The items in these minutes are not necessarily in the order discussed.

Mayor Burton called the meeting to order at 1:00 p.m.

Councillor Knoll

Moved by Councillor Duddeck

                                                                                                            CARRIED

Brad Sunderland, Planner, Planning Services, provided a review of Oakville’s main streets. The presentation included the following information:

-         At the request of Council, the review of the main streets were to proceed prior to other studies under the 5 year official plan review.

-         The reviews were to assess if and how development within the growth areas is meeting the Livable Oakville Plan’s objectives, and provide opportunities for the town to begin addressing the new growth forecasts identified in the Growth Plan for 2041

-         The reviews were to identify:

- If the intensification targets are being achieved;

- If the right type and mix of uses are being realized;

- If the right height and densities are provided for; and,

- If the appropriate growth area boundaries are provided.

-         The main street reviews represent a “grassroots approach” to planning, where additional development opportunities are identified with consultation and feedback from the community. 

-         After the main street growth area reviews had commenced, a town-wide Urban Structure Review was initiated in February 2016 in response to increasing growth pressures throughout the town and to confirm the town’s urban structure to assist with implementing Growth Plan conformity. The review is ongoing and is intended to assess how the town manages growth and change, both within the existing intensification areas and potential new opportunities.

-         Compared to the “grassroots approach” taken with the main street reviews, the urban structure review is taking a “wide lens” approach, to help direct how the town will manage growth as a whole.

-         The work done to date on the main street reviews, will help to inform and feed into the broader Urban Structure Review and discussion.

-         Following the initiation of the Urban Structure Review, the Province released a proposed Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2016) stemming from the ongoing Provincial coordinated planning review.

-         Significant changes have been proposed to the Growth Plan and staff continue to assess how policies that guide growth and change within the main street areas will fit into a larger framework.

Bronte Village Growth Area Review

Mr. Sunderland presented the following overview of the Bronte Village Growth Area Review including; Chronology, Assessment, Draft Directions, Findings and Comments, Conclusions and Discussion.

        Chronology:

-       February 10, 2014 - PDC, Content for OP Review

-       September 16, 2014 - Meeting, Bronte BIA

-       February 20, 2015 - Meeting, Bronte BIA

-       May 11, 2015   - PDC, 5 Year OP Review Launch

-       May 19, 2015 - Open House 1

-       July 29, 2015 - Landowner Mail-out

-       September 28, 2015 - Meeting, BVRA

-       October 13, 2015 - Meeting, Bronte Legion Executive

-       November 18, 2015 - Open House 2 January 27, 2016 – Public Information Meeting for Lakeshore & East Street Development Application

-       February 1, 2016 – Council, Urban Structure Review

-       February 4, 2016 - Open House 3

-       February 18, 2016 - Meeting, BVRA

Assessment:

Development Approvals

Development Trends

-       Ontario building code,

-       Financial feasibility

-       Main street viability consultant study

Provincial and Regional Policies

-       Emerging policy and directions

Town Initiatives (Recent and Ongoing)

-       Bronte Village Heritage Resources Review and Strategy

-       Bronte Business Action Plan

-       Transit Service Review and Five Year Plan

-       Harbours Master Plan (ongoing)

-       Cultural Heritage Landscape Review (ongoing)

-       Lakeshore Road West Environmental Assessment (ongoing)

Preliminary Consultation & Public Engagement

-       Ward Councillors, Bronte BIA & BVRA Meetings

-       Open House 1

Draft Directions and Findings:

The following draft directions were presented at Public Open Houses and findings were presented to the committee for discussion:

1.    Maintain existing growth area boundary

2.    Expand bonusing permissions on the main street

3.    Further emphasize the eastern gateway

4.    Support comprehensive developments

5.    Require commercial uses on the main streets & flexibility on side streets

6.    Strengthen and enhance existing urban design policies

7.    Remove growth target expressed as a number

8.    Undertake general housekeeping of policies

9.    Site specific policy direction for Bronte harbour

10. Broaden residential permissions

Conclusion:

1.    Staff will consider input received from the Livable Oakville Council

Sub-Committee on the draft directions in future phases of the Bronte Village Growth Area Review;

2.    Staff should commence the policy formulation phase of the Bronte Village Growth Area Review following sufficient direction stemming from the Urban Structure Review, if any;

3.    The next round of public consultation with regard to the Bronte Village Growth Area Review should convene when staff have prepared a draft official plan amendment for public comment, or, if the draft policy directions require substantive changes based on findings from the Urban Structure Review; and,

4.    Based on positive feedback to “strengthen and enhance urban design policies” (Direction 6), Urban Design staff should begin to prepare urban design guidelines specific to Bronte Village to support the established policy vision for the growth area. This would coincide with existing policies in the Livable Oakville Plan which commit staff to complete design guidance documents.

Discussion surrounding the Bronte Village Growth Area Review ensued and the following questions, responses and points were made:

A member sought clarification regarding the changes to the Ontario Building Code (OBC) and expressed concern that these changes would be a reason to justify increased height permissions from four to six storeys. The member sought to understand if this was the basis for the previous four storey height limit.

Staff responded that the increase from four to six stories matches the recent changes to the OBC for wood framed buildings, and that the previous four storey height limit was put in place to match the OBC at that time. Staff mentioned that the additional two storeys considered in the draft direction would only be permitted through bonusing which would help to balance the requirement for future growth to 2041 while also providing additional community benefit as a result.

The member noted that residents may have concerns with six storey building heights.

A member inquired as to why the number of attendees and respondents for the open house surveys was only provided in the presentation to the committee and suggested that this information be made available. 

Staff responded that the presentation slides will be made available online. Staff also pointed to the staff report which identifies the number of attendees and respondents.

A member suggested the term “population target” creates uncertainty within the community because there are no specifics attached to the term “target.” The member noted that it should be clear what level of growth is directed to each part of town, as opposed to the town as a whole.  The member stated that the public should be able to firmly grasp where the growth is going and an appropriate term other than “population target” could be explored.

A member inquired about the financial viability aspect of increasing heights from four to six storeys.  Diane Childs, Manager, Policy Planning, responded that a Main Street Viability Assessment is currently underway by consulting team Barry Lyons and is scheduled to finish in September 2016.

A member noted that there needs to be a coordinated approach to identify the amount of growth directed to each part of town. The member also noted that they understood the increase to the population forecast for Halton Region, under the Growth Plan between 2031A and 2031B, to be attributed to an increase in persons per household, not more dwelling units required.

The member sought clarification between the population forecasts contained in Schedule 3 of the Province’s Growth Plan and minimum targets. The member sought specific examples of where the Growth Plan states that the targets are ‘minimums’.

Staff noted that density targets, as directed by the Growth Plan, are to be expressed as minimums in official plans in order to achieve the growth forecast. Staff noted that forecasted amount of growth contained in the Growth Plan is given to Halton Region. Halton Region, through its official plan, then allocates the forecasted growth amongst the lower-tier municipalities. Staff noted that the policies and land use designations in Oakville’s Official Plan sets the growth framework for the town and sets out where and how the required growth (from Halton Region) will be accommodated. Staff noted that the town’s Official Plan achieves the minimum level of growth required to be accommodated. Staff noted that should a development application be submitted to the town which does not conform to the policies of the town’s Official Plan (e.g. in a location not planned to accommodate new growth, or, in a location that is expected to accommodate growth but at a larger scale than permitted) the applicant is required to apply for an Official Plan Amendment and staff would be required to assess the application on its merits and provide a recommendation to Council.

The committee as a whole discussed that there was apprehension that the Official Plan, being the vehicle to direct growth, would not contain population numbers for areas where growth is to be directed. A member then noted that an explanation on how growth is directed, and why, could form part of a formal guide to reading and understanding the Official Plan.  The member suggested that staff consider preparing an Official Plan guide for the public.

Mark Simeoni, Director, Planning Services, responded that this is something that staff would look into.

A member noted that the number of public responses reported on in the Bronte Village Growth Area Review was low and may not represent the full range of public voices. The member requested that staff find a larger sampling of residents to provide feedback. Staff responded that it will continue public consultation.

A member ask staff how the Bronte area will accommodate parking and requested that as part of future recommendations that a parking plan be considered.

A member asked how future growth in other areas of the town that have not been considered yet, such as the Bronte GO station, may impact the need for growth in Bronte Village.

Staff responded that this will be reviewed through the Urban Structure Review and there will be high level directions stemming from this review. Following the review, policy directions for Bronte Village may need to be revised and directions realigned.  Staff noted that the draft directions for Bronte Village were prepared before the Urban Structure Review began, but that the draft directions to date will inform the Urban Structure Review.

A member asked if there will be urban design guidelines specific to the Bronte vision. Staff responded that it is the intent that specific guidance will be prepared for Bronte Village.

A member asked when the committee will hear back about if the overall growth number is a minimum. Mark Simeoni, Director, Planning Services, informed the committee that staff will provide a repose at a future date and discussed that the Province gives direction through numbers, so Oakville should continue to follow the same model. Mr. Simeoni stated that Oakville’s population will continue to grow and the discussion now becomes: where will the growth go, and what will be the impact from that growth.

Discussion surrounding the Bronte Growth Area Review ensued and the following points were made:

-       The draft directions do not have official status and are for discussion purposes;

-       Council is the land use planning authority for Oakville; and,

-       Oakville’s Official Plan must conform to the Region of Halton’s Official Plan and the Provincial Growth Plan.

Kerr Village Growth Area Review

Carly Dodds, Planner, Planning Services, presented the following overview of the Kerr Village Growth Area Review included; Chronology, Assessment, Draft Directions, Findings and Comments, Conclusions and Discussion.

Chronology:

-       February 10, 2014 - PDC, Content for OP Review

-       May 11, 2015 - PDC, 5 Year OP Review Launch

-       May 26, 2015 - Open House 1

-       November 19, 2015 - Open House 2

-       February 1, 2016 - PDC, Urban Structure Review

-       February 16, 2016 - Meeting, KVBIA

-       March 24, 2016 - Meeting, KVBIA

Assessment:

Development Approvals

Development Trends

-       Ontario building code

-       Financial feasibility

-       Main street viability assessment - consultant study

Provincial and Regional Policies

-       Emerging directions

Town Initiatives (Recent and Ongoing)

-       Kerr Grade Separation

-       Transit Service Review and Five Year Plan

Preliminary Consultation

-       Ward Councillor Meetings

-       Open House 1

Draft Directions and Findings:

The following draft directions presented at the November 19, 2015 Open House and the findings were presented to the c committee for discussion:

1.    Extend the growth area boundary in the Upper Kerr Village District

2.    Extend the growth area boundary in the Lower Kerr Village District

3.    Eliminate the Central Business District (CBD) designation

4.    Re-designate northwest corner to Urban Core with bonusing

5.    Re-designate the Oakville Seniors Centre

6.    Permit bonusing along Kerr Street

7.    Strengthen and enhance existing urban design policies

8.    Remove growth Target expressed as a number

9.    Undertake general housekeeping of polices

Conclusion:

1.    Staff will consider input received from the Livable Oakville Council Sub-Committee on the draft directions in future phases of the Kerr Village Growth Area Review;

2.    Staff should commence the policy formulation phase of the Kerr Village Growth Area Review following sufficient direction stemming from the Urban Structure Review, if any;

3.    The next round of public consultation with regard to the Kerr Village Growth Area Review should convene when staff have prepared a draft official plan amendment for public comment, or, if the draft policy directions require substantive changes based on findings from the Urban Structure Review; and,

4.    Based on positive feedback to “strengthen and enhance urban design policies” (Direction 7), Urban Design staff should begin to prepare urban design guidelines specific to Kerr Village to support the established policy vision for the growth area. This would coincide with existing policies in the Livable Oakville Plan which commit staff to complete design guidance documents.

A discussion surrounding the Kerr Village Growth Area Review ensued and the following responses and points were made:

-       In regard to previous St. Augustine Drive concerns, staff confirmed that functional servicing aspects for Kerr Village, including traffic considerations, would be reviewed as a result of any proposed policy changes and that Jill Stephen, Senior Manager of Transportation, would be involved;

-       There was concern about the low number of response sheets and not being truly reflective of the broader area in terms of opinions about height and density;

-       There was a suggestion to include a question identifying whether the respondent was a resident or business owner in future surveys or worksheets;

-       A member suggested that staff review the open house and survey process to ensure the maximum number of residents are being reached and contributing feedback;

-       The committee explained that Council is not deciding on the directions based solely on the public workshops, they are just to gauge public feedback and help provide direction to staff;

-       The quality, not just quantity of the feedback is important to consider;

-       Staff works directly with residents associations and will continue a working relationship with them.

Downtown Oakville Growth Area Review

Carly Dodds, Planner, presented the following overview of the Downtown OakvilleGrowth Area Review included; Chronology, Assessment, Draft Directions, Findings and Comments, Conclusions and Discussion.

Chronology:

-       February 10, 2014 - PDC, Content for OP Review

-       May 11, 2015 - PDC, 5 Year OP Review Launch

-       November 23, 2015 - Open House

-       February 1, 2016 - PDC, Urban Structure Review

-       March 31, 2016 - Stakeholder Workshop

-       April 26, 2016 - Information Night

-       May 3 - 25, 2016 -  Online Survey

Assessment:

Development Approvals

Development Trends

-       Ontario building code

-       Financial feasibility

-       Main street viability assessment - consultant study

Provincial and Regional Policies

-       Emerging directions

Town Initiatives (Recent and Ongoing)

-       Downtown Plan (DCH and DTS)

-       Transit Service Review and Five Year Plan

Preliminary Consultation

-       Ward Councillor Meetings

-       PlanOakville

Draft Directions and Findings:

The following draft directions were presented at Public Open Houses and findings were presented to the committee:

1.    Maintain existing growth area boundary

2.    Maintain the existing land use permissions

3.    Explore opportunities for increased building heights

4.    Explore opportunities for bonusing

5.    Strengthen existing urban design policies

Conclusion:

1.      Staff will consider input received from the Livable Oakville Council

Sub-Committee on the draft directions and 3-D test site model in future phases of the Downtown Oakville Growth Area Review;

2.      Staff should commence the policy formulation phase of the

Downtown Oakville Growth Area Review following sufficient direction stemming from the Urban Structure Review, if any;

3.      The next round of public consultation with regard to the Downtown Oakville Growth Area Review should convene when staff have prepared a draft official plan amendment for public comment, or, if the draft policy directions require substantive changes based on findings from the Urban Structure Review; and,

4.      Based on positive feedback to “strengthen and enhance urban design policies” (Direction 5), Urban Design staff should begin to prepare urban design guidelines specific to Downtown Oakville to support the established policy vision for the growth area. This would coincide with existing policies in the Livable Oakville Plan which commit staff to complete design guidance documents.

Shadi Adab, Urban Designer, presented the 3-D Model of increased height options in Downtown Oakville.  This presentation was also given at the workshop and presentation night.

Ms. Dodds presented the information night and online survey results.  Findings showed that 23 people who attended the information night provided worksheet responses and 72 people took the online survey.

Staff clarified that draft directions are not official policy directions and have not been approved by Council.  Their purpose is to serve as tools to retain public feedback.

The committee expressed the following points regarding the Downtown Oakville Growth Area Review:

-       People residing in Oakville want a vibrant downtown core, the towns job is achieving that goal;

-       Staff should undertake an evaluation of the impact on having new residents and jobs in the downtown core, and how will this improve the vibrancy of downtown;

-       Mr. Simeoni informed the committee that there are computer programs to look at different options and their possible outcomes;

-       There are many pieces to making downtown vibrant and thriving and that a lot of people are heading downtown looking for a nice way to spend their afternoon;

-       Investments in public infrastructure such as the cultural hub and being close to water will play an important role in the development of growth in downtown;

-       Mr. Simeoni identified that 14% of businesses are currently vacant, with a target of 6%, leaving a gap of 8% to close;

-       The committee would like the actual square footage of the vacant business space available;

-       The average resident who lives north of the QEW visits downtown core each year around 1.5 times per year;

-       Staff informed the committee that the model adds approximately 900 residents and 500 jobs in the downtown area to demonstrate potential growth of 1400 residents and jobs;

-       A member requested information on how this will affect the missing 8% of activity;

-       A member addressed that in the mid-late 90’s the Town was working on a plan as to how to make the business districts more successful.  This was successful, and progress was made;

-       The committee would like history of the development of the business districts provided for the public and new councillors to review;

-       The committee requested that a 3-D model be created for Kerr and Bronte Village districts.

Moved by Councillor Gittings

That the Mainstreet Growth Area reviews for Bronte Village, Kerr Village and Downtown Oakville be received.

                                                                                                    CARRIED

         Moved by Councillor Duddeck

That the Official Plan Review Work Program Update be received.

                                                                                                    CARRIED

There were no information items.

The Mayor adjourned the meeting at 3:00 p.m.