Recommendation: INSTRUCT staff to:

Transcription

1 Page 1 of Report PB Planning and Building Department TO: Community Development Committee SUBJECT: Tremaine Road/Dundas Street (Evergreen) Community Planning Update Report Number: PB File Number: Report Date: October 31, 2012 Ward Affected: All Date to Committee: November 12, 2012 Date to Council: November 26, 2012 Recommendation: INSTRUCT staff to: SUPPORT a mixed use land option at the Ontario Municipal Board, in accordance with the attached Official Plan Schedule (Sketch No. 3) and proceed with developing a corresponding secondary plan; OR alternatively, SUPPORT the landowner s land use concept plan at the Ontario Municipal Board (as shown on Sketch No. 6 or 7); and, Prepare a secondary plan for the Evergreen community based on a comprehensive review of the developer s concept plan and a full assessment of the critical issues outlined in report PB-82-12, including the comments from consultation with departments, agencies and the public, AND inform the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) pre-hearing scheduled for November 26, 2012 of the Committee direction to assess the landowner concept plan for the purpose of developing a secondary plan. Purpose: Address goal or action in strategic plan Establish new or revised policy or service standard Respond to legislation Respond to staff direction Address other area of responsibility

2 Page 2 of Report PB Reference to Strategic Plan: Vibrant Neighbourhoods Prosperity Excellence in Government N/A The planning for the Tremaine/Dundas (Evergreen) greenfield land involves initiatives related to the three strategic directions, including but not limited to: Vibrant Neighbourhoods Burlington will create and improve neighbourhoods in harmony with the natural environment. Prosperity Burlington will create a prosperous community that provides a future for all, including our children. A community of choice for both employers and families. A place to spend a lifetime, with work, volunteer and housing options that are appropriate for every stage of life. Excellence in Government Ensure we are environmentally sustainable. Forge strong community relationships, with open dialogue and citizen involvement in municipal issues. Background: Official Plan and Ontario Municipal Board Appeal In October 2006, City Council adopted OPA (Official Plan Amendment) 55, containing revisions to the 1997 City Official Plan as a result of the Five Year Official Plan Review initiated in The aim was to implement the findings of the following studies: the Burlington and Oakville Strategic Land Use Options Study, 2000, the 2000, 2002 and 2006 Burlington Employment Land Needs Studies, and the 2002 City of Burlington Employment Lands Review. The Tremaine and Dundas farm lands were designated as Employment Lands on Schedule A Settlement Pattern of OPA 55. This designation was appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board by the Evergreen developer who was proposing an all residential use of the lands. The lands within the Evergreen Study Area (as shown on Sketch No. 1), outside of the Bronte Creek valley, remained as Land Use

3 Page 3 of Report PB To Be Determined on Schedule B Comprehensive Land Use Plan, Urban Planning Area. The basis for this was that the City of Burlington, the Town of Oakville and Halton Region had not completed the Secondary Plan Study to identify specific land use designations and policies required by the process outlined in the 1997 City Official Plan. In October, 2007, PL-80/07 was considered by Council to deal with modifications to OPA 55 recommended by the Region of Halton, based on their review. At that time, City Council was requested to make modifications to OPA 55 (which had been adopted by Council on October 10, 2006) by representatives of the Evergreen group to accommodate a residential proposal for the Norton/Stevenson lands within the subject Study Area (see Location Sketch No. 1). Prior to the adoption of OPA 55, the owners of these lands had not made any representations to Council regarding any re-designation or the proposed policies affecting these lands. In December 2007, Council refused to make the revisions proposed by the proponents of the Evergreen application, and the lands remained identified as Employment Lands on Schedule A of OPA 55 and Land Use To Be Determined on Schedule B, with the policy requirement that a Joint Inter-Municipal Secondary Plan be undertaken to identify specific land uses for the subject Study Area. In December 2007 applications for Official Plan Amendment, Rezoning and Plan of Subdivision were made by Evergreen Community (Burlington) Ltd. to permit 1275 dwellings on the Tremaine/Dundas lands comprising 5421, 5453, 5463 Dundas Street and 3232 Tremaine Road (see Location Sketch No. 1). The applications as submitted were not considered complete. They did not include a complete set of the supporting studies requested by the City and other commenting agencies during pre-consultation with the applicants and as a result the processing of the applications has not been completed by the City. On January 4, 2008, OPA 55 was approved by the Region of Halton with certain policies and land use designations referred to the Ontario Municipal Board. The Evergreen interests mentioned above appealed the Employment Lands designation on Schedule A, for the Tremaine/Dundas location and policies in Part VI, Section 1.3 relating to development application pre-consultation. The Town of Oakville has party status at the Ontario Municipal Board hearing relating to OPA 55 as it relates to the Tremaine Road lands. The Town has continued to express its concerns with

4 Page 4 of Report PB the inclusion of residential uses on the Tremaine/Dundas lands due to potential impacts and conflicts with the approved employment land use designation on the east side of Tremaine Road within the North Oakville West Secondary Plan ( NOSP ). The Region of Halton is the approval authority for the adoption of the secondary plan and the Official Plan amendment for this area. Land Use Options Report (PB-36-11) On September 26, 2011, a staff report was provided to Council concerning background and options prepared for the Tremaine and Dundas Secondary Plan. The Council decision gave support for a mixed use development, as follows: Whereas the subject site has designated land use to be determined and does not form part of the City s current designated employment inventory; Receive the report entitled Tremaine and Dundas Secondary Plan: Background and Options Report, prepared by Macaulay Shiomi Howson Ltd., dated September 2009, along with the addendum letter dated, January 11, 2010; and Support a mixed use development substantially in compliance with the attached generalized and conceptualized sketch (see Sketch No. 2). The sketch is not to scale and reflects the organization and general configuration of uses on the site, not the quantity or exact location of the uses depicted; and Direct the Director of Planning and Building to incorporate environmentally sustainable neighbourhood development and building policies into the secondary plan as criteria for the approval of residential development, site plan and employment lands development within the area; and, Direct the Director of Planning and Building to provide an update report in the first quarter of 2012, following consultation with the Town of Oakville, Region of Halton and Town of Milton. (PB-36-11).

5 Page 5 of Report PB Secondary Plan Process Schedule (PB-13-12) In accordance with this direction, on April 30, 2012, Council approved a schedule for the Evergreen Secondary Plan process (contained in Appendix I). The report outlined a proposed schedule for the secondary plan process that started in early 2012 with completion planned for the end of the year, as follows: Q Background Analysis Q2-Q3 Develop Goals, Objectives and Concept Plans Q3-Q4 Evaluate Alternative Plans Q4 Select Preferred Option Plan Preparation & Approval The secondary plan process commenced in accordance with the Council-approved schedule and based on the mixed use development substantially in compliance with the generalized and conceptualized sketch supported by Council in September An Evergreen Technical Team was formed to assist with the development of the components of the secondary plan, including community vision, structure, sustainable development strategy, design, land use and servicing. The technical team is comprised of inter-departmental representation as well as staff from the Region of Halton, Town of Oakville, Conservation Halton and provincial ministries as needed. The technical team meetings have been scheduled monthly since March Ontario Municipal Board Hearing Status In an OMB decision delivered on July 24, 2012 concerning appeals by Evergreen Community (Burlington) Ltd., the Board scheduled a pre-hearing for November 26, 2012 for an update on outstanding appeals including the Evergreen matter. Discussion: There are 4 key issues that have implications for the next stages of planning for the Evergreen community and the affected study area: Land use Secondary plan Ontario Municipal Board Hearing

6 Page 6 of Report PB Developer s Concept Plans Land Use Council has supported a mixed use development concept for the Evergreen lands (see background and Report PB-36-11). The plan has been referred to as a blob map since it is described as generalized, not to scale and not reflecting the exact quantity or location of land uses. This conceptual form of direction was considered to be appropriate at the time to enable the secondary plan process to begin. The Evergreen developer was supportive of the concept and staff proceeded on that basis for both the secondary plan and OPA 55 process. Council s concept plan was not transferred into an Official Plan Schedule as it would appear on Sketch No. 3. This had the effect of deferring the need for land use precision which is the foundation for forming the level of detail that is found in a secondary plan. The appeal to OPA 55 has not been resolved to-date. Secondary Plan The secondary planning process for Evergreen commenced in early In preparing for this process in late 2011, staff met with the developer to discuss the best way to proceed. There was agreement that since there was a mixed use plan approval in principle, it would be appropriate for the developer to withdraw the OMB appeal to OPA 55. This would provide clear support for the Council concept and avoid any further land use issues that would stand in the way of secondary plan discussions and work. However, the appeal was not withdrawn and as secondary plan work proceeded, including a public design open house, the proponent s uncertain position on the layout and composition (eg. environmental constraints) of the mixed use plan for Evergreen became apparent. This uncertainty poses a risk that the process will become mired in debates and discussions over differences in interpretation. The developer s consultants closely monitored the secondary plan process that was carried out. They participated in the Evergreen design public open house held in May and their team gave presentations to the technical team and staff on matters such as innovative low impact development (LID) and engineering possibilities. In July, the consultants met with staff to present the first notice of the developer s conceptual design interests. The concept shown in this powerpoint presentation resembled Concept A, shown on Sketch No. 6 which is discussed below. In spite of the fact that the Council supported plan was conceptualized, the presented plan showed alterations to the Natural Heritage System (previously set by Conservation Halton and the Region) and employment and residential land use locations. However at this time, staff were not provided with a hard copy of the concept plan or further written analysis to review.

7 Page 7 of Report PB Following the meeting and in order to better understand the plan, staff requested the details of the presentation and some additional explanation, including: 1. Employment and housing projections with an explanation to show how Places to Grow targets are met. 2. Concept plan housing mix composition by unit type. 3. Environmental constraint analysis and recommendations (consultant). 4. Concept plan details with stable top of bank delineation. 5. Engineering plan details showing how a stormwater management pond can be eliminated. 6. Engineering implementation details addressing different land uses, phasing, long term development timing and ownership changes. On September 20, 2012, the above information was received in a submission dated, September 17, 2012 (environmental information submitted on August 21 st ). Technical team meetings were postponed following the proponents land use concept submission given the discrepancies between the Council approved concept and the landowner submission, and pending further direction from Council. Ontario Municipal Board Hearing The report recommendation seeks direction from Committee with respect to the plan that City staff will support in the OMB hearing. The options at this point are to support the Council approved concept plan or the developer s concept plan dated, September 17, 2012 subject to the outcome of a detailed review. Developer s Concept Plans The proponent s consultant has submitted two concept plans dated September 17, 2012, as shown on Sketches 6 and 7. The distinction between the two plans lies with different stormwater management approaches. Concept A (Sketch 6) involves an innovative stormwater management option and Concept B (Sketch 7) relies on a standard stormwater pond system. This conceptual proposal serves as the basis for the completion of the Evergreen secondary plan. Staff have also shown the draft Official Plan Schedule B on Sketch No. 4 and 5 which show developer s Concepts A and B in the form of Official Plan map designations. During the secondary plan work that was underway, staff did not reach a stage with the technical team or the public where conceptual plans were developed for the Evergreen lands.

8 Page 8 of Report PB The concept plans have only received a preliminary planning staff review intended to identify significant issues that will require city and external agency approvals. In a letter dated, October 15, 2012 (contained in Appendix II), staff outlined these main issues as well as secondary plan implementation matters that will require agreement in order to ensure the realization of the concept plan. Table 1 below shows some of the issues that are related to the concepts including who is responsible for resolution: Table 1 Issue Evergreen Developer Concept Issues Resolution Modifications to environmental constraints, development limits and stormwater management plans. Approvals from city departments and agencies including but not limited to Conservation Halton and Region. (Developer agrees) Changes to the natural heritage system eg. (buffers to woodlots and wetlands). Approved open space areas are incorporated into the Region s OPA (ROPA) 38. Approvals from city departments and agencies including but not limited to Conservation Halton and Region. (Developer agrees) Objections to background study modifications. Concept plans will be required to comply. (Developer agrees) Secondary Plan Implementation Issues Development will occur based on policies that specify the range of uses, densities and form, with limitations and minimum and maximum heights and densities. This will affect: Mixed use development designations with employment and residential. Residential mix Land use configurations Requires developer agreement. The Council approved mixed use plan shows exclusive employment land. While not quantified, the developer s concept plan shows a smaller proportion but adds employment in a mixed use form elsewhere. Council approval of land use concept. Concept plan replaces employment with residential in the northwest quadrant of the site. Council approval of land use concept.

9 Page 9 of Report PB The concept plan expands the mixed use designations to provide employment and remove a stormwater pond. Council approval of land use concept and environmental/engineering approvals noted above. The stormwater management strategy and techniques (low impact development) have implications for municipal obligations, implementation, stormwater ponds and phasing. Detailed information will be required for department and agency approvals. A phasing plan will be required to ensure an orderly and timely delivery of a diversified mix of development. Staff review and approval. The roads and overall transportation plan will require a detailed analysis. Staff review and approval. Park plans and external and internal community connection plans require review. Staff review and approval. The Region s servicing plans and allocation timing needs updating. Region of Halton and developer. OMB appeals including compatibility conflict with Oakville s Employment District planning for the east side of Tremaine Road. Parties affected: City, developer, Oakville and other parties as determined by interest in proposed amendments. Council s September 2011 staff direction relating to the development of the secondary plan considered the analysis and study work that was completed through the planning process which led to the Tremaine and Dundas Secondary Plan: Background and Options Report. As such, the information contained in the background studies is to be used to create the secondary plan and environmental policies for incorporation into the plan. The proponent will be required to obtain support from departments and agencies for the planned modifications to these studies eg. changes to buffers woodlots and wetlands. The developer s concept plans need to be assessed from the perspective of the objectives and recommendations of the Tremaine and Dundas Secondary Plan Subwatershed Study (TDSPSWS). Specifically, it is understood from the developer s consultant that, in their view, there are discrepancies between their findings and those of the TDSPSWS.

10 Page 10 of Report PB These matters will be reviewed in more detail with engineering and agency staff following a Committee direction to proceed with one of the proposed concept plans. This review will determine what study modifications can be supported to remain or be removed from the concept plan forming the basis for the secondary plan. It is important to note that the differences in interpretation of the concept plans does not reflect a lack of support for an environmentally sustainable community development. Staff and the developer remain equally committed to satisfying this aspect of the Council direction of September The difference that requires the attention of Committee is a modification to the land use configuration. The innovative approaches to engineering techniques and integration of smart grid technologies are progressive and contribute to the goal of incorporating environmentally sustainable neighbourhood development and building policies into the secondary plan. There is a commitment to pursue additional sustainable development solutions. On the land use side, the concept plan presents a mixed use development proposal that is designed and organized in an alternative fashion with the goal of meeting the intent of Council s support (PB-36-11) for a mixed use concept plan. There is a proposal to create a distinct mixed use form at the key intersection of Dundas Street and Tremaine Road, conditional on approval to make changes to the stormwater plans. If acceptable, the future urban design could define this community with strong street edges. There are some land use opportunities that warrant further discussion such as the uses along the valley lands, variation in residential built form, the composition of the mixed use along Tremaine Road, open space and community linkages. Committee support for a conceptual plan should allow for these matters to be resolved through secondary plan discussions between the developer (and the consultants) and City staff. Strategy/Process It is recommended that a concept plan be identified as the plan that the city will advance in the OPA 55 appeal. This plan will form the basis for the Evergreen secondary plan process. The options are noted below. With respect to risk, it is important to note that, regardless of the concept approved, a secondary plan is detailed planning work that may create new land use objections by other parties. Options Considered There are two options that are under consideration in this report: Council has supported a mixed use development concept for the Evergreen lands (see background and Report PB-36-11). The plan has been referred to as a blob map and is described as generalized, not to scale and not reflecting the exact quantity or location of land uses. This plan leaves significant flexibility on land use but is considered to be fixed with respect to the environmental constraints (Natural Heritage System).

11 Page 11 of Report PB The developer has prepared a concept plan which presents a mixed use development proposal that is designed and organized in an alternative fashion with the goal of meeting the intent of Council s support (PB-36-11) for a mixed use concept plan. This plan will require approvals for modifications to natural heritage components as well as additional details outlined above in Table 1. Both land use options provide mixed use development concepts that can form the basis for detailing physical development that manages and arranges land uses for the Evergreen community, subject to resolving all issues. Financial Matters: The staff report dealing with the background and options for the Tremaine and Dundas (Evergreen) Secondary Plan referred to the financial analysis required as part of the secondary plan. Part II, Section 12.3 of the City s Official Plan requires that a Financial Impact Analysis be prepared for any secondary plan study where any one of the following criteria is fulfilled: a) Lands are being re-designated on Schedule A of the Official Plan; b) The land area affected is greater than 40 ha; c) The amount of retail or employment floor space is greater than 50,000 m 2 ; or d) The number of dwelling units is greater than 500. Total Financial Impact The financial analysis has not been initiated nor is the cost known. Source of Funding The financial analysis cost will be funded from the Department s consulting budget. Other Resource Impacts N/a Environmental Matters: The developer s concept plan will require approvals for modifications to natural heritage components as well as additional details relating to plans for a sustainable stormwater management strategy. There is a commitment to pursue additional sustainable development solutions to meet the council direction to incorporate environmentally sustainable development and building policies into the plan. Communication Matters: Staff will be using the city s website, newspaper notices and mailings at various stages throughout the secondary plan process. In addition, an list will be developed

12 Page 12 of Report PB comprising all interested parties and notification will be provided during all stages of the secondary planning process. Conclusion: There are two options that are under consideration in this report. Council has previously supported a mixed use development concept for the Evergreen lands. This plan leaves flexibility on land use but is considered to be fixed with respect to the environmental constraints (Natural Heritage System). The developer has prepared an alternative. This plan requires approvals for changes related to the natural heritage system and additional details outlined in the report. The report recommendation will instruct staff on the concept plan to be advanced by the city at the OPA 55 hearing, and as the basis for the completion of the Evergreen secondary plan. Respectfully submitted, Mike Greenlee Senior Planner, Development , Ext 7860 Appendices: A. Appendix I-Secondary Plan Schedule B. Appendix II- Staff Preliminary Comments to Developer s Concept Plans C. Appendix III Developer s Response to Staff Comments Concept Plans Notifications: (after Council decision) John Krpan Name Mailing or Address c/o Krpan Group, 2500 Appleby line, Ste 200, Burl., L7L0A2 Approvals: *required *Department City Treasurer General Manager City Manager

13 Page 13 of Report PB Committee Disposition & Comments Council Disposition & Comments To be completed by the Clerks Department 01-Approved 02-Not Approved 03-Amended 04-Referred 06-Received & Filed 07-Withdrawn 01-Approved 02-Not Approved 03-Amended 04-Referred 06-Received & Filed 07-Withdrawn

14 Page 14 of Report PB-82-12

15 Page 15 of Report PB-82-12

16 Page 16 of Report PB-82-12

17 Page 17 of Report PB-82-12

18 Page 18 of Report PB-82-12

19 Page 19 of Report PB-82-12

20 Page 20 of Report PB-82-12