area 11.724 24.2886 65.85 5.74 2.9743 12.17 30.945 Evaluation (H,M,L b ) Low Medium High Low Low Low Medium Rank c 3 5 7 2 1 4 6 Provincially Significant Wetlands 2.57 0 0 3.04 0 0 3.79 Other Wetlands 3.16 3.95 2.56 5.81 0.73 0.56 0.63 Total Area 5.73 3.95 2.56 8.85 0.73 0.56 4.42 Evaluation (H,M,L) Medium Medium Low High Low Low Medium Rank 6 4 3 7 2 1 5 Forest 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ANSI 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Conservation Lands 1.42 0.04 0.08 8.41 0.67 0.15 0.04 Slope Erosion 6.04 18.4 9.66 6.03 0.15 9.75 1.26 Total Area 7.46 18.44 9.74 14.44 0.82 9.9 1.3 Evaluation (H, M, L) Medium High Medium High Low Medium Low Rank 3 7 4 6 1 5 2 Percent Area (%)of Natural Heritage Features 24.9 46.7 78.2 29.0 4.5 22.6 36.7 Constraint Rank (H,M,L) Low Medium High Medium Low Low Medium Overall Rank 3 6 7 4 1 2 5 Notes: a - b - c - The total percentage area of Natural Heritage Features within the Block (Area). Percentage (%) areas were calculated by dividing the area of a natural feature within each block by the total area of that block. A ratio was calculated for the drainage featues (Virtual Drainage and River-stream cold water) where the total kilometres Blocks (Areas) 1 through 7 were ranked as either having High, Medium or Low constraints in terms of total percentage for each category. The highest percentage area was divided into thirds determining what was High, Medium or Low. For example, for the Aquatic category, Block "3" has the highest percentage (65.85) of aquatic natural features. Therefore Blocks with low constraints ranged from 0 to 22, Blocks with medium constraints ranged from 22 to 44 and Blocks with high constraints ranged from 44 to 66. Blocks (Areas) were ranked from 1 through 7 for each category, from least constrained to most constrained.

Appendix 6 Groundwater and Wellhead Protection Area Policies from the County of Brant Official Plan

SECTION 2 LAND USE MANAGEMENT STRATEGY the Ministry's recommended sound and vibration limits. The County of Brant may use Site Plan Control in accordance with Section 7.5 of this Plan to require buffering between uses of land where there may be conflicts such that one use may detract from the enjoyment and functioning of the adjoining use. Such buffering will be considered in light of the Ministry of Environment s guideline entitled Guideline on Separation Distance Between Industrial Facilities and Sensitive Land Uses, as amended from time to time, and may include landscaping, screening and the separation of uses by extra distance between them. Added conditions such as increased yard requirement, planting strips, fencing, and/or berms, deflective lighting, restrictions of use of certain portions of the land, etc., are all added requirements that may be imposed to offset aspects of incompatibility between any two land uses. In areas where a conflict already exists between residential and non-residential land uses, the municipality may consider the erection of a buffer such as sound attenuation fencing as either a general or local improvement. The municipality may also consider the installation of attractive buffering to screen storage and loading areas, particularly where there is an interface with residential uses or the 403 Freeway. 2.2.8 GROUNDWATER PROTECTION The County of Brant is extremely dependent on groundwater for all of the community s water requirements. In consultation with the Conservation Authorities and the Province, a Groundwater Protection Plan will be developed and implemented. Potential threats to surface and groundwater quality and quantity need to be evaluated, monitored, and appropriate policies implemented in order to prevent, mitigate or eliminate negative impacts. The Grand River Conservation Authority has undertaken a Grand River Regional Groundwater Study and has draft maps on Areas Vulnerable to Contamination, Overburden Thickness, Sand and Gravel Thickness, Upward Vertical Hydraulic Gradients, Downward Vertical Hydraulic Gradients, Potential Groundwater Discharge Areas, Water Table Surface, and Depth to First Aquifer. In addition studies have been done for the Paris municipal wells to determine the area of immediate or primary influence. Similar studies are being done for the Burford area and were done for St. George and around the Brantford Airport. Development applications within the wellhead protection areas and within the areas that are vulnerable to contamination including the Settlement Areas of Burford and the portion of St. George located east of Lot 8, will not be permitted where there is a COUNTY OF BRANT OFFICIAL PLAN PAGE 33 November, 2000

SECTION 2 LAND USE MANAGEMENT STRATEGY proposed use that includes any form of the following: underground transmission of oil, gasoline, or other petroleum liquid products; wood preserving and treating; outdoor storage of road salt, or other de-icing materials and dumping of salt-laden snow; petroleum product, refining and manufacturing; furniture and wood stripping and refinishing; horticultural nurseries; intensive livestock operations including the spreading of liquid manure; landfills; chemical/biological laboratory; chemical manufacturing/industrial areas; disposal of leachable waste (including the spreading of biosolids); electroplaters and metal fabricators; facilities generating, treating or disposing hazardous wastes; asphalt/concrete/tar plants; automobile junk yards; bulk fuel oil storage yards; car washes; cemeteries; dry cleaning facilities; gasoline service stations; underground storage tanks; agricultural spraying of herbicides and pesticides. Applications for any industrial or commercial uses within the Wellhead Protection Area (WHPA) must include a report outlining the nature of the business, details of their operation, specify if any chemical substances are used or stored on site, and the measures proposed for spill containment. Periodic groundwater quality monitoring for the area down gradient from the development may also be required as part of the approval process. Applications for golf courses within the WHPA will require a site specific assessment of the potential impact on the WHPA and periodic groundwater quality monitoring for the down gradient from the development as part of any approval process. The establishment of any new aggregate extraction pit will also require a site specific assessment of the potential impact on the WHPA including an assessment of potential interference, water quality, and stream flow impacts. COUNTY OF BRANT OFFICIAL PLAN PAGE 34 November, 2000

SECTION 2 LAND USE MANAGEMENT STRATEGY Approval from the County of Brant will be required before any application is processed to either a site plan approval stage and/or a zoning by-law amendment stage of development. The County of Brant will also require all abandoned wells be plugged in accordance with Ontario Regulation 903 or as amended from time to time. The County s Nutrient Management By-Law requires that Nutrient Management Plans be developed and approved by the County before new or expanded livestock operations may occur. The spreading of sludge, and the establishment of new intensive livestock operations are not permitted in the WHPA. Within the WHPA, no aggregate extraction operation, fish farm, landscape feature or any other uses that would result in the exposure of the high water table shall be permitted. Excavation shall be required to remain a minimum of one metre above the high water table. Rehabilitation of established licensed pits will also be restricted from establishing livestock intensive agricultural uses within the WHPA. Throughout the County of Brant, where development involves the taking of water in excess of 10,000 litres per day, the following additional policies shall apply: 1. hydrogeological studies will be required to ensure the quality and quantity of ground and surface water available to adjoining users of the aquifer is maintained; 2. no permit or license for the taking of water shall be issued by the appropriate authority until the hydrogeological studies have been circulated and consulted upon by the County of Brant; 3. the effect of land use proposals on the groundwater aquifers utilized by approved water taking operations will be considered before development is permitted so as to ensure land use compatibility and to maintain the quality and quantity of the groundwater resource in the aquifer; and 4. the effect of land use proposals on any Provincially Significant Wetlands and on any cold water trout stream including Whiteman s, Gilbert, and McKensie Creeks. 2.2.9 DEVELOPMENT ALONG INLAND WATERCOURSES COUNTY OF BRANT OFFICIAL PLAN PAGE 35 November, 2000

Appendix 7 Water Distribution System Assessment and Sanitary Sewer System Assessment

Appendix 7 Part 1 Brantford Growth Management Strategy Water and Wastewater Assessment, Relative Impact of Growth Areas on the Existing Water and Wastewater Systems

Earth Tech Canada Inc. Page 1 1. WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM ASSESSMENT The purpose of the water distribution system assessment is to identify the relative servicing impact of the proposed growth areas on existing water distribution system. The assessment focused on available pumping and storage capacity and the need for improvement to service growth areas outside the City boundary. The assessment is based on a projected build out population of approximately 100,000 and a design population of 30,000 for each of the identified growth areas. It is to be noted that this assessment was completed prior to the finalization of the projected population and employment estimates. Depending on the final population and employment projections, the water distribution assessment may have to be revised. In the assessment process the existing City of Brantford water hydraulic model is used to evaluate system capacity and identify the need for improvement works. The City uses the same hydraulic model for their Master Plan Study. 1.1. Design Criteria The following design criteria were used to determine the projected water demand for the estimated growth population of 30,000 persons. Average Day Consumption factor = 450 L/cap/day Maximum Day Consumption factor = 1.8 ( 1 ) x Average Day Consumption factor Peak Hour Consumption factor = 2.7 ( 2 ) x Average Day Consumption factor The above design criteria are used to calculate system demands and Tables 1 summarizes the system demand for a population of 30,000. 1 Obtained from MOE Guidelines, Appendix N, Table 1 Maximum Day Factor for equivalent population of 25001-50000 2 Obtained from MOE Guidelines, Appendix N, Table 1 Peak Rate Factor for equivalent population of 25001-50000 File Location: N:\Y517\A\Final report\app 7 Part 1.doc

Earth Tech Canada Inc. Page 2 Table 1: System Demand for a Population of 30,000 Demand Condition Average Day Demand Maximum Day Demand Peak Hour Demand System Demand 156.3 L/s (13.5ML/day) 281.3 L/s (24.3 ML/day) 421.9 L/s (36.5 ML/day) The storage requirement is calculated based on MOE Guidelines. According to MOE Guidelines, storage requirement is generally calaculated by: Total Storage = Fire Storage (A) + Equalization Storage (B) + Emergency Storage (C) Where: A = B = Fire Storage to allow for adequate fire supply and estimated based on population Equalization Storage to compensate for difference in demand when the local demand exceeds pumping capacity (25% of Max Day Demand) C = Emergency Storage to provide an allowance during system upset (25% of A + B) Table 2 summarizes the requirement storage to service each Growth Area via different water distribution district (pressure zone) File Location: N:\Y517\A\Final report\app 7 Part 1.doc

Earth Tech Canada Inc. Page 3 Table 2: MOE Recommended Storage Requirement for Population of 30,000 Via Zone 1 Via Zone 2/3 Via Zone 4 40% Via Z4 60% Via Z2/3 Total Equivalent Population per Zone within City Boundary Total Equivalent Population for Growth Area 74,000 74,000 21,000 21,000 74,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 12,000 16,000 Total Equivalent Population 104,000 104,000 51,000 33,000 90,000 Max. Day Flow within City Boundary (ML/d) 47 ML/d* 42 ML/d* 16 ML/d* 16 ML/d* 42ML/d* Max Day Flow for Growth Area 24 ML/d 24 ML/d 24 ML/d 10 ML/d 14 ML/d Total Max. Day Flow 71 ML/d 66 ML/d 40 ML/d 26 ML/d 56 ML/d A. Fire Storage Fire Flow ( 3 ) Fire Duration ( 4 ) 378 L/s 378 L/s 378 L/s 348 L/d 378 L/s 6 hrs 6 hrs 6 hrs 5 hrs 6 hrs Required Fire Storage = 8.2ML 8.2ML 8.2ML 6.3ML 8.2ML B. Equalization Storage 25% of Max Day Demand = 18 ML 16 ML 10 ML 6.5 ML 14ML C. Emergency Storage 25% of (A + B) = 6.6 ML 6.0 ML 4.6ML 3.2ML 5.6ML Total Required Storage A + B + C 32.8 ML 30.2 ML 22.8 ML 16ML 27.8ML * System demand within City boundary is calculated based on City s standards (274Lpcd for existing + 450 Lpcd for future) 1.2. Analysis of Water Servicing Requirements for the Seven Growth Areas The water distribution system assessments include the following: 3 Obtained from MOE Guidelines, Appendix N, Table 2 Suggested Fire Flow for equivalent population of 27000-33000 4 Obtained from MOE Guidelines, Appendix N, Table 2 Fire Flow Duration for equivalent population of 27000-33000 File Location: N:\Y517\A\Final report\app 7 Part 1.doc

Earth Tech Canada Inc. Page 4 1. Topographic analysis to identify potential water supply options. 2. Pumping capacity assessment to identify the additional pumping capacity requirement in each zone to maintain water supply to the growth area. 3. Storage capacity assessment to identify additional storage requirement in each zone to maintain sufficient storage as per the MOE Guideline (fire storage + equalization storage + emergency storage). Figure 1 presents the existing water service boundary for the City of Brantford and the location for each growth area. The subsequent sections summarize the water servicing requirements for each of the seven growth areas. Figure 1: City of Brantford Existing Water Service Boundary and Growth Areas Limit 1.2.1. Area 1 The topographic information suggests that the majority of water supply to Area 1 will be from Zone 1 via Zone 2/3 and Zone 4. File Location: N:\Y517\A\Final report\app 7 Part 1.doc

Earth Tech Canada Inc. Page 5 Additional Zone 1 Pumping Capacity Requirement = 9.7 ML/day No Additional Zone 2/3 Storage Capacity is required No Additional Zone 4 Storage Capacity is required 1.2.2. Area 2 The topographic information suggests that the majority of water supply to Area 2 will be from Zone 1 via Zone 2/3. The following system upgrades are required to service 30,000 persons in Area 2: Additional Zone 1 Pumping Capacity Requirement = 9.7 ML/day Additional Zone 2 Storage Capacity Requirement = 2.0 ML 1.2.3. Area 3 The topographic information suggests that the majority of water supply to Area 2 will be from Zone 1 via Zone 2/3. The following system upgrades are required to service 30,000 persons in Area 3: Additional Zone 1 Pumping Capacity Requirement = 9.7 ML/day Additional Zone 2 Storage Capacity Requirement = 2.0 ML 1.2.4. Area 4 The existing water distribution system connectivity allows servicing Area 4 directly from Zone 1. The following system upgrades are required to service 30,000 persons in Area 4: Additional Zone 1 Pumping Capacity Requirement = 9.7 ML/day Additional Zone 1 Storage Capacity Requirement = 9.0 ML 1.2.5. Area 5 The topology of Area 5 and system separation by Grand River necessitates that a new pressure district be created to supply Area 5. Area 5 will be supplied from Zone 1 via new pumping station within the new pressure district. The following system upgrades are required to service 30,000 persons in Area 5: Additional Zone 1 Pumping Capacity Requirement = 9.7 ML/day File Location: N:\Y517\A\Final report\app 7 Part 1.doc

Earth Tech Canada Inc. Page 6 Pumping Capacity for New Zone Requirement = 51.8 ML/day Storage Capacity for New Zone Requirement = 14.8 ML 1.2.6. Area 6 The topology of Area 6 and system separation by Grand River necessitates that a new pressure district be created to supply Area 6. Area 6 will be supplied from Zone 1 via new pumping station within the new pressure district. The following system upgrades are required to service 30,000 persons in Area 6: Additional Zone 1 Pumping Capacity Requirement = 9.7 ML/day Pumping Capacity for New Zone Requirement = 51.8 ML/day Storage Capacity for New Zone Requirement = 14.8 ML 1.2.7. Area 7 The topology of Area 7 and system separation by Grand River necessitates that a new pressure district be created to supply Area 7. Area 7 will be supplied from Zone 1 via a new pumping station within the new pressure district. The following system upgrades are required to service 30,000 persons in Area 7: Additional Zone 1 Pumping Capacity Requirement = 9.7 ML/day Pumping Capacity for New Zone Requirement = 51.8 ML/day Storage Capacity for New Zone Requirement = 14.8 ML 1.3. Water Servicing Constraints The water servicing constraints for each of the seven growth areas are discussed in the following sections. Several factors are considered in the assessment of the water servicing of the seven growth areas including: 1. Constructability constraints including the need for land accusation and river crossings. 2. Existing infrastructure constraints including the need for additional storage and pumping facilities. File Location: N:\Y517\A\Final report\app 7 Part 1.doc

Earth Tech Canada Inc. Page 7 3. Capital costs of new infrastructure to provide additional water servicing capacity. 4. Long term operational cost including pumping cost. 1.3.1. Area 1 Constraints Growth Area 1 is situated to the north of the existing city boundary. The system assessment indicates that additional storage in Zones 1 and 2/3 and possibly 4 is required. Additional pumping capacity in Zone 1 is also needed to meet the expected demand. There are no major river crossings required and the need for land accusation to build new water infrastructure is low. However, in comparison to the other growth areas, Area 1 is the highest in elevation and is the furthest from the City water treatment facilities. Thus, more energy would be required to pump the water two Area 1 resulting in higher long term operational costs. 1.3.2. Area 2 Constraints Growth Area 2 is situated to the north east of the existing city boundary. The system assessment shows that additional storage in Zones 1 and 2/3 is required. Additional pumping capacity in Zone 1 is also needed to meet the expected demand. There are no major river crossings required and the need for land accusation to build new water infrastructure is low. The average increase in energy consumption to pump water to Area 2 would be required but not to the extent of Area1 thus resulting in medium long term operational costs. 1.3.3. Area 3 Constraints Growth Area 3 is located to the south east of the existing city boundary. The system assessment indicates that additional storage in Zones 1 and 2/3 is required. Additional pumping capacity in Zone 1 is also required to meet the expected demand. However, to provide water service to Area 3, a major river crossing is necessary (high constraint). There is limited existing water infrastructure available to service Area 3 and therefore a significant level of capital expenditure will be required for a new water supply network for the area (medium constrain). There would be an average increase in energy consumption to pump the water to this service Area resulting in a medium long term operational cost. 1.3.4. Area 4 Constraints Growth Area 4 is situated to the south of the existing city boundary. The system assessment shows that additional storage in Zone 1 is needed. Additional pumping capacity in Zone 1 is also required to meet the expected demand. In comparison to other growth areas, the water servicing of Area 4 would require the least storage and pumping upgrades (low constraint). However, to provide water service to Area 4 a File Location: N:\Y517\A\Final report\app 7 Part 1.doc

Earth Tech Canada Inc. Page 8 major river crossing is necessary (high constraint). The subject growth area can be serviced from the existing water infrastructure in Zone 1 and therefore limited new infrastructure would be required (low constrain). The closeness of Area 4 to the City s water treatment facilities means that the increase in energy consumption to pump the water and service Area 4 will be low compared to the other service areas resulting in low long term operational cost. 1.3.5. Area 5 Constraints Growth Area 5 is located to the west of the existing city boundary. The system assessment shows that servicing Area 5 would require the creation of a new pressure zone. The new pressure zone will be supplied from Zone 1. Thus additional storage in Zone 1 is needed in addition to the storage requirement for the new zone. Additional pumping capacity in Zone 1 is also required to meet the expected demand in addition to the need for a new pumping station to service the new zone. In comparison to the other growth areas, the servicing of Area 5 requires higher storage and pumping upgrades (high constraint). There will also be a need for land accusation for the new water storage and pumping facilities (high constraint). Though the Grand River separates Area 5 from the rest of the city, there is an existing water main crossing the Grand River which could be used to provide water supply to the new zone (low constraint). The subject growth area will require some capital investment for new infrastructure (medium constrain). There would be an average increase in energy consumption required to pump water to service Area 5 resulting in a medium long term operational cost. 1.3.6. Area 6 Constraints Growth Area 6 is situated to the north west of the existing city boundary. The system assessment shows that servicing Area 6 would necessitate the creation of a new pressure zone. The new pressure zone will be supplied from Zone 1. Thus additional storage in Zone 1 is needed in addition to the storage requirement for the new zone. Additional pumping capacity in Zone 1 is also required to meet the expected demand in addition to the need for a new pumping station to service the new zone. In comparison to the other growth areas, servicing of Area 6 requires high storage and pumping upgrades (high constraint). There will be a need for land accusation for the new water storage and pumping facilities and a river crossing (Grand River) to service Area 6 from the city water supply system (high constraint). The subject growth area will also require a sizable capital investment for new infrastructure (high constraint). Compared to the other areas, there would be an average increase in energy consumption to pump the water to Area 6 resulting in a medium long term operational cost. File Location: N:\Y517\A\Final report\app 7 Part 1.doc

Earth Tech Canada Inc. Page 9 1.3.7. Area 7 Constraints Growth Area 7 is located to the north west of the existing city boundary. The system assessment shows that servicing Area 7 would require the creation of a new pressure zone. That would be supplied from Zone 1. Thus additional storage in Zone 1 is needed in addition to the storage requirements for the new zone. Additional pumping capacity in Zone 1 is also required to meet the expected demand in addition to the need for a new pumping station. In comparison to other growth areas, servicing Area 7 requires high storage and pumping upgrades (high constraint). Moreover, there will be a need for land accusation for the new water storage and pumping facilities (high constraint). A river crossing (Grand River) is also required (high constraint). There would also be a sizable capital investment for new infrastructure (high constraint). Area 7 has a very high ground elevation and is a considerable distance from the City water treatment facilities. Thus, more energy would be required to pump the water to Area 7 resulting in high long term operational costs. File Location: N:\Y517\A\Final report\app 7 Part 1.doc

Earth Tech Canada Inc. Page 10 2. SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM ASSESSMENT Similar to the Water System Assessment, the Sanitary Sewer System Assessment reviewed the relative servicing impact of the proposed seven growth areas on the existing sanitary sewer collection system. The assessment is based on a projected build out population of approximately 100,000 and a design population of 30,000 for each of the identified growth areas. It is to be noted that this assessment was completed prior to the finalization of the projected population and employment estimates. Depending on the final population and employment projections, the sanitary sewer system assessment may have to be revised. The City of Brantford s H2OMAP sanitary sewer hydraulic model was used to evaluate the system capacity for each growth area. 2.1. Design Criteria The following design criteria were used to determine the projected peak sanitary flow for the build out population plus the estimated growth population of 30,000 persons. Average Sewage Flow = 450 L/cap/day Design Population = 50 persons/hectare Inflow / Infiltration (I/I) Flow Allowances = 0.28 L/ha/s ( 5 ) Sewage Flow Peaking Factor = Harmon Formula ( 6 ) Utilizing the above design criteria, the sanitary sewer flow for the growth areas based on 30,000 persons is as below: Average Sewage Flow = 156.2L/s (13.5 ML/day) I/I flow = 168.0 L/s (14.5 ML/d) Harmon Peaking Factor = 1.69 5 Allowance as per MOE standard for extraneous flows 6 M = 1 + 14/(4+p 0.5 ) File Location: N:\Y517\A\Final report\app 7 Part 1.doc

Earth Tech Canada Inc. Page 11 Total Sewage Flow ( 7 ) = 432.0L/s (37.3ML/d) The total sewage flow was applied to H2OMap Model in order to identify the system constraints. 2.2. Analysis of Sanitary Servicing Requirements for the Seven Growth Areas The following is a brief summary of the sanitary servicing requirements for each of the seven growth areas. 2.2.1. Area 1 Approximately 67% of the total sewage flow from Area I can be accomodated by the eastern trunk sewer system with the remaining 33% going to the western sanitary sewer system. Figure 1 presents the connections to the existing sanitary sewer system for Area 1. Figure 1: Sanitary Sewer System Servicing Area 1 7 Total Sewage Flow = Average Sewage Flow * Peaking Factor + I/I File Location: N:\Y517\A\Final report\app 7 Part 1.doc

Earth Tech Canada Inc. Page 12 In Figure 1, the sanitary sewer lines in red color were indicating the sanitary sewer restriction (potential surcharge section). According to Figure 1, there are five (5) potential surcharging sewer lines with a total length of the surcharging sewer lines of approximately 1.9 km. The majority of the potential surcharge occurred in the western sanitary sewer system and some potential surcharged sewer lines are also identified in the eastern trunk system, downstream of Empey Street Pumping Station. 2.2.2. Area 2 Two connections were identified to transport sewage flow from Area 2 to the waste water treatment plant. Figure 2 presents the connections for Area 2 development. Figure 2: Sanitary Sewer System Servicing Area 2 According to Figure 2, the hydraulic model identified a total of ten (10) potential surcharging sewer lines with a total length of the surcharging sections of approximately 0.8km. File Location: N:\Y517\A\Final report\app 7 Part 1.doc

Earth Tech Canada Inc. Page 13 2.2.3. Area 3 Area 3 can be serviced from the existing 675mm sewer line on Colborne Street. Figure 3 presents the connection for Area 3 to the existing sanitary sewer system. Figure 3: Sanitary Sewer System Servicing Area 3 Based on the hydraulic analysis results two (2) pipes with a total length of 167m were identified as potential surcharging sewer lines. As indicated in Figure 3, the potential surcharge sections occurred at the following locations: 1. Intersection of Linden Ave and Colborne Street 2. 1050mm sewer line between Mohawk Street and Forest Road File Location: N:\Y517\A\Final report\app 7 Part 1.doc

Earth Tech Canada Inc. Page 14 2.2.4. Area 4 Area 4 is located at the southeast side of City of Brantford s boundary. The potential connection for Area 4 development is the 1200mm sewer line on Delamere Street. Figure 4 presents the connection for Area 4. Figure 4: Sanitary Sewer System Servicing Area 4 The hydraulic model identified that 19 pipes with approximately 2.6km in length will be potentially surcharging. The majority of the potential surcharging sections occur in the 1200mm/1350mm western trunk sewer lines from River Road to Brantford Waste Water Treatment Plant. 2.2.5. Area 5 The potential sanitary sewer connection for this area is the existing 675mm sewer line on Shellard Lane. Figure 5 presents the connection for Area 5. File Location: N:\Y517\A\Final report\app 7 Part 1.doc

Earth Tech Canada Inc. Page 15 Figure 5: Sanitary Sewer System Servicing Area 5 With the total sewage flow applied to this connection, the hydraulic model identified 24 potential surcharging sewer lines. The surcharging sections are approximately 3.0 km in length and the majority of the potential surcharged sewer lines occur in the 1200mm/1350mm western trunk sewer lines from River Road to Brantford Waste Water Treatment Plant. 2.2.6. Area 6 Area 6 could be serviced from the existing 1050mm eastern trunk system as indicated in Figure 6. With the total sewage flow applied to this connection, 25 pipes with a total length of about 3.2 km were identified as being subject to potential surcharging. Similar to Areas 4 and 5, the majority of potential surcharging sewer lines occur in the 1200mm/1350mm western trunk sewer lines from River Road to Brantford Waste Water Treatment Plant. File Location: N:\Y517\A\Final report\app 7 Part 1.doc

Earth Tech Canada Inc. Page 16 Figure 6: Sanitary Sewer System Servicing Area 6 2.2.7. Area 7 Area 7 can be serviced from the existing 750mm eastern trunk system as indicated in Figure 7. With the total sewage flow applied to this connection, 41 pipes with a total length of about 4.9km were identified as being subject to potential surcharging. Similar to Areas 3, 4 and 5 the majority of the potential surcharging sewer lines occur in the 1200mm/1350mm western trunk sewer lines from River Road to Brantford Waste Water Treatment Plant. File Location: N:\Y517\A\Final report\app 7 Part 1.doc

Earth Tech Canada Inc. Page 17 Figure 7: Sanitary Sewer System Servicing Area 7 2.3. General Comments The main sanitary sewer system constraint in the western sanitary sewer trunk system is the 1200mm/1350mm sewer lines located between River Road and the Brantford Waste Water Treatment Plant. Improvement works to these sections of sewer line are common to Areas 4, 5, 6 and 7. One of the sanitary sewer constraints in the eastern sewer trunk system is the Empey Street Pumping Station. According to the information provided by the City, the existing Empey Street Pumping Station consists of 4 pumps (each with a rated capacity of 455 L/s). According to the City s operational policy, the Empey Street Pumping Station firm capacity consists of two pumps under normal operating condition with the remaining two pumps only being used as backup pumps. Thus, the total available pumping capacity is 910 L/s. The Empey Street Pumping Station may not have sufficient capacity to meet the design sewage flows. As well, some sections of the sewer lines downstream of the Empey Pumping Station are experiencing an extreme high velocity of 5m/s; which is higher than the maximum allowable velocity of 3.0 m/s as recommended in MOE Guidelines. In the lower part of the eastern trunk sewer File Location: N:\Y517\A\Final report\app 7 Part 1.doc

Earth Tech Canada Inc. Page 18 system, the slope of two 1050mm sewer lines changes from steep to flat. Figure 8 presents the cross section profile of these two pipes. Figure 8: Sewer lines Profile Forest Road & Mohawk Street Using the City s H2OMap Sewer Model, a potential surcharge was identified for an existing pipe downstream of the Empey Pumping Station which has a very flat slope (pipe ID EC328-EC276). However, the impact of this configuration on existing and future sewage flows cannot be properly evaluated due to the limitation of a steady-state hydraulic model. In order to more accurately determine the impact of increased sewage flows on the upstream sewer lines and the downstream sewer lines with that are experiencing high velocities, a fully dynamic modeling analysis is strongly recommended. The modeling analysis would identify appropriate operational arrangements and/or specific pipe capacity improvements. File Location: N:\Y517\A\Final report\app 7 Part 1.doc

Earth Tech Canada Inc. Page 19 2.4. Sanitary Servicing Constraint The sanitary servicing constraints for each of the seven growth areas are discussed in the following sections. The following factors were considered in the assessment process: 1. Constructability constraints including the need for land accusation and river crossings. 2. Existing infrastructure constraints including available pipe capacity and the need for additional pumping facilities. 3. Capital costs including the cost of new infrastructure to provide sanitary servicing. 4. Long term operational cost including pumping cost. 2.4.1. Area 1 Constraints Growth Area 1 is situated to the north of the existing city boundary. The system assessment shows that the servicing of Area 1 can be made through a combination of both the Eastern Sewer Trunk and the Western Sewer Trunk systems. The analysis has indicated that the servicing of Area 1 will result in a potential surcharging of the existing sewer system resulting in a need for system improvements (medium constraints). Operational constraints in the Empey Street Pumping Station need to be addressed to service Area 1 through the Eastern Sewer Trunk (medium constraints). New sanitary infrastructure mainly in the western part of Area 1 would also be required (medium constrain). Servicing Area 1 through the Western Sewer Trunk will require the construction of a sewage pumping station within Area 1 due to the topology of the area. This would necessitate the need for land accusation (medium constraint). There will also be a need for multi pumping of sewage to the City wastewater treatment facilities resulting in long term operational costs (medium constraint). 2.4.2. Area 2 Constraints Growth Area 2 is located to the north east of the existing city boundary. The system assessment shows that Area 2 can be serviced through the Eastern Sewer Trunk system. There would be some potential surcharging of the existing sewer system and thus the need for system improvements (medium constraints). Operational constraints in the Empey Street Pumping Station need to be addressed to be able service Area 2 through the Eastern Sewer Trunk (medium constraints). No river crossings are required and a limited amount of new sanitary infrastructure would be required (low constrain). Compared to the other service areas, the sanitary servicing of Area 2 would have limited pumping needs resulting in low long term operational costs (low constraint). File Location: N:\Y517\A\Final report\app 7 Part 1.doc

Earth Tech Canada Inc. Page 20 2.4.3. Area 3 Constraints Growth Area 3 is located to the south east of the existing city boundary. The system assessment shows that servicing of Area 3 can be made through the Eastern Sewer Trunk system. The analysis indicated that servicing this will result in very limited potential surcharging in the existing sewers (low constraint). No operational constraints in existing pumping stations need to be addressed (low constraints). A River crossing would be required (medium constraint) and land acquisition for new pumping facilities would be needed (high constraint). Furthermore, the subject growth area has limited existing sanitary infrastructure and therefore a significant capital expenditure would be needed to build a new sanitary sewer system to service the area (high constraint). The servicing of Area 3 across the river would require the construction of a new pumping station with an outfall connection to the City wastewater treatment facilities resulting in high long term operational costs (high constraint). 2.4.4. Area 4 Constraints Growth Area 4 is situated to the south of the existing city boundary. The system assessment shows that servicing of Area 4 can be made through the Western Sewer Trunk system. The analysis indicated that servicing of Area 4 will result in a potential surcharging of a few of the existing sewers (medium constraint). No operational constraints in existing pumping stations need to be addressed (low constraints). A River crossing and land acquisition for new pumping facilities would be required (high constrain). As well, a capital expenditure would be needed to build a new sanitary sewer system to service the area (high constraint). There would be limited pumping requirements resulting in long term operational costs (medium constraint). 2.4.5. Area 5 Constraints Growth Area 5 is located to the west of the existing city boundary. The system assessment shows that servicing of Area 5 can be made through the Western Sewer Trunk system. The analysis has indicated that servicing of Area 5 will result in the potential surcharging of a few existing sewers (medium constraint). No operational constraints in existing pumping stations need to be addressed (low constraints). A River crossing and land accusation for new pumping facilities will be needed (high constraints). Furthermore, capital expenditures will be needed to build a new sanitary sewer system to service the area (high constraint). There would be limited pumping requirements resulting in long term operational costs (medium constraint). File Location: N:\Y517\A\Final report\app 7 Part 1.doc

Earth Tech Canada Inc. Page 21 2.4.6. Area 6 Constraints Growth Area 6 is located to the north west of the existing city boundary. The system assessment shows that the servicing of Area 6 can be made through the Western Sewer Trunk system. The analysis has indicated that servicing of Area 6 will result in a potential surcharging of several existing sewers (high constraint). No operational constraints in the existing pumping stations need to be addressed (low constraints). A River crossing and land accusation for new pumping facilities will be needed (high constraints). Furthermore, capital expenditures will be needed to build a new sanitary sewer system to service the area (high constraint). The sanitary servicing of Area 6 across the river will require multiple pumping of sewage to the City s wastewater treatment facility resulting in long term operational costs (medium constraint). 2.4.7. Area 7 Constraints Growth Area 7 is situated to the north west of the existing city boundary.. The system assessment shows that the servicing of Area 7 can be made through the Western Sewer Trunk system. The analysis has indicated that servicing of Area 7 will result in the potential surcharging of several existing sewers (high constraint). No operational constraints in the existing pumping stations needs to be addressed (low constraints). A River crossing and land accusation for new pumping facilities will be needed (high constraint). Furthermore, capital expenditures will be needed to build a new sanitary sewer system to service the area (high constraint). The sanitary servicing of Area 7 across the river will require multiple pumping of sewage to the City s wastewater treatment facility resulting in long term operational costs (medium constraint). File Location: N:\Y517\A\Final report\app 7 Part 1.doc

Appendix 7 Part 2 Brantford Growth Management Strategy Water and Wastewater Servicing Upgrades and Costs for Growth Area 1

Earth Tech Canada Inc. Page 1 1. INTRODUCTION The purpose of the water and wastewater servicing assessment is to identify the capacity upgrades and costs required to accommodate Brantford s projected growth at three points in time. The following is a description of the three growth scenarios: Complete build-out within the existing City limits by year 2036 Growth Area 1 by year 2046 Growth Area 1 at build out beyond 2046. The population of the City of Brantford is projected to increase to 155,500 by year 2046. The population increase, hence water and wastewater servicing, is based on the Compact City Scenario B that uses the following population projections: Total population projection by year 2046: 155,500 persons Scenario B City build-out population by year 2036: 139,000 persons Additional population in Area 1 by year 2046: 16,500 persons Additional population to build-out of Area 1 beyond year 2046: 15,000 persons For the ICI land the servicing is evaluated based the following: Scenario B City build-out ICI land by year 2036: 582 ha Area 1 ICI land by year 2046: 371 ha In the Water Servicing system assessment the following demand rates are used: Existing residential water demand: 274 l/cap/day Future residential water demand: 450 l/cap/day ICI water demand rate: 22,500 l/ha/day Max. day factor: 1.72 Peak hour factor: 2.75 In the Wastewater Servicing system assessment the following demand rates are used: Existing residential sanitary flow rate: 302.8 l/cap/day (including ICI and I/I) Future residential sanitary flow rate: 450 l/cap/day Future ICI sanitary flow rate: 22,500 l/ha/day Future I/I rate: 13,306 l/ha/day Harmon peaking factor: 2 File Location: N:\y517\a\Appendix 7 Part2April 13.doc

Earth Tech Canada Inc. Page 2 2. WATER SYSTEM CAPACITY ASSESSMENT AND COSTS 2.1 Scenario 1 Servicing City Build-Out by year 2036 This scenario assesses the ability of the existing water supply system to service the City to the projected full build-out population of 139,000 by year 2036 as described in the following tables 1, 2 & 3. A) Water Storage Table 1 Scenario 1 System Storage Requirements Pressure District PD1 PD2/3 PD4 Res Population 2036 72,736 64,075 2,189 ICI Population 2036 979 9,759 18,368 Total Population 2036 73,715 73,834 20,557 Ave. Day Demand (L/s) 314.80 281.32 104.70 Max. Day Demand (L/s) 541.46 483.87 180.09 Water Storage Required as per MOE Fire Flow per area (L/s) 378.00 378.00 274.18 Duration (hr) 6 6 4.36 A - Fire Storage (m3) 8,165 8,165 4,304 B - Equalization Storage (m3) 11,696 10,452 3,890 C - Emergency Storage (m3) 4,965 4,654 2,048 Total Required Storage = A+B+C (m3) 24,825 23,270 10,242 Total Required Storage = A+B+C (ML) 24.83 23.27 10.24 Existing Storage (ML) 23.35 27.69 12 Storage Surplus (+) or Deficit (-) as per MOE Guidelines (ML) -1.48 4.42 1.76 The analysis indicates that to service the City at full build-out (2036) there will be an additional storage requirement of approximately 1.5 million litres. An elevated storage facility is planned for 2016 at a cost of $2.0 million in the south west portion of the City that will also serve the downtown. File Location: N:\y517\a\Appendix 7 Part2April 13.doc

Earth Tech Canada Inc. Page 3 B) Water Pumping Table 2 Scenario 1 System Pumping Capacity Requirements Pressure District Total PD1 (PD1 Local + Transfer to PD2/PD3 & PD4 PD2/3 PD4 Peak Hour Demand (L/s) 774 288 Max Day Demand (L/s) 484 180 Fire Flow (L/s) 378 274 Total Max Day + Fire Flow (L/s) 862 454 Required Pump Capacity (L/s) 1583 862 454 Required Pump Capacity (ML/D) 137 74 39 Existing Firm Pump Capacity (ML/D) 168 154 45 Additional Pumping Capacity (ML/D) 0 0 0 The analysis indicates that no additional pumping capacity is required to service the City full build-out population. C) Water Transmission The analysis indicates the need for water transmission upgrades to accommodate the projected growth in the amount of $7.9 million which represents the prorated growth component directly attributed to the full build out (2036). The following water transmission main upgrades (for full build out) are planned for this timeframe. The location of these upgrade projects can be reviewed on Drawing W-1(shown in red). Project No. Table 3 Scenario 1 Water Transmission Capacity Upgrade Requirements Year Description Cost ($) in Million 1 2026 From intersection of Pearl St. & Nelson St. to Wayne Greztky PS $2.1 2 2026 Along Elgin St. from Wayne Gretzky Res to Hachborn Rd. $1.2 3 2026 Along Grandriver Ave. between Morrell St. & Waterloo St. $0.9 4 2016 From intersection of Brant Ave. & Parkside Rd. to Tollgate PS $1.9 5 2016 From Tollgate Res to King George ET $1.0 6 2016 Along Shellard Lane between Killarney St. & Hillcrest Ave. $0.8 Total $7.9 File Location: N:\y517\a\Appendix 7 Part2April 13.doc

Earth Tech Canada Inc. Page 4 E) Water Treatment Additional water treatment plant capacity will be required to service the anticipated build-out residential population and ICI water demands in 2036. Based on a construction unit cost of $1.00 per litre and a maximum day per capita equivalent flow of 860 litres, the prorated cost to provide additional water treatment capacity is $19.6 million. This represents only the prorated growth component of a $50 million Water Treatment Plant expansion planned for 2026. Summary of Scenario 1 (2036) Water Servicing Costs Additional Storage: $2.0 million Additional Pumping: $0.0 million Water Transmission Upgrades: $7.9 million Water Treatment Upgrades: $19.6 million Total Build Out (2036) Water Servicing Cost $29.5 million 2.2 Scenario 2 Servicing the Preferred Growth Area (Area 1) by year 2046 This scenario only considers capacity upgrades and costs for water servicing beyond year 2036 and up to 2046 as described in tables 4, 5 and 6. A) Water Storage Table 4 Scenario 2 System Storage Capacity Requirements Pressure District PD1 PD2/3 PD4 Water Storage Required as per MOE Fire Flow per area (L/s) 378 378 378 Duration (hr) 6 6 6 A - Fire Storage (m3) 8,165 8,165 8,165 B - Equalization Storage (m3) 11,696 12,566 8,383 C - Emergency Storage (m3) 4,965 5,183 4,137 Total Required Storage = A+B+C (m3) 24,825 25,914 20,685 Total Required Storage = A+B+C (ML) 24.83 25.91 20.69 Existing Storage (ML) 23.35 27.69 12 Storage Surplus (+) or Deficit (-) as per MOE Guidelines (ML) -1.48 1.78-8.69 File Location: N:\y517\a\Appendix 7 Part2April 13.doc

Earth Tech Canada Inc. Page 5 The analysis indicates that to service Area 1 by year 2046 an additional storage (over and above the 1.5 million litres required in pressure district 1) of approximately 8.7 million litres is required in pressure district 4 at a cost of $4.8 million. This represents only the prorated growth component of a 6.6 million litres above ground storage facility expansion and a new 3 million litres elevated storage tank planned for 2026 at a cost of $6.0 million. The additional capacity provided is for growth beyond 2046 and is for the full build-out of Area 1. B) Water Pumping Table 5 Scenario 2 System Pumping Capacity Requirements Pressure Zone Total PD1 + AREA1 (PD1 Local + Transfer to PD2/PD3, PD4 & AREA 1) PD2/3 + AREA 1 PD4 + AREA 1 Peak Hour Demand (L/s) 930 621 Max Day Demand (L/s) 582 388 Fire Flow (L/s) 378 378 Total Max Day + Fire Flow (L/s) 960 766 Required Pump Capacity (L/s) 1889 960 766 Required Pump Capacity (ML/D) 163 83 66 Existing Firm Pump Capacity (ML/D) 168 154 45 Additional Pumping Capacity (ML/D) 0 0 21 The analysis indicates that to service Growth Area 1 by year 2046 an additional pumping capacity is required at a cost of $0.1 million for the supply and installation of the pumps. This represents only the prorated growth component of pumping upgrades at the pressure district 4 above ground storage facility planned for construction in 2026 at a cost of $1.0M. C) Water Transmission The analysis indicates the need for water transmission upgrades to accommodate the projected growth in the amount of $3.8 million which represents the prorated growth component directly attributed to the servicing of that portion of Area 1 that services the 2046 growth projection. The following water transmission main upgrades are planned for this timeframe. The location of these upgrade projects can be reviewed on Drawing W-1(shown in green). File Location: N:\y517\a\Appendix 7 Part2April 13.doc

Earth Tech Canada Inc. Page 6 Table 6 Scenario 2 Water Transmission Capacity Upgrade Requirements Project No. Year Description Cost ($) in Million 7 2016 Within PD4 Boundary, North West of Hwy 403 $3.8 D) Water Treatment Additional water treatment plant capacity will be required to service that portion of Area 1 that services the 2046 growth projection. Based on a construction unit cost of $1.00 per litre and a maximum day per capita equivalent flow of 860 litres, the prorated cost to provide additional water treatment capacity is approximately $14.2 million. This represents only the prorated growth component of a $50 million Water Treatment Plant expansion planned for 2026. Summary of Water Costs for Scenario 2 Servicing Area 1 by year 2046 Additional Storage: $4.8 million Additional Pumping: $0.1 million Water Transmission Upgrades: $3.8 million Water Treatment Upgrades: $14.2 million Total Area 1 Water Servicing Costs $22.9 million 2.3 Scenario 3 Servicing the preferred Growth Area (Area 1) to Build-Out This scenario only considers capacity upgrades and costs for water servicing from 2046 to build-out in Area 1 as described in tables 7, 8 and 9. A) Water Storage The analysis indicates that to service the remainder of Area 1 (from 2046 to build-out) an additional storage (over and above the additional storage required for scenarios 1 and 2 ) of approximately 2.0 million litres is required at both PD2/PD3 and PD4 storage facilities at a cost of $1.2 million. This represents only the prorated growth component of a 6.6 million litres above File Location: N:\y517\a\Appendix 7 Part2April 13.doc

Earth Tech Canada Inc. Page 7 ground storage facility expansion and a new 3 million litres elevated storage tank planned for 2026 at a cost of $6.0 million. Table 7 Scenario 3 System Storage Capacity Requirements Pressure District PD1 PD2/3 PD4 Water Storage Required as per MOE Fire Flow per area (L/s) 378.00 378.00 378 Duration (hr) 6 6 6 A - Fire Storage (m3) 8,165 8,165 8,165 B - Equalization Storage (m3) 11,696 14,688 9,164 C - Emergency Storage (m3) 4,965 5,713 4,332 Total Required Storage = A+B+C (m3) 24,825 28,566 21,661 Total Required Storage = A+B+C (ML) 24.83 28.57 21.66 Existing Storage (ML) 23.35 27.69 12 Storage Surplus (+) or Deficit (-) as per MOE Guidelines (ML) -1.48-0.88-9.66 B) Water Pumping Table 8 Scenario 3 System Pumping Capacity Requirements Pressure District Total PD1 + AREA1 (PD1 Local + Transfer to PD2/PD3, PD4 & AREA 1) PD2/3 + AREA 1 PD4 + AREA 1 Peak Hour Demand (L/s) 1087 678 Max Day Demand (L/s) 680 424 Fire Flow (L/s) 378 378 Total Max Day + Fire Flow (L/s) 1058 802 Required Pump Capacity (L/s) 2024 1087 802 Required Pump Capacity (ML/D) 175 94 69 Existing Firm Pump Capacity (ML/D) 168 154 45 Additional Pumping Capacity (ML/D) 7 0 24 The analysis indicates that to service the remainder of Growth Area 1 (2046 to build-out) an additional pumping capacity of 7 ML/D at PD1 Pumping Station and 3 million litres /day at PD4 Pumping Station is required at a cost of $0.9 million in pump supply and installation cost. This represents only the prorated File Location: N:\y517\a\Appendix 7 Part2April 13.doc

Earth Tech Canada Inc. Page 8 growth component of pumping upgrades at the pressure district 4 above ground storage facility planned for construction in 2026 at a cost of $1.0M. Note: The additional 7 ML/D pumping capacity will be accomodated in the WTP upgrade improvements planned for 2007/8. C) Water Transmission The analysis indicates the need for water transmission upgrades to accommodate the projected growth in the amount of $1.4 million which represents the prorated growth component directly attributed to the full build out of Area 1 (beyond 2046). The following water transmission main upgrades (for full build out) are planned for this timeframe. The location of these upgrade projects can be reviewed on Drawing W-1 (shown in yellow). Table 9 Scenario 3 Water Transmission Capacity Upgrade Requirements Project No. Year Description Cost ($) in Million 8 2046 From Tollgate Res to Powerline Rd. 9 2046 Along Wayne Gretzky Parkway between Edmondson St. to north of Brier Park Rd. $1.4 D) Water Treatment Additional water treatment plant capacity will be required to service Area 1 at build-out. Based on a construction unit cost of $1.00 per litre and a maximum day per capita equivalent flow of 860 litres, the prorated cost to provide additional water treatment capacity is approximately $12.9 million. This represents only the prorated growth component of a $50 million Water Treatment Plant expansion planned for 2026. Summary of Water Costs for Scenario 3 Servicing Remainder of Area 1 (2046 to build-out) Additional Storage: $1.2 million Additional Pumping: $0.9 million Water Transmission Upgrades: $1.4 million Water Treatment Upgrades: $12.9 million Total Area 1 Water Servicing Costs $16.4 million File Location: N:\y517\a\Appendix 7 Part2April 13.doc

Earth Tech Canada Inc. Page 9 3. WASTEWATER SYSTEM CAPACITY ASSESSMENT AND COST The assessment included the available wastewater conveyance capacity, pumping capacity and wastewater treatment capacity. Sewer line Q flow /Q capacity is used as the criteria to identify the need for sewer upgrades. In the assessment Q flow /Q capacity = 0.8 indicates that the sewer has only 20% of its capacity available for the future flow, thus increasing the risk of surcharge. Therefore, any sewer with Q flow /Q capacity 0.8 is flagged as a capacity constraint and must be upgraded. 3.1 Scenario 1 Servicing City Build-Out by year 2036 The scenario assess the capability of the existing sanitary sewer system to service the City full build-out population of 139,000 by year 2036 A) Trunk Sewers Table 10 provide details of sewer upgrade projects required to accommodate the City build-out by 2036. The estimated total cost of these projects is $9.7 million of which the prorated growth component directly attributed to the City full build out (2036). The location of these upgrade projects can be reviewed on Drawing WW-1 (shown in red). Table 10 Scenario 1 Wastewater Trunk Sewer Upgrade Requirement Proj ID Year of Construction 1 2016 Project List West Brantford Trunk from Erie Ave. to Greenwich St. PS and Mohawk St. Trunk from PS to Cayuga St. Total Cost (million) $3.0 2 2016 Oak Hill Drive Bottleneck Twinning $1.2 7 2006 South of Hardy Rd. Collector Sewer $2.0 8 2016 North of Hardy Rd. Collector Sewer $3.5 Total $9.7 B) Pumping Servicing the west part of the full build out of Area 1 will be through the new pumping station at Hardy Road. Additional pumping capacity of 120 l/s will be required at the Hardy Road pumping station at an estimated cost of $0.7 million. This represents the only the growth component of a planned $ 3.2 million pumping station expansion planned for 2006 File Location: N:\y517\a\Appendix 7 Part2April 13.doc

Earth Tech Canada Inc. Page 10 D) Wastewater Treatment Additional wastewater treatment plant capacity is required to service the projected population of 139,000 persons at City build-out (2036). Based on a construction unit cost of $1.50 per litre and an average annual daily per capita flow equivalent of 590 litres, the prorated cost to provide additional wastewater treatment capacity (over and above the existing plant s 25 million liters/day remaining capacity) is approximately $3.2 million. This represents only the prorated growth component of a $50 million wastewater treatment plant expansion planned for 2026 Summary of Wastewater Costs for Scenario 1 (build-out 2036) Trunk Sewer Upgrades: $9.7 million Pumping Station Upgrades: $0.7 million Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion: $3.2 million Total Wastewater Servicing Costs for Scenario 1 $13.6 million 3.2 Scenario 2 Servicing the Preferred Growth Area (Area 1) by year 2046 This scenario assesses the ability of the existing wastewater system to service Area 1 by year 2046. Consideration is given only to the additional upgrades and costs beyond year 2036 described as follows: A) Trunk Sewers The analysis indicates the prorated growth component directly attributed to servicing Area 1 (2046) will be $4.4 million. The following trunk sewer upgrade is planned for this timeframe. The location of the upgrade project can be reviewed on Drawing WW-1 (shown in green). Table 11 Scenario 2 Wastewater Trunk Sewer Upgrade Requirement Proj ID Year of Construction 3 2026 Project List South West Trunk Twinning (Winter Way to Birkett Lane) Total Cost (million) $4.4 B) Pumping A pumping capacity constraint was identified at the Empey Street pumping station. An assessment indicates that the total flow to the pumping station by year 2046 is estimated to be approximately 900 l/s. which matches the existing total pumping capacity. The total estimated cost to upgrade the pumping File Location: N:\y517\a\Appendix 7 Part2April 13.doc

Earth Tech Canada Inc. Page 11 station to accommodate the full build out of Area 1 is $6.0 million of which the growth component to service Area 1 (2046) is $3.0 million. Servicing the west part of Area 1 will be through the new pumping station at Hardy Road. An additional pumping capacity of 448 l/s will be required at the Hardy Road pumping station at an estimated cost of $2.5 million. This represents the only the growth component of a planned $ 3.2 million pumping station expansion planned for 2006. C) Wastewater Treatment Additional wastewater treatment plant capacity is required to service Area 1(2036). Based on a construction unit cost of $1.50 per litre and an average annual daily per capita flow equivalent of 590 litres, the prorated cost to provide additional wastewater treatment capacity is approximately $11.2 million. This represents only the prorated growth component of a $50 million wastewater treatment plant expansion planned for 2026. Total Wastewater Costs for Scenario 2 Servicing Area 1 by year 2046 Trunk Sewer Upgrades: $4.4 million Pumping Station Upgrades: $5.5 million Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion: $11.2million Total Wastewater Servicing Costs for Scenario 2 $21.1 million 3.3 Scenario 3 Servicing the Preferred Growth Area (Area 1) to Build-Out This scenario assesses the ability of the existing wastewater system to service the remaining portion of Area 1 (2046 to build-out). Consideration is given only to the additional upgrades and costs described as follows: A) Trunk Sewers The analysis indicates the prorated growth component directly attributed to servicing Area 1 beyond 2046 will be $4.0 million. The following trunk sewer upgrades are planned for this timeframe. The location of the upgrade project can be reviewed on Drawing WW-1.(shown in yellow) File Location: N:\y517\a\Appendix 7 Part2April 13.doc

Earth Tech Canada Inc. Page 12 Table 12 Scenario 3 Wastewater Trunk Sewer Upgrade Requirement Proj ID Year of Construction 4 Beyond 2046 5 Beyond 2046 6 Beyond 2046 Project List Eastern Circumferential Trunk Twinning (Along Mohawk St. from Greenwich St. to WPCP) Eastern Circumferential Trunk Twinning (Along Empey St. from Henry St. to Empey PS) South West Trunk Twinning (Kinnard Rd. to Oak Hill Dr.) Total Cost (million) $1.0 $1.0 $2.0 Total $4.0 B) Pumping A pumping capacity constraint was identified at the Empey Street pumping station. Our assessment indicates that the total flow to the pumping station by build out of Area 1 is estimated to be approximately 1100 l/s. The pumping station currently has a total pumping capacity of approximately 900 l/s therefore additional pumping will be required. The total estimated cost to upgrade the pumping station to accommodate the full build out of Area 1 is $6.0 million of which $3.0 million would be the growth component required to service the balance of lands within Area 1 beyond 2046. C) Wastewater Treatment Additional wastewater treatment plant capacity will be required to service Area 1at build-out. Based on a construction unit cost of $1.50 per litre and an average annual daily per capita flow equivalent of 590 litres, the prorated cost to provide additional wastewater treatment capacity is approximately $9.8 million. Total Wastewater Costs for Scenario 3 Servicing Area 1 at Build-Out Trunk Sewer Upgrades: $4.0 million Pumping Station Upgrades $3.0 million Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion $9.8 million Total Area 1 (build-out) Wastewater Servicing Costs $16.8 million File Location: N:\y517\a\Appendix 7 Part2April 13.doc

Earth Tech Canada Inc. Page 13 Total Cost $million Summary of Water and Wastewater Servicing Costs Anticipated Year of Construction Project Funding from Development Charges ($million) To City Area 1 Build- Area 1 Beyond Beyond Area 1 Build- Out(2036) (2046) 2046 Out Capital Project Description Water Storage Elevated Storage Tank in PD1 2.0 2016 2.0 0.0 In Ground Storage in PD4 3.0 2026 2.4 0.6 0.0 Elevated Storage in PD4 3.0 2026 2.4 0.6 0.0 Total Storage 8.0 2.0 4.8 1.2 0.0 Pumping New Pumps in PD4 Above Ground Storage Facility 1.0 2026 0.1 0.9 0.0 Total Pumping 1.0 0.0 0.1 0.9 0.0 Transmission Project 1 2.1 2036 2.1 0.0 Project 2 1.2 2036 1.2 0.0 Project 3 0.9 2026 0.9 0.0 Project 4 1.9 2016 1.9 0.0 Project 5 1.0 2026 1.0 0.0 Project 6 0.8 2016 0.8 0.0 Project 7 3.8 2016 3.8 0.0 Project 8 1.1 2046 1.1 0.0 Project 9 0.3 2046 0.3 0.0 Total Transmission 13.1 7.9 3.8 1.4 0.0 Treatment Major WTP Expansion 50.0 2026 19.6 14.2 12.9 3.3 Total Treatment 50.0 19.6 14.2 12.9 3.3 Total Water 72.1 29.5 22.9 16.4 3.3 Wastewater Trunk Sewers Project 1 3.0 Project 2 1.2 Project 3 4.4 Project 4 1.0 Project 5 1.0 Project 6 2.0 Project 7 2.0 2016 2016 2026 Beyond 2046 Beyond 2046 Beyond 2046 2006 3.0 0.0 1.2 0.0 4.4 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Project 8 3.5 2016 3.5 0.0 Total Trunk Sewers $18.1 $9.7 $4.4 $4.0 $0.0 Pumping Empey PS Upgrade 6.0 2046 3.0 3.0 0.0 Hardy Road PS Upgrade 3.2 2006 0.7 2.5 0.0 0.0 Total Pumping 9.2 0.7 5.5 3.0 0.0 Treatment Major WWTP Expansion 50.0 2026 3.2 11.2 9.8 25.8 Total Treatment 50.0 3.2 11.2 9.8 25.8 Total Wastewater 77.3 13.6 21.1 16.8 25.8 Total W&WW 149.4 43.1 44.0 33.2 29.1 Gross Area Serviced (Hectares) 1043 1083 500 Cost per Hectare* 0.413 0.409 0.458 * accumulated average cost File Location: N:\y517\a\Appendix 7 Part2April 13.doc

Appendix 8 Transportation Assessment

Transportation Assessment Brantford Strategic Growth Study 1) Introduction Through the population forecasting and land use assessment, forecasts for the City of Brantford have identified the need to secure sufficient lands to accommodate future population and employment growth. Based on current land consumption trends, reflected in the City s Official Plan, approximately 630 ha of land is required to accommodate approximately 31,600 new residents. Through implementation of the Province s new Places to Grow density targets, this land requirement is reduced to approximately 308 ha, representing 15,400 new residents. Based on the future employment forecasts, and the availability of industrial lands with the City, it is estimated that 8,100 new employee will need to accommodated in lands outside of the current City boundaries. Within this context, the transportation assessment focuses on two key aspects of the transportation-land use equation: Marketability is an important criterion, particularly in terms of commercial and industrial land. The old adage Location, location, location still plays a key role in the business decisions of companies when considering relocation or establishing a new operation. In addition to such factors as a skilled workforce, and available serviced lands; access to key transportation and trade corridors is seen as a key factor influencing where companies choose to locate their facilities. With Brantford s proximity to the Highway 403 corridor, offering excellent and reliable access to both the Windsor and Niagara gateways, the marketability of industrial land in the Brantford area is largely centred on accessibility to Highway 403 for transportation and logistics dependant industries. Considering the marketability of lands is also an important consideration in terms of achievement of planning objectives. While it may make some sense to plan for industrial lands in certain areas of a City to minimize servicing costs or transportation impacts, the marketability of the site will determine if those lands actually develop into industrial operations. Poorly located industrial lands will often be identified by developers for rezoning due to lack of market demand. Impact on Existing Transportation Infrastructure is also an important criterion which looks at the relative impact a certain land use may have on the operation and capacity of an existing transportation facility or service. In examining alternative locations for new growth, the current and projected transportation demands on existing roads, the availability or practicality of servicing the area by transit, and the presence of constraints that would limit new transportation infrastructure opportunities are all key indicators of how an area will impact the transportation system.

2) Transportation Assessment of Growth Areas 2.1 Area 1 North Located to the north of the current City boundary, is served by three key north south arterial road connections; Paris Road/Brant Street, King George Road (Highway 24), and Wayne Gretzky Parkway (WGP). Each of these routes provides direct access to Highway 403 and all three feature interchanges allowing for full movements. A fourth link to the Highway 403 corridor is provided via Oak Park Road, at the west end of the study area, allowing for development of a separate industrial road access to the west end of Brantford. This area has the overall best location of the seven alternative growth areas from an industrial location / marketability perspective. The western most section of Area 1 is directly adjacent to the current North-West Brantford Industrial Park, which is currently developing with new industrial employers. The City is currently looking at options to provide transit service to this area, and land use alternatives which increase the number of employees within a distinct node are much more economically feasible to service with conventional transit. In the East-West direction, Powerline Road and County Road 5, both are relatively free flowing and have reserve capacity to accommodate east-west travel between residential and employment areas. In the North-South direction, Paris Road and Oak Park Road have reserved capacity today to accommodate new growth. King George Road is currently operating near capacity in some segments, due to the need for a centre left turn lane. The current localized congestion on King George Road is forecast to worsen by 2031 based on the Status Quo growth scenario and the addition of a large residential area to north of the current city boundary will likely requiring additional widening of this facility. Wayne Gretzky Parkway, to the north of Lynden Road, is currently forecast to operate satisfactorily under the Status Quo growth scenario for 2031. Additional population growth on the lands to the north of Powerline Road will increase north-south travel demands in this corridor, and may accentuate the need for widening of WGP to six lanes across Highway 403. Urban expansion to the north along the WGP corridor would facilitate the eventual extension of WGP to connect to a future Highway 424 linking Brantford to the Region of Waterloo area. 2.2 Area 2 East Located to the east of the current City boundary, Area 2 is bisected by Highway 403, which offers significant frontage for industrial land uses. Access to Highway 403 is via the new Garden Avenue interchange which currently has significant reserve capacity to accommodate additional growth. The access is essentially limited to one interchange location, however, which may strain the capacity of Garden Ave to service the industrial and residential highway access needs of this entire area over the longer term. As the lands to the east are constrained due to river and adjacent flood plain areas, opportunities to develop additional interchanges to service industrial expansion may be somewhat limited. To the north of Highway 403, the lands within Area 2 will use Lyndon Road and Powerline Road for east-west travel to the WGP corridor. The location of the river and flood plain lands in this sector would tend to focus the development opportunities around

the Lyndon Road corridor, which may result in significant growth on this key corridor. Current Status Quo forecasts show Lyndon Road operating near capacity on both sides of the WGP, but with reserve capacity east and west of this localized congestion. Given the existing commercial focus around this intersection, urban expansion in Area 2 (north) would likely require significant upgrades / widening through this intersection. There is one transit route providing half hour service along the Garden Avenue corridor today, as much of this area is lightly developed. Growth in this area would be difficult to service with conventional, fixed route transit services unless there is a significant density of residential and employment land uses to generate enough ridership to introduce additional routes. To the south of Highway 403 east west access between Area 2 and the downtown Brantford area is primarily served by two road connections; Henry Street and the Colborne Street corridor. Elgin Street does not currently extend to the east of Garden Avenue, limiting it s role in providing east-west capacity to service this growth area. Current forecast of future travel demands under the Status Quo land sue scenario indicate that Colbourne Street will be operating near capacity, from Garden Avenue through to the downtown area. Henry Street is forecast to operate at acceptable levels, except for localized congestion at the Henry Street / WGP commercial development node. 2.3 Area 3 South East The South East growth area is located to the south of Colborne Street and is located along the County Road 18 corridor. The land area is bisected by the Grand River, with the eastern most portion of the area located within the Oxbow Tract. Access to and from this area would need to be provided separate from the remaining lands in the south east growth area, unless a new crossing of the Grand River is built. The only opportunity to introduce access to the area within the Oxbow tract is via Oxbow Road, off Erie Street. Without a second access road to this area, growth potential for the area could be limited by capacity of the existing Oxbow Road. Emergency access would be forced to use this single route, which could prove problematic if the road is closed or blocked by an accident. With the land area bisected by the river, opportunities to integrate the land uses in this expansion area (i.e. employment areas near residential areas) are limited. The remaining lands on the east side of the Grand River have similar transportation challenges, and would prove difficult to integrate into the City s overall road network. The primary access to these lands is via County Road 18, which is currently operating at free flow conditions. If this land area was developed to accommodate the population and employment levels necessary to accommodate project City growth, it is anticipated that additional access routes would be required to provide effective and reliable service to this area. Colborne Street east is already projected to be operating at or near capacity by 2031, based on current land use and population projections. Erie Avenue is anticipated to have some localized congestion, but generally is expected to have some reserve capacity to accommodate future growth.

From an industrial marketing perspective, the eastern most lands within this growth area dose have access to two major transportation corridors. Access to Highway 403 would be gained via Garden Avenue, which may require widening to preserve an acceptable operation in the future. Truck access could also be gained to and from the east via County Road 2/53. County Road 54 provides a secondary access to the Caledonia Area and the Hamilton International airport area. Industrial access to the West is not as good as the northern growth areas, and all truck traffic would need to use Garden Avenue to access Highway 403. There is no current transit service in this part of the City, with the exception of route 9 along Colborne Street. Route 1, via Erie Avenue currently does not extend far enough south to service this growth area and the route is currently structured to provide local service. Growth in this area would be difficult to service with conventional, fixed route transit services due to the long distances required to access the developable lands. 2.4 Area 4 - South - The South growth area is essentially an extension of the current West Brant community, located south and west of the Grand River. From an industrial marketability perspective, this area does not have acceptable access to the Highway 403 corridor to be attractive for industrial development. Access to the east, for trucks, would need to be gained via County Road 18, currently under the jurisdiction of Brant County. Access to the West would be difficult for trucks, and would likely result in truck traffic infiltrating through the downtown area. From an industrial land perspective, it is unlikely that Area 4 would be attractive enough to encourage new development. The growth potential of Area 4 is also constrained by the Grand River. The existing Erie Avenue (County Road 4) crossing has reserve capacity to accommodate some growth in the future, but would likely need to be widened if 15-31,000 new residents were to locate south of the river. Alternative access to this area can be gained via Mount Pleasant Road to the BSAR, although future forecasts suggest that the BSAR crossing of the Grand River may be approaching capacity under current land use conditions. The Colborne Street crossing is also anticipated to be at or over capacity by the 2031 horizon as well. This area is also difficult to service with conventional, fixed route transit services. Existing transit services do not extend this far south, and are currently structured to provide service to local areas. The long distance between the existing routes and the proposed growth area, combined with the barrier effect of the Grand River, would likely require the introduction of a new separate transit route to service this area. The routing to this area would involve long sections with very little development to generate ridership. It is likely that this area could only be serviced with dial a bus service. 2.5 Area 5 & 6 South West These two growth areas are similar in terms of their serviceability from a transportation perspective. The marketability of these lands from an industrial development perspective is not nearly as good as the northern growth areas, since there is no direct access to the Highway 403 corridor. Access to the west for truck traffic would be via County Road 53, while truck access to the east would need to route through the downtown, a fact that could limit the development potential of these lands.

The location of the industrial growth area would, however, provide good opportunity for shorter trip lengths and more live-work opportunities, due to the close proximity of the existing West Brant residential area. Industrial growth in Area 4 could provide opportunities for integration with the existing Brantford Municipal Airport, a potential key to the redevelopment and enhancement of this facility. County Road 53, Shellard Lane and Mount Pleasant Road all provide access to Area 4 to some degree, although the only practical access route to Area 6 is via Colborne Street West, unless a new crossing of the Grand River is constructed. An extension of the BSAR across the Grand River to Oak Park Road was recommended as a longer term project in the 1997 Transportation Master Plan. This route would likely border the east edge of Area 6. Access to Area 4 would be provided by County Road 53 (Colborne Street West), and Shellard Lane bisects the remaining land area. Integration with the remaining road network in the City from these two growth areas is highly dependant on the existing crossings of the Grand River. Current forecasts based on the Status Quo growth scenario indicate that the BSAR crossing of the Grand River may be approaching capacity under current land use conditions. The Colborne Street crossing is also anticipated to be at or over capacity by the 2031 horizon as well. Additional residential growth in Area 4 or 6 would almost certainly require the new Oak Park Road extension across the Grand River to ensure adequate access to the existing built up areas of the City. There are two transit routes that currently provide service to this area of Brantford. Transit service to either of these growth areas would be relatively easy to implement, although additional buses may be required to maintain the current half hour service. An additional crossing of the Grand River via Oak Park Road would provide new opportunities to provide transit service to the growing Northwest Industrial Park. 2.6 Area 7 West With it s close proximity to the Highway 403 corridor, Area 7 is also well poised to attract industrial development, with primary highway access via the Highway 24 interchange. The Grand River, running along the east side of this growth area, would limit accessibility between this area and the existing Northwest Industrial Park unless a new crossing of the Grand River is constructed. The only means of access between these two areas would be via Highway 403 itself. Access to the existing road network in the City would be problematic for this growth area due to the barrier effect created by the river. A new arterial road connection to the south would likely be required to connect with Colborne Street west, likely to the west of the existing airport lands. Similar to Area 6, access to the downtown would put additional pressure on the existing Colborne Street and BSAR crossings of the river, both of which are forecast to be operating at or near capacity by 2031 under current land use forecasts. There is no current transit service in this part of the City, with the exception of dial a bus service to the Northwest Industrial Park area. Growth in this area would be difficult

to service with conventional, fixed route transit services due to the long distances required to access the developable lands. Summary Evaluation & Ranking of Growth Areas Growth Area Access & Marketability for Industrial Lands New Transportation Infrastructure Requirements Integration With Existing Road Network Ability to Service with Transit Area 1-North Excellent 1 Moderate 1 Excellent 1 Very Good 1 Area 2- East Very Good 2 Moderate 2 Good 2 Good 2 Area 3-South East Acceptable 4 Extensive 6 Poor 6 Poor 6 Area 4 South Poor 7 Significant 3 Poor 5 Poor 5 Area 5 South West Poor 6 Extensive 5 Acceptable 4 Acceptable 3 Area 6 West Poor 5 Extensive 7 Good 3 Acceptable 3 Area 7 - West Very Good 3 Significant 4 Poor 7 Poor 7

Appendix 9 Residential Monitoring Map City of Brantford

Appendix 10 Vacant Industrial Land Map City of Brantford

Powerline Rd. Powerline Rd. 3 1 2 Highway 403 Vacant Industrial Land 4 5 6 8 7 12 Oak Park Rd. 9 10 13 11 14 Hardy Rd. Hardy Rd. Paris Rd. Tollgate Rd. St. Paul Ave. Brant Ave. King George Rd. Highway 403 Charing Cross St. Fairview Dr. West St. Clarence St. Dalhousie St. 15 Henry St. West St. 16 18 Park Rd. North 17 Wayne Gretzky Pky. Wayne Gretzky Pky. 19 23 20 Lynden Rd. 22 24 33 Highway 403 21 Henry St. 34 25 35 29 30 26 36 32 41 31 37 38 39 40 Garden Ave. 27 28 Site No. Acres* Owner Servicing Northwest Industrial Area 1 93.8 Private General Capability 2 207.0 Private General Capability 3 30.0 Private General Capability 4 18.6 City Serviced 5 11.4 Private Serviced 6 5.3 City Serviced 7 12.3 Private Serviced 8 16.2 Private Serviced 9 7.0 City General Capability 10 5.7 City Serviced 11 2.0 Private Serviced 12 31.5 Private General Capability 13 75.0 Private General Capability 14 50.0 Private General Capability Total 565.8 Braneida Industrial Area - South of 403 15 21.0 Private Serviced 16 4.0 Private Serviced 17 6.5 Private Serviced 18 9.8 Private Serviced 19 43.0 Private Serviced 20 12.1 Private Serviced 21 2.0 Private Serviced 22 10.0 Private Serviced 23 28.0 Private Serviced 24 12.0 Private Serviced 25 4.0 Private Serviced 26 7.1 Private Serviced 27 15.1 Private General Capability 28 15.1 Private Serviced 29 3.4 City General Capability 30 29.5 City General Capability 31 17.2 City General Capability 32 27.9 City General Capability Total 242.7 Braneida Industrial Area - North of 403 33 3.6 Private Serviced 34 5.5 Private Serviced 35 6.6 Private Serviced 36 22.0 Private General Capability 37 5.8 Private General Capability 38 1.2 Private General Capability 39 3.7 Private General Capability 40 1.2 City Serviced 41 9.1 Private Serviced Total 58.7 Colborne St. West Colborne St. West Icomm Dr. Colborne St. Colborne St. East City-Owned 30.8 Serviced 85.0 General Capability 115.8 Total Brantford Southern Access Road Mount Pleasant St. Erie Ave. LEGEND Ownership Privately Owned 241.2 Serviced 535.1 General Capability 776.3 Total Total Vacant Industrial Land 272.0 Serviced 620.1 General Capability 892.1 Total * All areas are net City owned Privately owned Servicing Serviced General Capability Conditionally Sold 0 250 500 1,000 Prepared by the City of Brantford Planning Department Metres Amended May, 2005