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

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

As noted above.

Moved by Councillor Duddeck

That the minutes of the Livable Oakville (Official Plan Review) Council
Sub-committee meeting of July 25, 2016, be approved.

                                                                                           CARRIED

There was no business arising from the minutes.

a.

Provincial Coordinated Land Use Plan Review

Mark Simeoni, Director, Planning Services addressed the committee regarding the Coordinated Land Use Review presentation’s interactive format and discussed what will be examined today is what the plan (2006) currently says and what the proposed (2016) changes would include.

The committee expressed that although the Province has extended the commenting deadline for municipalities to October 31, 2016, that staff should still adhere to the September 30, 2016 deadline. That gives Council time to review prior to the Provincial deadline of October 31, 2016.

Mr. Simeoni responded that staffs presentation of comments will be brought to Planning and Development Council at the October 3, 2016 meeting.

Mr. Simeoni discussed the four provincial plans to guide and manage growth, and protect the natural environment including:

-     1985 - Niagara Escarpment Plan

-     2002 - Oak Ridges Moraine Plan

-     2005 - Greenbelt Plan

-     2006 - Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe

The two plans that apply to Oakville are the Greenbelt Plan and the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe.

Mr. Simeoni outlined the nine sections of the Proposed Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2016 and informed the committee that for today’s presentation the sections to be addressed would include, Introduction, Where and How to Grow, Infrastructure to Support Growth, Protecting What is Valuable, and Implementation and Interpretation.

Mr. Simeoni made the following general points about the proposed growth plan and presentation;

-     The overall planning framework in the Growth Plan to curb sprawl by directing and managing growth is confirmed, refined and strengthened.  This includes complete communities, transit and protecting natural heritage and water.

-     New concepts have been introduced, such as climate change and net-zero communities, prime employment and watershed planning.

-     Upper – and Single- tier responsibilities are enhanced, with more authority provided to these municipalities.

-     Some changes are  subtle but significant, including major office definition change, increased density and intensification targets.

-     Long-standing matters remain un-resolved, including the method for calculating a land budget.

-     Uncertainty is introduced through proposed implementation, including watershed planning guidelines, natural heritage systems mapping and land needs assessment, the methods for which have not been provided

                     Mr. Simeoni began the interactive presentation.

Where and How to Grow

                    Managing Growth – Complete Communities

Current (2006)

-     General direction to build complete communities (meeting people’s needs for daily living throughout an entire lifetime) in urban areas as well as and rural areas (2.2.2)

Proposed (2016)

-     New policy would provide more detail about how to support achievement of complete communities with greater emphasis placed on urban design, public realm, public health and climate change (2.2.1.3)

-     New policy on housing would clarify the requirements to provide for a “range and mix of housing types and densities” (2.2.6.2)

Staff commented that complete communities are an over-riding principle of the growth plan and that planning for complete communities constitutes “good planning in the public interest”.

                    Managing Growth – Growth Forecasts

Current (2006)

-     2.2.1.1 Population and employment forecasts contained in Schedule 3 for all upper- and single-tier municipalities will be used for planning and managing growth in the GGH.

-     Plan horizon to 2031

-     Halton population = 780,000

-     Oakville population = 255,00

Proposed (2016)

-     2.2.1.1 Population and employment forecasts contained in Schedule 3 will be used for planning and managing growth in the GGH to the horizon of this Plan in accordance with the policies in subsection 5.2.4.

-     5.2.4 requires that growth forecasts be applied by upper- and single-tiers at time of the next municipal comprehensive review.

-     Plan horizon to 2041

-     Halton population = 1 million

Responding to questions from the committee, staff explained that for the purpose of providing a number at this time, we are making an assumption that Oakville’s part of the 1 million population forecast for 2041 is 320,000 or 32%, which is based on our historical share of population.  Oakville is currently planned to the 2031 forecast of 255,000 out of a regional population of 780,000.  Staff expressed that the 820,000 amended number (2031B) has not been allocated. The committee believes that number is reflective of more people per unit.

Jane Clohecy, Commissioner of Community Development informed the committee that the relationship between the number of units and people per household will be more clearly identified after the 2015 federal census results are released.

Forecasts and Targets: Population and Employment

Built-up areas:

Minimum intensification target 60% new units within built boundary.

Urban Growth Centre:

Minimum gross density target 200 residents and jobs combined per hectare.

Major Transit Station Area:

Minimum gross density target 150 residents and jobs combined per hectare.

Designated Greenfield Area:

Minimum density target 80 residents and jobs combined per hectare.

Responding to questions from the committee, Mr. Simeoni explained that forecasts are a number and targets are what it takes to achieve that number. The forecasts presented are not a minimum or a maximum, they are an estimate of what level of growth is anticipated.  The urban structure review will also help to provide a sense of the forecasts.

Municipal Comprehensive Review

Current (2006)

-     Definition: An official plan review, or an official plan amendment, initiated by a municipality that comprehensively applies the policies and schedules of this Plan.

-     Used for conversion of employment areas and settlement area expansion.

Proposed (2016)

-       Definition: A new official plan, or an official plan amendment, initiated by an upper- or single tier municipality under section 26 of the Planning Act that comprehensively applies the policies and schedules of this Plan

-       Expanded to managing growth, applying forecasts, adopting targets

The committee agreed with staff that lower tier municipalities should be involved in the municipal comprehensive reviews, as their input on how they grow and develop within their municipality is of high importance. The province should maintain the current definition (2006), that doesn’t exclude lower tier municipalities.  The committee would like to know the justification behind this change.

Intensification Targets

Current (2006)

-       2.2.3.1 By the year 2015 and for each year thereafter, a minimum

of 40 per cent of all residential development occurring annually within each upper- and single- tier municipality will be within the built-up area.

Proposed (2016)

-       2.2.2.3 All upper- and single-tier municipalities will, at the time of their next municipal comprehensive review, increase their minimum intensification target such that a minimum of 60 per cent of all residential development occurring annually within each upper- and single-tier municipality will be within the built-up area.

Discussion ensued and the following was mentioned;

-       Staff confirmed that based on Table 2A in the Regional Official Plan, Oakville has a planned intensification target of approximately 60%.

-       The committee requested that staff look into intensification targets that would require different size units, and a mechanism to require builders to construct a variety of unit sizes that are both single bedroom/ bachelor and larger family units.

-       Staff expressed that the types of units being offered are currently set by the market.

-       The policy is in place to create density.

-       Committee would like to ensure housing and unit choices are provided.

-       Current apartments and condos being built do provide a range.

-       Clarification that the proposed change means that only 40% of residential development can be built on greenfields and 60% in built up areas, a shift from the 2006 direction.

-       In the Regional Official Plan, under the current Growth Plan, North Oakville is planned to achieve a target of 46 residents and jobs per hectare, and Milton is planned to achieve a target of 58 residents and jobs per hectare.

Designated Greenfield area Targets

Current (2006)

2.2.7.2 The designated greenfield area of each upper or single-tier municipality will be planned to achieve a minimum density target that is not less than 50 residents and jobs combined per hectare.

Definition: Designated Greenfield Area - the area within a settlement area that is not a built-up area.

Proposed (2016)

2.2.7.2 The designated greenfield area of each upper- or single-tier municipality will be planned to achieve a minimum density target that is not less than 80 residents and jobs combined per hectare within the horizon of this Plan.

Definition: Designated Greenfield Area - The area within a settlement area that is required to accommodate forecasted growth to the horizon of this Plan and is not a built-up area.

Managing Growth – Transit

Current (2006)

2.2.5.1 Major transit station areas and intensification corridors will be designated in official plans and planned to achieve;

a)  increased residential and employment densities that support

and ensure the viability of existing and planned transit service levels

b)  mix of residential, office, institutional, and commercial

development wherever appropriate

Proposed (2016)

-       2.2.4.2 Planning will be prioritized for mobility hubs associated with priority transit corridors, including through updated zoning.

-       2.2.4.3 Upper- and single-tier municipalities, in consultation with lower-tier municipalities, will determine the size and shape of major transit station areas and delineate their boundaries in official plans.

-       2.2.4.5 Major transit station areas will be planned to achieve a minimum gross density target of 150 residents and jobs combined per hectare (for express GO rail)

Staff made note of the committees concerns about the erosion of local powers through some of the definition changes between 2006 and the proposed 2016. 

Managing Growth – Employment

Current (2006)

Major Office Definition: Major office is generally defined as freestanding office buildings or 10,000 m2 or greater, or with 500 jobs or more.

Proposed (2016)

Major Office Definition: Freestanding office buildings of approximately 4,000 square metres of floorspace or greater, or with approximately 200 jobs or more.

Prime Employment Definition: Definition: Areas of employment within settlement areas that are designated in an official plan and protected over the long-term for uses that are land extensive or have low employment densities and require these locations, including manufacturing, warehousing and logistics and appropriate associated uses and ancillary facilities.

The following matters were raised by the committee:

-       There appears to be a decrease in Oakville’s ability to direct growth, and the committee would like to ensure that Oakville retains local power to direct employment growth.

-       There is concern with the push to direct major office  towards  growth areas only.

-       A member expressed concern that the direction of development seems more appropriate for a large urban city, as opposed to a smaller town.

-       There is a general consensus by committee members to contest local power loss across the region.

Implementation and Interpretation                                                               

Supplementary Direction

Current (2006)

5.3 The Minister of Infrastructure will work with other Ministers of the

Crown, municipalities and other stakeholders on the following key pieces of further analysis, in order to implement this Plan:

1. Verification and finalization of the built boundary;

2. Assessment of the need for new designated greenfield areas;

3. Determination of the approximate size and location of the urban

growth centres …

Proposed (2016)

5.2.2.1 In order to implement this

Plan, the Minister will, where appropriate, identify, establish or update the following:

a) The built boundary;

b) The size and location of the urban growth centres;

c) A standard methodology for land needs assessment;

d) Prime employment areas, where necessary; and

e) Data standards for monitoring implementation of this Plan.

The following matters were raised by the committee:

-      A Provincial Secretariat could be set up to coordinate community infrastructure for planned complete communities and review how funds are distributed at a Cabinet level to implement the Growth Plan.

-      A member noted, as an example of required coordination at the Provincial level, the Big Move identified that a Trafalgar Road BRT would be operational by 2015, which has not happened. 

-      There is a shift in decisions regarding land budgets and growth

management to the Province.

Infrastructure to Support Growth

Transportation – General

Current (2006)

-       Coordinate transportation and land use planning, and investment.

-       Goals – connectivity, balance, sustainability, multi-modal, safe

-       Transportation demand management policies in official plans.

-       TDM policies in OP or other planning documents.

Proposed (2016)

-       New sections for goods movement and corridors.

-       Complete streets approach for design, refurbishment or reconstruction.

-       Add GHG reduction as a goal in sustainable trip making.

-       Add programs to TDM policies, and list goals of TDM – reduce trip distance and time; increase the modal share of alternatives to cars; prioritize AT, transit and goods movement; and target significant trip generators.

Integrated Planning

Current (2006)

Section is called Infrastructure Planning in current Plan.

-       Identifies “Ministers of the Crown”, “Minister of Infrastructure”.

-       Infrastructure investment will facilitate intensification.

-       Strategic infrastructure needs will be identified through multiyear infrastructure planning, and sub-area assessments of transit and transportation, and water and wastewater systems.

Proposed (2016)

-       More general – “Province”, not “Ministers”.

-       Infrastructure investment – also facilitate higher density development in strategic growth areas.

-       Asset management plans - infrastructure vulnerability, and ways to increase resilience.

-       Consider climate change impacts.

-       Province and partners will identify strategic infrastructure needs through multi-year infrastructure planning for the transportation system and public service facilities.

Jill Stephen, Senior Manager of Transportation made the following comments:

-       There is no definition for the plan for integrated planning, but components, plans and disciplines are included.

-       Infrastructure plans should leverage the investments that have already been made or are planned in order to direct growth and development in accordance with the Plan, including achieving minimum intensification and density targets and providing sufficient infrastructure capacity in strategic growth areas.

-       Budgets and priorities need to be aligned across the board.

-       The Minister of Infrastructure will work with other Ministers of the Crown and other public sector partners to identify strategic infrastructure needs to support the implementation of this Plan through multi-year infrastructure planning, and through the sub-area assessment of transit and transportation, and water and wastewater systems.

-       Staff suggest that the province needs to take the lead and demonstrate its commitment to the growth plan itself by focusing its investment in public service facilities in a manner consistent with this plan and that text should be added to this section to state that the province will prioritize reviews of environmental assessments and part 2 order requests for growth plan related infrastructure.

Complete Streets

Current (2006)

Elements of complete streets, included, but the specific term is not used.

Proposed (2016)

Specific policy added (3.2.2, #3) regarding including a complete streets approach in the design, refurbishment or reconstruction of the existing and planned street network, to ensure the needs and safety of all road users, including pedestrians, cyclists, transit-users and operators, and drivers of cars and trucks are considered and appropriately accommodated.

Ms. Stephen raised the point that no definition for the term “complete streets” has been provided by the Province, and that having a specific definition for this plan would be helpful.  She added that definitions for the terms refurbishment and reconstruction should be defined for the plan.

The following matters were raised by the committee:  

-       Agree with staff that the Province needs to define the terms above so that a local definition can be defined.

-       Should Oakville ask for the powers required to meet objectives related to all transportation goals?

-       Implementation tools are required for Section #3.

-       Would like to maintain and possibly strengthen local objective setting where possible.

Climate Change

Current (2006)

Not included as a policy theme

Proposed (2016)

-       Specifically mentioned in Part 3

-       Integrated Planning (3.2.1), Transportation – General (3.2.2), Moving People (3.2.3) have policies related to climate change or GHG reductions.

-       Stormwater Management (3.2.7) has a policy related to extreme weather events.

Ms. Stephen discussed that the transportation infrastructure policies in the current plan mention increasing the use of active transportation and transit, but focus heavily on providing balance and choice regarding how people move around, more than climate change impacts.  Under integrated planning, policy 3.2.1 2d states in part that Planning for new or expanded infrastructure will occur in an integrated manner, considering the impacts of a changing climate.

The following matters were raised by the committee:

-       Municipalities should have the authority to set individual GHG reduction goals and objectives.

-       The Province states that any reduction in GHG emissions is positive, yet on a local level should Oakville be setting milestones and measures to better achieve the emission reductions?

-       Municipalities will require proper tools from the Province to implement and meet goals.

-       Oakville should be asking for the powers required to meet objectives related to modal split targets.

-       Oakville would like to maintain and where necessary or applicable streamline local objective setting.

Ms. Clohecy explained that it’s important for the Province to set clear definitions so that all regions and municipalities start from the same place, giving us the tools to set local objectives.

Active Transportation

Current (2006)

-       “Pedestrian and bicycle networks”.

-       Within existing communities and new development.

-       Provide linkages, including dedicated lane space for bicyclists on the major street network where feasible.

Proposed (2016)

-         “Active transportation networks”.

-         Comprehensive networks.

-         Adds “other users of active transportation”.

-         Continuous linkages, including dedicated lane space for bicyclists on the major street network, where feasible, or other safe and convenient alternatives.

Ms. Stephen expressed that these changes are in line with the principles Oakville has already set at a local level.

Transit

Current (2006)

-       Transit infrastructure to shape growth

-       Priority on increasing capacity to support intensification areas.

-        Expanding service so as to achieve transit-supportive densities.

-       Facilitating improved linkages from nearby neighbourhoods to urban growth centres, major transit areas and other intensification areas.

Proposed (2016)

-       Prioritizing areas with existing or planned higher densities to optimize ROI and efficiency and viability of transit service levels.

-       Increasing capacity to support strategic growth areas

-       Expanding service to areas that have achieved (planned to achieve) transit-supportive densities.

-       Facilitating improved linkages between and within municipalities

-       Provincial GHG targets

-       Work to support transit service integration within and across municipal boundaries.

Discussion ensued and staff and the committee raised the following points:

-       The new plan includes subtle but significant changes.

-       Public transportation will be the first priority for infrastructure planning.

-       The current plan discusses more about using transit to shape growth, as opposed to the new plan addresses using transit to support strategic growth areas, the difference is shape vs. support.

-       The new plan includes facilitating better linkages between and within municipalities as one of the criteria on which transit decisions should be made, rather than just focusing on transit within municipalities.

-       The new policy (3.2.3 #3) says that municipalities are to work with transit operators, the Province, Metrolinx and each other to support transit service integration within and across municipal boundaries.

-       Staff have suggested that more clarification be provided regarding the expectation to plan to support transit service integration. Also, more information on the expected roles of municipalities, transit providers, Province and Metrolinx is required.

-       Staff mentioned that providing transit isn’t just about capital for buses and stops, but also road network and infrastructure improvements for strong linkages and services expansions.

-       Staff believe that decisions on transit planning need to also focus on how to get more riders onto transit to increase mode share and improve viability of transit as a choice for commuters and travelers. 

-       Operating funds are important, where will the increased investment come from?

-       The committee would like to know the impact of the loss of the word “shape” and the impact on the language in the Official Plan.

-       The definition for “integrated transit” is required.

-       More information is required on the premise for integrated planning, beyond transportation and integrated services into the Master Plans.

-       The committee addressed that development charges and other provincial funding is needed to support transit.

-       Staff and the Committee would like clarification on the role of Metrolinx.

-       Clarification from the Province regarding if these responsibilities fall to upper or lower tier of municipalities.

-       Further clarification of the term “moving people” should be provided.

-       Transportation Master Plan requires defined targets.

-       The policies presented are okay, it is the implementation and the funding associated with the solutions and how to get there that requires further clarification.

-       New revenue tools to support transit are required.

-       More discussion to take place surrounding fare integration and costs associated with it.

Moving Goods

Current (2006)

-       The first priority of highway investment is to facilitate efficient goods movement by linking inter-modal facilities, international gateways, and communities within the GGH.

-       Specific ministerial titles included in policies.

-       Corridor planning – Ministries, agencies and “municipalities”.

Proposed (2016)

-       “Communities” removed from priority statement.

-       Prime Employment Areas

-       New section (3.2.5) for Infrastructure Corridors.

-       Corridor protection as per PPS policies.  

-       Planning for development, optimization or expansion of corridors and supporting facilities - Province, other public agencies and upper- and single tier municipalities.

-       Co-location of linear facilities.

Ms. Stephen addressed that in the current plan, there are more moving goods policies – in the proposed 2016 plan, the policies are split into two sections – moving goods (3.2.4) and infrastructure corridors (3.2.5).

With respect to the current plan, the corridor planning policy refers to municipalities generally, but in the proposed 2016 plan only upper and single tier municipalities are included with the province and other public agencies as being responsible for planning for developing, optimizing or expanding corridors and supporting facilities. 

Staff suggests that there should also be a role for the local municipality.  Midtown Oakville is a prime example – A provincially designated Urban Growth Centre, adjacent to the provincial highway network, with a GO transit station and along a major regional road corridor – but also with significant local infrastructure improvement needs identified and an important role for local transit to play connecting to the GO network and to move people into, out of and around help them travel within the UGC.  All those parts need to be integrated and connected, and Oakville needs to remain at the table as well, for developing the plans for corridor works impacting Midtown Oakville, just as the Province, Metrolinx and the Region also have roles.

The committee agreed that it is important to maintain a local role in planning and decision making.

Watershed Planning

Current (2006)

Not included in current plan.

Proposed (2016)

-       Watershed as a geographic area.

-       Watershed planning – comprehensive look at all the things that can impact water quality and quantity.

-       Undertaken at many scales.

-       More specific for smaller geographic areas. Importance of a clean and sustainable supply of water is highlighted.

-       Informs water infrastructure planning.

-       Vulnerability assessments.

Discussion ensued and staff and the committee raised the following points:

-       This new concept, in terms of the Growth Plan, highlights the importance of water as a resource, and for a clean and sustainable supply of water for the health and prosperity of the region, and the need to protect both water quality and quantity.

-       This plan links the water, wastewater and stormwater management disciplines in a way that hasn’t explicitly been done in other planning documents. 

-       The need for watershed plans to inform water, wastewater and stormwater infrastructure planning is positive, but it also will require enhanced coordination between the Town, the Region and CH, and it is possible for all these groups to have different mandates.

-       The committee would like clarity to be provided regarding responsibilities associated with watershed planning and roles explained

-       Can the studies required for an OP review be paid through develoment charges? The committee noted that the level of detail provided in the Stormwater section is not also provided for inin other sections of the Plan such as Transit .

Stormwater Management

Current (2006)

One policy, under Water and Wastewater Systems, encouraging municipalities to implement and support innovative stormwater management actions as part of redevelopment and intensification.

Proposed (2016)

-       New section for stormwater.

-       Direction regarding the development of stormwater master plans.

-       Cumulative environmental impacts and assessment of extreme weather events.

-       Low impact development and green infrastructure to be incorporated where appropriate.

-        Full life-cycle costs to be identified.

-        Implementation and maintenance plans to be included.

Ms. Stephen explained that stormwater management has its own section in the proposed 2016 plan.  It was explained that the stormwater master plans are to assess the cumulative environmental impacts of stormwater from planned and existing development and that an assessment of how extreme weather events could exacerbate those impacts. Provincial direction on assessing the effects of extreme weather events is required to support municipalities. Staff would also like to see “where appropriate” be added to the use of LID techniques because some soil types and topography do not support the use of LID.

The committee requested more information on Burlington’s  response to the proposed \stormwater master plan policies.

Public Service Facilities

Current (2006)

Definition: Community infrastructure refers to lands, buildings, and structures that support the quality of life for people and communities by providing public services for health, education, recreation, socio-cultural activities, security and safety, and affordable housing.

-       Less detail regarding access and location.

-       Services planning, funding and delivery sectors – encouraged to develop strategy, facilitate coordination.

Proposed (2016)

-       Community infrastructure replaced by Public Service Facilities.

-       Definition: Public Service

Facilities - Lands, buildings and structures for the provision of programs and services provided or subsidized by a government or other body, such as social assistance, recreation, police and fire protection, health and educational programs, and cultural services. Public service facilities do not include infrastructure. (PPS, 2014)

-       Co-locate Public Service Facilities in community hubs.

-       Maintain and adapt existing public service facilities and spaces as community hubs.

-       Public service facilities near strategic growth areas, accessible by AT, transit - preferred community hubs.

-       Preference to sites accessible by AT and transit.

-       Municipalities to collaborate and consult with service planning, funding and delivery sectors.

Discussion ensued and staff and the committee raised the following points:

-       The proposed 2016 plan has replaced the title of this section with Public Service Facilities, from the 2006 term Community Infrastructure.  The new term is taken directly from the Provincial Policy Statement.

-       Inclusive of “Lands, buildings and structures for the provision of programs and services provided or subsidized by a government or other body, such as social assistance, recreation, police and fire protection, health and educational programs, and cultural services. Public service facilities do not include infrastructure”.

-       The Public Service Facilities definition adds the governmental role, and is clearer – for example, replacing “safety and security” with police and fire protection, terms that are more specific.

-       Affordable housing is removed from the definition, and from this section of the Plan.  It has been placed in the section on Where and How to Grow.

-       Staff would like to see school boards and other public service providers brought into the process of identifying and working to develop community hubs, with the province, to bring these initiatives into compliance with the land use densities and directions of this plan.

-       The committee would like to know the result and impact of moving Affordable Housing out of this section.

-       Oakville would like more direction provided from the Province on what constitutes a community hub and the roles of health hubs.

-       Staff explained that it includes everything from recreation centres to fire stations.

-       The committee would like to know who will own the policy framework and definition of community hubs, Province or Municipality?

-       A member expressed concern that this may lead to downloaded costs to municipalities and would like more clarity.

-       The committee would like to know the financial implications and responsibilities of co-locating new facilities (community hubs)  over the long term. Oakville has been the lead  on co-location but in the long run ends up buying back the facitlities that it financed originally.

-       It is clear in the proposed 2016 plan that Municipalities are identified as the lead, and are to collaborate and consult with service planning, funding and delivery sectors to facilitate the co-ordination and planning of community hubs and other public service facilities.

Mr. Ray Green, CAO, addressed the committee regarding transit and infrastructure and made the following comments:

-       The Provincial Policy Statement regarding Transit may seem vague because it is.

-       Transit is a very expensive endeavour and some of those costs are being downloaded to municipalities, while the Province remains in the role of setting the targets and objectives.

-       The municipality will need new revenue tools to continue developing transit in the way the Province has outlined.

-       The Province encourages fare integration, but the TTC is not on board.  There may be fare integration around the GTA without Toronto.

-       The Province owns 80% of the land for transportation, meaning they could build new facilities and require that municipalities be responsible for operating transit services.

Protecting what’s Valuable

Natural Heritage Systems

Current (2006)

4.2.1.3 Planning authorities are encouraged to identify natural heritage features and areas that complement, link, or enhance natural systems.

Proposed (2016)

4.2.2.2 Official plans will incorporate a natural heritage system as mapped by the Province, and will apply appropriate designations and policies to maintain, restore or improve the diversity and connectivity of the system and the long-term ecological or hydrologic functions of the features and areas as set out in the policies in this subsection and the policies in subsections 4.2.3 and 4.2.4.

Deferral to PPS 2014 for NHS within settlement areas already.

Kirk Biggar, Senior Planner presented this policy and informed the committee that Oakville has a wide range of natural heritage policies and systems and is equipped to implement this aspect of the growth plan.

Climate Change

Current (2006)

Not addressed in the current Growth Plan.

Proposed (2016)

4.2.10.1 Upper- and single-tier municipalities will develop policies in their official plans to identify actions that will reduce greenhouse gas emissions and address climate change adaptation goals, aligned with the Ontario Climate Change Strategy, 2015 and Action Plan.

4.2.10.c) establish municipal interim and long-term greenhouse gas emission reduction targets that support provincial targets and reflect consideration of the goal of net-zero communities, and monitor and report on progress made towards the achievement of these targets.

Definition: Net zero communities - Communities that meet their energy demand through low-carbon or carbon-free forms of energy and offset, preferably locally, any releases of greenhouse gas emissions that cannot be eliminated. Net-zero communities include a higher density built form, and denser and mixed-use development patterns that ensure energy efficiency, reduce distances travelled, and improve integration with transit, energy, water and wastewater systems.

Discussion ensued and staff and the committee raised the following points:

-       The upper and single tiers are setting the regulations for the lower-tier to implement, both staff and the committee would like to see the lower tier be able to implement as well.

-       A member asked if Oakville can include in the Official Plan options to hold subdivisions to certain standards regarding GHG emission reductions.

-       A member would like higher level policies to be “higher statements”

Growing the Greenbelt and the Urban River Valley

Mr. Biggar informed the committee that the 2005 Greenbelt Plan included Bronte Creek Provincial Park and was also applied to lands north of the 407.

A few years ago there was a process called Growing the Greenbelt which was a provicnai lintiaitive supported by Oakville Council. This process eventually led to the development of the Urban River Valley designation which was applied to the Glenorchy Preserve.

The proposed Greenblt Plans (2016) propsed to expand the urban river valley designation to 21 urban rivers and  for Oakvlle this  includes Bronte Creek, Sixteen Mile Creek and Fourteen Mile Creek..  The Urban River Valley governs publically owned lands, but also protects all lands found within the designated area.

Discussion between staff and the committee ensued and the following concepts were raised:

-       The Urban River Valley should be applied to all lands, not just publicly owned lands.

-       The committee requires more information on how the Urban River Valley supports Oakville’s Harbours areas, as well the role of buffers and hazards and development permissions

-       Staff noted that the Urban River Valley designation refers to the policies in the local Official Plan for how these lands may be protected or developed.

General Discussion and Comments with Committee

-       The committee would like to know the relationship between the Growth Plan and the Official Plan, and if the Official Plan can be stricter providing it adheres to the Growth Plan.

-       The committee believes that Oakville needs a stronger ability and every possible opportunity to manage and direct growth strategically and locally.

-       Staff and the committee discussed possible appeals of the Official Plan and it was expressed that Oakville needs to be more reliant on a comprehensive review.

-       The committee believes that Oakville should be protected from unnecessary appeals following the approval of the Official Plan.

-       The committee would like a copy of the presentation forwarded to them for review and in the future would like the presentation in advance for review. 

There were no information items.

-           Employment and Commercial Review: Employment Land Demand and Supply Analysis.

-           Minutes from today’s session will be brought to Planning and Development Council on September 6, 2016.

-           Committee comments from today’s session will be brought to Planning and Development Council on October 3, 2016 as part of a staff report on the Province of Ontario  - Coordinated Land Use Planning Review. These comments will form part of the submission to the province for October 31, 2016.

The Mayor adjourned the meeting at 3:30 p.m.