Niagara 2201 St
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Administration Office of the Regional Clerk Niagara 2201 St. David's Road W, PO Box 1042, Thorold,Sub-item ON L2V 4T7 12 Telephone: 905-685-4225 Toll-free: 1-800-263-7215 Fax: 905-687-4977 www.niagararegion.ca July 24, 2015 CL 13-2014, July 23, 2015 PDC 10-2015, July 15, 201 5 Report PDS 31-2015 LOCAL AREA MUNICIPALITIES SENT ELECTRON/CALLY Province of Ontario Coordinated Policy Review Mapping Submission PDS 31-2015 Regional Council, at its meeting of July 23, 2015, approved the following recommendation of its Public Works Committee: That Report PDS 31-20151 dated July 15, 2015, respecting Province of Ontario Coordinated Policy Review Mapping Submission, BE RECEIVED and the following recommendations BE APPROVED: 1. That Regional Council ENDORSE the maps attached to Report PDS 31-2015 (Appendices I - VII), which form the second component of the Region's submission to the 2015 Coordinated Policy Review process; and, 2. That a copy of this report BE FORWARDED to the local area municipalities, the Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority and the local MPPs. A copy of Report PDS 31-2015 is enclosed for your information. The report in its entirety (including appendices), may be found at the following link: http://www. n iagararegion.ca/council/Council%20Documents/2015/pdc-agenda-ju ly-15 2015.pdf .../2 Yours truly, QL)W__ Ralph Walton Regional Clerk :amn cc: C. D'Angelo, Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority E. Acs, Planner J. Docker, Planner T . Donia, Project Manager K. Martel, Planner M. L. Tanner, Director, Community and Long Range Planning/Chief Planner N. Smagata, Administrative Assistant N. Oakes, Executive Assistant to the Commissioner, Planning & Development Services PDS 31-2015 July 15, 2015 Page 1 REPORT TO: Planning and Development Committee MEETING DATE: Wednesday, July 15, 2015 SUBJECT: Province of Ontario Coordinated Policy Review Mapping Submission RECOMMENDATIONS 1. That Regional Council ENDORSE the maps attached to this report (Appendices I – VII), which form the second component of the Region’s submission to the 2015 Coordinated Policy Review process; and, 2. That a copy of this report BE FORWARDED to the local area municipalities, the Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority and the local MPP’s. KEY FACTS • The Province has initiated the Coordinated Policy Review of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, the Greenbelt Plan, the Niagara Escarpment Plan and the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan. • Influencing Provincial Plans was identified as one of Council’s Strategic Priorities under the theme of “Investment, Innovation, and Entrepreneurship”. • The Region provided Council endorsed comments on May 28, 2015 as the first of two components of the Regional submission to the Coordinated Policy Review. This report is the second component of the Region’s submission, and provides detailed mapping and supplemental commentary related to the Provincial Plans in Niagara. CONSIDERATIONS Financial The Regional Official Plan is required to conform to the three Provincial Plans that apply in Niagara. Any cost associated with achieving conformity to Provincial Plans is accounted for in the Planning and Development Services operating budget. PDS 31-2015 July 15, 2015 Page 2 Corporate The project team, as outlined in report PDS 22-2015, has continued to consult with representatives across the organization in order to ensure comments on the plans align with other corporate initiatives. The project team also participated in a second Regional Town Hall meeting with Provincial representatives held in Beamsville on May 21. As endorsed by Planning and Development Committee on May 13, 2015, planning staff delivered the same messaging at that meeting. Governmental Partners Throughout the review process, the project team has worked collaboratively with local municipal planning staff to develop a coordinated response. The maps attached with this report are the result of a collaborative effort, illustrating issues that impact the local municipalities and Region as a whole. Staff have received copies of the submissions made to the Province by the local municipalities, and have further consulted with local planning staff to identify and refine the areas shown in the attached mapping. The Region has also been trying to work better with the Province to ensure greater understanding and consideration of Niagara's specific issues that will ideally lead to positive change. The Province has been very receptive to learning about the issues in Niagara, as evidenced by having a second Regional Town Hall session in Niagara on May 21. Regional and many local staff have also had an opportunity to meet informally with Provincial staff to further discuss the Region’s submission and the specific issues in Niagara. The better working relationship demonstrates the efforts towards the Regional Priority of Influencing Provincial Plans. Through continued dialogue throughout this process and many of the related projects Council and staff are working together to bring positive changes to Niagara. Public and/or Service Users The project team has continued to meet with stakeholders from across Niagara as previously outlined in report PDS 22-2015. The project team was contacted by and assisted several residents by providing them with information and mapping which was used to create individual submissions to the Province. The project team has received copies of submissions made by private citizens as well as consulting firms representing clients in Niagara. All of this information has been reviewed in conjunction with local municipal partners, and has informed the mapping attached with this report. PDS 31-2015 July 15, 2015 Page 3 ANALYSIS The first component of the Region’s submission to the Coordinated Policy Review consisted of a textual submission outlining challenges and opportunities associated with the Greenbelt Plan, Growth Plan, and Niagara Escarpment Plan. The submission included detailed requests and recommendations and also indicated the Niagara Region would be following up with a second submission consisting of mapping that helps further explain some of the issues and requests and additional comments. The maps attached with this report (Appendix I - VII) form the second submission to the Province. The attached maps include: Appendix I This map illustrates four important changes the Region requested to the Niagara Escarpment Plan (NEP) Area. Three additional maps are provided as Appendix I a, I b, and I c to help clarify the proposed additions to the Plan. Removing Urban Land from the Plan Area The first pivotal change is the removal of urban designated land from the NEP area. This would allow Niagara municipalities to have greater power over how lands within the urban areas are developed or redeveloped without the limitations of outside development control measures. The Provincial Growth Plan requires density targets to be reached. As development pressures grow in urban areas, there may be opportunities for redevelopment in these areas that would benefit the municipalities to be better able to plan for this growth, while still respecting the key Escarpment features. This would also ensure that the urban design considerations the community has in place are respected, and reflects the needs and local character. Despite being within the Escarpment Area, two areas in Niagara on the Lake, St. David’s and Queenston, both have a majority of their urban lands not subject to NEP development control. Illustrating that this request makes sense, better allowing Niagara municipalities to plan for their future. Therefore, the Region requests that lands within urban areas in Niagara be removed from the Niagara Escarpment Plan area to allow for better urban development, while respecting the preservation of key environmental features that define the Escarpment. Recognizing the Fonthill Kame In 2013 Regional Council requested that the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF) acknowledge the work of Dr. Menzies to define the boundaries of the Fonthill PDS 31-2015 July 15, 2015 Page 4 Kame Delta, and properly consider the extent of this area as an Area of Natural and Scientific Interest (ANSI). The MNRF has defined a smaller area. Through this review process, the Region again reiterates its request for the lands outlined by Dr. Menzies as being part of the Kame to be recognized, and added to the Niagara Escarpment Plan area. The lands are identified in green on the map. Not Supporting Niagara Escarpment Commission (NEC) Proposed Plan Additions Three areas were proposed for addition to the NEP Area: a piece of land beside the General Motors Glendale Avenue plant in St. Catharines, three small pieces of land surrounding the Lathrop Nature Reserve in Pelham, and Calaguiro Estates, an established residential neighbourhood in Niagara Falls. After analysis of the three proposed areas, and discussions with local planning staff, it was determined that the proposed areas were selected based on inaccurate data and would create undue restrictions on already established residential and industrial properties. The Region requests that these proposed additions not be included in the Niagara Escarpment Plan Area. Appendix Ia. shows the lands proposed for addition in what NEC staff refer to as the General Motors Woods. The subject land is owned by Transport Canada, and Seaway Haulage Road is located within this area; a vehicle and equipment access point for the Welland Canal. Considering that federally owned land is exempt from the policies of the NEP, the addition of this land to the NEP area does not add protection or value. Furthermore, in the unlikely event this land was declared surplus by the Federal Government, given the proximity of the active General Motors plant, it would not be desirable to have heavily restricted land in the area of General Motors. Appendix Ib. shows the lands proposed for addition in what the NEC refers to as Lathrop Nature Preserve. The reality of this proposal is that with the exception of the 3 small parcels representing a combined total of 8.6 hectares, the Lathrop Nature Preserve is already within the NEP area.