HomeMy WebLinkAboutDTS-10-131 - Regional Official Plan Update
REPORT
REPORT TO:
Development & Technical Services Committee
DATE OF MEETING:
June 21, 2010
SUBMITTED BY:
Alain Pinard, Interim Director of Planning
PREPARED BY:
Alain Pinard, Interim Director of Planning (519-741-2319)
WARD(S) INVOLVED:
All
DATE OF REPORT: June 17, 2010
REPORT NO.:
DTS-10-131
SUBJECT:
REGIONAL OFFICIAL PLAN UPDATE
RECOMMENDATION:
For information
BACKGROUND:
The Region of Waterloo is updating its Official Plan. The City of Kitchener has participated in
the review process through informal staff comments and more formally by way of Council
resolutions following the consideration of staff reports. The most recent Kitchener Council
resolution on this matter was passed on June 15, 2009 as follows:
“That the Regional Municipality of Waterloo be requested to address the comments
and concerns regarding the second draft of the Regional Official Plan 2029, as
outlined in Development and Technical Services Report DTS 09-086;
and further;
That the Regional Municipality of Waterloo be advised that the City of Kitchener
does not support the permanency of the “Protected Countryside” designation for the
following reasons:
technical reports in support of the groundwater recharge mapping have not
been made available to the public for review; and
a permanent designation precludes the possibility of alternate technologies to
achieve groundwater recharge, or alternate sources for drinking water. "
On June 16, 2009 Regional Council adopted the most recent public version of the Regional
Official Plan (ROP). This version incorporated many of Kitchener’s comments. In adopting the
new ROP, Regional Council decided to defer approval of the Protected Countryside, described
in Policy 6.B and shown on Map 7, in order to provide additional information and consultation
with the community. Regional Council also decided to defer consideration of the Regional
Recharge Area and Protected Countryside designations in Southwest Kitchener pending
Regional Council’s review of the Regional Transportation Master Plan and the Grand River
Conservation Authority’s Tier 2 Integrated Water Budget and Stress Assessment process.
The adopted ROP was forwarded to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing for approval
on June 29, 2009. On May 13, 2010 the Province informed the Region that it is now in a
position to approve the ROP subject to several modifications. The Province is seeking the
concurrence of Regional Council on the modifications in advance of the approval decision. The
Region’s Planning and Works Committee will be considering the modifications on June 22, 2010
as part of Report P-10-056. Report P-10-056 is recommending acceptance/approval of most of
the modifications proposed by the Province. Report P-10-056 also recommends approval of the
mapping and policies related to the Protected Countryside and Regional Recharge Area in
Southwest Kitchener that were previously deferred. This recommendation is supported by
technical reports entitled “Delineation of the Regional Recharge Area in the 2009 Regional
Official Plan” and “Regional Transportation Master Plan: Implications of Southwest Kitchener
Development Beyond the Countryside Line”.
REPORT:
Highlights of Report P-10-056 pertaining to the Protected Countryside designation and
Southwest Kitchener are provided below. Report P-10-056 minus the attachments is appended
to this report for additional information.
Community Consultation on Protected Countryside
Report P-10-056 outlines the community consultation that has taken place in response to
Regional Council’s direction to provide additional information and consultation with the
community. Open house forums were the primary means of consultation. Over 300 people
attended four public open houses held during the fall of 2009. Regional staff received 91 written
comments of which 42 were in support and 14 were opposed to the Protected Countryside
designation. The Protected Countryside designation in the City of Kitchener was not the focus
of these consultations.
Delineation of the Regional Recharge Area in the 2009 Regional Official Plan
Report P-10-056 provides an overview of the report entitled “Delineation of the Regional
Recharge Area in the 2009 Regional Official Plan”. This report was prepared by Regional staff
and it consolidates various studies and information with respect to the Regional Recharge Area,
including the Grand River Conservation Authority’s Tier 2 Integrated Water Budget and Stress
Assessment. A complete copy of this lengthy document was circulated to staff under separate
cover and can be viewed on the Region of Waterloo website. The Protected Countryside
designation in the City of Kitchener is the focus of this report. The report concludes that there is
a strong policy and technical justification for applying the Regional Recharge Areas and
Protected Countryside designations within the southwest corner of the City of Kitchener.
Regional Transportation Master Plan: Implications of Southwest Kitchener Development
Beyond the Countryside Line
Report P-10-056 also provides and overview of a transportation analysis for the area that was
completed in conjunction with the Regional Transportation Master Plan. The report identifies 22
roadways or roadway segments that would require expansions in the form of additional traffic
lanes, and 7 roadway intersections and 4 highway interchanges that would require
improvements. The report concludes that development within the southwest corner of the City of
Kitchener would not be practical given the financial burden associated with such development
and the adverse social, environmental and cultural heritage impacts that would result from the
required road system expansions.
Next Steps
Regional Council’s decision(s) regarding Report P-10-056 will be forwarded to the Province
which may result in refinements to the modifications before the Minister of Municipal Affairs and
Housing issues a Notice of Decision on the approval of the ROP. The Notice of Decision will be
sent to all parties who have asked to be notified of the Minister’s decision. As defined in the
Planning Act, eligible parties will then have 20 days within which to file an appeal to the
Minister’s decision. Any such appeals received, will ultimately be adjudicated by the Ontario
Municipal Board. In cases where the new ROP policies and/or mapping have been appealed or
deferred, existing Regional Official Policies Plan policies and/or mapping will continue to apply.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
N/A
CONCLUSION:
This report provides an update on the progress of the approval of the Region’s new Official
Plan.
ACKNOWLEDGED BY:
Jeff Willmer, Interim General Manager
Development and Technical Services Department
Attachment:
Regional Report P-10-056 (minus attachments)
Report: P-10-056
REGION OF WATERLOO
PLANNING, HOUSING AND COMMUNITY SERVICES
Community Planning
TO:
ChairJim Wideman and Members of the Planning and Works Committee
DATE: FILE CODE:
June 22, 2010D16-050
SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO THE PROVINCE’S PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS TO THE
REGIONAL OFFICIAL PLAN
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT the Regional Municipality of Waterloo approve the following with regard to the proposed
modifications to the Regional Official Plan adopted by Regional Council on June 16, 2009, as
described in Report No. P-10-056, dated June 22, 2010:
a) Forward Report P-10-056 and more particularly Appendices 2 to 6 to the Minister of Municipal
Affairs and Housing as Regional Council’s recommendations regarding modifications to be
included in the Province’s approval of the Regional Official Plan;
b) Request the Province to approve the Protected Countryside policies and mapping as they
pertain to the Townships of North Dumfries, Wellesley, Wilmot and Woolwich and the Cities of
Cambridge and Waterloo as part of the Provincial approval of the Regional Official Plan;
c) Request the Province to modify Maps 4 – Greenland Network and 6g – Other Source Water
Protection Areas to designate the southwest corner of the City of Kitchener as Regional
Recharge Areas as originally recommended to Regional Council on June 16, 2009;
d) Request the Province to modify Map 7 – The Countryside to designate the southwest corner of
the City of Kitchener as Protected Countryside as originally recommended to Regional Council
on June 16, 2009; and
e) Authorize the Regional Commissioner of Planning Housing and Community Services to initiate
an appeal of any decision of the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing related to the new
Regional Official Plan as required to protect the Regional interest as expressed by Regional
Council through the adoption of the new Regional Official Plan, subject to the ratification of
Regional Council of any such appeal as soon as reasonably practicable.
SUMMARY:
This report has been prepared in response to the Province’s draft recommended modifications to
the new Regional Official Plan (ROP) adopted by Regional Council on June 16, 2009. The
Province’s Draft Decision Note, which was issued on May 13, 2010 (refer to Appendix 1), outlines
the modifications to the ROP that the Province is proposing as part of the approval process. The
Province is supportive of the ROP and the manner in which it addresses Provincial planning
interests, plans and legislation.
The modifications proposed by the Province primarily focus on those matters of Provincial interest
that relate to land use planning as set out in the Planning Act, the 2005 Provincial Policy Statement
and the Places to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. With the exceptions noted
766354 Page 1 of 50
P-10-056 June 22, 2010
below, the Province’s recommended modifications are generally minor in nature and do not alter the
fundamental elements of the ROP. Responses to the proposed modifications, together with
several additional modifications associated with Regional staff’s further review of stakeholder
comments and completion of additional work as directed by Regional Council, are included in this
report. It is recommended that this report be forwarded to the Province to help inform their final
approval of the ROP.
The Province has recommended two significant modifications to the ROP that are inconsistent with
the policy direction as adopted by Regional Council. More specifically, the Province is proposing
modifications that would:
Permit mineral aggregate extraction within the two year time of travel in Wellhead Protection
Areas; and
Permit manufacturing of asphalt materials associated with mineral aggregate operations
within Wellhead Protection Areas.
Regional staff is still in discussion with the Province related to several other issues also associated
with aggregate extraction. It is currently anticipated that the results of these discussions will be
available in time for Regional staff to report back on the matter directly to Regional Council on June
30, 2010.
At the time of adoption of the new ROP, Regional Council directed Regional staff to meet with
several stakeholders and the Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) to address a range of
issues that were raised by delegations. Regional Council also directed that further public
consultation sessions be held with respect to the Protected Countryside designation and that
additional documentation be prepared with respect to the proposed Regional Recharge Areas and
Protected Countryside designations in the southwest corner of the City of Kitchener.
Regional staff has met with these stakeholders and the GRCA and has followed up on each of the
issues as directed by Regional Council. As a result of this additional consultation, Regional staff is
proposing some minor modifications to the ROP, but does not recommend any changes to the
Urban Area boundaries as proposed by the delegations. Issues raised by the GRCA have been
addressed to their satisfaction through proposed Provincial modifications that are supported by
Regional staff. In addition, based on the results of the extended consultation process relating to the
Protected Countryside designation, Regional staff is recommending that the Protected Countryside
designation as originally proposed in the Townships of North Dumfries, Wellesley, Wilmot and
Woolwich, the City of Cambridge and the City of Waterloo continue to be supported by Regional
Council and that the Province be requested to approve this designation for these areas as originally
adopted by Regional Council on June 16, 2009.
Based on additional work undertaken as directed by Regional Council relating to the southwest
corner of the City of Kitchener, Regional staff recommends that Regional Council request that the
Province modify ROP Maps 4 – Greenlands Network, 6g – Other Source Water Protection Areas
and 7 – The Countryside (see Appendices 3, 4 and 5) such that the Regional Recharge Areas and
Protected Countryside designations be established within the southwest corner of the City of
Kitchener as originally proposed by Regional staff on June 16, 2009. The technical information
supporting this recommendation is contained in reports entitled “Delineation of the Regional
Recharge Area in the 2009 Regional Official Plan” that was completed by Regional staff in May
2010, and the “Regional Transportation Master Plan: Implications of Southwest Kitchener
Development Beyond the Countryside Line” completed by Regional staff in June 2010. These
reports can be found on the Region of Waterloo website under the new Regional Official Plan
766354
Page 2 of 50
P-10-056 June 22, 2010
section. Copies of the “Delineation of the Regional Recharge Area in the 2009 Regional Official
Plan” have previously been provided to Regional Council.
Regional staff acknowledges the thoughtful and constructive input that has been received from Area
Municipal staff, GRCA staff, area landowners and the staff of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and
Housing (London and Toronto offices) and its partner Ministries. Regional staff has met with Area
Municipal staff to discuss the modifications proposed by the Province. No issues were raised by
Area Municipal staff at these meetings with respect to the recommendations of Regional staff as
outlined in this report.
Following receipt of Regional Council’s position related to the recommended modifications, the
Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing will determine which if any of Regional Council’s
recommended modifications it wishes to incorporate into the Notice of Decision. The Notice of
Decision will be sent to all parties who have asked to be notified of the Minister’s decision. In
accordance with the provisions of the Planning Act, eligible parties will then have 20 days within
which to file an appeal with the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Following the appeal
period, Regional staff will prepare a report to update Regional Council on the nature of any appeals
received and the next steps in the appeals process. In circumstances where ROP policies and/or
mapping are appealed, the related existing Regional Official Policies Plan policies and/or mapping
will remain in effect until such time as the Ontario Municipal Board has issued a decision related to
the appeal.
Regional Council will continue to be able to consider amendments to the ROP in accordance with
the provisions of the Planning Act. Regional staff expects to bring forward three ROP amendments
for the consideration of Regional Council in 2011/2012. The first amendment would implement key
elements of the Regional Transportation Master Plan and the Rapid Transit Project Assessment.
The second amendment would address refinements to the Environmentally Significant Valley
Features policies and mapping. The third amendment would be a “housekeeping” amendment to
address minor editorial revisions identified since adoption of the ROP by Regional Council. This is
standard practice in implementing any new official plan.
REPORT:
This report has been prepared in response to the Province’s draft recommended modifications to
the new Regional Official Plan (ROP) adopted by Regional Council on June 16, 2009. The
Province’s Draft Decision Note, which was issued on May 13, 2010 (refer to Appendix 1), outlines
the modifications to the ROP that the Province is proposing as part of the approval process. The
Province is supportive of the ROP and the manner in which it addresses Provincial planning
interests, plans and legislation.
The modifications proposed by the Province primarily focus on those matters of Provincial interest
that relate to land use planning as set out in the Planning Act, the 2005 Provincial Policy Statement
(PPS) and the Places to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (Growth Plan). With
the exceptions noted below, the Province’s recommended modifications are generally minor in
nature and do not alter the fundamental elements of the ROP. Responses to the proposed
modifications, together with several additional modifications associated with Regional staff’s further
review of stakeholder comments and completion of additional work as directed by Regional Council
are included in this report. It is recommended that this report be forwarded to the Province to help
inform their final approval of the ROP.
Regional staff has participated in numerous meetings and conference calls with Ministry of
Municipal Affairs and Housing staff, its partner Ministries and the Grand River Conservation
766354
Page 3 of 50
P-10-056 June 22, 2010
Authority (GRCA) to address their questions about the ROP policies as they pertain to Provincial
interests. Issues raised by the GRCA have been addressed to their satisfaction through proposed
Provincial modifications that are supported by Regional staff. Regional staff has also met with Area
Municipal staff to discuss the modifications proposed by the Province. No issues were raised by
Area Municipal staff at these meetings with respect to the recommendations of Region staff as
outlined in this report.
The Province has recommended two significant modifications to the ROP that are inconsistent with
the policy direction as adopted by Regional Council. More specifically, the Province is proposing
modifications that would:
Permit mineral aggregate extraction within the two year time of travel in Wellhead Protection
Areas; and
Permit manufacturing of asphalt materials associated with mineral aggregate operations
within Wellhead Protection Areas.
Regional staff is still in discussion with the Province related to several other issues also associated
with aggregate extraction. It is currently anticipated that the results of these discussions will be
available in time for Regional staff to report back on the matter directly to Regional Council on June
30, 2010.
The Province has also provided Regional staff with updated mapping of bedrock areas that are
required to be included on ROP Map 8 – Mineral Aggregate Resource Areas (refer to Appendix 6).
The bedrock area mapping affects small areas in the southeast corner of the Township of North
Dumfries and the northeast corner of the City of Cambridge. Regional staff supports this proposed
modification.
Regional staff acknowledges the thoughtful and constructive input that has been received from Area
Municipal staff, GRCA staff, area landowners and the staff of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and
Housing (London and Toronto offices) and its partner Ministries. Regional staff has met with Area
Municipal staff to discuss the modifications proposed by the Province. No issues were raised by
Area Municipal staff at these meetings with respect to the recommendations of Regional staff as
outlined in this report.
Modifications Proposed by the Province / Region Supported by Regional Staff
Appendices 2 through 6 identify the proposed modifications that Regional staff is recommending be
forwarded to the Province for consideration as part of the Province’s approval of the ROP. While
most of the recommended modifications contained in these Appendices have been proposed by the
Province, several are being proposed by Regional staff based on the additional consultation
directed by Regional Council. Proposed modifications are shown in bold type within the broader
text that has been provided for the purpose of context.Key modifications proposed are
accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for the modification.
Of particular note are the Province’s proposed modifications as they relate to the
Countryside/Future Urban Expansion Area designation in the ROP as adopted by Regional Council.
The Countryside/Future Urban Expansion Area designation and associated polices are a clear
statement of Regional Council’s intended strategy for accommodating greenfield development
beyond the 20 year time horizon of the ROP. This designation provides a land use planning
framework within which Regional infrastructure master plans and long-term strategic investments,
766354
Page 4 of 50
P-10-056 June 22, 2010
both of which typically have time horizons in excess of 20 years, may be prepared and
implemented.
The Province acknowledges the purpose and appropriateness of the Countryside/Future Urban
Expansion Area policy framework, but does not support use of the Countryside/Future Urban
Expansion Area designation on Map 7 – The Countryside. The Province is of the view that the PPS
does not specifically permit land use designations that address planning matters beyond the
maximum 20 year time horizon of official plans.
Following extensive negotiations, the Province is now recommending that the Countryside/Future
Urban Expansion Area designation and associated policies be modified by deleting the designation
and rephrasing the policies to make reference to, “…lands located between the Urban
Area/Township Urban Areas designations and the Countryside Line” rather than to the
“Countryside/Future Urban Expansion Area”. The change proposed by the Province has no impact
on the actual application of the policies in the ROP. Regional staff supports the proposed
modifications as they continue to accurately and clearly reflect Regional Council’s directions.
Modifications Proposed by the Province Not Supported by Regional Staff
The modifications to the ROP that have been proposed by the Province that are not supported by
Regional staff include Modification Nos. 43, 44, 45 and portions of Modification No. 52 as contained
in the Draft Decision Note issued on May 13, 2010 (refer to Appendix 1).
Policy 4.3 of the PPS states, “This Provincial Policy Statement shall be read in its entirety and all
relevant policies are to be applied to each situation.” The modifications opposed by Regional staff
all relate directly to the apparent desire of the Province to provide virtually unfettered access for the
aggregate industry to extract aggregate resources, even where such extraction appears to conflict
with requirements established under other provisions of the PPS.
In accordance with the provisions of Policy 2.2.1 of the PPS, municipalities, “shall protect, improve
or enhance the quality and quantity of water by: … d) implementing necessary restrictions on
development and site alteration to: 1. protect all municipal drinking water supplies and designated
vulnerable areas; …” Site alteration within the definitions of the PPS includes aggregate extraction.
The applicable PPS policy relating to aggregate extraction is Policy 2.5.2.1, which states, “As much
of the mineral aggregate resources as is realistically possible shall be made available as close to
markets as possible.” It is the reasonable balance between these two specifically directive policies
relating to the protection and use of natural resources that needs to be achieved in order for the
ROP to be “consistent with” the provisions of the PPS as required by the Planning Act. It is
Regional staff’s opinion that the modifications proposed by the Province fail to achieve this
reasonable balance. In addition, the modifications proposed by the Province through Modification
Nos. 43 and 44 directly conflict with previous decisions relating to such issues elsewhere in the
Province.
The proposed modifications of concern and the basis for Regional staff’s objection are briefly
outlined below:
Modification Nos. 43 and 44 – These modifications propose to permit mineral aggregate extraction
within the two year time of travel in Wellhead Protection Areas subject to the submission of
supporting studies. Mineral aggregate extraction was specifically restricted within the two year time
of travel in the policies as adopted by Regional Council.
Response – The proposed restrictions to aggregate extraction within the two year time of travel only
766354
Page 5 of 50
P-10-056 June 22, 2010
affect approximately 1.5 percent of the total area of the Region designated as Aggregate Resource
Area. These lands are concentrated primarily around eight wells, K22, K23, K24, K25, K26, K29,
K50 and K51 in the City of Kitchener and Wilmot Township. The K22, K23, K24, K25, K26 and K29
wells are part of the cluster of wells in the Mannheim area, including the Region’s Aquifer Storage
and Recovery System, that supply approximately 20 percent of the Region’s municipal water
supply. The K50 and K51 wells in Wilmot Center supply approximately three percent of the total
Regional municipal water supply.
Notwithstanding the presence of fuels and other chemicals associated with the operation and
maintenance of equipment used in the mineral aggregate extraction process, the Province argues
that mineral aggregate extraction is not a threat to groundwater. While Regional staff has concerns
with the risks associated with mineral aggregate extraction, of particular concern is the resulting
landscape where the geologic protection otherwise afforded to the underlying aquifers has been
removed. The removal of this aggregate increases the vulnerability of the municipal supply wells to
contamination, thereby putting their long-term operation at increased risk. This would potentially
result in the need to install additional treatment for the supply wells and could increase the Region’s
obligations under the Clean Water Act. This is of particular concern with respect to K22 and K23,
which are classified as GUDI wells (Groundwater Under the Direct Influence of Surface Water)
making them especially susceptible to increases in vulnerability. Loss of these municipal supply
wells could significantly impede the ability of the Region to meet both its existing municipal water
supply obligations and the growth targets established for the Region of Waterloo through the
Growth Plan.
While Regional staff fully appreciates the need for ensuring a balance between the competing
Provincial interests established in the PPS, it is unclear how the policies as adopted by Regional
Council that restrict mineral aggregate extraction in only 1.5% of the Aggregate Resource Area, in
favour of protection of municipal water supplies as mandated by the PPS, fails to achieve this
balance. It should also be noted that policies in the ROP restrict any form of urban development
within the vast majority of the affected area, thereby ensuring that if these wells are ever
decommissioned, the aggregate would still be accessible for extraction purposes. Regional staff
questions the position being taken by the Province related to this matter, particularly given that the
Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing approved restrictions virtually identical to those proposed
by the Region as part of the approval of the County of Oxford Official Plan.
Modification No. 45 – The purpose of this modification is to permit manufacturing of asphalt
materials specifically associated with mineral aggregate operations within all Wellhead Protection
Areas. Asphalt plants have been identified as a restricted use within Wellhead Protection Areas
WPSA1 to WPSA 7 inclusive in the ROP as adopted by Regional Council.
Response: It would appear that the Province has no concern that asphalt plants in general have
been identified as representing a risk to groundwater supplies as they have not proposed to delete
the provisions that restrict asphalt plants in wellhead protection areas, except where associated
with an aggregate extraction operation. In most cases, an asphalt plant associated with a mineral
aggregate operation will be located on the floor of the pit to mitigate noise associated with its
operations.
Notwithstanding the fact that asphalt plants generally represent a risk to groundwater supplies, the
Province is proposing to allow such uses in areas where the majority of the geologic protection has
been or is being removed through the aggregate extraction operations, thereby bringing the asphalt
plant even closer to the groundwater. Combined with Modification Nos. 43 and 44, this modification
could result in new asphalt plants being located in the immediate proximity of some of the most
important supply wells in the Region’s municipal water supply system. Regional staff is unclear
how this modification could be considered consistent with Policy 2.2.1 of the PPS as noted above.
766354
Page 6 of 50
P-10-056 June 22, 2010
It should also be noted that the restriction related to asphalt plants does not apply in WPSA 8,
meaning that the entire 401 corridor outside of the Urban Area, and the vast majority of both the
Township of North Dumfries and the Aggregate Resources Area generally throughout the Region of
Waterloo, would be unaffected by the restriction as proposed by the Region.
Modification No. 52 - Regional staff also do not support the first change proposed to 9.D.1 (b)
contained in Modification No. 52, which seeks to apply the requirement for a subwatershed scale
hydrogeological study to support below the water table extraction only to what the Province defines
as “priority subwatersheds”. Based on discussions with the Province subsequent to the issuance of
the Draft Decision Note, it is Regional staff’s understanding that this proposed modification will not
be included in the final Notice of Decision.
Follow-Up on Regional Council’s Directions
At the time of adoption of the new ROP, Regional Council directed Regional staff to meet with
several stakeholders and the GRCA to address a range of issues that were raised by delegations.
Regional Council also directed that further public consultation sessions be held with respect to the
Protected Countryside designation and that additional documentation be prepared with respect to
the proposed Regional Recharge Areas and Protected Countryside designations in the southwest
corner of the City of Kitchener.
Regional staff has continued to work with a variety of stakeholders (refer to Appendix 7) to address
the issues identified by Regional Council. Regional staff has also participated in meetings and
conference calls with staff of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing and its partner Ministries,
the GRCA and Area Municipalities regarding these matters.
The six key issues that have been addressed through this additional review include:
determination of the appropriate policy framework for the southwest corner of the City of
Kitchener;
establishing flexibility to consider Urban Area boundary rationalizations in the Breslau area;
issues related to mineral aggregate extraction;
the appropriateness of the Protected Countryside designation as it applies to the Townships
of North Dumfries, Wellesley, Wilmot and Woolwich, the City of Cambridge and the City of
Waterloo;
the appropriateness of various site-specific Urban Area boundary expansions as proposed
by individual property owners; and
potential minor revisions to Map 4 - the Greenlands Network to reflect additional fieldwork.
Consistent with the recommendations contained in the original staff report presented to Regional
Council at the time of the adoption of the ROP, Regional staff does not support any of the
landowner proposals to expand the Urban Area or Township Area boundaries as such requests are
not consistent with either the conclusions of the Regional Land Budget or the associated provisions
of the PPS, and do not conform to the provisions of the Growth Plan. However, Regional staff does
support the addition of a new policy in the ROP to provide greater flexibility to consider Urban Area
boundary rationalizations in the Breslau area through a comprehensive review process similar to
that already provided for with respect to Township Urban Area boundaries. The new policy would
provide the Township of Woolwich with a framework within which to consider possible Urban Area
boundary refinements in the context of the forthcoming comprehensive update of the Township of
Woolwich Official Plan and the subsequent preparation of a Secondary Plan for the Breslau area.
As a result of additional field work that has been undertaken subsequent to the adoption of the
ROP, Regional staff is also supportive of several minor revisions to the boundaries of Core
766354
Page 7 of 50
P-10-056 June 22, 2010
Environmental Feature designations. Additional detail related to these issues is outlined in the
following sections of this report.
Protected Countryside Policies
Further to Regional Council’s motion of June 16, 2009, requesting the Province defer approval of
the Protected Countryside policies pending additional stakeholder consultation, Regional staff held
four additional Public Open Houses to receive further feedback from the public. These meetings
were held: September 28, 2009 (Township of North Dumfries); October 1, 2009 (Township of
Wellesley); October 7, 2009 (Township of Wilmot); October 15, 2009 (Township of Woolwich).
Notice of the Public Open Houses was provided by direct mail to over 4,800 property owners within
the Protected Countryside, advertisements in local newspapers and on the Region’s website.
Over 300 people attended the Public Open Houses. Submissions were reviewed and the results of
the Public Open Houses were presented in a Memorandum to Regional Council on November 17,
2009. Regional staff received a total of 91 written comments through the Public Open House
process. Of these written comments, 42 supported the proposed Protected Countryside policies
(some expressed that the area should be expanded to include additional lands); 35 of the
comments addressed other issues such as aggregate extraction, municipal and private wells, and
illegal dumping that weren’t intended to be addressed as part of this consultation process; and 14 of
the comments received opposed the policies. Giving appropriate consideration to the feedback
received through these Open Houses, Regional staff continues to recommend that Regional
Council request the Province to approve the Protected Countryside policies and mapping as they
pertain to the Townships of North Dumfries, Wellesley, Wilmot and Woolwich, and the Cities of
Cambridge and Waterloo as part of the Provincial approval of the ROP.
Southwest Kitchener
Regional Council deferred consideration of the Regional Recharge Areas and Protected
Countryside designations as they relate to the southwest corner of the City of Kitchener pending
Council’s review of three items: 1) a report addressing the technical information used by Regional
Staff to delineate the Regional Recharge Area; 2) the results of the Grand River Conservation
Authority’s Tier 2 Integrated Water Budget and Stress Assessment; and 3) relevant information and
analysis from the Regional Transportation Master Plan.
A report entitled “Delineation of the Regional Recharge Areas in the 2009 Regional Official Plan”
was prepared by Regional staff in May 2010 to address the first two issues. This report, which
considered previously existing information, the results of the GRCA’s Tier Two Water Budget and
Stress Assessment, and additional information provided by consultants for a number of landowners
in the southwest corner of the City of Kitchener, provides a strong policy and technical justification
for applying the Regional Recharge Areas designation within this area.
A transportation analysis for the area was also completed in conjunction with the completion of the
Regional Transportation Master Plan. The Regional Transportation Master Plan: Implications of
Southwest Kitchener Development Beyond the Countryside Line (June 2010) concludes that
significant expansions would be required along virtually all of the corridors serving the southwest
corner of the City of Kitchener to support development within the area. The following chart
illustrates the anticipated road system expansions that would be required:
Roadway RTMP or Planned Required Width due to
WidthSW Kitchener
Development
Fischer-Hallman Rd (Bleams to Columbia) 6 lanes (including 2 6 - 8 lanes (including 2
766354
Page 8 of 50
P-10-056 June 22, 2010
transit only lanes) transit only lanes)
Fischer-Hallman Rd (Bleams to Plains) 4 lanes 6 lanes
New Fischer Hallman Plains to Cedar Creek 2 lanes 4 lanes
Interchange
Westmount Rd (Fischer-Hallman – Block Line) 4 lanes 6 lanes
Trussler Rd (Bleams – Ottawa) 4 lanes 4 lanes
Trussler Rd (Ottawa – Highway 7/8) 4 lanes 6 lanes
Trussler Rd (Bleams – New Dundee) 2 lanes 4 lanes
Trussler Rd (New Dundee to Cedar Creek 2 lanes 4 lanes
Interchange )
Ira Needles Blvd (Highview – Erb) 4 lanes 6 lanes
Bleams Rd (Fischer-Hallman – Strasburg) 4 lanes 6 lanes
Bleams Rd (Trussler - Fischer-Hallman) 2 lanes 4 lanes
Huron Rd (Fischer-Hallman – Homer Watson) 4 lanes 6 lanes
Huron Rd (Fischer-Hallman – Trussler) 2 lanes 4 lanes
Strasburg Rd (Bleams – New Dundee) 4 lanes 6 lanes
Strasburg Rd (Ottawa – Bleams) 3 lanes 5 lanes
New Dundee Rd (Trussler – Hwy 401) Upgrades 4 lanes
New Dundee Rd (Hwy 401 crossing) 2 lanes 4 lanes
Fountain St (East of Blair) N/A 4 lanes
Highway 7/8 (Fischer-Hallman – Hwy 8) 6 lanes 8 lanes
Homer Watson Blvd (Ottawa – Manitou) 4 lanes 6 lanes
Plains Road widening or new road (Trussler Rd N/A 4 lanes
to Fischer Hallman Rd)
New Mid Block Connection to Stauffer Dr. N/A 2 Lanes
(Fischer Hallman Rd to Strasburg Rd extension)
In addition to the above noted road widenings, many intersections would also require improvements
to ensure safe and efficient traffic operations. The following intersections would require
improvements:
Homer Watson Boulevard & Huron Road
Homer Watson Boulevard & Manitou Drive
Manitou Drive & Bleams Road
Huron Road & Strasburg Road
Fischer Hallman Road & Ottawa Street
Fischer Hallman Road & Bleams Road
Fischer Hallman Road & New Dundee Road
Improvements would also be required at some highway interchanges serving the area including:
Highway 401 & Homer Watson Boulevard
Highway 401 & Cedar Creek Road
Highway 401 & Trussler Road (new interchange required)
Highway 7/8 & Fischer Hallman Road
In addition, the above noted road system expansions are predicated based on the results of the
Regional Transportation Master Plan review of the currently designated lands in the southwest
portion of the City of Kitchener which require a significant modal shift to transit if the road system is
to function properly. Achieving such a modal shift in the southwest corner of the City of Kitchener
would require additional high levels of investment in transit infrastructure and operations.
766354
Page 9 of 50
P-10-056 June 22, 2010
The report concludes that development within the southwest corner of the City of Kitchener would
not be practical given the financial burden associated with such development and the adverse
social, environmental and cultural heritage impacts that would result from the required road system
expansions. Accordingly, Regional staff recommends that Regional Council request the Province to
modify Maps 4 and 6g to designate the southwest corner of the City of Kitchener as Regional
Recharge Areas. Likewise, Regional staff recommends that Regional Council request the Province
to modify Map 7 - The Countryside to designate the lands within the southwest corner of the City of
Kitchener as Protected Countryside. Both modifications are consistent with the original
recommendations made by Regional staff to Regional Council on June 16, 2009.
Copies of the two reports referenced in this section can be viewed on the Region of Waterloo
website under the new Regional Official Plan section. A copy of “Delineation of the Regional
Recharge Area in the 2009 Regional Official Plan” has previously been provided to Regional
Council.
Property Specific Urban Area/Township Urban Area Boundary Expansions
Regional staff met with various landowners and their representatives concerning proposed Urban
Area/Township Urban Area boundary expansions as directed by Regional Council. Regional staff
does not support any of the landowner proposals to expand the Urban Area or Township Urban
Area boundaries at this time, as such requests are not consistent with the conclusions of the
Regional Land Budget or the associated provisions of the PPS and the Growth Plan. While
Regional staff cannot currently support any urban expansions, there may be justification to consider
such expansions at the time of the five-year review of the ROP to be undertaken in accordance with
the provisions of ROP Policy 10.F.5. All such requests should be referred to this future process for
consideration. However, future consideration of any such requests could only be addressed within
the policy framework of the new ROP as approved by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.
One of the areas where expansions to the Urban Area were proposed was in the vicinity of the
South Boundary Road at the City of Cambridge – Township of North Dumfries municipal boundary.
The requested expansions would move the Urban Area boundary from its current location
coincident with the City of Cambridge boundary, southward into the Township of North Dumfries so
as to coincide with the new alignment for the south boundary road. Regional staff does not support
this proposed expansion as it cannot be justified through the land budget process, would bring
residential development into close proximity with a major arterial roadway, would encroach on
several smaller environmental areas (including one core environmental feature), would require
cross boundary servicing and is not supported by the Township of North Dumfries. While Regional
staff does not support the expansion of the urban boundary in this area, the potential exists for
several non-agricultural uses (recreational, tourism and rural institutional uses) given the Rural Area
designation applicable to these lands.
Conestoga Rovers and Associates has proposed an expansion to the Urban Area boundary north
of Bridge Street West at the City of Waterloo – Township of Woolwich municipal boundary.
Regional staff does not support this proposed expansion as it cannot be justified through the land
budget process, would require cross boundary servicing, and is not supported by the Township of
Woolwich. In addition, any consideration of an Urban Area boundary expansion in this location
would, at minimum, only be appropriate following the finalization of the required Environmental
Assessment associated with the Regional Transportation Master Plan conclusion that additional
road capacity is needed to service the northeast area of the City of Waterloo in the vicinity of
Highway 85 and Bridge Street West, and the ROP amendment implementing the Regional
Transportation Master Plan.
766354
Page 10 of 50
P-10-056 June 22, 2010
Mr. Ken Haggerty has proposed the development of an industrial subdivision in the Township of
Wilmot north of Highland Road, southwest of the Region of Waterloo landfill facility. The subject
lands are located within the Protected Countryside as adopted by Regional Council. Regional staff
does not support either an expansion of the Urban Area in this location or a special policy permitting
industrial development within the Protected Countryside as was proposed by Mr. Haggerty and his
representative.
Urban Area Boundary Expansions/Rationalization in the Breslau Area
During the preparation of the ROP, submissions were received from a number of developers and
landowners in the Breslau area of the Township of Woolwich (including Empire Communities,
Breslau Properties Limited, Dave Rutherford, and Breslau North Developments Inc. (Smart
Centres)) that proposed some form of Urban Area expansion or rationalization of the proposed
Urban Area boundary to accommodate the sale and/or development of their respective properties
(refer to Appendix 7, ISSUE 5). Township of Woolwich staff has expressed an interest in having the
ability to consider such requests in the same manner as is currently provided for Township Urban
Area boundaries through ROP Policies 2.B.5 to 2.B.7.
Township staff has indicated that they would consider the relative merits of these submissions
through a three-step process: 1) bring the Township official plan into conformity with the ROP; 2)
complete a secondary plan for the Breslau area; 3) processing of applications to amend the
Township and Regional Official Plans as appropriate. Regional staff supports this proposed change
in the policy framework and is recommending that modifications be made to the ROP to provide this
opportunity. Consistent with the provisions of the policies as they apply to Township Urban Area
rationalizations, any such rationalizations of the Urban Area boundary in this location could only be
considered where they result in no net gain in the area of developable land within the Township.
This modification is supported by Township staff.
Minor Modifications to Core Environmental Features Mapping, Map 4 – The Greenlands Network
One of the issues raised by stakeholders related to the appropriateness of the boundaries of
several of the Core Environmental Features designated on Map 4 – The Greenlands Network.
Regional staff has further investigated the areas of concern and has proposed minor modifications
to the boundaries to reflect the additional field investigations. The proposed modifications are as
identified on Appendix 3.
Next Steps
Provincial Approval of the ROP
The Province will, at its discretion, use this report to further refine the modifications that will be
included in the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing’s Notice of Decision relating to the
approval of the ROP. The Notice of Decision will then be sent to all parties who have asked to be
notified of the Minister’s decision. As defined in the Planning Act, eligible parties will then have 20
days within which to file an appeal to the Minister’s decision. Any such appeals received, will
ultimately be adjudicated by the Ontario Municipal Board. At the end the appeal period, Regional
staff will prepare a report to update Council on the nature of any appeals that have been filed and
the next steps in the appeals process. In cases where the new ROP policies and/or mapping have
been appealed or deferred, the related existing Regional Official Policies Plan policies and/or
mapping will continue to apply.
766354
Page 11 of 50
P-10-056 June 22, 2010
Authorization for the Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services to Appeal the
Decision of the Province
As noted above, upon issuance of the Notice of Decision by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and
Housing, appeals of the decision must be filed within the 20 day appeal period. The timing of the
issuance of any such decision may preclude Regional staff from seeking direction from Regional
Council within the appeal period where issues of Regional interest such as those noted in this
report are not appropriately addressed within the decision. As a result, it is recommended that
Regional Council authorize the Regional Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community
Services to initiate an appeal of any decision of the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing
related to the new Regional Official Plan as required to protect the Regional interest as expressed
by Regional Council through the adoption of the new Regional Official Plan, subject to the
ratification of Regional Council of any such appeal as soon as reasonably practicable.
Future ROP Amendments
Regional Council will continue to be able to consider amendments to the ROP in accordance with
the provisions of the Planning Act. Regional staff expects to bring forward three ROP amendments
for the consideration of Regional Council in 2011/2012. The first amendment would implement key
elements of the Regional Transportation Master Plan and the Rapid Transit Project Assessment.
The second amendment would address refinements to the Environmentally Significant Valley
Features policies and mapping. The third amendment would be a “housekeeping” amendment to
address minor editorial revisions identified since adoption of the ROP by Regional Council. This is
standard practice in implementing any new official plan.
Area Municipal Consultation/Coordination
Regional staff met with Area Municipal planning staff representatives on May 28, 2010 and May 31,
2010 to review the Province’s comments and the next steps in the ROP approval process. No
concerns were raised at these meetings regarding the approach taken by Regional staff to the
issues raised by the Province through the approval process to date.
CORPORATE STRATEGIC PLAN:
This update directly supports the Region’s priorities with respect to implementing Focus Areas 1
and 5 of the Corporate Strategic Plan.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Costs for the printing, distribution, advertising of the new ROP will be covered out of existing
budgets. The approach for dealing with costs associated with appeals of the Province’s approval of
the ROP will be addressed through a subsequent report once the appeal period has expired and
the number and type of appeals has been determined.
OTHER DEPARTMENT CONSULTATIONS/CONCURRENCE:
Legal Services, Finance, Transportation and Environmental Services have had the opportunity to
provide comments on this report and concur with Community Planning staff’s recommended
modifications to the ROP.
ATTACHMENTS:
766354
Page 12 of 50
P-10-056 June 22, 2010
Appendix 1 - Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing’s Draft Decision Note – May 13, 2010
Appendix 2 - Regional Official Plan Modifications As Recommended By Regional Staff
Appendix 3 - Modifications to ROP Map 4 - The Greenlands Network
Appendix 4 - Modifications to ROP Map 6g - Other Source Water Protection Areas
Appendix 5 - Modifications to ROP Map 7 - The Countryside
Appendix 6 - Modifications to ROP Map 8 - Mineral Aggregate Resource Areas
Appendix 7 - List of Additional ROP Stakeholder Meetings
PREPARED BY:
Kevin Curtis, Manager, Strategic Policy Development
Kevin Eby, Director, Community Planning
APPROVED BY:
Rob Horne, Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services
766354
Page 13 of 50