DOCSLIB.ORG

Appendix K Transportation Technical Report Schedule “C” Class Environmental Assessment Study for Red Cedar / Cedar Avenue

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Appendix K Transportation Technical Report Schedule “C” Class Environmental Assessment Study for Red Cedar / Cedar Avenue Appendix K Transportation Technical Report Schedule “C” Class Environmental Assessment Study for Red Cedar / Cedar Avenue September 2020 Class Environmental Assessment for Red Cedar / Cedar Avenue from Langstaff Road East to High Tech Road Transportation System Technical Report (Revision 2) Regional Municipality of York August 12, 2019 Class Environmental Assessment for Red Cedar / Cedar Avenue from Langstaff Road East to High Tech Road Transportation System Technical Report (Revision 2) Contents 1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 5 1.1 Study Area ................................................................................................................................. 5 2 Planning Context ................................................................................................................................. 7 2.1 Provincial Planning Context ...................................................................................................... 7 2.2 Regional Planning Context ........................................................................................................ 9 2.2.1 York Region Transportation Master Plan (2016) ....................................................... 10 2.2.2 Richmond Hill/Langstaff Centre Transportation Study ............................................... 13 2.2.3 York Region Committee of the Whole Report No. 16, November 16, 2017: Richmond Hill/Langstaff Gateway Regional Centre – Growth Capacity and Timing ......................................................................................................................... 14 2.2.4 York Region Transportation Mobility Plan Guidelines for Development Applications (2016) ..................................................................................................... 15 2.3 Municipal and Other Relevant Planning Context .................................................................... 17 2.3.1 City of Richmond Hill .................................................................................................. 18 2.3.2 City of Markham ......................................................................................................... 29 2.3.3 Yonge Subway Extension .......................................................................................... 39 3 Existing Conditions ............................................................................................................................ 40 3.1 Current Land Use Context....................................................................................................... 40 3.2 Current Transportation System ............................................................................................... 40 3.2.1 Existing Road network................................................................................................ 40 3.2.2 Existing Transit Network............................................................................................. 41 3.2.3 Existing Pedestrian and Cyclist Network.................................................................... 45 3.3 Traffic Analysis ........................................................................................................................ 47 3.3.1 Methodology ............................................................................................................... 47 3.3.2 Existing Conditions Traffic Analysis ........................................................................... 50 3.3.3 Existing Traffic Operations ......................................................................................... 53 3.4 Active Transportation Analysis ................................................................................................ 57 3.4.1 Bicycle Level of Service ............................................................................................. 57 3.4.2 Pedestrian Level of Service ....................................................................................... 61 4 2041 Future Conditions ..................................................................................................................... 65 4.1 Future Land Use Context ........................................................................................................ 65 4.2 Future Transportation System Context / Plans ....................................................................... 66 4.3 Transportation Modelling Methodology ................................................................................... 67 4.4 Future Scenario Macro Analysis ............................................................................................. 68 4.4.1 Screenline and Link Analysis ..................................................................................... 68 4.4.2 Network Congestion Analysis .................................................................................... 69 4.4.3 Preliminary Macro Scenario Recommendations ........................................................ 70 4.5 Future 2041 Traffic Operations ............................................................................................... 70 4.5.1 Future Intersection Traffic Volumes ........................................................................... 71 4.5.2 Do Nothing (No Red Cedar / Cedar Avenue Extension) ............................................ 74 4.5.3 4-Lane Red Cedar / Cedar Avenue Extension ........................................................... 78 4.6 Traffic Infiltration Impact Analysis ........................................................................................... 85 4.7 Future Active Transportation ................................................................................................... 86 4.8 Future Transit / HOV Considerations ...................................................................................... 86 4.9 Signal Warrant Analysis .......................................................................................................... 87 August 12, 2019 | i Class Environmental Assessment for Red Cedar / Cedar Avenue from Langstaff Road East to High Tech Road Transportation System Technical Report (Revision 2) 4.9.1 Traffic Signal Warrants ............................................................................................... 87 4.9.2 Active Transportation Considerations ........................................................................ 88 4.10 Traffic Control Sensitivity Analysis .......................................................................................... 88 5 Recommendations ............................................................................................................................ 92 Tables Table 2-1: Provincial Planning Context ......................................................................................................... 7 Table 2-2: Regional Planning Context .......................................................................................................... 9 Table 2-3: Markham Langstaff Gateway Secondary Plan Growth Projections ........................................... 38 Table 2-4: Langstaff Gateway Infrastructure Phasing ................................................................................ 39 Table 3-1: Description of L.O.S. .................................................................................................................. 49 Table 3-2: Existing Turning Movement Counts ........................................................................................... 50 Table 3-3: Critical Movements under Existing Conditions .......................................................................... 53 Table 4-1: 2041 Population and Employment Forecast Assumptions ........................................................ 65 Table 4-2: Screenline Capacity Analysis – 2041 AM Peak Hour Scenarios ............................................... 69 Table 4-3: Network* VKT and VHT by Scenario, 2041 AM Peak Hour ...................................................... 70 Table 4-4: Critical Movements under Future Do Nothing Conditions ......................................................... 74 Table 4-5: Critical Movements Comparison of Do Nothing and 4-Lane Red Cedar / Cedar Avenue Extension Conditions ..................................................................................................................... 81 Table 4-6: Signal Warrant Justification – Red Cedar Ave & High Tech Rd ................................................ 87 Table 4-7: Signal Warrant Justification –Cedar Ave & Langstaff Rd .......................................................... 88 Table 4-8: Sensitivity Analysis – 2041 AM Peak Hour Intersection Operations ......................................... 89 Exhibits Exhibit 1-1: Study Area and Project Site Area .............................................................................................. 6 Exhibit 2-1: Proposed 2041 Road network (Source: YR-TMP) ................................................................... 11 Exhibit 2-2: Proposed 2041 Cycling Network (Source: YR-TMP) ............................................................... 12 Exhibit 2-3: Proposed 2041 Transit Network (Source: YR-TMP) ................................................................ 13 Exhibit 2-4: Richmond Hill/Langstaff Gateway Regional Centre ................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • April 30, 2021 Council Information Package
    1 Town of Newmarket Council Information Package Index of Attachments Date: April 30, 2021 Pages General Correspondence Items 1. Road Management Action on Invasive Phragmites 1 Township of The Archipelago April 19, 2021 2. Review of Farming and Agriculture in Richmond Hill 3 City of Richmond Hill April 19, 2021 3. Support For 988, A 3-Digit Suicide And Crisis Prevention Hotline 8 Town of Plympton-Wyoming April 20, 2021 4. Resolution of Support for Fire Departments 11 Town of Cochrane April 21, 2021 5. Application of the Carbon Tax on Primary Agriculture Producers 13 Municipality of Calvin April 21, 2021 6. Request for Paid Sick Leave 17 City of Cambridge April 22, 2021 7. 2021 Property Tax Rates 19 2 York Region April 26, 2021 8. ventureLAB 2020 Results 29 York Region April 26, 2021 9. 2020 Regional Centres and Corridors Update 39 York Region April 26, 2021 10. Growth and Development Review 2020 56 York Region April 26, 2021 11. 2020 Drinking Water Systems Report 108 York Region April 26, 2021 12. 2020 Integrated Management System Update Report for Water, 143 Wastewater and Waste Management York Region April 26, 2021 13. 2021 Speed Limit Revisions 154 York Region April 26, 2021 14. Pedestrian Crossover Policy Regional Roads 167 York Region April 26, 2021 15. Transportation Services Capital Infrastructure Status Update 201 York Region April 26, 2021 16. Cannabis Licensing and Enforcement 226 City of Port Colborne April 26, 2021 3 17. Support for Universal Paid Sick Days 229 Town of Shelburne April 28, 2021 18. Bus Stops on Dead End Roads 230 Township of Scugog April 28, 2021 19.
    [Show full text]
  • Affordability, Transit, and Housing: a Case Study of Vivanext on Yonge Street in Richmond
    Affordability, Transit, and Housing: A case study of Vivanext on Yonge Street in Richmond Hill and Newmarket by Goretti Maria Mpaka supervised by Dr. Jennifer Foster A Major Paper submitted to the Faculty of Environmental Studies in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master in Environmental Studies York University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada Date November 30, 2016 1 Abstract The GTA has experienced population growth in the past decade, and the majority of this growth is attributed to immigration. As municipalities push for more sustainable ways to travel, it is crucial that it is done in a just and equitable manner that caters to the diversity in cities. This includes cost effective means of travel for children, the elderly, families, low income communities, people with disabilities, and also the working population. There are many overlaps in these groups and they should not be considered as separate groups, for instance a working woman may have low income or high income. To fully harness the benefits of transit systems, walkable, compact and mixed use developments in proximity to transit stations have been suggested in the form of Transit-oriented Development (TOD). Transit and housing are big indicators of affordable neighborhoods. TOD has added to the equation of affordability in YR because of the low numbers of affordable housing along major transit corridors and Stations. York Region is becoming highly unaffordable, especially for low and moderate income earner. Policy solutions should not only cater for low income families but also alleviate the challenges of moderate income earners who spend more than 50% of their household income on housing.
    [Show full text]
  • TTC Ride Guide
    King-Vaughan Rd. Jefferson Sideroad 19th Ave. 19th Ave. 19th Ave. Woodstone 19th Ave. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Brookwood h ig Devons le 11 St. Subrisco Ave. TTC Surface Route Numbers and Names Coleraine Dr. Keele St. Bernard 1C Jane St. YONGE 'C' Leslie St. McCowan Rd. The Gore Rd. NEWMARKET 'B' Ave. 4 2 ANGLESEY 86 SCARBOROUGH Woodriver Mayfield Rd. 27 Warden Ave. Kennedy Rd. Bathurst St. Yonge Huntington Rd. 400 Weston Rd. 4 ANNETTE 87 COSBURN Dr. Nashville Kipling Ave. Pine Valley Dr. Rd. Bernard Woodbine Ave. Branch 5 AVENUE RD. 88 SOUTH LEASIDE 3A Teston Rd. Yorkland D Teston Rd. Bayview Ave. 6BAY 89 WESTON D Teston Rd. Elgin Mills 2 1C Elgin Mills Rd. Rd. W. •Rose Sat Elgin Mills Rd. 7 BATHURST 90 VAUGHAN 1A 8 Elgin Ride Guide Nashville Mills Rd. E. 9 BELLAMY 91 WOODBINE Rd. N. Taylor Mills 10 VAN HORNE 92 WOODBINE SOUTH 1C 2 1C 11 BAYVIEW 94 WELLESLEY Islington Ave. 3 49 N 12 KINGSTON RD. 95 YORK MILLS Countryside Dr. e w Dr. 96 WILSON Neal 14 GLENCAIRN 1A k . RICHMOND 4 i r S. Taylor Mills 15 EVANS 97 YONGE 8 k ve Crosby Ave. A 16 McCOWAN 98 SENLAC Yonge St. Pugsley e 1C 1C l Mill St. l 99 ARROW RD. i aughton Rd. 1A 3 3 17 BIRCHMOUNT lv N 4 R e c 20 CLIFFSIDE 100 FLEMINGDON PARK M Wright Dunlop d M . Roseh 107C,D St. 21 BRIMLEY 10th Line 102 MARKHAM RD.
    [Show full text]
  • Metrolinx Accessibility Status Report 2016
    Acknowledgements We would like to acknowledge the efforts of former Metrolinx Accessibility Advisory Committee (AAC) members Mr. Sean Henry and Mr. Brian Moore, both of whom stepped down from the AAC in 2016. They provided valuable input into our accessibility planning efforts. We would like to welcome Mr. Gordon Ryall and Ms. Heather Willis, who both joined the Metrolinx AAC in 2015. Lastly, we would like to thank all of the Metrolinx AAC members for the important work they do as volunteers to improve the accessibility of our services. Metrolinx Accessibility Status Report: 2016 1. Introduction The 2016 Metrolinx Accessibility Status Report provides an annual update of the Metrolinx Multi-Year Accessibility Plan published in December 2012, as well as the 2015 Metrolinx Accessibility Status Report. Metrolinx, a Crown agency of the Province of Ontario under the responsibility of the Ministry of Transportation, has three operating divisions: GO Transit, PRESTO and Union Pearson Express. This Status Report, in conjunction with the December 2012 Metrolinx Multi-Year Accessibility Plan, fulfills Metrolinx’s legal obligations for 2016 under the Ontarians with Disabilities Act (ODA), to publish an annual accessibility plan; and also under the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA), to publish an annual status report on its multi-year plan. The December 2012 Metrolinx Multi-Year Accessibility Plan and other accessibility planning documents can be referenced on the Metrolinx website at the following link: www.metrolinx.com/en/aboutus/accessibility/default.aspx. In accordance with the AODA, it must be updated every five years. Metrolinx, including its operating divisions, remains committed to proceeding with plans to ensure AODA compliance.
    [Show full text]
  • GO Transit Fare Increase
    Memorandum To: Metrolinx Board of Directors From: Greg Percy President, GO Transit Date: December 3, 2015 Re: Proposed GO Transit Fare Increase Executive Summary As part of the annual business plan process, an extensive review is undertaken of both operating expenses as well as other revenue opportunities to determine if a fare increase is warranted. Effective February 1, 2016, a GO Transit fare increase of approximately 5% is being recommended to meet the needs of our growing customer base and to ensure long term financial sustainability for the corporation. Staff are proposing to continue with a tiered fare increase approach, based on a four-tier system that exemplifies the fare-by-distance approach. Fares for short-distance trips would be frozen under this proposal. Base adult single fares would be increased as follows: Base Adult Single Fares Current Fare Increase Range $5.30 - $5.69 $0.00 $5.70 - $6.50 $0.40 $6.51 - $8.25 $0.50 > $8.25 $0.60 The discounts for the initial Adult PRESTO card fare would be increased from 10% to 11.15%. The discount on the initial PRESTO card fare for a student would increase from 17.25% to 18.40% while the discount on a senior fare would increase from 51.50% to 52.65%. The net result would be an approximate 5% effective rate of increase for the majority of our customers who use the PRESTO card. Additionally, PRESTO users will now pay less for short-distance trips due to the fact that the fares for these trips are not increasing while the initial discount for using PRESTO is increasing.
    [Show full text]
  • Special Council Meeting Will Address Essential and Time Sensitive Items
    Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville Special Council Agenda Tuesday March 24, 2020 10:00 AM Council Chambers 111 SANDIFORD DRIVE This Special Council Meeting will address essential and time sensitive items. As the Municipal Offices (111 Sandiford Drive) are now closed to the public, residents may listen to the meeting live online at townofws.ca/cmlivestream. Please note that the audio link will be available 5 minutes before the meeting is expected to start. Residents who wish to submit comments, which will form part of the public record, may write to the Town Clerk at [email protected]. In addition to the items to be discussed, Mayor Iain Lovatt will be making a statement regarding the current COVID-19 situation. Follow all council meetings on Whitchurch-Stouffville’s official council Twitter account @ws_townhall. Chair: Mayor Lovatt Page 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 7 1. Due to provincial direction Council are required to amend the Procedural By-law to facilitate electronic participation for members in a Council meeting. 2020-027-RE BEING A BY-LAW to amend Procedural By-law 2016- 001-RE being a by-law to govern the proceedings of Council Meetings (Electronic Participation) 3. Roll Call 4. Confirmation of Agenda 1. To confirm the agenda That Council confirm the agenda, as circulated. Council Agenda March 24, 2020 5. Declarations of Pecuniary Interest 6. Consideration of Items 8 - 15 1. Report No. FTS-007-20 2019 Statement of Remuneration and Expenses for Members of Council, Committees and Local Boards 1) That Council receive the Report No. FTS-007-20 for information.
    [Show full text]
  • TTC Rideguide
    5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Brookwood h 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ig Devons le Shaft sbury 1A t. L A 11 S Subrisco Ave. a v Yonge TTC Bus and Streetcar e Keele St. r r . Bernard Bernard a 1C Jane St. t t YONGE 'C' Route Numbers and Names Leslie St. NEWMARKET 'B' Ave 4 Canyon L Hill Ave. Woodriverh 27 . c 400 a 2 Anglesey 87 Cosbur n Weston Rd. n Bathurst St. 1A Dr. Pine Valley Dr. ra Woodbine Ave. orkland B 4 Annette 88 South Leaside Need TTC Maps & Information? Y 3A Teston Rd. Bayview Ave. 5 Avenue Rd. 89 Weston D Teston Rd. Elgin Mills 2 1C Elgin Mills Rd. D Rd. W. •Rose Sat Elgin Mills Rd. 6 Bay 90 Vaughan 1A 8 Elgin . Mills Rd. E. 7 Bathurst 91 Woodbine e N. Taylor Mills v 8 Broadview 92 Woodbine South Brandon A 4 k 1C Gate Dr. r 2 1C 9 Bellamy 94 Wellesley a 3 P l N 10 Van Horne 95 York Mills a n e r. e o w t D N 11 Bayview 96 Wilson s k n 1A . RICHMOND 4 i a e r r S. Taylor Mills 12 Kingston Rd. 97 Yonge 416-393-4636 8 k v Redstone C Crosby Ave. Rd. A 6 14 Glencair n 98 Willo wdale-Senlac Yonge St. P e 1C 1C l Mill St. ug S l i ughton Rd 3 h 15 Evans 99 Arrow Rd. v a . 1A Recorded & Faxback (24/7) l N sle 4 R i e c rl M d e 16 McCowan 100 Flemingdon Park www.ttc.ca y Wright Dunlop y M .
    [Show full text]
  • Transportation Master Plan Report
    Transportation Master Plan Final Report City of Toronto May 9, 2017 City of Toronto | ConsumersNext TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN REPORT Contents 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................11 1.1 Study Area and Background .......................................................................................11 1.2 TMP Purpose and EA Process....................................................................................12 2 Planning Context ................................................................................................................14 2.1 Local Area Characteristics ..........................................................................................14 2.1.1 Profile Summary ..................................................................................................14 2.1.2 Natural Environment ............................................................................................14 2.1.3 Cultural and Archaeological Heritage ...................................................................14 2.2 Provincial Planning Context ........................................................................................15 2.3 City of Toronto Policy Framework ...............................................................................16 2.3.1 Toronto Official Plan ............................................................................................16 2.3.2 Transportation Policies ........................................................................................16
    [Show full text]
  • SRPRS.20.004 – York Region's Municipal
    Staff Report for Council Meeting Date of Meeting: February 26, 2020 Report Number: SRPRS.20.004 Department: Planning and Regulatory Services Division: Policy Planning Subject: SRPRS.20.004 – York Region’s Municipal Comprehensive Review (Part 2): Major Transit Station Areas, Settlement Area Expansion, and Agricultural System Purpose: To provide Council with a summary of York Region’s Municipal Comprehensive Review (MCR) process to update the York Region Official Plan (ROP) as it relates to Major Transit Station Areas and Prime Agricultural Areas, and to seek Council’s endorsement of recommendations related to the Region’s MCR. Recommendation(s): a) That SRPRS.20.004 be received; b) That Council endorse the staff recommendations contained in SRPRS.20.004 for modifications to the identification, boundaries, and resident to job ratios of York Region’s proposed Major Transit Station Areas, as follows: i. Staff Recommendation 1: Link the Richmond Hill Centre and Bayview MTSAs, ii. Staff Recommendation 2: Investigate through the OP Update the inclusion of lands on the east side of Bathurst Street in the Bathurst/Highway 7 MTSA, iii. Staff Recommendation 3a: Consider Employment Conversion requests in setting of residents to jobs ratio, iv. Staff Recommendation 3b: Increase Bayview MTSA to a ratio of 80 residents to 20 jobs, and v. Staff Recommendation 3c: Increase Weldrick MTSA to a ratio of 80 residents to 20 jobs; City of Richmond Hill – Council Meeting Date of Meeting: February 26, 2020 Report Number: SRPRS.20.004 Page 2 c) That Council continue to direct City staff to communicate to the Region the desire to include the Richmond Hill (Newkirk) GO Station as a MTSA in the Region’s intensification framework.
    [Show full text]
  • Integrated Bilateral Agreement - Public Transit Stream Funding (Formerly PTIF-2)
    Clause 4 in Report No. 10 of Committee of the Whole was adopted, as amended, by the Council of The Regional Municipality of York at its meeting held on June 28, 2018. 4 Integrated Bilateral Agreement - Public Transit Stream Funding (Formerly PTIF-2) Minute No. 103 - Integrated Bilateral Agreement – Public Transit Stream Funding (Formerly PTIF 2) Report: Amendment to Recommendations It was moved by Mayor Barrow, seconded by Regional Councillor Heath that Council receive the memorandum from Bill Hughes, Commissioner of Finance dated June 14, 2018 and refer to Clause 4 of Committee of the Whole Report No. 10. Carried (See Minute No. 106) Minute No. 106 - That the recommendations be amended as described in the memorandum from Bill Hughes, Commissioner of Finance dated June 14, 2018. Carried (See Minute No. 103.) 1. Receipt of the presentation by Bill Hughes, Commissioner of Finance at the June 7, 2018 Committee of the Whole meeting. 2. Council endorse the following recommendations, as amended, contained in the report dated May 22, 2018 from the Commissioner of Finance: 1. Council endorse the selection of transit projects (illustrated in Table 13) that are currently in the Region’s ten-year Capital Plan for funding under the Public Transit Stream of the Investing in Canada Plan based on the criteria outlined in this report: Committee of the Whole 1 Transportation Services June 7, 2018 Integrated Bilateral Agreement - Public Transit Stream Funding (Formerly PTIF-2) a. Transit Bus Replacement b. Transit Bus Growth/Expansion c. Transit Facilities d. Transit Technology e. GO/RER Grade Separations 2. The Chief Administrative Officer and the Commissioner of Finance be authorized to submit an application on behalf of the Region in the event that an application is required during the Council election hiatus.
    [Show full text]
  • ​COVID-19 Durham Resources
    ​ UPDATED April 16 2020 ​ ​COVID-19 Durham Resources *Please note that the attached documents are currently up to date, but that in all likelihood some of the information might become outdated in the coming weeks. As such, please treat this as a guide and please connect directly with the agencies and services listed via phone, email or by visiting their websites for the most up to date information. 1 ​ UPDATED April 16 2020 ​ Table of Contents COMMUNITY SERVICES AND OUTREACH …………………………..…. Page 3-8 ​ CRISIS RESPONSE ….……………………………………………...………...…. Page 9 ​ EMERGENCY CHILDCARE ….……………………...………………………..... Page 10 ​ FOOD BANKS ……………………………………………………………….. Page 11-18 ​ (including Grocery Delivery Services) ………………………………..…... Page 18 ​ HOUSING SECURITY ……………………………………………………… Page 19 ​ INCOME SECURITY …………………………………………………………... Page 21 ​ NATIVE RESOURCES …………………………………………………………..Page 23 ​ MEDICAL SERVICES ……………………………………………………….. Page 23 ​ (including Pharmacy’s that provide delivery) ……………………….….. Page 24 ​ SUPPORTS FOR VICTIMS OF VIOLENCE ……………………………..….. Page 25 ​ RESOURCES FOR INDEPENDENT YOUTH …………………………… Page 26 ​ TRANSIT ……………………………………………………………………. Page 28 ​ 2 ​ UPDATED April 16 2020 ​ COMMUNITY SERVICES AND OUTREACH Child & Youth Supports Central Intake: ​ Central Intake is the front door to services and supports for children and youth who need help with a mental health issue or who have a diagnosed autism spectrum disorder. Central Intake can answer your questions, guide you through the referral process or steer you to an agency or service in the community that can best meet your needs. For service, please call Central Intake; 1-888-454-6275 or https://www.kinark.on.ca/contact-us/ Frontenac Youth services: (Free)- Age 12+ ​ Frontenac Youth Services is a non-profit organization that provides services and programming for youth in Durham Region who experience mental health concerns.
    [Show full text]
  • Langstaff Gateway Secondary Plan)
    Report No. 6 of the Planning and Economic Development Committee Regional Council Meeting of June 23, 2011 8 AMENDMENT NO. 183 AND 184 TO THE TOWN OF MARKHAM OFFICIAL PLAN (LANGSTAFF GATEWAY SECONDARY PLAN) The Planning and Economic Development Committee recommends: 1. Receipt of the following communications: (a) Ana Bassios, Commissioner of Planning and Regulatory Services, Town of Richmond Hill, dated June 15, 2011; and (b) Christine Hyde, Planner, York Catholic District School Board, dated June 15, 2011; and 2. Adoption of the recommendations contained in the following report, undated, from the Commissioner of Planning and Development Services. 1. RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that: 1. The Commissioner of Planning and Development Services be authorized to issue the Notice to approve Amendment No. 183 and 184 to the Official Plan of the Town of Markham, subject to the modifications set out in Attachment 1 to this report. 2. A request be sent to the Minister of Municipal Affairs by the Commissioner of Planning and Development Services to amend the Parkway Belt West Plan to either, delete lands from the Parkway Belt West Plan or to amend the Parkway Belt West Plan to clarify that the policies of the Growth Plan prevail. 2. PURPOSE The report recommends the approval of the Langstaff Gateway Secondary Plan that implements the Provincial Places to Grow Growth Plan and Regional Centre policies of the Regional Official Plan. The Town of Markham Official Plan amendments 184 and 183 create the new Langstaff Gateway Planning District and the new Secondary Plan to implement the vision of the Town of Markham’s Langstaff Land Use & Built Form Master Plan and the Regional Centre policies in the York Region Official Plan.
    [Show full text]